ISU Football "Pro Style Offense"

[temperflare]

How many games have Russell Wilson and Kaepernick missed? A combined zero? I suppose it helps that they had coaches who actually knew how to use them. You don't just run them into the ground. you run them enouh to let the defense know they have to defend it.

That's all not to mention the NFL lacks innovation. They are a copycat league with a few exceptions. If teams want to sit around and wait for a guy like Rodgers or Manning to appear, they can have at it and in the meantime try to squeeze Andy Dalton into your system just to make the playoffs. Meanwhile, I'm going to draft a guy in the 2nd or 3rd round, use his strengths and be better than you because I don't refuse to use a QBs legs because that's not Footbawl.

The NFL isn't short on QBs any more than it ever has been. You have the tiers of guys just like we always have. There is the establishment, however that wants to make an excuse for their ****** QB play, that colleges aren't producing them. They are, they just look different.

And for the love of football, "spread offense" doesn't mean running QB.

You can do this in any offensive system. The point is running QB's are much more likely to get injured, so you draft a guy who can run an offense and who may have the ability to run to keep defenses honest. If you do it right, the QB doesn't need to run and many teams have had a lot of success with that. It isn't that the NFL isn't innovative as you suggest, they just understand their investment. It's just stupid to think teams won't innovate when there are millions of dollars on the line to be had.

 

[klamath632]

A lot of you are saying that everyone in the Big 12 runs the spread now, but you do realize that at least half the Big 12 was running it when we changed to it right? It's not like we were an early-adopter.

Also, wins are a terrible metric with so few games played per year. Binary data requires HUGE sample sizes (pro basketball or MLB type seasons) to be an effective measure for determining which teams are better than others. The 90% confidence interval for winning percentage for a team that is 1-2 through 3 games is 0.010 - 0.750. So through 3 games so far, based just on wins and losses, we can't say that this isn't a 0.500+ team. If we expand that to the 6-21 mark, the 90% confidence interval is 0.124 - 0.380. If we use Rhoads' full record at ISU through today, 30 - 48, the 90% confidence interval is 0.300 - 0.478.

At the 90% confidence level, using wins as the only metric, Paul Rhoads is only statistically significantly different than three coaches - he's worse than Earl Bruce, and better than Chizik and Vince DiFrancesca (who went 6-21-1 from 1954 - 1956). If you want to say anything else about Rhoads' coaching ability, you have to use something beyond wins and losses.

We don't suck, because science?

 

[Stewo]

An offense that wins would be cool. I really don't care what it looks like, as long as it produces wins. I'll be honest, I like watching K-State's offense. All you really need is an experienced coordinator and the right guys. There's no reason we shouldn't be able to replicate (to some extent) in Ames what they have going on in Manhattan.

 

[besserheimerphat]

We don't suck, because science?

Never said we don't suck, just that win/loss record alone isn't as concrete as people like to think it is. Especially in college football where you play only a handful of games against a small subset of the entire FBS/D1.

 

[KnappShack]

Never said we don't suck, just that win/loss record alone isn't as concrete as people like to think it is. Especially in college football where you play only a handful of games against a small subset of the entire FBS/D1.

So we're the best 5-win-in-two-years-team in all the land!!!

 

[temperflare]

An offense that wins would be cool. I really don't care what it looks like, as long as it produces wins. I'll be honest, I like watching K-State's offense. All you really need is an experienced coordinator and the right guys. There's no reason we shouldn't be able to replicate (to some extent) in Ames what they have going on in Manhattan.

Agreed. Part of the problem is we've gone through too many coordinators, O-L coaches, etc. I do wonder if we keep the same coaches if that will pay dividends in the next season. But really, we should be seeing much more consistency in the 2nd season under Mangino.

Like you, I just want to win. I don't care what we run at this point.

 

[DSM4Cy]

An offense that wins would be cool. I really don't care what it looks like, as long as it produces wins. I'll be honest, I like watching K-State's offense. All you really need is an experienced coordinator and the right guys. There's no reason we shouldn't be able to replicate (to some extent) in Ames what they have going on in Manhattan.

Yup. Have to say, Collin Klein was a BEAST for them and was fun to watch.

 

[Skyh13]

I think ISU should switch to doing a pro style offense because 1.) I hate watching QB's run and get killed half the time, and 2.) That could, possibly, maybe, help in some way in recruiting if you can convince people that the NFL wants to see players play in a pro-style offense, which they do. I'm sure it probably wouldn't make a difference, but if all you're going to do is execute a spread worse than everybody else, then don't run a spread anymore.

