When the offense executed, we scored enough points to win. See OSU, TTU this year. There weren't any new plays that I saw, just executed better.
Continuity is huge. You don't want players having to annually learn new schemes. With up and down QB play and the 2nd ranked SOS according to Sagarin you were able to rank 61st in offense and 39th in rushing. Pair that with improved QB play and you could have something there as better recruits hit the program.
Also, please explain to me how the "pistol" and "spread" are distinct offenses.
Your ability to execute is largely a function of how sound your scheme is. Every team has miscues. Those are compounded when your scheme does not put you in advantageous positions. Our lack of execution is largely due to Herman's offense magnifying our talent deficiencies. Sure, if you have NFL guys at every position, just run whatever, and it is on their execution.
I realize I will need to trivialize my point for you. Which will have better execution:
-An offense going against a defense that was in the huddle and knows the play
-An offense going against a defense that is confused and must defend the entire field.
I would say 2011 ISU was a zone option team that typically used spread formations and made frequent use of the RB in the pass game.
Using the pistol formation can help angles in the run game sometimes but using it would not change ISU's current way of operating one iota.
Exactly. And I would add the two lobs to Reynolds in the endzone that he has caught through the season.
This is not to say that regular execution is inconsequential because I think it sets up opportunities to make big plays, but the game often goes one way on another on the big plays. We may lots of great stops on defense including several by Reeves (and others) on Coleman, but the one was a dagger. Of course, it was set up by a three-and-punt that was related to regular execution. If we had kept the ball in our hands and marched downfield to tie the game, they wouldn't have had it to throw to him at that time.
ISU's "spread" doesn't spread the field vertically. Pretty much all the routes are run within 15 yds of the line of scrimmage. ISU rarely runs deep routes. Defenses know this, and they congest the area where the routes are run, which makes it difficult to complete passes and establish the run.
Until ISU spreads the field vertically, the spread offense will struggle. It's a chicken-and-egg thing. The defense will not respect the deep routes if the QB/WR combination doesn't provide a credible threat of completing the pass, but the QB/WR combo won't get the experience to make the completion until they run are given the opportunity to throw/catch the deep passes.
Somehow, ISU has to develop a credible (doesn't have to be outsanding) deep threat, or the spread will always struggle.
Holgerson uses it as the formation that doesn’t give away which direction the runner is going, but otherwise it’s not that different from traditional sets. Nevada, by contrast, uses it to run a lot of read or option schemes, meshing them with downhill run schemes. Mike Leach, who just hired a Pistol guy as OC, has commented the Pistol will have staying power as it “changes the angles.
Here's a comparison between WVU's and Clemson's recruiting classes.
Yahoo Sports: Rivals.com 2012 West Virginia Commitments
Yahoo Sports: Rivals.com 2012 Clemson Commitments
Yahoo Sports: Rivals.com 2012 Iowa St. Commitments
I just want an example of an undertalented BCS team, not running out of a shotgun spread who is achieving above normal offensive success.