Oregon offense installation videos

Brophy has a full collection of Oregon installation videos, i.e. video cutups showing the plays for teaching purposes. Check them all out here.Very useful stuff.

And, to pile on unnecessarily (though it’s fun), contrast this statement by Gregg Easterbrook:

[In Oregon’s offense, p]ass patterns are minimal, which keeps the quarterback’s mind from melting under the pace. Oregon runs hitch screens, then occasionally fakes a hitch screen and sends a receiver on the fake side deep. That’s it — that’s the blur offense passing tree.

With this video:

  • YourEconProf

    So, really, what brophy is showing is that the true innovation in Oregon’s defense is finding many different ways to run hitches, right?

  • Troy

    Easterbrook making a reductive statement for the sake of bolstering his argument?! For this there is no precedent. Nope, absolutely none.

  • http://blog.showmeprogress.com Clark

    More piling on – the Oregon “blur” offense that runs at an “unprecedented” breakneck speed actually ranks 14th in plays per game in 2010, more than 10 plays less per game than the leading team, and just behind Louisiana Tech. It’s certainly a fast pace, but not nearly unprecedented.

  • Matt

    Clark, with all due respect this site published a rebuttal to the article that coined the phrase
    ‘blur offense” about a week ago… god save us if that thought process spreads to announcers. Also plays per game is affected by your defense, you opponents defenses, your opponents offenses, and finally your own offensive tempo. I agree that this is not unprecedented, Gus Malzahn has done it for nearly a decade now.

  • http://blog.showmeprogress.com Clark

    Sorry, Matt. I had read Chris’ earlier post, but I did not click through to the link to his earlier post on Malzahn, which includes more or less the same evidence I provided, along with a lot of other great stuff.

    You’re correct of course that the plays per game stat is affected by more than just your own offensive tempo. Looking just at what the offense does when it has the ball, I looked at time of possession divided by plays per game (Oregon incidentally averages 27:48.) I didn’t break down all teams, but Oklahoma (the leader with 88.3 plays per game) averaged a play every 21.25 seconds, Oregon every 21.44 seconds, and Louisiana Tech every 21.01 seconds of time of possession.

    A few factors can skew those stats, but I think the point has been beaten into the ground that Easterbrook is wrong on this point, as he is wrong on many others.

  • http://brophyfootball.blogspot.com brophy

    Do you think the “blur offense” moniker or manufactured ‘mystique’ fail (“pistol, misdirection,option, spread”) of that article needs a closer look in terms of the revolutionary meme it alluded to?

    I mean, its spread option….why was there a need to believe that Oregon was doing something unrivaled? I don’t mean that from a snarky perspective, just wondering what would influence someone to portray such a profound image (“the blur”) to something ordinary and common (the offense is a matter of rational solutions of a zone running schemes, and NONE of the elements the author listed had any distinctive quality).

    Just contemplating motivations for it – was it as you previously alluded to, a need for webclicks, and seeing how Oregon is a front runner, best to appeal to the masses (anything will suffice, regardless of substance)? Or was it a genuine investigation (albeit a juvenile attempt), examining Oregon within a vacuum, oblivious to the commonplace occurence of spread run game since 1997?

  • Troy

    Brophy, Easterbrook prides himself in identifying trends (in football and elsewhere) before the media and the general public catch on. His TMQ articles are full of links back to older editions that champion his prescience. My guess is that some Oregon highlights/box scores got him interested, and he was impressed enough by watching one of their games to go on a “fact-finding” mission that involved heavy use of the Google toolbar, Wiki and Youtube. The fact that he frequently scorns “big-time” college football programs leads me to believe he probably doesn’t watch much FBS football, so he might be legitimately ignorant of the dozens of other teams that run offenses similar to Oregon’s.

    But it’s hard to say for sure.

  • duck in the couve

    Ummm Clark & Brophy…Oregon gets off plays on average at right around an 18-19 second clip…the pace you show is skewed by the fact that oregon slows it’s pace down in the 4th quarter when they get huge leads to eat up the clock and ice the game. Oregon has been timed at getting off plays in a full series at a 15.2 seconds per play clip. that is literally flying. Oregon starts off playing semi-fast until they get comfortable with their reads of the defense and in sync, then they really step up the tempo to put the screws to the tiring opposing defensplaying fast just to play fast is not smart…Oregon plays fast with a plan, with a purpose.

    Also your plays per game stat is also skewed by the slowing of the pace when the game is well in hand. Basically all this comes back to their are lies, damned lies, and statistics. Any one can twist stats and cherry pick stats to prove their own points.

    The spread is not new…(there are many variations of it)Though the way Oregon(chip kelly) runs it is.

    No one up tempo’s as much as Oregon, No one reads D tackles or nose guards on read options (except oregon). Oregon does run a triple option, but they will run it out of a two back set, or a one back with a tazer (flanker/slotback) trailer pitchman.

    Oregon runs approx 7-8 base pass routes, with various route options off of every route depending on the WR/QB read of the defense.

    Easterbrooks article was idiotic and poorly researched, but he did have a couple valid points.

  • http://brophyfootball.blogspot.com brophy

    Didn’t look like anyone was debating Oregon’s efficiency, only the hoopleheadedness of Easterbrook’s assertions. For my part, all I did was present video, supplied by Oregon, as is, to introduce their base concepts (no manipulation necessary).

    As far as ‘no one does it like Oregon’…. There really are many teams in NCAA and high school that operate at Indy/NASCAR pace (nor is it new). So Miss (under OC Anderson) and UL-Lafayette have been synonymous for it for years (as well as some recent teams at Tony Franklin’s stops).

    Pointing out the common elements of the Oregon offense isn’t a dismissal of their effectiveness, merely framing the discussion on rational terms

    It appeared that the only contention folks had with Easterbrook’s work is the intellectually lazy effort put into it.

  • JM

    Looks like somebody literally doesn’t know the meaning of “literally”.

  • Mr.Murder

    This isn’t unlike the ‘all go’ article at smartfootball, of Leach from Texas Tech days, only it is 3×1 instead 2×2 for the formation.

    Because they are likely to zone or stay on top of routes from this, so you’d essentially bend a go route to comeback.

    See also @ -1:13 the skinny post read to the front side that is just like the all go seam/crease on MOFO.

    They’ve basically insulated a curl/flat with the overload man to the slot challenging rotation help out to flat by running the crease hard in a variety of ways.

    Outside routes on ‘all go’ usually break back. One is going outside shoulder like a fade/stop, the other is bringing that back to the numbers landmark on this all hitch series. The routes still come back and pressure defender leverage at a level designed to free other routes when the player gets squeezed by cover reads. Makes it simple to determine who gets the ball, so you adhere to the plan and increase timing through those reps.

    There goes your articles on the Colts. Two forms, several base concepts, done so often and so well they are mastered. This has that simple approach to getting it down perfectly.

  • endersgame

    Why do fans and sports writers insist they “know football?”