 

[Cyclone1985]

While I would prefer a flexbone triple option offense I think that is the whole point. Everyone runs the spread now so we need to do something different.

Not sure if your'e serious but you bring up a good point.

I read an interview with G-Tech's head coach. He was saying that in his offense, he is not competing for the same players as the Alabamas, Ohio States and USCs of the world because his system requires different types of players -- QB doesnt need to be a pocket passer, he needs to be an athlete. Linemen don't need to be 300 lbs, they need to be 250 and quick. WRs don't need to run a sub 4.4 40, they need to know/want to block. He essentially pulling from a different pool of players.

Now I know there is more to this, but the idea behind it makes total sense.

FTR, I am not saying we should run the triple option, just thought it was an interesting viewpoint.

 

[besserheimerphat]

So we're the best 5-win-in-two-years-team in all the land!!!

There are a lot of other stats you could use, especially in combination, to show how bad we are and have been. But just screaming "1-2! 5-19! 6-21!" is not a convincing argument by itself.

 

[Tre4ISU]

You can do this in any offensive system. The point is running QB's are much more likely to get injured, so you draft a guy who can run an offense and who may have the ability to run to keep defenses honest. If you do it right, the QB doesn't need to run and many teams have had a lot of success with that. It isn't that the NFL isn't innovative as you suggest, they just understand their investment. It's just stupid to think teams won't innovate when there are millions of dollars on the line to be had.

If the NFL is so innovative, how come the college game always precedes NFL change? If they care so much about their investment, why is Andy Dalton getting paid what he's getting paid and Tyrod Taylor is getting paid what he's getting paid? It's because 3/4 of NFL franchises are scared to death of a QB that can/will run and it's to their own detriment. Average QBs are given huge contracts each year while perfectly viable options are avoided because they might get hurt. Tom Brady and Peyton Manning have both had serious injuries. Neither one happened while they were scrambling. How many times has Jay Cutler been hurt?

Also, your premise is wrong as well:

http://www.slate.com/articles/sport..._like_colin_kaepernick_more_injury_prone.html

 

[temperflare]

If the NFL is so innovative, how come the college game always precedes NFL change? If they care so much about their investment, why is Andy Dalton getting paid what he's getting paid and Tyrod Taylor is getting paid what he's getting paid? It's because 3/4 of NFL franchises are scared to death of a QB that can/will run and it's to their own detriment. Average QBs are given huge contracts each year while perfectly viable options are avoided because they might get hurt. Tom Brady and Peyton Manning have both had serious injuries. Neither one happened while they were scrambling. How many times has Jay Cutler been hurt?

Also, your premise is wrong as well:

http://www.slate.com/articles/sport..._like_colin_kaepernick_more_injury_prone.html

I didn't say the NFL owners don't make mistakes on their investments and the NFL can't afford to tinker around in the manner colleges do. Add in that coaches bring what they know with them to the NFL and its pretty obvious why things happen the way they do.

Look, you feel it is to their own detriment that they don't "innovate" and I flatly disagree. They innovate all the time. Just because they don't innovate the way you think they should is your hang up. And those pocket QB's have how many super bowl rings? This isn't college where making it to a bowl is good enough.

And Jay Cutler... that poor guy. There isn't a QB out there that could survive that offensive line.

 

[Ficklone02]

Not sure if your'e serious but you bring up a good point.

I read an interview with G-Tech's head coach. He was saying that in his offense, he is not competing for the same players as the Alabamas, Ohio States and USCs of the world because his system requires different types of players -- QB doesnt need to be a pocket passer, he needs to be an athlete. Linemen don't need to be 300 lbs, they need to be 250 and quick. WRs don't need to run a sub 4.4 40, they need to know/want to block. He essentially pulling from a different pool of players.

Now I know there is more to this, but the idea behind it makes total sense.

FTR, I am not saying we should run the triple option, just thought it was an interesting viewpoint.

I remember thinking when Nebraska fired Solich and hired Callahan they were idiots for the same reason. Now they were going to have to recruit the same linemen, QBs, WRs as the rest of the field.

 

[KnappShack]

There are a lot of other stats you could use, especially in combination, to show how bad we are and have been. But just screaming "1-2! 5-19! 6-21!" is not a convincing argument by itself.

