Here's A Controversial Topic For This Board

the real grad88 · October 4, 2007

Here's a controversial statement for the board. A running game played at its top level beats a spread attack played at its top level every time. Am I glad Dodge is here? You bet. We need it for the fans...that's just the way college football has evolved. I am still an old schooler that believes that a running game that is fine-tuned will beat an all-out passing team (even if it is fine-tuned) every time. I even liked the Wish Bone! Now, that is not to say that La-La is that kind of a running team. I don't think they will beat us. Just making a philosophical point.

Does anyone not think that Nebraska made a mistake by trying to jump on the Spread Offense band-wagon. They used to be able to recruit the best running backs and offensive line in the nation. Now they compete against 100 schools for receivers and QBs that are capable of running a spread attack. You tell me...when were they more dominant? Arkansas, with the WishBone was the same way. Now look at them. They are average, at least among the majors.

I am telling you that defenses have figured out the Spread Offense. It ain't fooling nobody no more (bad grammar intended). I am still very hopeful and high on Dodge not necessarily because of his offense but because of the quality of coach he is and recruiting ability. Great athletes win games no matter what the system. I am counting on Dodge bringing in great athletes and knowing how to coach them. His relationship with the fans is also a great plus.

GoMeanGreen1999 · October 4, 2007

I am telling you that defenses have figured out the Spread Offense. It ain't fooling nobody no more (bad grammar intended).

You are so right, it sure didn't fool Ohio State in the National Championship game last year. Come to think of it, OU sure had it figured out in their bowl game.

Eagle1855 · October 4, 2007

There are some good points in your post. A good run game can act as a good defense. The Texans beat the Colts last year in November and it was almost certainly because they established a solid running game, keeping peyton off the field.

the real grad88 · October 4, 2007

You are so right, it sure didn't fool Ohio State in the National Championship game last year. Come to think of it, OU sure had it figured out in their bowl game.

Not sure of your point. Ohio State didn't figure anything out. Florida's defense dominated Ohio State all night. A stupid coaching decision to go for it on their own 30 yard line contributed to the dominoes falling.

CaribbeanGreen · October 4, 2007

That all used to be true... Times have changed, though. It's all cyclical. Nebraska hadn't been dominant for a few years by the time they brought in Callahan. What was the last team to win a national title with that kind of offense? Probably Nebraska, mid-nineties. Some run-first teams have won, yes, but it's a totally different style. That zone-read shotgun formation Texas won with and something similar the Tee Martin UT Vols won with... and those teams still threw a bit - one had just come from the Simms/Applewhite era and still was loaded at WR, and Tennessee had spent the previous few years with Peyton Manning throwing it around.

Frankly, the spread is, in a way, the modern version of the wishbone. The very unbalanced, gimmicky, unique-to-defend, talent equalizing offense of the moment. There are a lot of similarities there. Texas Tech doesn't have near the athletes of TAMU or most of their conference, but they've competed well because of that offense. That being said, you have to have SOME athletes -- see Baylor's failed spread (or Army's wishbone, for that matter).

My feeling is that you can't be a national title contender and be that one-dimensional anymore. Defenses are too big, fast, and sophisticated at the highest levels. Now, if you're a low to mid level school, you can go really unbalanced and sneak up on some people and be a Mumme or Leach and have a decent little record and mid level bowl every year, but that's usually the ceiling. Not saying that's bad - most schools would take it.

The 90% running team just isn't sexy anymore.... it's not as flashy or exciting, and it's harder to recruit to that way of thinking than it used to be. Nebraska stopped getting players.. you have to be absolutely physically dominant to win big when you're that one-dimensional to the run, and that's hard to achieve in this era. It may (and probably will) swing back, but this is the way it is now.

GoMeanGreen1999 · October 4, 2007

Not sure of your point. Ohio State didn't figure anything out. Florida's defense dominated Ohio State all night. A stupid coaching decision to go for it on their own 30 yard line contributed to the dominoes falling.

I was being sarcastic. Meyer runs his version of the "Spread" at Florida and he has been giving SEC teams fits since he got there. To make a statment that "defenses have figured out the spread" is a little misleading after watching Florida destroy OSU last year. OU hasn't figured out how to stop it, or at least they hadn't before their bowl game against Boise State. Yes I agree you have to be able to run the ball, but to make a blanket statement that defenses have figured it out and that teams that run the "Spread" are not fooling anyone anymore, I think is a bad statement.

