The abysmal South Carolina offense in perspective

[18IsTheMan]

This article gives the grim statistics:

14th in the conference in yards per game and yards per play. 8th in ppg. 12th in TD % inside the red zone. Last nationally in sacks, regardless of opponent...25 allowed in 5 SEC contests.

Simply brutal numbers.

We all knew the offense was poor against OU, but I didn't realize just how bad (since I had to leave at halftime). We had 69 yards of offense in the 2nd half...69! I feel like I have to say that again for those who argue we just went conservative by design....69 yards!!!!!!!

There is simply no way you can attribute 69 yards in an entire half of football entirely to conservative play calling. It's not like we were up 52-0 at halftime and subbed in the 3rd stringers. Yes, we won against OU, but only because the D spotted us a 21-0 lead 5 minutes into the game. Take away those defensive scores (I'm attributing the short field TD after the first pick to the D) and it's a 14-9 nail-biter, and possibly a loss.

Our two SEC wins this year have been fueled, almost entirely, by the opponents OL crumbling against our stout DL.

Consider that our 2 SEC wins have almost been carbon copies of each other offensively. Very similar scores (31-6 and 35-9). Almost identical total yardage (252 and 254) passing yardage (173 and 180) rushing yardage (79 and 74) and yards/rush (2.3 and 1.8). The deciding factor in both games was the opponents OL simply cratering.

As thrilling as the win was on Saturday, it's impossible to ignore that the offense is a seriously major liability for this team. Our D is good enough to keep us in our remaining games, but it's unrealistic to expect that they'll go out and generate 21 points each time.

Beamer: Gamecocks can't use youth as an excuse on offense

What did Shane Beamer have to say about the team's offense on Sunday night?

247sports.com

 

[The Reel Ess]

The goal for the offense in the 2nd half was to run clock, punt and not lose the game. The 2nd half stats are meaningless. Now I'm not trying to say the offense is good or even decent. They're almost a polar opposite of the defense, especially on the lines. As good as the DL is, the OL is horrid. It's as if they've given up. 6 guys can't block 4.

 

[Piscis]

The problem is going to be the games where the opponent doesn't completely collapse and puts together some long drives and our D is on the field all day and wears out late. Vandy runs the triple option and that offense can keep a D on the field for long stretches. Our O has loads of 3 and outs.

 

[18IsTheMan]

The goal for the offense in the 2nd half was to run clock, punt and not lose the game that the defense had already won for them. The 2nd half stats are meaningless. Now I'm not trying to say the offense is good or even decent. They're almost a polar opposite of the defense, especially on the lines. As good as the DL is, the OL is horrid. It's as if they've given up. 6 guys can't block 4.

I know that's a popular narrative and seems attractive b/c it suggests we could have done more on offense if we really wanted to. But it simply doesn't hold water.

Am I to believe we were running for no gain and throwing incomplete passes on purpose?

 

[PrestonyteParrot]

Our defense outscores our own offense.
What more does Beamer need to make some offensive changes?

 

[PrestonyteParrot]

I know that's a popular narrative and seems attractive b/c it suggests we could have done more on offense if we really wanted to. But it simply doesn't hold water.

Am I to believe we were running for no gain and throwing incomplete passes on purpose?

We should be able to move the ball 10 yds for 1st downs if the offense is competent and we want to eat clock.

 

[PrestonyteParrot]

The goal for the offense in the 2nd half was to run clock, punt and not lose the game that the defense had already won for them. The 2nd half stats are meaningless. Now I'm not trying to say the offense is good or even decent. They're almost a polar opposite of the defense, especially on the lines. As good as the DL is, the OL is horrid. It's as if they've given up. 6 guys can't block 4.

We should be able to move the ball 10 yds for 1st downs if the offense is competent and we want to eat clock.

 

[18IsTheMan]

Our defense outscores our own offense.
What more does Beamer need to make some offensive changes?

One can only wonder.

The "going conservative" narrative also doesn't hold water b/c the offense sucked in the first quarter as well. It's not as though we were moving the ball well in the first half and then stopped trying in the second. Shoot, we got the ball at the OU 25 to start the 2nd quarter and managed 4 yards before kicking a FG.

Maybe we're the first team in history to go conservative to start the 2nd quarter.

