Will Riley's Speed Force Our Opponents Defense

[UNT Mean Green]

No, Riley's speed will make no difference. Why? Because we proved last season that we rely on the short underneath passes, obvious WR screens and running on predictable downs. Opposing teams will do exactly what they did last season...send multiple blitzers and dare us to get rid of the ball, which we will do for about 3 maybe 4 yards a pass. And we'll be tackled the second the catch is made.

Do you not think any of that had to do with the athletic ability and/or speed of the WR's? There's no way to stretch a defense when your fastest WR is a 4.6 or 4.7 40 guy. And a few long balls per game were attempted last season only to fall well ahead of the WR's because of their lack of speed...it was a lost cause. There is improved speed at WR this year, and that should help, and would expand the passing game playbook quite a bit.

[The Fake Lonnie Finch]

I really was responding to the Sun Belt side of the coin, but sure, we'll go ahead and throw Riley Dodge into the list of players you name as players these coaches have all seen. Pick out one of them that wasn't very difficult to defend. Who cares if all these coaches have seen it before? What we care about is whether or not we are MORE difficult to defend with Riley at QB than without him.

I do agree that this year hinges more on our defense and special teams showing signs of life, but an improved offense can't hurt. Can it?

This is where the 'UNT doesn't exist in a football vacuum' point is made. They know how to defend quarterbacks who can run. Every coach of every team we play has already done it against bigger and faster quarterbacks. So, they won't have to do anything special or new for Riley. They already know how to account for quarterbacks who are bigger and faster than what we'll throw out there.

Here is our problem - our offense isn't innovative or challenging to the degree that opposing defenses have to dream up new schemes. To wit:

(1) Because they know we're going to have our QB stand back in the shot gun everytime and throw the ball the majority of the time, linebackers don't have to worry as much about the run game. There's no guesswork to it. They can clog and crowd passing lanes against what is essentially a short passing offense. Or, they can blitz. It doesn't matter. There is no fullback and rarely a tight end for them to account for either as recievers or blockers.

(2) Along the same lines, because our opponents know we're not going to even attempt to establish the run, they can drop a variety of players into short zones and send any player from any part of the field to blitz.

(3) In normal offenses where the run game is used, receivers learn how to block. No so with us. All opposing defenses have to do against us is either (1) drop into a passing lane, or (2) wait for our receivers to catch a pass, then tackle them for the puny gain or pass break up. As long as our opponents are sure tacklers, our offense is ineffective. It didn't take them long to figure it out, as the 1-11 season following the 2-10 season demonstrated.

(4) Because we don't have a quarterback who has the ability to throw an accurate deep ball, opposing safeties are freed up to spy or go ahead and blitz. They could chase butterflies on most plays since our quarterback will rarely have time to throw that far downfield anyway...even if any of them did have the arm strength to do it more than once or twice a game.

(5) Because our head coach and offensive coordinator have little experience with the speed of the game and intricacies of the opposing defenses, they haven't shown the ability to adjust to what is being thrown at them. Nothing Dodge or Ford have in their high school bag of tricks will prevent opposing defenses from bringing the house to us series after series. Until they show they can, they will not be respected by opposing players or coaches in the schemes.

(6) Not having a fullback or tight end regularly simply exacerbates the problems. A blitzing linebacker or safety can simply shoot a gap. If a defensive end wants to stay at home and bat down short passes at the line, that option is more than available. Corners can blitz with impunity knowing short routes can be clogged with linebackers, safeties, or defensive ends and there are no backs to impede their progress to the quarterback.

My suspicion is that opposing coaches and defensive coordinators look at our game film and salivate at the opportunity. And, knowing there is virtually no experience in our quarterback ranks in 2009, I'd say we're going to see heavy blitzing right out of the gate. I won't matter whether Riley is pulled for ineffectiveness or injury. There is no credible back up and our opponents know that.

These are the very reasons that I say quit pretending like our success depends on the offense in 2009. It doesn't. It depends on the side of the ball where we have college coaches who can adjust in game - the defensive side of the ball. It will be Deloach, Nelson, & Co. and their charges that will keep us competitive in 2009...if we are to be competitive. All the offense needs to do is protect the ball.

Unfortunately, I don't think our offensive gameplanners understand that enough to swallow their pride and actually adjust their "high school title winning" playbook to better suit the college game.

