Here is my attempt to talk about something theoretical.
Offense wins in ultimate. [Go here or here for what prompted this topic. And also, the fact that the redskins gained like 100 yards and still won a playoff game puzzles me.]
I feel I have played at or close to the top of the elite club level the last 5 years with zero. I have never been in the semis. This year was my first glimpse into it. Although we were not there, we were close. We had a chance. The first chance I have ever really had. And it was due to the offense.
What was the difference between the semifinalist and the rest this year, offense. The northwest + dog, all had their offense scoring consistently in the very big games. Same holds true for 04 when the northwest and Pike were scoring big on everyone.
When we struggled in 01 + 02 to attempt to get the semis, it was not due to talent (Masulis, Chase, Turtle, Ryder, OBrien, Greff, Sebby, Guyette, Cooter, Burkhardt, Kaiser, Severt...). And those were the guys we lost since then. We could play d on anyone. We could convert ds on anyone. But we did not have an offense that could consistently score. We did not have an o that when receiving the disc late in the game, you can count. We could score in one way, a long throw. Watching Furious, Jam, et al this year, that can score with the bomb or working it up the field.
03 + 04 saw us change to an o/d squad to maximize experience playing with each other. 03 lack of experience + talent. Followed by 04 where we were better, but still taking baby steps.
05 saw the same concept of o + d. Part of it this year was having enough talent that stocking the o team did not leave the d team bare. So we could avoid runs + make runs at the same time (not necessarily true in 03 + 04). Plus, this year we could score in multiple ways, something that the talented 01 + 02 teams struggled with.
Granted a d team can go on a big run. Convert a lot of goals. But if your O can't hold it, it means nothing. It is not so much that the other team knows they can win. It is that you are unsure if you can win.
College is different, less skilled player, rely on more d. But the 02 Stanford team and the 03 Hodag team were some of the best offenses ever in college ultimate. Maybe they could not have done great at the club level, but they took that basis of club ultimate and applied it to college. If you get a smaller group of guys who know each other and play well together with the disc....
What are some of the keys I see in the successful teams breifly mentioned above.
- Win with the huck but not die by the huck. Guys who can throw deep, guys who can run deep. But also guys who can throw short. Around the mark. Beat them underneath. A team knows that can beat you with the deep game, but they do not HAVE to beat you with their deep game. I would argue a lot of teams who lose in the quarters die by the huck.
- Interchangeable parts. The most important idea. Did anyone see the Kirkshank moving downfield move? If someone told me that after 04, I would have thought what the hell are they doing. It got them a championship and obviously a couple of guys and to fill in for his numerous throws around the disc. If your guys can ONLY handle, your o is in for some trouble. Same goes if they can only go deep.
- Scoring on the endzone. Duuuhhh. We had 2 extra possessions on the upwind endzone against Furious. My hammer gets sl-mo'd on disc 4. Luckily, they don't show the other turn. I am fairly certain Furious never turned it on the endzone against us.
- Hot receivers. Sockeye last year, even Pike last year. You need at least one or 2 guys that the defense is scratching their heads.
Offense wins in ultimate. [Go here or here for what prompted this topic. And also, the fact that the redskins gained like 100 yards and still won a playoff game puzzles me.]
I feel I have played at or close to the top of the elite club level the last 5 years with zero. I have never been in the semis. This year was my first glimpse into it. Although we were not there, we were close. We had a chance. The first chance I have ever really had. And it was due to the offense.
What was the difference between the semifinalist and the rest this year, offense. The northwest + dog, all had their offense scoring consistently in the very big games. Same holds true for 04 when the northwest and Pike were scoring big on everyone.
When we struggled in 01 + 02 to attempt to get the semis, it was not due to talent (Masulis, Chase, Turtle, Ryder, OBrien, Greff, Sebby, Guyette, Cooter, Burkhardt, Kaiser, Severt...). And those were the guys we lost since then. We could play d on anyone. We could convert ds on anyone. But we did not have an offense that could consistently score. We did not have an o that when receiving the disc late in the game, you can count. We could score in one way, a long throw. Watching Furious, Jam, et al this year, that can score with the bomb or working it up the field.
03 + 04 saw us change to an o/d squad to maximize experience playing with each other. 03 lack of experience + talent. Followed by 04 where we were better, but still taking baby steps.
05 saw the same concept of o + d. Part of it this year was having enough talent that stocking the o team did not leave the d team bare. So we could avoid runs + make runs at the same time (not necessarily true in 03 + 04). Plus, this year we could score in multiple ways, something that the talented 01 + 02 teams struggled with.
Granted a d team can go on a big run. Convert a lot of goals. But if your O can't hold it, it means nothing. It is not so much that the other team knows they can win. It is that you are unsure if you can win.
College is different, less skilled player, rely on more d. But the 02 Stanford team and the 03 Hodag team were some of the best offenses ever in college ultimate. Maybe they could not have done great at the club level, but they took that basis of club ultimate and applied it to college. If you get a smaller group of guys who know each other and play well together with the disc....
What are some of the keys I see in the successful teams breifly mentioned above.
- Win with the huck but not die by the huck. Guys who can throw deep, guys who can run deep. But also guys who can throw short. Around the mark. Beat them underneath. A team knows that can beat you with the deep game, but they do not HAVE to beat you with their deep game. I would argue a lot of teams who lose in the quarters die by the huck.
- Interchangeable parts. The most important idea. Did anyone see the Kirkshank moving downfield move? If someone told me that after 04, I would have thought what the hell are they doing. It got them a championship and obviously a couple of guys and to fill in for his numerous throws around the disc. If your guys can ONLY handle, your o is in for some trouble. Same goes if they can only go deep.
- Scoring on the endzone. Duuuhhh. We had 2 extra possessions on the upwind endzone against Furious. My hammer gets sl-mo'd on disc 4. Luckily, they don't show the other turn. I am fairly certain Furious never turned it on the endzone against us.
- Hot receivers. Sockeye last year, even Pike last year. You need at least one or 2 guys that the defense is scratching their heads.
posted by sometallskinnykid at 1:30 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home