the real grad88 · October 4, 2007

That all used to be true... Times have changed, though. It's all cyclical. Nebraska hadn't been dominant for a few years by the time they brought in Callahan. What was the last team to win a national title with that kind of offense? Probably Nebraska, mid-nineties. Some run-first teams have won, yes, but it's a totally different style. That zone-read shotgun formation Texas won with and something similar the Tee Martin UT Vols won with... and those teams still threw a bit - one had just come from the Simms/Applewhite era and still was loaded at WR, and Tennessee had spent the previous few years with Peyton Manning throwing it around.
Frankly, the spread is, in a way, the modern version of the wishbone. The very unbalanced, gimmicky, unique-to-defend, talent equalizing offense of the moment. There are a lot of similarities there. Texas Tech doesn't have near the athletes of TAMU or most of their conference, but they've competed well because of that offense. That being said, you have to have SOME athletes -- see Baylor's failed spread (or Army's wishbone, for that matter).
My feeling is that you can't be a national title contender and be that one-dimensional anymore. Defenses are too big, fast, and sophisticated at the highest levels. Now, if you're a low to mid level school, you can go really unbalanced and sneak up on some people and be a Mumme or Leach and have a decent little record and mid level bowl every year, but that's usually the ceiling. Not saying that's bad - most schools would take it.
The 90% running team just isn't sexy anymore.... it's not as flashy or exciting, and it's harder to recruit to that way of thinking than it used to be. Nebraska stopped getting players.. you have to be absolutely physically dominant to win big when you're that one-dimensional to the run, and that's hard to achieve in this era. It may (and probably will) swing back, but this is the way it is now.

My point is that Nebraska would still be winning had they stayed with what brought 'em to the dance. The national championship Nebraska teams would make hay out of the Texas Tech and Boise States of the world...teams that run the Spread at the highest level.

GoMeanGreen1999 · October 4, 2007

My point is that Nebraska would still be winning had they stayed with what brought 'em to the dance. The national championship Nebraska teams would make hay out of the Texas Tech and Boise States of the world...teams that run the Spread at the highest level.

So you believe that Nebraska would still be winning NC's running the offense they were? If that is the case, why did they remove Frank Solich as the head coach after he took over for Osborn?

Edited October 4, 2007 by GoMeanGreen1999

Dodge2007 · October 4, 2007

I was being sarcastic. Meyer runs his version of the "Spread" at Florida and he has been giving SEC teams fits since he got there. To make a statment that "defenses have figured out the spread" is a little misleading after watching Florida destroy OSU last year. OU hasn't figured out how to stop it, or at least they hadn't before their bowl game against Boise State. Yes I agree you have to be able to run the ball, but to make a blanket statement that defenses have figured it out and that teams that run the "Spread" are not fooling anyone anymore, I think is a bad statement.

Ask Texas Tech if OU hasn't learned to stop the spread and ask Texas as well, prior, to Vince Young's one great season. The thing about Dodge's spread is he only has two formations. Trips, or doubles. Never does he run a TE in the game to drag across the middle, to assist in the running game, nor does he run in a TE to assist in pass blocking off the edge.

Dodge's offense does not mix in any other formation then an occasional no back set (5 wide). OU, except on occasions, has defensed the spread awful well.

Edited October 4, 2007 by Dodge2007

CaribbeanGreen · October 4, 2007

My point is that Nebraska would still be winning had they stayed with what brought 'em to the dance. The national championship Nebraska teams would make hay out of the Texas Tech and Boise States of the world...teams that run the Spread at the highest level.

But they WEREN'T winning. They didn't change for the sake of change. Those were great teams, yes, but that was a decade ago, and they stopped winning.

The closest thing to a run run run team around here is Texas A&M, and I think they've beaten Tech twice in 10 years or something ridiculous? If you're gonna run all the time, you gotta have the horses (see Dickey, Darrell).

UNTLifer · October 4, 2007

So you believe that Nebraska would still be winning NC's running the wishbone? If that is the case, why did they remove Frank Solich as the head coach after he took over for Osborn?

Nebraska ran the Power I and OU, UT and some others ran the wishbone.

CaribbeanGreen · October 4, 2007

Ask Texas Tech if OU hasn't learned to stop the spread and ask Texas as well, prior, to Vince Young's one great season. The thing about Dodge's spread is he only has two formations. Trips, or doubles. Never does he run a TE in the game to drag across the middle, to assist in the running game, nor does he run in a TE to assist in pass blocking off the edge.
Dodge's offense does not mix in any other formation then an occasional no back set (5 wide). OU, except on occasions, has defensed the spread awful well.

OU, except on occasions, has defensed EVERYTHING awfully well.

CaribbeanGreen · October 4, 2007

Btw, good sports topic, Grad88.

GoMeanGreen1999 · October 4, 2007

OU, except on occasions, has defensed EVERYTHING awfully well.

You're right they have, I put the Boise State game in there and just said it wrong. I was trying to make the argument against the blanket statement that defenses have figured out how to stop it. Should have stayed with Florida on it.

Dodge2007 · October 4, 2007

Like I said in a previous post, coaches lose games that they are supposed to win.....Mack Brown

CMJ · October 4, 2007

I think what you need is a fast, superior defense. Nebraska won because of the "blackshirts" more than the option. Florida didn't win because Chris Leak ran Meyer's spread. They won because their defense was just nasty to go against.

