So as someone not as familiar wt the Flexbone - tell me the difference. What are the benefits of it? why is it hard to defend and prepare for? Why would it succeed in the Big 10 when our old 1990s version would not?
There - I served up a softball for you to hit out of the park. Let's see what you can do with it.
We never ran anything close to the Flexbone under Osborne. As many have pointed out, Osborne preferred to work the ball down the field with ISO, Pitch, and Counter. The option look was a change-up to break tendencies. He never had his quarterbacks actually read the defense - it was either a called give to the FB or a QB keep/pitch.
In the Flexbone, the quarterback is reading a defender most plays. The 'B' back, or what we would call the fullback, dives straight ahead most plays, and either gets the ball, or he doesn't. A guy like Yant would be PERFECT for this. This stresses a defense right away, because they have to take away that immediate threat. Many times, if the B-Back can break a tackle, he gets yards quickly. After that, it's a matter of getting a hat on a hat. If the QB reads the end or tackle crashing, he pulls, and options out like we've seen so much.
There is a very simple reason as to why it's hard to prepare for. Not only does no one else do it, almost every other defense is built to stop spread offenses, like ours right now. Most defenses, even in the B1G, need to have more defensive backs, more speed on the field, and this necessarily means less size. Also, as a coach, in every other game, you have to teach your players good habits and tendencies when reading twins, trips, Texas route concepts, defending mesh, Y-cross, run leverage against the zone read, and many other things to stop what USED to be new and innovative with the spread. But that's just it. The spread isn't new anymore. Defenses have caught up, and we all know that the red-zone is one of the main weaknesses of the spread. For instance, we gave up 3 field goals to Ohio State's spread on Saturday in the second half. Our defense is built to stop the spread.
They aren't built to sustain blow after blow from a B-Back, working down the field at 4-7 yards a play. They aren't built to recognize if a slot-back is curl-blocking or actually running a route, and this is what leads to many good gains on the outside for the QB and pitch-back.
It fits right into our recruiting wheel-house. I contend we can always recruit linemen and running backs. We could still get some receivers, but we wouldn't be wasting recruiting time and money trying to beat out the B1G's other heavy-hitters. We're not beating them now, so why play that game? Osborne understood this more than anyone. He recruited the best athletes he could for defense, and focused on linemen and running backs. He focused on development and repetition - the back-up could come in and do a serviceable job if the starter went down. This is a staple of the Flexbone, as well.
A ball-control offense like this helps the defense by keeping it off the field. It moves the chains, works the clock, and gives the defense a breather. Normally. No offense is without its 3-and-outs, of course.
I really could go on and on, but I don't get why everyone wants to keep doing more of the same, and then expect our offense to do better.