[H-towngreen]

These are the very reasons that I say quit pretending like our success depends on the offense in 2009. It doesn't. It depends on the side of the ball where we have college coaches who can adjust in game - the defensive side of the ball. It will be Deloach, Nelson, & Co. and their charges that will keep us competitive in 2009...if we are to be competitive. All the offense needs to do is protect the ball.

I think that most everyone on this board would agree with you on this point.

[LoveMG]

dont expect miracles. riley cant make up 25 points a game difference by himself. all phases will have ot kick it up several notches.

[MeanMag]

This is where the 'UNT doesn't exist in a football vacuum' point is made. They know how to defend quarterbacks who can run. Every coach of every team we play has already done it against bigger and faster quarterbacks. So, they won't have to do anything special or new for Riley. They already know how to account for quarterbacks who are bigger and faster than what we'll throw out there.

Here is our problem - our offense isn't innovative or challenging to the degree that opposing defenses have to dream up new schemes. To wit:

(1) Because they know we're going to have our QB stand back in the shot gun everytime and throw the ball the majority of the time, linebackers don't have to worry as much about the run game. There's no guesswork to it. They can clog and crowd passing lanes against what is essentially a short passing offense. Or, they can blitz. It doesn't matter. There is no fullback and rarely a tight end for them to account for either as recievers or blockers.

(2) Along the same lines, because our opponents know we're not going to even attempt to establish the run, they can drop a variety of players into short zones and send any player from any part of the field to blitz.

(3) In normal offenses where the run game is used, receivers learn how to block. No so with us. All opposing defenses have to do against us is either (1) drop into a passing lane, or (2) wait for our receivers to catch a pass, then tackle them for the puny gain or pass break up. As long as our opponents are sure tacklers, our offense is ineffective. It didn't take them long to figure it out, as the 1-11 season following the 2-10 season demonstrated.

(4) Because we don't have a quarterback who has the ability to throw an accurate deep ball, opposing safeties are freed up to spy or go ahead and blitz. They could chase butterflies on most plays since our quarterback will rarely have time to throw that far downfield anyway...even if any of them did have the arm strength to do it more than once or twice a game.

(5) Because our head coach and offensive coordinator have little experience with the speed of the game and intricacies of the opposing defenses, they haven't shown the ability to adjust to what is being thrown at them. Nothing Dodge or Ford have in their high school bag of tricks will prevent opposing defenses from bringing the house to us series after series. Until they show they can, they will not be respected by opposing players or coaches in the schemes.

(6) Not having a fullback or tight end regularly simply exacerbates the problems. A blitzing linebacker or safety can simply shoot a gap. If a defensive end wants to stay at home and bat down short passes at the line, that option is more than available. Corners can blitz with impunity knowing short routes can be clogged with linebackers, safeties, or defensive ends and there are no backs to impede their progress to the quarterback.

My suspicion is that opposing coaches and defensive coordinators look at our game film and salivate at the opportunity. And, knowing there is virtually no experience in our quarterback ranks in 2009, I'd say we're going to see heavy blitzing right out of the gate. I won't matter whether Riley is pulled for ineffectiveness or injury. There is no credible back up and our opponents know that.

These are the very reasons that I say quit pretending like our success depends on the offense in 2009. It doesn't. It depends on the side of the ball where we have college coaches who can adjust in game - the defensive side of the ball. It will be Deloach, Nelson, & Co. and their charges that will keep us competitive in 2009...if we are to be competitive. All the offense needs to do is protect the ball.

Unfortunately, I don't think our offensive gameplanners understand that enough to swallow their pride and actually adjust their "high school title winning" playbook to better suit the college game.

The defense is the key to making a great college team. In any case.

[TIgreen01]

This is where the 'UNT doesn't exist in a football vacuum' point is made. They know how to defend quarterbacks who can run. Every coach of every team we play has already done it against bigger and faster quarterbacks. So, they won't have to do anything special or new for Riley. They already know how to account for quarterbacks who are bigger and faster than what we'll throw out there.

Here is our problem - our offense isn't innovative or challenging to the degree that opposing defenses have to dream up new schemes. To wit:

(1) Because they know we're going to have our QB stand back in the shot gun everytime and throw the ball the majority of the time, linebackers don't have to worry as much about the run game. There's no guesswork to it. They can clog and crowd passing lanes against what is essentially a short passing offense. Or, they can blitz. It doesn't matter. There is no fullback and rarely a tight end for them to account for either as recievers or blockers.

