Did Texas A&M football take a step back offensively against Bowling Green?
This Texas A&M football team has been a bit of an enigma over the first few weeks, especially on the offensive side of the ball. The uncertainty at quarterback has made them look a little harder to figure out than they may otherwise have been, but things go deeper than that.
Why all the issues all of a sudden? It looked like things had been well figured out against the Florida Gators, and all of a sudden the Aggies are struggling against Bowling Green. Yeah, the Falcons are good, but are they that good?
It’s that question that I’m setting out to solve. Going back to the tape with an eye to what this Aggie team is going forward, there are some interesting observations to be made.
Versatility in offensive approach for Texas A&M football
One of the things we praised so much about Collin Klein when the hire was made was his demonstrated ability to adapt his scheme to the strengths of his players. Though there are some who are currently disgruntled with Klein, I think this is an evaluation that has borne out.
We really saw it in full force against Florida. Marcel Reed, stepping in for Weigman, ran a ground-and-pound scheme very effectively against the Gators. Now, it helps that UF has a terribly coached defense and had no idea what they were doing half the time, but what the Ags did was impressive nonetheless.
But close observers of the team will be aware that the offense looked a little bit different against Bowling Green. Not totally—there were several of the same concepts—but what we saw out of the Aggies against the Falcons was reflective of a different approach by the coaching staff.
Two different approaches
To illustrate what I mean, let me discuss the opposite. Ever since he arrived in Oxford, Lane Kiffin’s teams have absolutely demolished lower-level competition. When his teams go out there, their goal seems to be to mercilessly exploit the weaknesses of the other team in order to put up as big of a number as possible.
But even though Kiffin’s teams look like absolute world-beaters against these low-level squads, it usually becomes evident midway through the season that the Rebs are no better than about a top-10, top-15 squad. Meanwhile, there are other teams that seem less dominant against the cupcakes, but end up treating Ole Miss like they’re a cupcake themselves.
But now let’s come back to the Aggies. Remember how, against McNeese, the Cowboys ended up putting together a long drive against the Aggie third and fourth stringers to eventually score? How during that stretch, Elko never called a timeout to sub back in the players who had been dominating McNeese?
I said at that point that this was reflective of a certain strategy on Elko’s part—one that makes a lot of sense. These guys, low on the Aggie depth chart, need snaps—game action. So Elko put them in.
McNeese isn’t an amazing team, but they found something and got it going against A&M’s depth. Elko, instead of stopping things to preserve a shutout by reinserting the starters or backups, decided to let these depth guys try to figure it out themselves. Because sometimes, you’re in a game, and you need to figure things out on the fly!
In other words, he viewed it as a learning experience for these players. It was as safe as a live-game environment could be, given that the Ags had a 52-point lead, but it was still a live-game environment.
While Kiffin and other coaches like him may view games like Furman and Georgia Southern as an opportunity to put up huge numbers, pad stats, and run successful concepts time and time again, Elko and his staff view them as a lab. What are some things we need to work on in game action? What are some concepts that we need to test against live opponents?
Testing the limits
This takes us back to the Bowling Green game. Conner Weigman is still out, and there’s a chance Reed has to start against Arkansas. With that in mind, Klein and Elko make the decision to see what Reed can do with a slightly different offensive scheme than he ran against Florida.
They push it downfield more. They rely on his arm more. They stay vanilla on the ground. This is all part of testing the limits of their QB2—how versatile can they get with him? Or do they need to stick with what we saw against Florida?
I don’t think the answer was a very positive one, to be honest. Reed’s inability to execute this shifted offensive approach pigeonholes him a little bit. But better to know now than be figuring that out against Arkansas.
Now, it’s still going to be a challenge. If the Hogs begin to stop the Aggie ground game consistently, we could see a complete slog of a game. And I think, too, this proves why the A&M staff chose Weigman coming out of camp—his ability in the passing game makes the offense much more versatile overall.
But just look at the two scripted drives that Reed ran. Both were touchdowns, and both felt far easier than most other parts of the game. Klein had those in his pocket, and Reed executed quite well on both. The rest of the game was about getting Marcel out of his comfort zone in order for the staff to see what exactly they had at the signal caller position.
Like I said, they may not be completely thrilled with the answer. But it’s important to understand the approach they were taking.