 

[18IsTheMan]

We should be able to move the ball 10 yds for 1st downs if the offense is competent and we want to eat clock.

Right. One goal of going conservative is to chew up clock. Our 2nd half drives took 3:56, 4:25, 1:59, 2:09, 1:24 and 2:45 off the clock.

Three of our 2nd quarter drives were under 2 minutes each.

We had a 3-play 51 second drive for 1 yard in the 1st quarter

 

[LonghornsGamecocks]

I know that's a popular narrative and seems attractive b/c it suggests we could have done more on offense if we really wanted to. But it simply doesn't hold water.

Am I to believe we were running for no gain and throwing incomplete passes on purpose?

I agree. The narrative doesn't hold water. Offense is pathetic.

 

[gamecock stock]

Watching our offense brings to mind a John McKay quote:

"They were absolutely horrible, and that's the best thing I can say. Besides that, they were bad."

 

[Uscg1984]

Am I to believe we were running for no gain and throwing incomplete passes on purpose?

Not to mention the sacks. Fortunately, Sellers didn't have any fumbles this time.

 

[I4CtheFuture]

The goal for the offense in the 2nd half was to run clock, punt and not lose the game that the defense had already won for them. The 2nd half stats are meaningless. Now I'm not trying to say the offense is good or even decent. They're almost a polar opposite of the defense, especially on the lines. As good as the DL is, the OL is horrid. It's as if they've given up. 6 guys can't block 4.

No no, no..... full stop.

You can't have it both ways. Ala the movie "A Few Good Men..." - If the game had already been won, as you claim - why the need to go conservative on offense???

*THAT* is the exact time to open up the playbook and let Sellers let it fly throwing. He needs all the practice he can get. So do our WR's. The second half, and entire season has been unacceptable on Offense. We are horrible. Changes need to be made at seasons end. There are no excuses.

 

[The Reel Ess]

No no, no..... full stop.

You can't have it both ways. Ala the movie "A Few Good Men..." - If the game had already been won, as you claim - why the need to go conservative on offense???

*THAT* is the exact time to open up the playbook and let Sellers let it fly throwing. He needs all the practice he can get. So do our WR's. The second half, and entire season has been unacceptable on Offense. We are horrible. Changes need to be made at seasons end. There are no excuses.

You've seen our offense? Our defense is our best offense. How many sacks were given up Saturday? Do you like winning? If there's one way to lose a game that's completely in hand it's by asking that inept offense to do more than necessary. You can't have it both ways. Either they are inept or they should step on the gas.

 

[18IsTheMan]

You've seen our offense? Our defense is our best offense. How many sacks were given up Saturday? Do you like winning? If there's one way to lose a game that's completely in hand it's by asking that inept offense to do more than necessary. You can't have it both ways. Either they are inept or they should step on the gas.

It begs the question, how do you discern an inept offense from conservative play calling?

It's clear we weren't trying to air it out or anything wild in the 2nd half, but were we running for no gain on purpose? Dropping passes on purpose?

 

[18IsTheMan]

Not to mention the sacks. Fortunately, Sellers didn't have any fumbles this time.

That, really, was the biggest win by a long shot for the offense in this game. Which speaks volumes.

 

[I4CtheFuture]

You've seen our offense? Our defense is our best offense. How many sacks were given up Saturday? Do you like winning? If there's one way to lose a game that's completely in hand it's by asking that inept offense to do more than necessary. You can't have it both ways. Either they are inept or they should sep otn the gas.

Again.......

If the game is "completely in hand" - It shouldn't matter what you ask the offense to do. So, may as well open up the playbook and treat the rest of the game as a practice.

 

[18IsTheMan]

Again.......

If the game is "completely in hand" - It shouldn't matter what you ask the offense to do. So, may as well open up the playbook and treat the rest of the game as a practice.

I agree. We're not in position to mail it on offense and waste live game snaps when the offense had scored 1 TD and 2 FGs all game. This offense needs work.

So, no, going conservative simply doesn't explain what we saw. In part, because what we saw in the 2nd half is representative of what we've seen all season. It wasn't anomalous.

 

[The Reel Ess]

It begs the question, how do you discern an inept offense from conservative play calling?

