Well thank God for that... we wouldnt want to win a game now, would we? <INSERT SARCASM>No, they will not. Same offense they ran last year. Probably more running, a few option plays, but the same for the most part in terms of formations and game plan(less plays though).
I'd look for an offense closer to 2006's offense, with a little option mixed in. That team had 4 capable backs and could run and pass pretty well. I don't understand your concern, the problem last year wasn't the offense.Well thank God for that... we wouldnt want to win a game now, would we? <INSERT SARCASM>No, they will not. Same offense they ran last year. Probably more running, a few option plays, but the same for the most part in terms of formations and game plan(less plays though).
Its not concern, just curiosity with all I read about spread offense here and there. If its so good, then why havent we picked it up? thats all I was asking. :hmmphI'd look for an offense closer to 2006's offense, with a little option mixed in. That team had 4 capable backs and could run and pass pretty well. I don't understand your concern, the problem last year wasn't the offense.Well thank God for that... we wouldnt want to win a game now, would we? <INSERT SARCASM>No, they will not. Same offense they ran last year. Probably more running, a few option plays, but the same for the most part in terms of formations and game plan(less plays though).
.............Its not concern, just curiosity with all I read about spread offense here and there. If its so good, then why havent we picked it up? thats all I was asking. :hmmph
You make good points.It is a chess match, it's all football is, the reason our offense was so successful under Osborne was because we were the only ones able to get the athletes to run the triple option as a base offense.