Texas Tech's big gaps can cause big headaches for defenses

  • Article by: PHIL MILLER , Star Tribune
  • Updated: December 20, 2012 - 6:39 AM

The Red Raiders spread out their offensive linemen more than most teams, and that can create problems for opposing defenses.


Texas Tech quarterback Seth Doege.

Photo: Max Faulkner, Mct - Mct

CameraStar Tribune photo galleries

Cameraview larger

The difference amounts to two or three feet in each direction, maybe 45 inches at the extreme, nothing so significant that the average football fan would necessarily even notice. But those roomy gaps between offensive linemen that Texas Tech has made a signature component of its offense have an outsized effect on the defense that must line up against it.

"It doesn't look to the naked eye like it's a big deal," said Gophers defensive coordinator Tracy Claeys, who has documented and catalogued the Red Raiders' wide-line tendencies in preparation for next week's Meineke Car Care Bowl. "But it can be."

By not standing shoulder-to-shoulder at the line of scrimmage, the Red Raiders essentially announce what the stats prove, too: They're a passing team first, second and third. A predominantly running team never would leave those lanes to the backfield unguarded, because a tailback would be smothered before he could take two steps.

But the Red Raiders, the second-most prolific passing team in the nation last season, don't hand the ball off much, only a little more than one-third of the time. Instead, they spread out the line to spread out the defense, then use a three-step drop to get the ball downfield or toward the sidelines before pass-rushers can get there.

"The philosophy of the big splits is that you don't need as athletic linemen, because you're just asking them to backpedal and not cover [running] lanes on most snaps," Claeys explained. "It means our edge rushers have to come further to get to the quarterback. It's like running around five mountains, and the ball is usually out before you get there."

And once it's out, good luck containing the Red Raiders' receivers. Texas Tech, with senior quarterback Seth Doege normally operating the offense and completing 70 percent of his passes, connected on 42 touchdown passes this season to 10 different receivers. Darrin Moore, a 6-4 senior who along with junior Eric Ward give Texas Tech two receivers who average more than 85 yards per game, also caught 13 touchdown passes. That's exactly as many as the Gophers defense gave up this season; only 20 teams in the nation surrendered fewer.

"It'll be one of the biggest challenges we've faced all year, if not the biggest," junior safety Brock Vereen said of the Red Raiders offense, which piles up 370 passing yards a game. "Those wide splits and the quick outs make it a lot harder to get sacks, so coverage will be key."

It also means linebackers figure to blitz less and cover receivers more, since Doege is so well-versed in dumping the ball in a hurry. Besides, the Red Raiders frequently split four receivers wide, keeping safeties busy and making the defense more vulnerable to draw plays and delayed runs.

"We're going to have to play a lot of different coverages, but there's a lot of pressure on the linebackers and safeties," Gophers coach Jerry Kill said. "They're going to have to make plays in space, because [Texas Tech] will throw those little 6- and 8-yard out routes. They just do a lot of stuff that makes you tackle them in space, and if you get too greedy, then they'll go over the top on you."

The extra room on the line also means that when Texas Tech does run the ball, it's easier to create a hole.

"That's one of their biggest plays, the full draw. Once they get inside leverage on a [defender], they push that guy out and the center blocks back, and the hole is bigger," Gophers linebacker Keanon Cooper said. "As much as they throw, it means we can't overplay the pass."

Of course, there are weaknesses to the wide split, too. One big one: "They can't double-team me," defensive tackle Ra'Shede Hageman, a disruptive force in the middle, said with excitement in his voice. "I'm going to be one-on-one a lot. I love the wide gaps."


