Is the Option Dead?

[Hastings_husker_in_plano]

IMO there was never a problem with that O . Maybe in execution. But it would still work today.There has been no iredible discovery to negate it. Just a silly coach with a silly sceme that might aswell be written in chinese . Solich didnt help much either.

[I am I]

coming from a family whose father coached very successfully in at the college level for over 25 years, i can say with some levelheadness that indeed, it is important to have some kind of option game.

 

this is true for the high school and college games because the players aren't as conditioned, disciplined, or trustworthy 100% of the time. when running a play that has different 'options', all it takes is ONE breakdown by one defender to get a good gain. then later, to keep them guessing, to keep them off balance.

 

an 'option' can be run out of the gun (which is like WVU), out of a multiple set (like Florida), or out of the I (like old Nebraska U).

 

the way we ran it in the 80's was straight triple option and clearly couldn't be run today. a quick trap by the FB or pull it and attack the D-ends and wait to pitch or keep would, nowadays, get the QB hurt or would not gain much yardage because safeties and OLB are sooo much faster and have much better range today.

 

in the 90's the triple option morphed into belly options, counter options, and read options. couple that with great power running (i.e. with a fullback lead on almost all plays), and good effective play-action passing and it is possible with the right players to be fully effective today. yes, a more capable thrower and a more agile running type quarterback are needed, along with countless hours of repetition and chemistry.

 

i personally think these hybrid type offenses run by WVU and Florida, where the QB is a runner, passer, and distributor is MUCH more effective at the COLLEGE level where great talent is great talent, but there will always be a weak link in the D. having a few option plays keeps the D honest and makes them prepare in pratctice for a long time to just defend a few basic plays.

 

in today's college football world you have to be able to spread the field and open lanes against the defense. but to keep them in check it is important to attack with plays that force them to defend and be responsible. and that is what the option does.

[Spiderman]

The option, as we know it, is dead. I don't think we'll see a team run it and win championships like NU in the 90's.

 

I don't buy the idea that it's speed. I think with the right athletes you can run it. But the question is really, are you going to be able to find the QB to run the system? I think you may find the occasional stud QB to run it, but it's easier to find a good throwing QB than a QB that can run a 4.5 40 and still pose a threat in the passing game to keep the defense from putting 9 guys in the box.

 

Again, same thing. "It's dead because nobody runs it, and nobody runs it because it's dead." Why doesn't someone run it? I think it's still a good theory. I'm looking for a reason why, properly executed, it doesn't have the potential to win championships. For all we bitch about ESPN, I think we can realize that 'the hottest offensive item' is not necessarily the best or ONLY way to play football.

 

X

 

 

Given the right athlete, it can be very effective. But it's easier to find the athletes, and be competitive with other schemes.

[BigBoyBoelts]

If you want a simple answer to why the option offense is "dead"....cause kids that want to someday play in the NFL will never get there with a college that runs the option. Ex:

 

Tommy Frazier/Eric Crouch...best option qb's of all time...ZERO NFL play time, sure some of the "skill" players will get into the NFL but in this day and age when its ALL about the kids and giving them a chance to get to the NFL with recruiting them into a system, Pro-style/WCO is the only way to go. Yes we used to do the option effectively this with walk ons and everyone else, but the times have changed, with scholarships limits and increase in academic requirements I do not think this system would work anymore. JMO

[I Bleed RED]

The spread offense using a form of the option. I think some of you mean the triple option like we ran in the 70's and 80's. That version is dead unless you are Navy.

 

The spread offense is usually an option offense when it uses the run. Did you not see Chase Daniel use it?

 

The "option" is alive in a different form now. Vince Young ran a form of it also. The option only indicates that the QB make the decision of whether or not to hand of the ball or run it himself based on the play of the defense, usually the penetration of the DE and the setup of the LBs.

 

So the option does work, but the triple option is dead.

