The Option could be CU's only hope

[EddieCrowder]

Let’s face it there are over 150 FBS teams playing currently,of which about 60 really matter in the big picture. Of those the vast majority want to run a “pro-style” offense, which incorporates multiple wide receivers,tight ends, and running backs, or they want to have a good passing game and be able to control the game by running, “balanced”if you will.
The exceptions are teams like the Service Academies, Oregon, and K-State. For the sake of my argument let’s take the service academies out of the equation, and talk about the others, and this is where the basic strength of the argument comes in. We cannot compete with USC, or Texas’s of the world, for the top talent to run the“pro-style” so automatically we are at disadvantage. This also applies to the defensive talent, everyone needs passrushers, and DB’s to cover all of these receivers, again disadvantage.
On the other hand Oregon and K-State are recruiting triggermen for the option and the sheer numbers of teams looking for this athlete being so much smaller they have their pick of the best (see C. Klein from our own backyard) it has also become easier to recruit running backs then it is to get a top flight wide receiver. The net result of this switch is an upgrade in speed and ability to succeed.
Now for the last point to my argument, in most cases that option QB that has helped you win 10 or more games comes back 2 or 3 years and becomes a senior. Whereas the “pro-style” QB is gone as a sophomore, or junior at best, for his millions in the NFL. This keeps you in a more frequent pressurized search for the next NFL capable QB. The option is also now so rare it is very difficult for even the best defense’s to prepare for.
I have always believed the beginning of the slow end to CU’s dominance in the early 90’s began in the practices of the Blockbuster Bowl against Gene Stallings’s Alabama Crimson Tide and Mac’s switch to a more balanced offense. The only thing that kept it from happening faster was a young man from Metairie LA. Named Kordell Stewart. He was a special talent not unlike today’s RG111, or Cam Newton in that he was a good passer as well as runner. A rarity a program cannot count on having all the time
I am not talking about the “wishbone” or “spread option” I am talking about a 90’s circa Air Force Flexbone, or more specific “Shootbone”. In short lining up in a run and shoot and the slot backs are the wishbone halfbacks, if you are interested I have attached a link to some info on this formation.


http://ncaastrategy.com/salukifans-shoot-bone-offense

 

[Walter White]

Yup, prob not a good idea to run a "pro-style" offense with guys who will never be pros.

 

[BuffLuke80]

Just my opinion but I think we lack the athletes in several areas to run it effectively. An offense that I'm more open to is a spread look, never thought I'd say that. It would have to be one where we could run it well. I don't wanna see 60 pass attempts a game. However, I'm more open to it now than ever.

 

[CanadianDuck]

If Oregon was to try and run a pro offense they would not be where they are today. The state of Oregon produces very little d1 talent and getting guys to move from sunny socal to Oregon is tough. So the only way for Oregon to compete was to move to a spread offense and take advantage of guys who are to small to play in a pro offense. Oregon has very few 4 or 5 stars but with the spread offense it's not a big deal. The biggest advantage is with a spread offense we don't need big 315 pound lineman so finding quality smaller lineman is easy since we won't have to compete with USC or the Alabamas of the world.

 

[SuperiorBuff]

I despise the spread and pray it never comes to CU.

 

[Quattro]

I despise the spread and pray it never comes to CU.

Why

 

[SuperiorBuff]

I don't like watching chuck and duck offense. I would much more prefer 4 - 5 yards per play in a power running attack that chews up clock.

 

[Dark Bohner]

I despise the spread and pray it never comes to CU.

I would gladly watch CU run circles around opponents with a Oregon/Arizona type spready that still incorporates tons of running the ball. Especially with the altitude factored in.

 

[1989Buff]

Oregon has only one player on its roster right now from the state of Oregon. That point is moot. They are getting some of the top talent in the nation, in nationwide recruiting. They recruit both California and Texas very well.

As to the OP's point, I absolutely agree. But where he wanted to discount the service academies, I think the service academies are what make the point so strong. THEY LACK TALENT. They make up for it with scheme. We too lack talent.

In addition, the other point raised was excellent. Switch offenses and you become a destination for players who play more to an option style (a large pool of less highly recruited people). NU used to get people that never would have gone there had a warm weather school nearer to them had been running that option-type system.

One other benefit (and I remember Mac saying this at the time) is that the option (and going against it as the defense in practice) builds toughness and smarts. It fosters the understanding of fundamentals. I would disagree about using a spread version (because I think you run into the top-flight athlete problems again) and suggest doing it the way Air Force and Georgia Tech do. They still incorporate spread elements from time to time, but they are pretty old school for the most part.

Now, there ARE downsides. That offense likely is limiting wins-wise. You probably aren't winning conference championships with it. You probably are losing in BIG bowl games to powerhouse teams with the talent to counter your schemes. But, considering where we are right now, should we be worrying about that? Mac's plan when he brought that offense in was to use it to get our win totals up, not to get to the pinnacle of the game. It's part of a progressive improvement program. If it got us 5 wins next year, and 7 or 8 the year afterward, how many of us would think it was worth it?

