Around the Big Ten

[UMStan White]

Forgetting about MSU is easy. They haven't been relevant since the early sixties. As Aesop's story of the spendthrift teaches us "one swallow does not a spring make".

[Jeff Buchanan]

.......What I think is the interesting question is what system works best with optimal talent? ......

Before we go any further with this question, let's be right up front and state that using terms like the Spread or Power/Pro-set are terrible terms to use to talk about the advantages or disadvantages of college football offenses.

What might work is to talk about a continuum of offenses in college ball (NOT the NFL) that has at one end an entirely spread offense with 3-4 wides all the time, one of them a slotty guy, an option type/dual threat QB in the shotgun all the time and I'd probably include gap blocking and throw in a speedy tailback type guy that sometimes but not always lines up a step or two laterally and somewhere around the QB.

On the other end of the spectrum is the classic, for lack of a better term, I- Formation offense where there are 2 wides at most and usually just one on the play side with a flanker or TE set out to the other side, a drop back QB who may or may not have quick feet, power blocking on the OL a Full Back and a Tailback.

I don't think any of the current coaches that are coaching the truly competitive teams are doing either of these things to the extremes of the continuum. They're doing hybrids that flow back and forth along the continuum depending on down and distance for one or just personal preference maybe based on the skill set of the players on the roster.

I'd go as far as to say, if you've got a read option in your playbook, your into the spread half of the continuum. If you don't your into the I-Form side.

So, with that having been said, which system is best? You have to have power or you're not going to score touchdowns against good defenses with talent at the hybrid space player positions that can limit big plays from spready offenses and track down and snuff out the read option.

My preference, if I were doing it would be an offense that is on the I-Form side of the continuum but not so far as to make your team look like a Woody or Bo coached team of the 60s and 70s. I like the read option. I like spreading the field with every offensive play challenging the defense in all three dimensions. I like a dual threat QB that can run the hybrid power offenses when that's called for so you can demoralize and beat up an opponent's good front four as the game wears on.

While I know exactly where ufm is (pretty spready but still likes power), I'm still not entirely sure where Harbaugh is in all of this. Right now, I think he is clearly pretty far from center and on the I-Form power side of the continuum but I don't think he'd have any problem moving to the middle or even slightly spready if he had a QB that could do that. Rudock can't so he's doing what he thinks his players can do well right now.

[iam416]

Agree entirely re continuum.

I don't think any of the current coaches that are coaching the truly competitive teams are doing either of these things to the extremes of the continuum. They're doing hybrids that flow back and forth along the continuum depending on down and distance for one or just personal preference maybe based on the skill set of the players on the roster.

Not sure I agree with this. "Spread" teams aren't putting their QB under center...ever. It drives me nuts, but OSU's QBs won't take a snap under center this year. Further, they're never really go double tight. They have their power run package, but it's a power run package that is "spread" based.

I'd go as far as to say, if you've got a read option in your playbook, your into the spread half of the continuum. If you don't your into the I-Form side.

I think this is a good rough point of demarcation. I'd also look at percentage of snaps taken under center. Arizona, Oregon, Ohio State, etc...roughly 0%. Alabama is probably closer to 50%. M is probably more along the lines of 75%. You could also look at whether a team carries a FB.

As for the "better" system -- yeah, it's so personnel dependent. For Ohio State, they have the talent to be great either way, but I guess I like bringing all their weapons to bear. Adding a FB or another TE to OSU's offense means removing a really good player for one that is considerably less dangerous. I want Michael Thomas, Jalin Marshall, Braxton Miller, Curtis Samuel and Ezekiel Elliot on the field at the same time.

M's current roster would be a disaster in the spread. They're not very good in the I-side of things either, but there's a hope for functional competence. I think JH will move more to the "middle" as things progress. I think he'll aim for QBs that are athletic enough to pose a real running threat. I think Gentry is in the mold.

At the end of the day, however, I've never really thought of JH teams as offensive juggernauts. His teams seemed to focus on winning the LoS on both sides of the ball and eventually grinding out a win. In many ways his game philosophy is similar to Coach Tressel's.

And that brings me to another point -- this is a particularly interesting discussion because Ohio State basically went from near one end of the continuum to the other end. The results seem to favor UFM's approach.

[Jeff Buchanan]

Good points.

I think you're exactly right about Harbaugh and where he would like M's O going foward.

Add O'Korn to that mix of potentially dual threat QBs. I see JH looking for guys less like Luck and more like a healthy Braxton.

[iam416]

Yeah, I'm not familiar with O'Korn other than I've "heard" he looks like the best of the bunch right now. If he can run a little then JH will use that. Frankly, JH is too smart and too competitive to cede even a smallish 5-yd running threat from a QB.

I dunno if JH will go after Braxton types -- there aren't many of those. I actually could see him going after JT Barrett types. JTB is, IMO, a passer first but he's a really efficient runner with just enough giddy up to pose more than a 5-yd threat. They abused MSU last year with QB leads (Elliot is a better blocker than a runner, IMO -- just killer good on lead blocks).