(2) Along the same lines, because our opponents know we're not going to even attempt to establish the run, they can drop a variety of players into short zones and send any player from any part of the field to blitz.

(3) In normal offenses where the run game is used, receivers learn how to block. No so with us. All opposing defenses have to do against us is either (1) drop into a passing lane, or (2) wait for our receivers to catch a pass, then tackle them for the puny gain or pass break up. As long as our opponents are sure tacklers, our offense is ineffective. It didn't take them long to figure it out, as the 1-11 season following the 2-10 season demonstrated.

(4) Because we don't have a quarterback who has the ability to throw an accurate deep ball, opposing safeties are freed up to spy or go ahead and blitz. They could chase butterflies on most plays since our quarterback will rarely have time to throw that far downfield anyway...even if any of them did have the arm strength to do it more than once or twice a game.

(5) Because our head coach and offensive coordinator have little experience with the speed of the game and intricacies of the opposing defenses, they haven't shown the ability to adjust to what is being thrown at them. Nothing Dodge or Ford have in their high school bag of tricks will prevent opposing defenses from bringing the house to us series after series. Until they show they can, they will not be respected by opposing players or coaches in the schemes.

(6) Not having a fullback or tight end regularly simply exacerbates the problems. A blitzing linebacker or safety can simply shoot a gap. If a defensive end wants to stay at home and bat down short passes at the line, that option is more than available. Corners can blitz with impunity knowing short routes can be clogged with linebackers, safeties, or defensive ends and there are no backs to impede their progress to the quarterback.

My suspicion is that opposing coaches and defensive coordinators look at our game film and salivate at the opportunity. And, knowing there is virtually no experience in our quarterback ranks in 2009, I'd say we're going to see heavy blitzing right out of the gate. I won't matter whether Riley is pulled for ineffectiveness or injury. There is no credible back up and our opponents know that.

These are the very reasons that I say quit pretending like our success depends on the offense in 2009. It doesn't. It depends on the side of the ball where we have college coaches who can adjust in game - the defensive side of the ball. It will be Deloach, Nelson, & Co. and their charges that will keep us competitive in 2009...if we are to be competitive. All the offense needs to do is protect the ball.

Unfortunately, I don't think our offensive gameplanners understand that enough to swallow their pride and actually adjust their "high school title winning" playbook to better suit the college game.

Alright...I'll bite, again.

What those of us that see Riley's running ability (and ability to execute the zone read) as being an asset are saying is that your 1st and 2nd points are hopefully thrown out this coming year. If you've ever watched Dodge's offense from his days at Southlake you know that he runs the ball MUCH more than what we've seen the first 2 years here. That may be b/c defenses in high school were more worried about the pass so they dropped back and opened up for the run. I really don't know on that point. But looking at teams that run offenses that are VERY similar to Dodge's (Missouri & Texas), you know that they also run a significant amount of designed QB runs, zone read, and draw plays to the RBs. For one reason or another we have never really established any of that in Dodge's 2 years.

I think the question is whether or not that was due to our QB's not being dangerous enough as a running threat or simply b/c we never forced the D to drop deep enough that it ever really opened up those plays for us.

Our strengths going into next season will be the experience of our oline and the depth at RB. One would think that we'll be looking to take advantage of those relative strengths by trying to establish the running game. If we do that, that means that our QBs will have to get into the act as well....and that's where you'd expect Riley's running ability to help this team.

To the point about UNT not existing in a vacuum. I know this. I know that coaches have seen running QBs before and that they KNOW how to stop them. The simple answer is that knowing how to do it and actually doing it are not the same. Riley's ability to run the ball will hopefully develop into a weapon for this offense. However, very few teams are successful if they can only do one thing. Offenses have to be able to develop a balance so that defenses can't just focus on stopping any one thing. During the past 2 seasons we have not been able to reach a balance...and it has made it easier to defend us--as you have pointed out again and again.

Edited June 5, 2009 by TIgreen01

[PHSCoach]

What those of us that see Riley's running ability (and ability to execute the zone read) as being an asset are saying is that your 1st and 2nd points are hopefully thrown out this coming year.

Riley will be able to execute the zone read, it will take a few games but it will happen, the only real problem is that his speed vs other team safties and LBers the advantage will go to them.

Our strengths going into next season will be the experience of our oline and the depth at RB. One would think that we'll be looking to take advantage of those relative strengths by trying to establish the running game. If we do that, that means that our QBs will have to get into the act as well....and that's where you'd expect Riley's running ability to help this team.