It's clear we weren't trying to air it out or anything wild in the 2nd half, but were we running for no gain on purpose? Dropping passes on purpose?

I seem to recall Lou saying that when your offense was not great, punting and winning field [position is winning. It's boring, but it beats losing. Clearly, the OL is subpar.

 

[The Reel Ess]

Again.......

If the game is "completely in hand" - It shouldn't matter what you ask the offense to do. So, may as well open up the playbook and treat the rest of the game as a practice.

We gave up 6 sacks Saturday? How many more did you want to see?

 

[I4CtheFuture]

How many sacks were given up Saturday? How many more did you want to see?

Irrelevant to your point. You're changing questions. Your narrative doesn't hold up to scrutiny.

If the game was in hand, it doesn't matter what you do on offense. May as well practice at getting better throwing the ball. Completing passes and getting first downs has a way of slowing down a pass rush. That's why teams don't blitz every single play. They run the risk of getting burned.

When you have no passing game (like us) other teams can pin their ears back and yeah, you're going to get lots of sacks. You're kinda making my point for me.

Was the game "in hand" - or not? Frankly, I didn't feel comfortable until about 5 min left in the 4th. But that's just me.

 

[18IsTheMan]

Irrelevant to your point. You're changing questions. Your narrative doesn't hold up to scrutiny.

If the game was in hand, it doesn't matter what you do on offense. May as well practice at getting better throwing the ball. Completing passes and getting first downs has a way of slowing down a pass rush. That's why teams don't blitz every single play. They run the risk of getting burned.

When you have no passing game (like us) other teams can pin their ears back and yeah, you're going to get lots of sacks. You're kinda making my point for me.

Was the game "in hand" - or not? Frankly, I didn't feel comfortable until about 5 min left in the 4th. But that's just me.

I saw us blow a 17-0 lead to LSU in a game where we had every ounce of momentum early on. Granted. there was a different feel to that game than the OU game, but I've seen way strange things happen than seeing a 32-9 game get much more interesting. I was nervous precisely because our offense couldn't do squat. One can argue we had gone conservative to prevent us from giving OU the ball in favorable position. However, the way our offense was performing, we were giving OU more offensive possessions.

So, no, the going conservative explanation just doesn't quite explain what we saw.

 

[The Reel Ess]

Irrelevant to your point. You're changing questions. Your narrative doesn't hold up to scrutiny.

If the game was in hand, it doesn't matter what you do on offense. May as well practice at getting better throwing the ball. Completing passes and getting first downs has a way of slowing down a pass rush. That's why teams don't blitz every single play. They run the risk of getting burned.

When you have no passing game (like us) other teams can pin their ears back and yeah, you're going to get lots of sacks. You're kinda making my point for me.

Was the game "in hand" - or not? Frankly, I didn't feel comfortable until about 5 min left in the 4th. But that's just me.

The game was in hand because the defense. In hand doesn't mean it was won. I said it could be lost. And who could lose it? This offense that gave up 6 sacks that you want to see open it up more. I mean I'd love to see a successful offense. We don't have one. They can practice in practice. What's the name of the game?

 

[I4CtheFuture]

I saw us blow a 17-0 lead to LSU in a game where we had every ounce of momentum early on. Granted. there was a different feel to that game than the OU game, but I've seen way strange things happen than seeing a 32-9 game get much more interesting. I was nervous precisely because our offense couldn't do squat. One can argue we had gone conservative to prevent us from giving OU the ball in favorable position. However, the way our offense was performing, we were giving OU more offensive possessions.

So, no, the going conservative explanation just doesn't quite explain what we saw.

Beamer was even asked after the game about "going conservative" on play calling and Beamer denied it. So, if he denied it, that means we suck on offense. THAT explains what we saw.

 

[Sig31r]

I agree that the best strategy was to run the clock out and not have any get hurt. The only offensive threat we have is Rocket that garners the respect of defensive coordinators. Until we get another homerun threat in the passing game our offense will continue to chug along slowly.

There have been some wr that have flashed. Next year will tell if we are making strides forward. Sellers is still slow at reading the game.

Look at Clemson, the OC finally learned that the QB likes to throw deep. The plays he started with was setting us up for another 5 in a row over them. I hate that he figured it out.