I see few downsides (and considering our desperate circumstances, I think something desperate is called for. This losing tradition has to be derailed...by any means necessary. And there just aren't that many ways to do it without the athletes. An option offense is one proven way...and it has been proven right here at CU to bring us out of a similarly horrible era in our history).

 

[BuffLuke80]

I despise the spread and pray it never comes to CU.

I hear ya, not a huge fan of it either. That said, I'm turning the corner a bit. I want a run oriented type spread tho, throwing it maybe 25 to 35 times a game. I don't want one where all we do is pass. Kids like playing in it, would probably boost recruiting as well. I think Sefo would be a nice fit for it.

 

[Jens1893]

I don't like watching chuck and duck offense. I would much more prefer 4 - 5 yards per play in a power running attack that chews up clock.

I´ll pretty much take anything over the crap we´re watching right now. If a spread is what it takes for us to compete and not have our asses handed to us every ****ing weekend anymore, I won´t mind and neither will you.

 

[buffs04]

The differences between CU and teams with good offenses has a lot more to do with the fact that RB, WR, and QB on our team are an absolute wasteland than what our scheme is or how good our lineman are. Our skill position players are flat-out garbage. You guys romanticize run-oriented offenses: do you think Oregon pounds the rock so effectively because of their scheme or because they consistently field teams with multiple superstar athletes at the RB position? Last year they were able to run out LaMichael James and DeAnthony Thomas both. There isn't an athlete on CU's team that belongs in the same league as either of those guys, save perhaps a healthy Paul Richardson on a good day. Their third best player at the position last year, Kenjon Barner, is also heads and shoulders above every player on our roster.

No old-school scheme nostalgia is going to change the fact that our players suck.

 

[Quattro]

I don't like watching chuck and duck offense. I would much more prefer 4 - 5 yards per play in a power running attack that chews up clock.

I'd take scoring 51 ppg, being a top 2 team in the nation, having won three straight conference titles, having the most potent offense in the nation, winning a rose bowl and going to the national title game. If we were putting up points like UA or ASU or Oregon or La Tech or WVU I bet you wouldn't be complaining much...

 

[EddieCrowder]

That is the beauty of the Shootbone formation, you are spreading out the Defense much like the spread option, it is in fact the Run and Shoot formation with the slot backs being a guy like Tony Jones. The difference is the QB lining up under center, as Mouse Davis put it it limits the offense's ability to have deception in the play action pass game. Remember back to the real run and shoot and the QB was always under center. It creates so much deception, think of Mike Pritchard on the inside handoff when we went option in the opposite direction. Frankly with Powell,and all the pint sized RB's on this team I think we do have the personel to run it. Dont forget Connor Wood is a better runner then we all think. and you recruit a kid that is ideal for this offense.

 

[BuffCat]

I despise the spread and pray it never comes to CU.

I don't care what kind of offense we run if it leads to winning some games.

 

[BuffLuke80]

The shootbone sounds kinda interesting. I like a pro style system but it just isn't working, we don't have the right personnel for it. I wouldn't mind changing to something else right now. Pretty sure Mac did that right before a Bowl against Bama once, I still hate Palmer btw, juking sumbitch lol.

 

[Liver]

get the guy from georgia tech... is he still there running the bone?

if we are going to do it, let's get coaches that know how to run it.

 

[EddieCrowder]

Basic fromation QB under center, two WR or one WR one TE, 2 slot backs, Powell lined up deep like an I-back

 

[Ralphandler1]

first of all I'll freely admit that I LOVE watching option football. Grew up watching CU, OU and NU play it and I really do like watching it. BUT there is a reason the option is no longer used. Players today are too big and fast on the defensive side to make this work. When a LB is as fast as the RB and 60 pounds bigger it makes it pretty hard to gain an edge. The only school in major D1 ball doing it now is GT and look at where they are (ie not much better off than CU). Pro-style will work at CU if we get the right players. We won a big 12 title with it. We won the north 4 times in 5 years with it. Sure we may not have USC type talent year in and year out. But the goal at CU should be 8-10 win seasons routinely with the pieces in place every couple years to make a legit run at a top 10 spot. We can do that.... and I think JE recruiting is headed the right way for this. But it does take time to get the pieces in place.

 

[EddieCrowder]

first of all I'll freely admit that I LOVE watching option football. Grew up watching CU, OU and NU play it and I really do like watching it. BUT there is a reason the option is no longer used. Players today are too big and fast on the defensive side to make this work. When a LB is as fast as the RB and 60 pounds bigger it makes it pretty hard to gain an edge. The only school in major D1 ball doing it now is GT and look at where they are (ie not much better off than CU). Pro-style will work at CU if we get the right players. We won a big 12 title with it. We won the north 4 times in 5 years with it. Sure we may not have USC type talent year in and year out. But the goal at CU should be 8-10 win seasons routinely with the pieces in place every couple years to make a legit run at a top 10 spot. We can do that.... and I think JE recruiting is headed the right way for this. But it does take time to get the pieces in place.