If Dodge puts some plays in that take the running back oustide the QB will not need to try getting around the corner. Last Vizza ran the ball about 8 times per game about the same as what he ran JoMO his SR. year. Running plays accounted for about 42% of the play calling. When you are behind that is alot.

Edited June 5, 2009 by PHSCoach

[The Fake Lonnie Finch]

If you've ever watched Dodge's offense from his days at Southlake you know that he runs the ball MUCH more than what we've seen the first 2 years here. That may be b/c defenses in high school were more worried about the pass so they dropped back and opened up for the run. I really don't know on that point. But looking at teams that run offenses that are VERY similar to Dodge's (Missouri & Texas), you know that they also run a significant amount of designed QB runs, zone read, and draw plays to the RBs. For one reason or another we have never really established any of that in Dodge's 2 years.

....

Our strengths going into next season will be the experience of our oline and the depth at RB. One would think that we'll be looking to take advantage of those relative strengths by trying to establish the running game. If we do that, that means that our QBs will have to get into the act as well....and that's where you'd expect Riley's running ability to help this team.

To the point about UNT not existing in a vacuum. I know this. I know that coaches have seen running QBs before and that they KNOW how to stop them. The simple answer is that knowing how to do it and actually doing it are not the same.

First, you can toss any high school references out in relation to college football. The vast majority of high school players aren't talented enough to play college football at any level...NAIA, Division III, FBS...none of them. Most guys play high school football because its a way to be popular and have a better shot at chicks. So, whatever Todd Dodge's teams did against other teams chalk full of mostly white, middle class, undersized, slow kids who were more interested in cheerleaders and drill team dolls and where the party was after the game is completely irrelevant. Kids on scholarship at FBS schools are a different breed altogether.

Second, the offense Dodge runs is nothing remotely like what Texas and Missouri run. Both UT and MU employ the use of fullbacks and tight ends. They both try to establish a credible run threat every game. We do none of those things.

Third, yes, you'd expect us to run more. A coaching staff with any modicum of sense would look at what we have coming back versus the rank inexperience of what will compose our passing attack and resolve to a 50/50 split in running and passing. I hope this is the case. However, I severly doubt it. Even though it doesn't work at this level of competition, Dodge and Ford seem hell bent on running their offense anyway.

Finally, knowing how to do it and doing it can be one and the same when you have a coaching staff that knows how to teach it. Even the Sun Belt these days is full of coaches with enough experience to know how to get the job done. Dodge and Ford make it that much easier by taking fullbacks and tight ends out of the equation.

At the end of the day, there is simply too much speed at the FBS level on defense to try to run the offense Dodge and Ford are running. It doesn't matter who the quarterback is. If he's not protected and there is no threat of a run game, then it becomes an opposing defensive coordinator's dream game. UNT isn't playing high school football. You can't just snap the ball back to an unprotected quarterback and expect him to outrun defenders with no blocking. Texas didn't even do that with Vince Young.

[TIgreen01]

Riley will be able to execute the zone read, it will take a few games but it will happen, the only real problem is that his speed vs other team safties and LBers the advantage will go to them.

If Dodge puts some plays in that take the running back oustide the QB will not need to try getting around the corner. Last Vizza ran the ball about 8 times per game about the same as what he ran JoMO his SR. year. Running plays accounted for about 42% of the play calling. When you are behind that is alot.

Good points. I'd still be inclined to think that he'd beat most LBers one-on-one, but probably not most DBs.

So, if we ran the ball 42% and were behind in all but 2 games after the 1st quarter, I wonder what our running percentages would go to if we could actually play some defense and stop teams from outscoring us early? Though some of those numbers could be due to us trying to run the clock (at least in KSU, Rice games) out....

[TIgreen01]

First, you can toss any high school references out in relation to college football. The vast majority of high school players aren't talented enough to play college football at any level...NAIA, Division III, FBS...none of them. Most guys play high school football because its a way to be popular and have a better shot at chicks. So, whatever Todd Dodge's teams did against other teams chalk full of mostly white, middle class, undersized, slow kids who were more interested in cheerleaders and drill team dolls and where the party was after the game is completely irrelevant. Kids on scholarship at FBS schools are a different breed altogether.

Ok, then what would you have me reference then?! UNT's 1992-1993 offense?!! All we have to go on (recently) is his HS experience....and he's mostly running the same offense in D1 and having pretty decent success, considering all the roster turnover and playing underclassmen at QB and center (and most of the oline, for that matter). Dodge's problem, thus far, has been the complete no-show of our defense and special teams...not a totally anemic offense.