All interesting stuff. It'll be interesting to see how JH brings his offense along. It'll be interesting to see if he adjusts his defensive scheme when playing a little better offenses -- the theory would be to play less aggressive and be less susceptible to big plays and keep things in front of you to avoid getting caught in a shootout. That said, if the DL can control the LoS he'll have some latitude there. BTW-Wormley finally showed. I really like him out of HS - he was one of the kids Hoke got that I thought was a real loss. Glad he's showing a bit. Well, glad only in a self-congratulatory way. Otherwise, F Michigan.

[WM Wolverine]

O'Korn can run a lil but teams aren't going to be afraid of him running, he's not going to beat you with his running. He might make you pay by picking up a few first downs if you neglect his ability to scramble...

Wormley showed flashes the last couple seasons so this season isn't a surprise. He's always had all B1G potential. Really good athlete for his size and consistently showed much better technique than he ever has to date vs Utah.

[Hannibal]

If I had to guess now, I'd say that it'll be Gentry next year. O'Korn strikes me as another typical transfer candidate -- we're excited about him now but in time we'll find out why his previous program wasn't too depressed about losing him. Nice to have that extra bullet in the chamber though.

If Morris continues to look like a lost cause then I wouldn't mind seeing Gentry's redshirt burned. QB recruiting has been good so we might not need his fifth year and 2016 is a hardcore "win now" year with a cupcake OOC schedule, Penn State at home, and our only decent shot at beating OSU for the next five years.

[iam416]

Yeah, Ohio State is going to lose a bit for 2016. Woof. As I mentioned in the OSU thread, their next 9 games should provide lots of playing time for young 'uns, so there's hope. And they'll still have JTB.

Speaking of which, another factoid that may interest only me....JTB ran one time and passed one time against VT...and finished with more total yards than Christ Hackenberg.

[Hannibal]

And that brings me to another point -- this is a particularly interesting discussion because Ohio State basically went from near one end of the continuum to the other end. The results seem to favor UFM's approach.

The results favor UFM's approach and if you ask me, the results have favored his approach to the game since at least the 1980s. Tresselball/Lloydball is a good way of handcuffing your own talent and IMHO the logic defending it has always been flawed.

[iam416]

As one who once ardently defended that approach I tend to agree. With all things being equal, the "spready" offenses will score more, IMO.

I was watching Ken Burns Civil War last night and they were talking about the Monitor-Merrimack battle. At that moment in 1862, every other navy in the world became obsolete. They just didn't know it. Sort of reminds of the spread in CFB in the early 2000s - though not quite as extreme. I was blind to it, but it was already written.

The final nail in the coffin for my opinion has been this OSU squad and the way they can still run big-time power. And it is "the way" as much as the fact that they can. Using horizontal constraints instead of double tights and keeping all your real danger threats on the field. It can be devastatingly effective.

[entropy]

what is really interesting is if Solich chose Bobby Newcombe over Crouch, would UNL have been one of the pioneers of the spread? They had the option base and Bobby was a good passer.. they were heading that way until Crouch won the battle... and the job full time.. and the offense changed drastically. Hoss and I discuss that from time to time. That the safe play might have cost UNL more in the long run, especially in recruiting.

In the 90's UNL was different from most schools and I think that helped them in recruiting.. the question I can't answer is would the same thought benefit UNL today and is Riley's offense really the right choice? Competing with OSU, auburn, oregon, most of the country for spread QB's will be a challenge. Then again, I've never liked statue QB's and one reason I never liked watching Michigan football...

I still would love to see TO's offense with better WR's.. I think it would still dominate.

[entropy]

and talent.. we've always told you statue QB's were not the best choice. =)

I think it is funny how times have changed and even the ESPN talking heads have changed their tune on QB's who can make yds with their feet.

[iam416]

Heh. I haven't heard that name in years. NUKE 'EM!!!!

TO's offense would dominate.....if they had tommIE, Larry and a hellacious OL.

[entropy]

Heh. I haven't heard that name in years. NUKE 'EM!!!!

TO's offense would dominate.....if they had tommIE, Larry and a hellacious OL.

one could argue, most offenses would dominate with the right players..

but I think that system still has advantages in today's CF environment. The play action capabilities were a nightmare for D's. Miller would be an absolute stud in that system.. even more so than he is today, imo. Plus, TE's loved it. And you know my feelings on TE's as weapons.

[Hannibal]

The tipping point might have been in the 1980s when the Miamis, Florida States, and Texas A&Ms all converted to heavy blitzing and attacking defenses that piled up against the run and applied pressure to the QB. For about a decade and a half, the national powerhouses in the Southeast played tons of low scoring games, even with a ton of offensive talent on the field. The spread offenses have broken those defenses. You can no longer pack guys to the line of scrimmage because you will give up 60 second TD drives and you can't run downhill on every play because you will get constantly burned by all of the option and misdirection. I wonder if we will see defenses gradually return to the "bend-but-don't break", "read and react" type of stuff that were more popular in Bo's days. Like the stuff that Iowa ran with Norm Parker or OSU under Heacock. I can't remember a Norm Parker defense ever giving up a ton of points in a game, even to a prolific spread team.