    8 p.m. Dec. 28 vs. Texas Tech • Reliant Stadium, Houston • TV: ESPN (100.3-FM)

  • get related content delivered to your inbox

  • manage my email subscriptions


Team Irvin 7:15 PM
Team Carter
Miami 96 FINAL
Chicago 84
Oklahoma City 98 FINAL
Cleveland 108
Dallas 2 1st Qtr 10:31
New Orleans 4
Indiana 4 1st Qtr 9:12
Orlando 8
LA Clippers 0 1st Qtr 9:59
Phoenix 4
Minnesota 5 1st Qtr 10:19
Atlanta 4
Detroit 6:00 PM
Milwaukee 6:00 PM
San Antonio
Boston 7:00 PM
Golden State
Washington 7:00 PM
Houston 8:30 PM
LA Lakers
Team Toews 4 2nd Prd
Team Foligno 4
South Florida 53 FINAL
Connecticut 66
Boston College 64 FINAL
Georgia Tech 62
Virginia 50 FINAL
Virginia Tech 47
Indiana 70 FINAL
Ohio State 82
Stony Brook 61 FINAL
Binghamton 54
Cincinnati 56 FINAL
UCF 46
Maine 70 FINAL
Hartford 61
Monmouth 64 FINAL
Manhattan 71
Fairfield 67 FINAL
Marist 73
Rowan 48 FINAL
Princeton 96
St Bonaventure 48 FINAL
Rhode Island 53
Duke 77 FINAL
St Johns 68
Saint Peters 69 FINAL
Siena 55
Drake 40 FINAL
Wichita State 74
Vermont 61 FINAL
UMass Lowell 50
Seton Hall 57 FINAL
Butler 77
South Alabama 55
Northern Iowa 54 FINAL
Illinois State 53
Louisville 80 FINAL
Pittsburgh 68
UMBC 40 2nd Half 10:03
Albany 57
Niagara 35 2nd Half 15:13
Iona 50
Notre Dame 5:30 PM
NC State
Belmont 5:30 PM
Tennessee St
Creighton 6:00 PM
Northwestern 6:30 PM
Washington 7:30 PM
Senior-North 34 FINAL
Senior-South 13
Seton Hall 99 FINAL
Georgetown 85
St Johns 69 FINAL
Villanova 81
Arkansas 58 FINAL
Florida 72
Maine 56 FINAL
Vanderbilt 55 FINAL
Alabama 52
Lafayette 60 FINAL
Lehigh 65
SMU 57
Utah 51 FINAL
Washington 63
James Madison 73 FINAL
Coll of Charleston 53
Delaware 56 FINAL
Drexel 61
Hofstra 56 FINAL
William & Mary 57
Hartford 58 FINAL
Albany 82
Binghamton 54 FINAL
Stony Brook 67
Towson 63 FINAL
UNC-Wilmington 71
Wake Forest 80 FINAL
(17) Florida State 110
Georgia Tech 68 FINAL
Virginia 62
(22) Georgia 51 FINAL
(5) Tennessee 59
Drake 79 FINAL
Evansville 62
Iona 80 FINAL
Canisius 62
Fairfield 33 FINAL
Monmouth 59
Northwestern 75 FINAL
Penn State 76
Wisconsin 71 FINAL
Michigan State 77
Ohio State 79 FINAL
Purdue 71
Northern Iowa 57 FINAL
Indiana State 55
Butler 58 FINAL
Xavier 54
Creighton 93 FINAL
Marquette 75
Providence 42 FINAL
DePaul 90
Northeastern 77 FINAL
Elon 80
(2) Connecticut 96 FINAL
Cincinnati 31
Oregon 78 FINAL
Arizona 81
Bradley 46 FINAL
Loyola-Chicago 45
NC State 49 FINAL
(23) Syracuse 66
(7) Maryland 84 FINAL
Indiana 74
Illinois State 35 FINAL
Missouri State 58
Colorado 68 FINAL
Washington St 73
Tulane 45 FINAL
South Florida 64
(14) Kentucky 83 FINAL
Missouri 69
(9) Oregon State 68 FINAL
(13) Arizona State 57
Vermont 54 2nd Half 3:20
UMass Lowell 62
Iowa State 50 2nd Half 5:00
(8) Texas 49
Southern Ill 50 2nd Half 8:00
Wichita State 56
(15) Duke 28 2nd Half
(12) North Carolina 38
Miami-Florida 31 2nd Half 20:00
(4) Louisville 27
(21) Minnesota 31 2nd Half
(25) Rutgers 37
California 6:00 PM
(11) Stanford 7:00 PM
Connect with twitterConnect with facebookConnect with Google+Connect with PinterestConnect with PinterestConnect with RssfeedConnect with email newsletters





question of the day

Poll: Do you favor the plan for expanded athletic facilities at the U of M?

Weekly Question