Like Steve Spurrier said, "Statistics are for losers and assistant coaches. Head coaches worry about wins and losses"

The CPR record is what it is. That is the true measure of on field performance. I can't spin 5 wins positively. Just can't.

(Is this a good post, Fales??)

 

[Tre4ISU]

I didn't say the NFL owners don't make mistakes on their investments and the NFL can't afford to tinker around in the manner colleges do. Add in that coaches bring what they know with them to the NFL and its pretty obvious why things happen the way they do.

Look, you feel it is to their own detriment that they don't "innovate" and I flatly disagree. They innovate all the time. Just because they don't innovate the way you think they should is your hang up. And those pocket QB's have how many super bowl rings? This isn't college where making it to a bowl is good enough.

And Jay Cutler... that poor guy. There isn't a QB out there that could survive that offensive line.

Just one but I would hope that would be the case. Outside of Vick, no one was taking guys who were perceived as a real running threat. Since teams started using them, they have had a lot of success.

Guys in the NFL shift around Gase goes from one team to another. A lot of guys do and at the end of the day, systems are all pretty similar. The difference is if you have Tom Brady, Aaron Rodgers, or Peyton Manning. Russell Wilson isn't half the passer those guys are but he makes up for it in other way and teams that use a guy like that can really narrow the gap rather than sitting on a Dalton or Tannehill or you name the mediocre guy you hitch your wagon to.

 

[Clonefan94]

Not sure if your'e serious but you bring up a good point.

I read an interview with G-Tech's head coach. He was saying that in his offense, he is not competing for the same players as the Alabamas, Ohio States and USCs of the world because his system requires different types of players -- QB doesnt need to be a pocket passer, he needs to be an athlete. Linemen don't need to be 300 lbs, they need to be 250 and quick. WRs don't need to run a sub 4.4 40, they need to know/want to block. He essentially pulling from a different pool of players.

Now I know there is more to this, but the idea behind it makes total sense.

FTR, I am not saying we should run the triple option, just thought it was an interesting viewpoint.

Another bonus to that offense (not saying we should switch, but why it works well for GT) is that GT is probably the only team on the opposing teams schedule that runs that offense. When you play in the Big 12, the basic offensive strategy is seen again and again. You obviously have key guys and stuff each team does a bit different, but the over all offensive strategy is the same from week to week.

GT has an advantage as most teams only have one week to prepare for a completely different style of play than what the other teams are used to playing and have been seeing.

I definitely don't know what would work for ISU, but I do feel we need to start looking at some other kind of gimmick to put points on the board and move the football.

 

[besserheimerphat]

Like Steve Spurrier said, "Statistics are for losers and assistant coaches. Head coaches worry about wins and losses"

The CPR record is what it is. That is the true measure of on field performance. I can't spin 5 wins positively. Just can't.

(Is this a good post, Fales??)

Where are you getting positive spin from?

Like Besserheimerphat once said, "Trite quotes about the usefulness of statistics are for people who are bad at math."

 

[KnappShack]

Where are you getting positive spin from?

Like Besserheimerphat once said, "Trite quotes about the usefulness of statistics are for people who are bad at math."

A positive spin from my side.

60% of the time my posts make sense everytime

 

[ThatllDoCy]

I think we may have the personnel to run the air raid, but the Herman/Urban Meyer Spread that relies on a very athletic QB just isn't a fit for us. We don't have that QB. We could run KState's.

I was hoping Mangino was bringing in something interesting, but it looks similar to what we had before.

I would rather see us run anything besides the zone read.

Give me a Harbaugh like offense, that grinds the other team down, and controls the clock. That said, I don't think the style of offense matters that much. Execution does, and that is absolutely not something we seem to do.

 

[clonedude]

I don't know if the spread is the right offense for us to run or not, but don't kid yourself.... we run nothing like a spread offense.

The "ISU spread" stretches the field horizontally from sideline to sideline, but does not spread the field vertically at all. Defenses can put all 11 guys within about 8 yards from the line of scrimmage against us because 99% of the time that is the only part of the field we use.

I wish I could get a screenshot of the one play we ran on Saturday night against Toledo where Toledo had all 11 guys on defense lined up ON the line of scrimmage. It was unreal. I can't ever remember seeing that before. And no, we weren't near the goal line either. I was screaming at my TV set for us to just send a couple guys straight down the field at full speed, there would have been no way to stop them.

So, we can debate if the spread is what we should be running, but let's not confuse what we actually do to any kind of spread at all.