• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

Projected 2-deep Offense for football

Where is TD slotted to be I have heard good things about him. We need all the TD's we can get.
 
I was curious so I ran the numbers again. I'll post more if TWDeac or somebody can tell me how to format a chart properly on these boards. From the looks of it, I can post my Excel chart but that may be overkill.

Over the time that Lobo has been our OC, here is where Wake stands in Total Offense and Scoring Offense among 120 FBS teams

Total Offense (highest after the comma)
Average yards per game per season = 340.8 (#102, Texas Tech 501.2)
Average Total Offense rank = 82.4 (#104, Texas Tech 5.5)


Scoring offense
Average points per game per season = 24.1 (#80, Boise State 41.9)
Average TDs per season = 35.8 (#85, Boise State 71.4)
Average FGs per season = 12.3 (#93, Wisconsin 18.3)
Average scoring offense rank = 75.3 (#84, Boise State 4.1)

Average total/scoring offense rank = 78.8 (#96)

In other words, average together all the total offense and scoring offense ranks for Wake Forest in every year since 2003, it comes down to the #96 ranked offense out of 120 teams. By comparison, Duke is next to last in overall offense at #119. When you consider that in 2003, there were only 117 teams, that's stunning. UNC is at #97 and UVa is at #94. FSU is the best at #39. Keep in mind, they fired an OC over that stretch.
 
So if our TEs really struggle and we have good depth at WR, it seems like we should be going with 3 WRs more often than not, no?
 
tiltdeac said:
So if our TEs really struggle and we have good depth at WR, it seems like we should be going with 3 WRs more often than not, no?
Click to expand...

You'd think but our line needs help and our 3 and 4 WR sets don't really spread the defense out much because they know we're not going to run many deep routes. The front seven can account for the QB/RB and take care of the middle of the field and the DBs don't have to worry too much about getting beat deep. If you're a DC and you see Wake lineup with just a subpar O-line and maybe a FB or TE knowing that they're either going to run a slow developing running play out of the shotgun or a short passing play, you tell your LBs to either sit back in a zone and assume your 4 down lineman can handle the run or you run blitz or go after the QB.
 
Buttermaker said:
I am disappointed to hear Godfrey still has yet to impress. I really thought he would be a good OL once he had time to settle into that position. He certainly has the size, and you would think he has the athleticism having played TE.
Click to expand...

Actually I would argue the opposite. I dont think his body has ever gotten used to putting on that much weight. I think it has hurt him as a player and is the reason for his many injuries
 
I am still pretty high on Garcia at TE but he got injured so.... it looks like TE will still be nonexistent in our playcalling this year.. Ford really is an underachiver..
 
It is just so hard for me figure out how a Jim Grobe team can struggle so, when it comes to mush-mouth football, the way our offense has performed the last two years. I mean, what is that we have done different lately - we been recruiting a bunch of artists or something for linemen? RULZ, we're counting on 'lil RULZ and this new crowd to start steamrolling folks again.

Not that I have anything against artists, mind you.
 
Last edited:
What's different is the defense lately. The offense has been consistently poor. In 2006, the defense was #45 in the nation in total defense and #12 in scoring defense. The 2006 offense was #96 in total offense and #78 in scoring offense, below average for the Lobo era.

Looking back at the stats I posted, it's mindblowing that there is a school that has scored about twice as many TDs per game as Wake over the time Lobo has been our coach regardless of differences in the level of competition.
 
PhDeac said:
You'd think but our line needs help and our 3 and 4 WR sets don't really spread the defense out much because they know we're not going to run many deep routes. The front seven can account for the QB/RB and take care of the middle of the field and the DBs don't have to worry too much about getting beat deep. If you're a DC and you see Wake lineup with just a subpar O-line and maybe a FB or TE knowing that they're either going to run a slow developing running play out of the shotgun or a short passing play, you tell your LBs to either sit back in a zone and assume your 4 down lineman can handle the run or you run blitz or go after the QB.
Click to expand...

Sounds like a reason to give Lo Jackson more deep routes. Course, he needs to be on the field first.
 
1976Deac said:
It is just so hard for me figure out how a Jim Grobe team can struggle so, when it comes to mush-mouth football, the way our offense has performed the last two years. I mean, what is that we have done different lately - we been recruiting a bunch of artists or something for linemen? RULZ, we're counting on 'lil RULZ and this new crowd to start steamrolling folks again.

Not that I have anything against artists, mind you.
Click to expand...

We actually had decent offense in 2009. Actually, it could even be called good, but the coaches wouldn't let it win games for a large part of the season.
 
TBR said:
We actually had decent offense in 2009. Actually, it could even be called good, but the coaches wouldn't let it win games for a large part of the season.
Click to expand...

Not sure about decent or good, but the offense was definitely more capable of winning games than the defense.
 
PhDeac said:
Not sure about decent or good, but the offense was definitely more capable of winning games than the defense.
Click to expand...

Well, when an offense coordinated by Lobo under Grobe's direction is top 50 in total offense it must be more than decent. Their conservative methodology is always going to hamper an offense. Grobe either needs to find a different methodology or a good defense. I don't care which.
 
TBR said:
Well, when an offense coordinated by Lobo under Grobe's direction is top 50 in total offense it must be more than decent. Their conservative methodology is always going to hamper an offense. Grobe either needs to find a different methodology or a good defense. I don't care which.
Click to expand...

Some additional info to go along with this point:

From 2003-2010, our best season of scoring offense was #50 in 2003 and the best total offense was #41 in 2009. Over that time frame, 100 of the 120 schools have had a season in which they were Top 40 in total offense and 106 schools have had a season in which they were better than #50 in scoring offense.

Not only that. 84 teams had multiple years better than #50 in scoring offense and 40 schools finished better than #50 in 5 or more of the last 8 seasons.

94 teams had multiple years in the Top 40 in scoring offense and 34 schools finished better than #41 in 5 or more of the last 8 seasons.

So in other words, our highs weren't all that high and our highs would be considered low by plenty of programs.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top