 

You more or less have said exactly the same thing everyone else says without taking into account what I posted. I realize that the triple-option as a running philosophy is not currently in use, but I'm mostly talking about it as a viable, workable theory that could once again be implemented in either our own team or some other team. Right now the best I can squeeze out of anyone is a circular theory with no other argument to satisfy my curisoty: "The option is dead because nobody runs it, and nobody runs it because the option is dead." Why does someone not ressurect it? Yes, the QB argument is valid, but you're telling me with all the atheletes out there today that we can't find 2-4 of them who can run such a system? That's a big pill to swallow.

 

X

 

I agree with you. The option is dead b/c coaches don't run it. I think it comes down to the scholarship changes in football also. Today it is very tough to have multiple athletic QB's. QB's want to be superstars and they are even transfering now if they can't play. With only 1 viable Qb I think it scares coaches to take their punishment. I think the triple option could work as you have stated. It is dead because of the difficulty to maintain that many athletic QB's and most QB's think they are all worthy of starting and want to be NFL stars. I also think coaches are seeing the opportunity to play these QB's at receiver and DBs and getting a lot of production their. Navy proves it can still work because they have no athletes and still run for a ton of yards. I think it's dead for other reasons so it's morphed to a spread or V offense.

[REDSTEEL]

If you want a simple answer to why the option offense is "dead"....cause kids that want to someday play in the NFL will never get there with a college that runs the option. Ex:

 

Tommy Frazier/Eric Crouch...best option qb's of all time...ZERO NFL play time, sure some of the "skill" players will get into the NFL but in this day and age when its ALL about the kids and giving them a chance to get to the NFL with recruiting them into a system, Pro-style/WCO is the only way to go. Yes we used to do the option effectively this with walk ons and everyone else, but the times have changed, with scholarships limits and increase in academic requirements I do not think this system would work anymore. JMO

 

I would call what Frazier ran compared to what Crouch ran to totaly different systems. Frazier might been looked at in the pros if he didn't have blood clot problems. Back then no one was looking at having black QB either. Charlie Ward didn't run the option and he wasnt given a serious look at QB.

[huskernumerouno]

This is a matter I've tried to give a lot of thought because personally I like a power running game. I hear a lot of people shoot off the ESPN one-liner "the option's dead" and then sit around waiting for a bunch of goofy smiles and nodding heads. What I rarely hear is an argument as to WHY it is dead, aside from fallacious "because it doesn't work anymore," "or linebackers are too fast" arguments. Now, it may, in fact, be dead; I simply doubt it. I'll give some reasons here in a moment, and break down some arguments.

 

First of all let's define our terms. I think it's readily obvious that the "option" itself is not an offensive philsophy. The triple option that Nebraska 'ran' was a play that added flavor to a much more complicated running game. When I refer to the option as an offense, what I'm really saying is the power running game which features the option as a base play run out of the I-formation. So to avoid confusion that's how I think of the term.

 

Here is why I would say the option could be very much alive both as a play and a looser term for our old offensive system. To begin with, the play itself, run properly, is indefensible. Even if the opposing defense KNOWS that it is coming (which is unlikely given the versatility of the I-formation), it doesn't necessarily guarantee success defending it. Sure, linebackers are smaller and quicker these days, but if you run a standard triple option play, you have the opportunity to let the FB drive for a few yards (which sucks up an LB from the getgo), the QB can run or fake pitch, and obvioulsy pitch the ball off. Most plays on defense, it would seem, don't take that much thought in defending. Not only would your LBs have to be fast and strong to stop power backs and speedy quarterbacks, but they'd have to be sharp enough to read the play and react. This is made difficult when we consider that very, very few teams run the triple-option at all; LBs today would in all likelihood not have much experience defending it, which plays into our hands.

 

In larger terms, speaking of the option as a philosophy, I see even less of a problem. Any offensive philosophy can work under ideal conditions. The power running game has been dead ever since Columbus stepped off that ship in 1492, but somehow Nebraska managed to win 5 national championships and contend for several others using this archaic formula. Frankly I like the formula. It's a ball control offense; it becomes progressivly more effective as the game goes along; it's low risk. The option PLAY mixed in with a more complicated SCHEME should, I would argue, yield fine results. After all, why wouldn't it? So what if those LBs can run 4.40 times? If they try to jump on a fullback who all but doubles their weight, there is a very good chance he's going to get yards anyway. If your scheme is complex enough, they won't see the option coming, and that then frees you up to run the option, or a number of other running plays.