Finally, knowing how to do it and doing it can be one and the same when you have a coaching staff that knows how to teach it. Even the Sun Belt these days is full of coaches with enough experience to know how to get the job done. Dodge and Ford make it that much easier by taking fullbacks and tight ends out of the equation.

At the end of the day, there is simply too much speed at the FBS level on defense to try to run the offense Dodge and Ford are running. It doesn't matter who the quarterback is. If he's not protected and there is no threat of a run game, then it becomes an opposing defensive coordinator's dream game. UNT isn't playing high school football. You can't just snap the ball back to an unprotected quarterback and expect him to outrun defenders with no blocking. Texas didn't even do that with Vince Young.

So, the entire point of this thread is whether or not Riley's running ability will make opposing defenses play us any differently. You appear to answer the question entirely independently of what Riley's effect on the actual running game will be. By saying that he'll not have the help of a running game behind him, you take him out of the equation for helping to establish the running game himself. That's missing the point, imho. In the offense that Dodge is trying to install, the QB is an integral part of the running game. He's not just a drop back passer. So, either he helps us establish the run, or he doesn't. If we can't establish the run, then you'll see more of what you've been seeing for the last 2 years. No argument on that point.

[Got5onIt]

Is he a different QB than Vizza? Of course he is. He can bring a different style of playcalling to the O with his athletic ability. However, TFLF is right, most spread O's utilize an athletic QB. It will be nice to see what he can do. However, I'm not expecting him to be an outright game changer. We're not talking Vince Young or Matt Jones here, folks. This offense will still hinge on his arm & Cam's legs, IMO.

[Mean Green 93-98]

Todd Reesing and Riley have some obvious similarities. Here's an article about how the Jayhawks use Reesing successfully.

http://www.ncaa.com/sports/m-footbl/spec-rel/060509aaa.html

"Sometimes he has to hold the ball longer to find some open throwing lanes," Warinner said. "He can't just throw it right on the break because there could be somebody 6-foot-5 in front of him."

It's an unorthodox style that the Jayhawks practice, preaching that Reesing run all over the pocket just to find the right widow, but he's expertly developed the skill of throwing accurately when he's on the move. His highlight reel is filled with plays in which most quarterbacks would have either taken sack or simply thrown it away.

The Jayhawks, out of the spread, do it with precision timing, precision passing and, of course, a little bit of faith.

"The whole connection between the quarterback and the receiver is based on him being in the right spot at the right time," Reesing said. "So there are plenty of times when I can't see my receiver when I let go of the ball and I'm sure that he can't see me."

Yet they connect. At least five times a game Reesing is throwing a completely blind pass, Warinner said, but rarely does he get hurt by it.

[FirefightnRick]

My only question in regards to the running game is this. Should we ever get ahead late in the game can we control the clock by running the ball? So far I haven't seen us able to do that? I would think a Tightend and a fullback would help in this regard but that's just me.

Rick

[UNTLifer]

So, whatever Todd Dodge's teams did against other teams chalk full of mostly white, middle class, undersized, slow kids who were more interested in cheerleaders and drill team dolls and where the party was after the game is completely irrelevant. Kids on scholarship at FBS schools are a different breed altogether.

Sorry, but compiling a 79-1 record in the state's highest classification while winning state a number of times does not equal playing all of your games against Richey Rich and his gang of pasty white guys.

[The Fake Lonnie Finch]

Sorry, but compiling a 79-1 record in the state's highest classification while winning state a number of times does not equal playing all of your games against Richey Rich and his gang of pasty white guys.

Apparently, it does because he's 3-21 against teams composed of mostly non-white, college scholarship players. The point remains the same - he's coaching against teams with fast athletes now, so he needs to seriously scrap a major portion of the high school offense playbook he brought. But, again, because the offensive coordinator is also a high school coach, it isn't likely to happen.

Therefore, my original answer stands: Riley "speed" will not force our opponents defense to do anything differently than they did in 2007 or 2008. The only thing that will cause our opponents defense to change would be a change in the offensive philosophy. That ain't happening. So, we're pulling for the defense and special teams to close the gap for us in 2009.

[The Fake Lonnie Finch]

My only question in regards to the running game is this. Should we ever get ahead late in the game can we control the clock by running the ball? So far I haven't seen us able to do that? I would think a Tightend and a fullback would help in this regard but that's just me.

