FOOTBALL MTSU lands QB transfer from P4 school
- Thread starter Matt Dossett
- Start date
Talked to him.
"Really liked the coaching staff and the opportunity to play football at a high level close to home."
"Called Coach Reeder and Coach Mason when I committed and they were excited."
"I visited MTSU on Tuesday and loved the coaching staff. I’ve been around the campus many times growing up so I had a rough understanding of the layout, but enjoyed getting a look at the new football facilities."
"I have three years of eligibility remaining, and looking to come in and compete every day to make the QB room and team as strong as possible."
"I would consider myself a pass-first QB, but have the athleticism to extend plays and make throws out of the pocket."
"Really liked the coaching staff and the opportunity to play football at a high level close to home."
"Called Coach Reeder and Coach Mason when I committed and they were excited."
"I visited MTSU on Tuesday and loved the coaching staff. I’ve been around the campus many times growing up so I had a rough understanding of the layout, but enjoyed getting a look at the new football facilities."
"I have three years of eligibility remaining, and looking to come in and compete every day to make the QB room and team as strong as possible."
"I would consider myself a pass-first QB, but have the athleticism to extend plays and make throws out of the pocket."
Last edited:
Missouri and Drinkwitz run the pistol offense it looked like MT tried to run (in spots) last year. Seems like a good take to help implement it more in year two.
The pistol is a pointless and worthless offensive formation. You can do it for a little while then the defense quickly adjusts because it's basically the I-formation with at least one less blocker. It's especially ineffective in short yardage.
The reason I don't like it is because it basically removes one or two blockers from a traditional pro set (as noted above) and it also reduces options for misdirection in the run game. Jet sweeps, reverses, traps, counters, etc., are almost eliminated. The most elaborate thing you can do is pull an offensive linemen. It just does not do enough to change the eyes of the defense. I also think play action is weakened a bit.
But then again, I've already been on the record from day one that I was very worried about Mason installing a garbage offensive system. I hope we stay away from the pistol and find more creative ways to get play makers in space.
The reason I don't like it is because it basically removes one or two blockers from a traditional pro set (as noted above) and it also reduces options for misdirection in the run game. Jet sweeps, reverses, traps, counters, etc., are almost eliminated. The most elaborate thing you can do is pull an offensive linemen. It just does not do enough to change the eyes of the defense. I also think play action is weakened a bit.
But then again, I've already been on the record from day one that I was very worried about Mason installing a garbage offensive system. I hope we stay away from the pistol and find more creative ways to get play makers in space.
Missouri went 22-5 in the SEC in the last two years with that offense.
There's no one ultimate way to win football games. If there was, everyone would do it. You get the right Jimmies and Joes and you can run anything you want.
The reason I don't like it is because it basically removes one or two blockers from a traditional pro set (as noted above) and it also reduces options for misdirection in the run game. Jet sweeps, reverses, traps, counters, etc., are almost eliminated. The most elaborate thing you can do is pull an offensive linemen. It just does not do enough to change the eyes of the defense. I also think play action is weakened a bit.
I don't think we're going to be in a position to install a complicated offense like that above. We're going to have guys for 1-2 years max - we just need to find ourselves a Qb who's a run/pass threat, stick him in something simple, and run the RPO. The pistol is perfect for that.
A
This is an unfair oversimplification of the pistol. Pistol with 10 personnel doesn't have the extra blocker, but you can run pistol with 12 and 21 personnel (extra blockers).
You do realize that counters / traps involve pulling OL, right? And that it's still possible to run jet sweeps / reverses from pistol?
Honestly, I think pistol can be effective for the PA passing attack (again, depends how you use it).
But, I don't disagree with you re: Mason & offense. That was one of my concerns when he was hired and it remains a concern heading into year 2. Mason's offense and his offensive views (or at least what we saw toward the end of Vandy & last year) are 2008 football. Football has changed. Good coaches adapt. Will Mason?
And as @RaiderDoug said, the name of the game with the portal is simple. I'd do a 3-4 day install (not the traditional 7 day install for pro style offenses) of core concepts with tags to attack defensive tendencies. Utilize tempo to MT's advantage.
I’m going to just respond to one part of this because if I can disassemble one thing I could the rest of it but don’t feel like wasting my time on this. Of course I didn’t provide a complicated or sophisticated analysis of this. It was a broad stroke. Using my one example sure you can run a jet sweep but without misdirection with the RB. It’s easy for LB to key off this. Easier to defend.
Also Missouri mid tier in offense and scoring. Top 20 defense. They won with defense.
So basically, you're saying you can't run a fake to RB and hand off on a jet sweep?
I won't argue this. But I think this may have been in response to someone else?
Well, they're Missouri. They're never going to amass the talent to really run up the stats on the rest of the SEC.
My point was if the Pistol was so ineffective and easily shut down, they wouldn't have won 22 games in 2 years. They'd have to reincarnate the '85 Bears defense to do that.
Again, there's not an instruction manual to win football games. Run specific X offense, Run specific X defense = win all games.
UGA runs the pro-style. Tennessee runs the veer'n'shoot. Air Force runs the triple option. They all win a load of games with completely different offenses. It's the Jimmy's and Joe's, not the X's and O's.
Agreed. You can either recruit offensive linemen or you can't. That is why most CUSA teams run some version of the Air Raid - it's easier to find receivers than offensive linemen.
I'm not against a run based offense because, personally, I prefer to watch that over a QB dropping back 40 times, but it remains to be seen if Mason and Reeder can implement any offense successfully at this level.
They might or might not. If they do, I'm not sure it'll be because they figured something out that no one else has. If they don't, I don't think it'll be because they're stupid.