My question to you then would be what is it that K-State is running ?

 

[J.R. Ewing]

Let's face it. In terms of talent, we're in the bottom 1/4 of BCs teams, and we have quite possibly the worst coaching staff that has trouble teaching the absolute basics of football. You can make the arguement that we'd do slightly better by running gimmick 'X' offense, but until we get better coaches in here, we're going to get run off the field no matter how we line up.

 

[EddieCrowder]

Fair statement HouBuff, I do think the one thing that EB knows inside and out is the option, and don't forget Darien Hagan is still employed by this coaching Staff in some capacity

 

[EddieCrowder]

In fact this staff might be more suited to coaching the option

 

[leftybuff]

I would argue most CFB teams are not running a prostyle O. Looking at the P12, only Stanford and USC are truly prostyle. OSU and UW are close, but everybody else is spread. CU, well I must admit, looks like they are running pro style, but it is such a cluster, I have a hard time labeling it.

There are teams that run a traditional I formation run game. Wiscy, Bama and some others, but those teams have DOMINANT OL. Teams like Oregon Mizzou and others are competing by spreading it out. Look at aTm for example. They went form prostyle to spread and look pretty good. I don't really like the spread much, but it is awfully hard to argue with results. JMO.

 

[1989Buff]

The differences between CU and teams with good offenses has a lot more to do with the fact that RB, WR, and QB on our team are an absolute wasteland than what our scheme is or how good our lineman are. Our skill position players are flat-out garbage. You guys romanticize run-oriented offenses: do you think Oregon pounds the rock so effectively because of their scheme or because they consistently field teams with multiple superstar athletes at the RB position? Last year they were able to run out LaMichael James and DeAnthony Thomas both. There isn't an athlete on CU's team that belongs in the same league as either of those guys, save perhaps a healthy Paul Richardson on a good day. Their third best player at the position last year, Kenjon Barner, is also heads and shoulders above every player on our roster.

No old-school scheme nostalgia is going to change the fact that our players suck.

Were you under the impression that we had better talent in 1985 than we have now? Our talent was worse then. Embree was about the best player on the team.

And Ga Tech is sure doing a hell of a lot better than we are. The losses they do have are all close.

I mean, we can go on and on about how "our players suck" if you like...but you have to come up with a way to climb out of the hole we are in. We aren't getting top-flight name coach anytime soon (best bet is to get lucky with a guy no one knows yet, as we did with Mac, but "getting lucky" can't be your PLAN) and we aren't getting a slew of top-flight talent anytime soon. So, how do you rebuild a program "burned to the ground"? Gotta do it with wins (obviously)...but the wins are going to come slowly...a little at a time...are we all going to be patient with this (or th enext) coach's five or six year plan? Especially when the almost inevitable backslide occurs at some point?

Imagine changing coaches isn't an option...and imagine the calibre of players we have now is what we are likely to have for the next few years and NOW start thinking of ideas to improve win totals. Changing the offense is probably a pretty good thing to consider (if not the option, then something else).

 

[EddieCrowder]

Agree 100% 89Buff, I remember the media laughing at Mac when he switched to the wishbone, does anybody remember how they came up with the first "Wishbone QB" his name was Mark Hatcher. They lined up all the WR's and RB's and basiclly picked out the best "thrower". The net result was a trip we all thought was as good as going to the Orange Bowl. A trip to Anahiem for the Freedom Bowl against UW.
What I also remember was the previous year we were in the top 5 in the country in passing offense and couldnt beat our way out of a paperbag.

 

[BuffClass90]

I agree with the concept. The bone is a way for average athletic teams to really compete; then when they get better athletes they switch. That's how Mac built CU, but not what Embree's doing.

That being said, it's never gonna happen. Embree has talked repeatedly about maintaining his vision for the program and not getting distracted. Plus, Embree has shown very little flexibility in my mind...like keeping Jordan Webb as starter.

At least when he gets fired he can say he did it his way.

Oh well...

 

[Flatirons2]

Or the I bone as the architect of it is still in our backyard, no longer will the term "smashmouth" be an after thought....when was the last time we heard a coach or saw a stat for "pancake" blocks?

 

[Tea Rex]

Yeah no time to stop living in 1989. GT was successful at running it for a few seasons with Chan Gailey's players. Look at them now. These kind of ideas are why Buff fans are stuck living in the past.

 

[EddieCrowder]

Yeah no time to stop living in 1989. GT was successful at running it for a few seasons with Chan Gailey's players. Look at them now. These kind of ideas are why Buff fans are stuck living in the past.

Great ! give us an idea from 2012 then ?????? becuase the ideas i see are nothing more then whining, and if you read the post and info this offense isnt from 1989, and it isnt the wishbone,.... let us know when you have some wisdom to throw out there all of us have missed.