Rick

You're not alone. Mack Brown, Urban Meyer, Bob Stoops...and all of the other 115 FCS college coaches would agree with you. We're about three months away from finding out whether the coaches who run the offensive side of the ball have learned anything in their two years on the college sideline.

[UNTLifer]

Apparently, it does because he's 3-21 against teams composed of mostly non-white, college scholarship players. The point remains the same - he's coaching against teams with fast athletes now, so he needs to seriously scrap a major portion of the high school offense playbook he brought. But, again, because the offensive coordinator is also a high school coach, it isn't likely to happen.

Therefore, my original answer stands: Riley "speed" will not force our opponents defense to do anything differently than they did in 2007 or 2008. The only thing that will cause our opponents defense to change would be a change in the offensive philosophy. That ain't happening. So, we're pulling for the defense and special teams to close the gap for us in 2009.

Can you not twist the facts or change direction just once? Your comment that I responded to was that Southlake was successful because they played against:

other teams chalk full of mostly white, middle class, undersized, slow kids who were more interested in cheerleaders and drill team dolls and where the party was after the game

I responded that you don't post the record Dodge did at SLC, win 4 state championships, etc... playing teams of this nature. Maybe if it was only a district winning streak or district championships, but they won the highest classification. You don't do that beating up on teams of what you described, you do it by beating the best teams in the state on a weekly basis.

I understand you don't like Dodge and Ford, but at least be honest in your assessment. Anyone that downplays what they did at SLC is just plain wrong in their assessment.

[Green Crazy]

Can you not twist the facts or change direction just once? Your comment that I responded to was that Southlake was successful because they played against:

I responded that you don't post the record Dodge did at SLC, win 4 state championships, etc... playing teams of this nature. Maybe if it was only a district winning streak or district championships, but they won the highest classification. You don't do that beating up on teams of what you described, you do it by beating the best teams in the state on a weekly basis.

I understand you don't like Dodge and Ford, but at least be honest in your assessment. Anyone that downplays what they did at SLC is just plain wrong in their assessment.

i believe tflf is a lawyer of some sort, so asking him not to twist the facts or change direction is against his nature.

[Dodge2007]

Riley will be fine. Defense and special teams will win us games. The offense will be the exact same from the previous two seasons. Its up to the defense and special teams to show up and keep it close.

Riley will dink and dunk early on. Dodge will play it smart his first three or four starts with his son. Riley will set every freshman record imaginable considering he will be starting every game. That will be great for his confidence for next season. We are still one more year away but we should expect huge gains in the OL play (keeping Riley from getting the crap knocked out of him), we should have more legitimate WR's instead of just one possession receiver and an occasional snag by Brock. Hopefully, the wideouts catch the ball this season. I look for Dunbar in the slot and more screens to Lance as well.

The bulk of Vizza's rushing attempts were from sacks. His "planned" rushes were good. Riley's zone read rushes will be good and he will net possibly more yardage. Riley is faster but they both have quick burst speed. Vizza brought the fullback mentality that set a different type of tone. Riley brings the big gainer opportunities. Arm strength and toughness is a different story.

But its Deloach's season to make strides or he and Dodge will be burnt toast.

[Greendylan]

Apparently, it does because he's 3-21 against teams composed of mostly non-white, college scholarship players. The point remains the same - he's coaching against teams with fast athletes now, so he needs to seriously scrap a major portion of the high school offense playbook he brought. But, again, because the offensive coordinator is also a high school coach, it isn't likely to happen.

Therefore, my original answer stands: Riley "speed" will not force our opponents defense to do anything differently than they did in 2007 or 2008. The only thing that will cause our opponents defense to change would be a change in the offensive philosophy. That ain't happening. So, we're pulling for the defense and special teams to close the gap for us in 2009.

I see your point, but comparing Dodge's final five high school years (79-1) to his first two years of college (3-21) is a little misleading. His first two years of high school coaching he was 8-12.

[NT80]

I see your point, but comparing Dodge's final five high school years (79-1) to his first two years of college (3-21) is a little misleading. His first two years of high school coaching he was 8-12.

Also, the spread offense in Dodge's high school coaching years was not as widely used as it is now. More is known now (especially in 1-A college ball) about how to defend the spread. In other words it's not so special anymore. Either new wrinkles are needed to make it special again or we need superior athletes to run it better than it can be defended by our opponents.