 

We haven't even spoken of the passing game yet, which PA opens beautifully in a running attack. I think we could probably number off quite a few amazing gains when lone corners dropped their assigments expecting the run only to see the receivers galloping off into the sunset with the ball in hand.

 

But overall I guess what I'm trying to make clear is that if you have a complex running system and players who can execute that system, I see no reason why it shouldn't work. As long as you have a defense that can keep you from playing catch-up (not a running game staple), and you can move the ball without going three and out, you wear down your opponent. Winning the war of attrition, in my opinion, is the best way to win. It secures victory much more easily and confidantly, breaking the morale of an opponent not on big plays, but with a steady, merciless grind up front. The power running game allows for a lot more underclassmen to see action, especially on the front lines and at the RB position.

 

In 2003 Nebraska won 10 games using a running/option system. I know, we lost a few of them big, and won a few others close, but let's remember, it was Frank Solich, after all. He didn't exactly have the cream of the crop coming into this fine state to play for the greatest football tradition in the world. If it worked well enough to win 10 games with a lousy coach in 2003, what is so different about 2007? What if we had a spectacular option coach to teach and run it? What is it specifically about the system that falls short?

 

I could be making myself look like an idiot posting this, but for those of you who disagree, I offer this only in the spirit of intellectual engagement, and if there truly are good reasons why the option is not viable (besides we now have WCO players), I would love to hear your arguments. I hold no great conceit for my opinion on the matter. Fire away.

 

X

You make a lot of sense here

[Fan]

The option is a dead offense. It doesn't work anymore. Get over it.

 

 

Dumbest post I have ever seen on this forum!! If you think the option is dead, you obviously know very little about football. Also, Nebraska's offense of old was not a true option offense. They ran the option, sure, but it was power football at its best. Read the "Assembly Line" ! As for offenses being based on the option? Well, the zone read is an option play. The zone read is the base play for Florida, West Virginia, Illinois, and others spread running teams. So you could say their offenses are based on the option. The option is far from dead. You probably won't see teams running the bone, except for the service academies, who do well with what they have by the way. However, the option is still the single best play in football. Callahan's offense is not that bad, although it looked it Saturday night. The problem with him is that he is a west coast guy and that equals no defense. As long as he is in charge the defense will be weak no matter who the DC is because he will put the best players on offense because that is his side of the ball.

Nebraska's old power running game was one of the reason's the Black Shirts were so good. You go up against smashmouth football with option in practice every day, especially in the Spring, you are going to be good on defense. It is ridiculous to think the option is dead. Speed does not kill the option. The option is designed to neutralize speed, so saying defenses are too fast for the option is also ridiculous. Like someone posted earlier, all offenses have their good points and can be effective but their are consequences. For example see Texas Tech's defense. Before posting something like "the option is dead", please research, watch a few games, read some clinic books, and learn football.

[Fan]

The power running game has been dead ever since Columbus stepped off that ship in 1492, but somehow Nebraska managed to win 5 national championships and contend for several others using this archaic formula.

 

One reason for this is because they were using zone blocking schemes before everyone else was. That was a very good post by the way.

[lkplayer]

How many high school QBs are lining up to run the option?

 

How many NFL teams that they may aspire to play for run that offense?

 

15 years ago it was a lot easier to find a Tommie Frazier, Scott Frost, Eric Crouch, or even Steve Taylor. It still starts with the QB--but it's a question of the type of QB. It's a lot easier nowadays to find one that can throw the ball than run a 4.5 40.

 

The number one recruit in the country is a scrambling quarterback. They are far superior behind center in the college game.

[lkplayer]

coming from a family whose father coached very successfully in at the college level for over 25 years, i can say with some levelheadness that indeed, it is important to have some kind of option game.