Sure you need an offense to score. Florida won with he spread last year. Texas ran a bit more of a traditional offense - with Vince Young as their wild card. USC was explosive - but they didn't run "the spread". When LSU shared the title with them, the Tigers weren't a spread either, though it was somewhat similar to one. Look at Ohio State in 2002. That was an average offense, that was clutch in every sense. They found ways to get the job done when they had to. But what did they win with?

Defense.

CaribbeanGreen · October 4, 2007

You're right they have, I put the Boise State game in there and just said it wrong. I was trying to make the argument against the blanket statement that defenses have figured out how to stop it. Should have stayed with Florida on it.

No no, I totally agree with you. I was responding to D2007's statement about how well OU stops the spread when they play Tech or Texas (who doesn't really run the spread in my eyes anyway)... You're right, Boise moved on them big time. I'm just saying that saying OU stops something isn't really fair, because generally they stop everything.

GoMeanGreen1999 · October 4, 2007

I think what you need is a fast, superior defense. Nebraska won because of the "blackshirts" more than the option. Florida didn't win because Chris Leak ran Meyer's spread. They won because their defense was just nasty to go against.
Sure you need an offense to score. Florida won with he spread last year. Texas ran a bit more of a traditional offense - with Vince Young as their wild card. USC was explosive - but they didn't run "the spread". When LSU shared the title with them, the Tigers weren't a spread either, though it was somewhat similar to one. Look at Ohio State in 2002. That was an average offense, that was clutch in every sense. They found ways to get the job done when they had to. But what did they win with?
Defense.

Good points. You do have to have a good defense to go along with the type of offense you want to run in order to be successful.

CaribbeanGreen · October 4, 2007

I think what you need is a fast, superior defense. Nebraska won because of the "blackshirts" more than the option. Florida didn't win because Chris Leak ran Meyer's spread. They won because their defense was just nasty to go against.
Sure you need an offense to score. Florida won with he spread last year. Texas ran a bit more of a traditional offense - with Vince Young as their wild card. USC was explosive - but they didn't run "the spread". When LSU shared the title with them, the Tigers weren't a spread either, though it was somewhat similar to one. Look at Ohio State in 2002. That was an average offense, that was clutch in every sense. They found ways to get the job done when they had to. But what did they win with?
Defense.

Great points all - especially with the Ohio State team.. what was that, Craig Krenzel and company?? Yeah, that was defense all the way.

CMJ · October 4, 2007

Great points all - especially with the Ohio State team.. what was that, Craig Krenzel and company?? Yeah, that was defense all the way.

Exactly. I also forgot to mention this. When Texas upset USC in the Rose Bowl to win the National Title, they also won because of their defense. Yes, Vince Young was an absolute GOD in that game. But USC had a 4th and...I think it was 2 to win the game. Texas came up with the stop. USC couldn't hold a 12 point lead with about 6 minutes to go.

That USC team that was called one of the best ever, WAS a great OFFENSE. But it was one of Carroll's worst defenses, that basically was carried by the offense the whole season. How many times that season did they get down by big margins and had to have extraordinary comebacks? You saw what their best defense(and still a helluva an offense) did the year before to Oklahoma's vaunted squad. A shellacking.

Edited October 4, 2007 by CMJ

GoMeanGreen1999 · October 4, 2007

I may be have misunderstood the topic conversation - I thought the topic was do people prefer the traditional "run" style offense, or the new "Spread" style offense? I don't think anyone is saying that you don't have to have a good defense or special teams to win with either one of the offensive style that one prefers.

CMJ · October 4, 2007

I may be have misunderstood the topic conversation - I thought the topic was do people prefer the traditional "run" style offense, or the new "Spread" style offense? I don't think anyone is saying that you don't have to have a good defense or special teams to win with either one of the offensive style that one prefers.

I think the topic was which was more successful in the year 2007 - the spread, or a more traditional type of offense(I guess even the west coast offense is more traditional). My point was I don't know that it really matters at all - you don't win with it.

flyeater · October 4, 2007

I was being sarcastic. Meyer runs his version of the "Spread" at Florida and he has been giving SEC teams fits since he got there. To make a statment that "defenses have figured out the spread" is a little misleading after watching Florida destroy OSU last year. OU hasn't figured out how to stop it, or at least they hadn't before their bowl game against Boise State. Yes I agree you have to be able to run the ball, but to make a blanket statement that defenses have figured it out and that teams that run the "Spread" are not fooling anyone anymore, I think is a bad statement.

Yeah, your sarcasm was so clear and didn't come off as a wise-arse jerky remark, because context on message boards is always so obvious and never condescending.

Oh sorry, I was just being sarcastic.

the real grad88 · October 4, 2007

Someone mentioned defense. Well, great defense and the kind of football I am talking about do go together. Great defenses needs rest in order to be great, and the offense has to give them that rest. The great run-based offensive teams do just that. Tech drives down the field to score in a minute, and their defense is back on the field, and they can't figure out why their defense can't keep them in a game? I'm saying that great defense and great running games go together...and it almost always equals winning.