Nobody out there is re-inventing football - look at the NFL - they all have an army of coaches and staffers and a mountain of tape on every offense out there and it still boils down to players making plays.
No one has all the right answers here. It's a cat and mouse game at every level.
Pick a system (I haven't seen anyone running the Flying-V though), recruit and acquire the right players, coach and develop and motivate them properly, and then you still have to choose the right play in the playbook at the exact right time. All of those variables combine in myriad different ways to produce the outcome of a game or even a play.
Good coaches can get more of those variables right than wrong and win. Bad coaches don't, and lose.
All of those offenses have proven they can be a top 5 offense in the country. Show me a pistol focused offense that's done that.
To answer your question : The 2009 Nevada team finished 2nd, the 2010 Nevada offense finished 4th, and the 2011 Nevada offense finished 6th in total offense running the pistol offense (system) which was first introduced at Nevada in the mid-2000s. Not sure exactly when it became a full "system" of plays, but it was the dominate formation when Colin K was QB IIRC.
But, a few thoughts :
1) How much of the disagreement (re: the pistol) is the difference between the pistol as a formation and the pistol as a scheme? LOTS of teams have run the pistol formation (and been successful).
2) The pistol offense (system) isn't perfect (no system is) and the formation has its weaknesses (as does every formation). You brought up a good point about not being able to run Jet Sweep misdirection. I searched and couldn't find anyone running a Jet Sweet with a fake zone on backside (there may be one, but I couldn't find it). The closest I did find was a jet sweep with a QB midline IIRC.
One of the advantages of the pistol (formation) is that it can take away defensive keys based on RB alignment. That's one of the weaknesses to the shotgun run attack : It telegraphs the run direction (ex : RB aligned near right = inside run to the left). However a few teams have managed to add a same-side pin & pull as a tendency breaker.
In the pistol formation, RB is direction behind the QB so there's no way to know if run is left, right, or up the middle. Plus, if you want to run midline / veer type concepts, you can do that pretty easy with a RPO concept on the outside.
Personally, I'm probably a spread / pro-spread (Think Kiffin / Brohm) hybrid guy myself so I would rather MT's offense be a little more up-tempo, aggressive, and modern compared to whatever monstrosity was put out on the field last year. It was mind-numbingly awful to watch last year.
Which, back to the point someone else made earlier (I think @RaiderDoug) was one of my concerns with CDM when he was hired. His offensive philisophy seems stuck in 2008. Football has changed. It's time to change with it.
You don't win games 24-17. You need to be prepared to score 30+ to win. And MT's offense (last year) wasn't prepared to do that. And honestly, I'm not sure the traditional, 21 personnel pro-style can do that without having DOMINATE personnel in most games (which MT didn't).
We don't need to be top 5 in the country.
We just need to score enough points to win the game.
Yes, that was more or less the point. And certainly the novelty of it was initially unique but my broader point was that it became quickly defensible, which is why it requires elite playmaking and blocking (very similar to what is required to now run a pro style in college) to have broader success. There's a reason why you can't find any examples since it was initially introduced.
It's more about when pistol is your base offense. I don't really care for the formation writ large either, but if you're predominantly running your scheme out of the pistol that's what I was referring to. It has mostly went away in the past few years as a base offense (because it's ineffective).
And I'm the one that's been raising the offensive concerns since he was hired regarding trying to keep the games low scoring.
Thanks for the explanation. I think that's why there was disagreement. I was using the pistol to refer to a formation while you were using it to refer to a scheme / system.
Fair enough.
It's a valid concern, but you aren't the only one expressing it. I have. Others have. It's a legit concern, especially after how things ended at Vandy AND how the 2024 campaign looked.
Sure it does.
Here's your point, in your own words, that started our conversation:
"The pistol is a pointless and worthless offensive formation."
My counterpoint is that it's effective enough to win a lot of games at Missouri and is in a lot of programs playbooks now, and has been in the past effective. There's no evidence that we would have been successful last year but for the choice of offensive system (not that you said that specifically).
You then pivoted to Missouri's offensive rankings.
"Also Missouri mid tier in offense and scoring. Top 20 defense. They won with defense."
My counterpoint to that is that stats are fine and good, but at the end of the day, you have to win the game. All systems have proven that they'll lead to winning games under the right circumstances - including Missouri - a team with a week in/week out talent deficiency relative to it's conference mates, running plays out of the pistol coupled with a strong defensive effort (that didn't lead the league either).
Ultimately, as I mentioned above - the success or failure of a given play (and enough of those will win or lose a game) is a complex interconnection of installed system, individual in the moment playcalling, personal effort and execution on any given play, long term coaching and development of players, and sometimes just dumb luck.
Furthermore, this isn't NCAA on Playstation, where you pick a "system" and you're stuck with a particular 20 plays. Football playcalling and strategy and formations evolve during any individual game or even series. Do they run plays out of the pistol. Yes. Do they run plays only out of the pistol? No.
The Mason era did not get off to a flying start. But there's nothing to indicate that the choice of offensive playcalling was the culprit. In fact, I would put that far below the defense as a concern.
I know everyone hates this in the world of instant gratification and hot takes, but sometimes it is best to reserve judgment until you gather more information. Let's see what 2025 looks like.
Personally idc what scheme we play just as long as we are winning games. Honestly, if we were winning 8-10 games yearly (regular season) and in the hunt for conference titles, Floyd would be packed even if it was the triple option. Fans don’t really care as long as there is winning.
Yup. I don't give a rats toot where we are ranked in offense or defense or passing or anything, or how awful it looks.
I just want to be better than the 8 teams we play in CUSA, beat a FCS every year, and win vs another G6/P4 now and then. Give me 9 wins a year reg season and I won't complain over anything.