 

this is true for the high school and college games because the players aren't as conditioned, disciplined, or trustworthy 100% of the time. when running a play that has different 'options', all it takes is ONE breakdown by one defender to get a good gain. then later, to keep them guessing, to keep them off balance.

 

an 'option' can be run out of the gun (which is like WVU), out of a multiple set (like Florida), or out of the I (like old Nebraska U).

 

the way we ran it in the 80's was straight triple option and clearly couldn't be run today. a quick trap by the FB or pull it and attack the D-ends and wait to pitch or keep would, nowadays, get the QB hurt or would not gain much yardage because safeties and OLB are sooo much faster and have much better range today.

 

in the 90's the triple option morphed into belly options, counter options, and read options. couple that with great power running (i.e. with a fullback lead on almost all plays), and good effective play-action passing and it is possible with the right players to be fully effective today. yes, a more capable thrower and a more agile running type quarterback are needed, along with countless hours of repetition and chemistry.

 

i personally think these hybrid type offenses run by WVU and Florida, where the QB is a runner, passer, and distributor is MUCH more effective at the COLLEGE level where great talent is great talent, but there will always be a weak link in the D. having a few option plays keeps the D honest and makes them prepare in pratctice for a long time to just defend a few basic plays.

 

in today's college football world you have to be able to spread the field and open lanes against the defense. but to keep them in check it is important to attack with plays that force them to defend and be responsible. and that is what the option does.

 

Ding Ding Ding! *raises the champ's hand

[rkhufu7]

No, the option is not dead, it has just evolved. UT and Florida ran versions of it to win MNCs and WV is thriving running it now, but they have no DEFENSE! The new addition is called the zone read, from the gun. It spreads the field and allows the offense to run the ball, w/o 8-9 man fronts and the 3 wides keeps the defense on their heels with the constant threat of 3 vertical passing threats. VY is Tommie Frazier and Tebow is Scott Frost, while Pat White is Darian Hagan. If coach OZ was around today i'm sure he would be mixing it in with the I-formation. Illinois runs it and so does Auburn and LSU.

[REDSTEEL]

No, the option is not dead, it has just evolved. UT and Florida ran versions of it to win MNCs and WV is thriving running it now, but they have no DEFENSE! The new addition is called the zone read, from the gun. It spreads the field and allows the offense to run the ball, w/o 8-9 man fronts and the 3 wides keeps the defense on their heels with the constant threat of 3 vertical passing threats. VY is Tommie Frazier and Tebow is Scott Frost, while Pat White is Darian Hagan. If coach OZ was around today i'm sure he would be mixing it in with the I-formation. Illinois runs it and so does Auburn and LSU.

 

I agree and Tom Osborne was always changing and evolving his playbook. Unfortunately to Solich fault he evolved it to a one man team and when that one man left the team had no one to rely on.

[REDSTEEL]

How many high school QBs are lining up to run the option?

 

How many NFL teams that they may aspire to play for run that offense?

 

15 years ago it was a lot easier to find a Tommie Frazier, Scott Frost, Eric Crouch, or even Steve Taylor. It still starts with the QB--but it's a question of the type of QB. It's a lot easier nowadays to find one that can throw the ball than run a 4.5 40.

 

The number one recruit in the country is a scrambling quarterback. They are far superior behind center in the college game.

 

 

I find it very ironic that why most teams are going to a quarterback that can scramble and run out of trouble that the last two Nebraska Quarterbacks have had as much burst of speed as Marino.

[MadcatNU]

The option play isn't dead. It's used quite frequently bymany teams at all levels outside the pros, but usually at most a couple times a game. The bulk of the offense is generally something else.

 

Offenses that relly heavily on this play continue to be common in high school and some divisions of cfb. But it's become nearly extinct at the 1-A (bowl subdivision?) level.

 

The biggest knocks i've heard on these so called "option" offenses is that they are hard to recruit to, they are relatively easy for a speedy defense to counter (which speed has become a major priority to teams around the country) and that your own defense doesn't get much preparation for the opponent as they are facing an option attack all week during practice.