Er - see Texas game for a prime example of head scratching? New routes, new formations, all within our scheme, but new looks that Texas was unprepared for. They were a good team then and had not mailed in their season at all, yet.
Now we have to decide whether we want our OC to be doing this sort of thing - exploiting various weaknesses, such as the power game on Missouri, the passing attack on OSU, the zone read on KSU - or if we should just do the same thing, over and over, and have an "identity" that happens to be so good nobody can stop it anyway.
I couldn't disagree more. The passes seemed more like desperation reactions to the fact that our zone-read wasn't working than the product of a pre-mediated game plan. I guess we'll never know for sure, but let me put this thought into your head: We tend to blame Burkhead, Kinnie, and Paul for all those dropped balls and claim that it was a lack of execution---not play calling---that doomed us. But which is more likely? That our players all miraculously failed to execute pass plays they'd been drilling all week? Or that the players failed to execute pass plays with which they were largely unfamiliar, having not run them regularly in practice leading up to the game?
I think it's clear that Watson figured we'd run all over Texas, and then hastily inserted some pass plays when he found that his run game was getting stuffed. If Watson comes in prepared to run and pass out of jumbo sets and the I-formation, we win that game.
Considering we ran the zone read over and over and over and over again in that game, even though it wasn't working, I'd say your on to something.