Our WR Corp is still lightweights and short on height compared to other top tier teams. 170 lbs is not going to cut it in the SEC.

 

[Baltcock96]

This article gives the grim statistics:

14th in the conference in yards per game and yards per play. 8th in ppg. 12th in TD % inside the red zone. Last nationally in sacks, regardless of opponent...25 allowed in 5 SEC contests.

Simply brutal numbers.

We all knew the offense was poor against OU, but I didn't realize just how bad (since I had to leave at halftime). We had 69 yards of offense in the 2nd half...69! I feel like I have to say that again for those who argue we just went conservative by design....69 yards!!!!!!!

There is simply no way you can attribute 69 yards in an entire half of football entirely to conservative play calling. It's not like we were up 52-0 at halftime and subbed in the 3rd stringers. Yes, we won against OU, but only because the D spotted us a 21-0 lead 5 minutes into the game. Take away those defensive scores (I'm attributing the short field TD after the first pick to the D) and it's a 14-9 nail-biter, and possibly a loss.

Our two SEC wins this year have been fueled, almost entirely, by the opponents OL crumbling against our stout DL.

Consider that our 2 SEC wins have almost been carbon copies of each other offensively. Very similar scores (31-6 and 35-9). Almost identical total yardage (252 and 254) passing yardage (173 and 180) rushing yardage (79 and 74) and yards/rush (2.3 and 1.8). The deciding factor in both games was the opponents OL simply cratering.

As thrilling as the win was on Saturday, it's impossible to ignore that the offense is a seriously major liability for this team. Our D is good enough to keep us in our remaining games, but it's unrealistic to expect that they'll go out and generate 21 points each time.

Beamer: Gamecocks can't use youth as an excuse on offense

What did Shane Beamer have to say about the team's offense on Sunday night?

247sports.com

2 SEC losses 398 yards vs LSU and 374 vs Alabama.

 

[Jaykid28]

I agree about the offensive woes, but enjoy the win and chill on the complaints (if you can).

 

[Beanerball]

I can’t argue with complaints about the play calling. But I certainly don’t think we should start flinging the ball all over the field. That’s a recipe for turnovers and sacks. My problem is that we call too many run plays up the middle. I don’t understand why we don’t stretch the field from sideline to sideline line more in the run game and with play action roll outs. Those things work when we do them so do them more. Make teams have to defend the edges. Sellers is our biggest threat so make teams have to chase him more. We don’t have to be great on offense to win but we do have to be competent.

 

[The Reel Ess]

I can’t argue with complaints about the play calling. But I certainly don’t think we should start flinging the ball all over the field. That’s a recipe for turnovers and sacks. My problem is that we call too many run plays up the middle. I don’t understand why we don’t stretch the field from sideline to sideline line more in the run game and with play action roll outs. Those things work when we do them so do them more. Make teams have to defend the edges. Sellers is our biggest threat so make teams have to chase him more. We don’t have to be great on offense to win but we do have to be competent.

I wish we could, but our receivers don't block well.

 

[Sig31r]

I wish we could, but our receivers don't block well.

100

 

[Beanerball]

Perhaps, but we need to mix it up and throwing 30-40 passes a game is not who we are. I still say we need inside/outside balance, and sure, throw it 20, maybe 25 times a game

 

[SpurOfTheMoment]

This article gives the grim statistics:

14th in the conference in yards per game and yards per play. 8th in ppg. 12th in TD % inside the red zone. Last nationally in sacks, regardless of opponent...25 allowed in 5 SEC contests.

Simply brutal numbers.

We all knew the offense was poor against OU, but I didn't realize just how bad (since I had to leave at halftime). We had 69 yards of offense in the 2nd half...69! I feel like I have to say that again for those who argue we just went conservative by design....69 yards!!!!!!!

There is simply no way you can attribute 69 yards in an entire half of football entirely to conservative play calling. It's not like we were up 52-0 at halftime and subbed in the 3rd stringers. Yes, we won against OU, but only because the D spotted us a 21-0 lead 5 minutes into the game. Take away those defensive scores (I'm attributing the short field TD after the first pick to the D) and it's a 14-9 nail-biter, and possibly a loss.

Our two SEC wins this year have been fueled, almost entirely, by the opponents OL crumbling against our stout DL.

Consider that our 2 SEC wins have almost been carbon copies of each other offensively. Very similar scores (31-6 and 35-9). Almost identical total yardage (252 and 254) passing yardage (173 and 180) rushing yardage (79 and 74) and yards/rush (2.3 and 1.8). The deciding factor in both games was the opponents OL simply cratering.

As thrilling as the win was on Saturday, it's impossible to ignore that the offense is a seriously major liability for this team. Our D is good enough to keep us in our remaining games, but it's unrealistic to expect that they'll go out and generate 21 points each time.

Beamer: Gamecocks can't use youth as an excuse on offense

What did Shane Beamer have to say about the team's offense on Sunday night?

247sports.com

You mean #1 in sacks allowed which we are dead last in fewest sacks and sacks per game. Everything else though, totally agree. We need to can Loggains and put Elliot on as our OL Assistant Coach

 

[I4CtheFuture]

I can’t argue with complaints about the play calling. But I certainly don’t think we should start flinging the ball all over the field. That’s a recipe for turnovers and sacks. My problem is that we call too many run plays up the middle. I don’t understand why we don’t stretch the field from sideline to sideline line more in the run game and with play action roll outs. Those things work when we do them so do them more. Make teams have to defend the edges. Sellers is our biggest threat so make teams have to chase him more. We don’t have to be great on offense to win but we do have to be competent.

To add to what you're saying, run game, Harbor is fast, right? Right.

Sideline to sideline, right? Right.

Where are the sweep plays with Harbor in motion? If he can't handle motion and a handoff and run, he should take up checkers. Poor play calling. OC has to go.

 

[SpurOfTheMoment]

I know that's a popular narrative and seems attractive b/c it suggests we could have done more on offense if we really wanted to. But it simply doesn't hold water.

Am I to believe we were running for no gain and throwing incomplete passes on purpose?

You are missing the point entirely. It boils down to making the right play calls to put our offense in position and to secure a score. NO TEAM can do that when the play calling is so predictable and the selection is not throwing the opposing defense off guard. No creativity at all with the passing game. Off tackle and inside zone read runs every set of downs. Bubble screens and short outside pass plays on obvious long pass situations. Who in their right mind thinks that will put points up on the board every drive? Come on bro, it doesn’t! Even when the players execute those plays well, they are relying on the opposing D to make a bad read or miss an assignment. Very rarely has that happened all season. Get real

 

[SpurOfTheMoment]

No no, no..... full stop.

You can't have it both ways. Ala the movie "A Few Good Men..." - If the game had already been won, as you claim - why the need to go conservative on offense???

*THAT* is the exact time to open up the playbook and let Sellers let it fly throwing. He needs all the practice he can get. So do our WR's. The second half, and entire season has been unacceptable on Offense. We are horrible. Changes need to be made at seasons end. There are no excuses.

Season end? It needs to happen NOW

 

[18IsTheMan]

You are missing the point entirely. It boils down to making the right play calls to put our offense in position and to secure a score. NO TEAM can do that when the play calling is so predictable and the selection is not throwing the opposing defense off guard. No creativity at all with the passing game. Off tackle and inside zone read runs every set of downs. Bubble screens and short outside pass plays on obvious long pass situations. Who in their right mind thinks that will put points up on the board every drive? Come on bro, it doesn’t! Even when the players execute those plays well, they are relying on the opposing D to make a bad read or miss an assignment. Very rarely has that happened all season. Get real

Who said anything about scoring points on every drive? I think more than 14 offensive points is a fairly realistic expectation though.

 

[SpurOfTheMoment]

Who said anything about scoring points on every drive? I think more than 14 offensive points is a fairly realistic expectation though.

Scoring on every drive is an expectation of a winning football team. When we go 3 & out the majority of the time without 3 or 7 points on the board more so than the majority of other SEC/NCAA teams then there is a serious problem, a problem that a lot of us are highlighting but not everyone is keen to listening to.

 

[gamecox4982]

When this defense has a bad game, this team will lose. This is a given!

 

[18IsTheMan]

When this defense has a bad game, this team will lose. This is a given!

And that's the thing. We basically need the D to be perfect. Every game.