CFB51 College Football Fan Community
The Power Five => Big Ten => Topic started by: OrangeAfroMan on August 14, 2020, 03:08:10 AM
-
The traditional option was widespread across the country by the mid-70s. I'm not talking about Faurot inventing it or Wilkinson at OU or Yeoman's split veer, but the more modern option born in Austin with Ballard, under Royal.
Texas used it, OU perfected it...Bear Bryant implemented it, Florida and Georgia ran it, as did most decent programs. Nebraska eventually implemented it and became its champion after others had moved on.
But this thread is about those name programs who never made the leap: USC.....Penn State.....who are some others? I know USC had 'student body right' and relied on a talented RB and great defense. Penn State seemed to set one of those big, talented PA QBs behind center and give him a decent number of pass attempts.
From that era, around 72-79, soooo many programs were running the option. Bo did, Woody did...the SWC was largely running it into the 90s. Notre Dame seemed to dabble in it, but would let a talented QB run a more balanced offense. This seems more rare than it perhaps should have been.
Who else didn't, and why?
-
Tennessee was a strong program back then, did the Vols ever run the option?
the Big 8 was OU and NU and the other 6 that didn't run it or didn't run it well
I don't remember any PAC team running the option
-
John Cooper ran it initially at OSU with Kirk Herbstreit. Not sure if he brought it over from ASU, or tailored his offense to the personnel. He switched to a pro style in the mid 90s to boost recruiting.
-
Anything to do with what high schools were running at a time when recruiting was much more localized/regionalized?
-
Purdue at the time was on a run of pretty good QBs, and I don't the option would have utilized their skills well.
-
it would have banged up their throwing shoulder well
-
Anytime there is a coaching opening at IU there will be a group of fans advocating hiring an option coach. They always cite IU's historic recruiting struggles and think that going to the option would mitigate that. They also like to cite Georgia Tech as an example of a lesser program that competed in Power 5 conference by running the option.
-
Tennessee was a strong program back then, did the Vols ever run the option?
the Big 8 was OU and NU and the other 6 that didn't run it or didn't run it well
I don't remember any PAC team running the option
UCLA did it for at least a couple of years under Vermeil.
-
Anything to do with what high schools were running at a time when recruiting was much more localized/regionalized?
That's what I chalk up Penn State to....Rutledge, the Hostetlers, etc w/ fertile PA recruitnig.....I guess JoePa couldn't make them all LBs.
Same with Purdue, who had at least a recent history of passing since Greise on to Herrmann, but idk if their recruiting areas had anything to do with that.
Does anyone know what Bowden ran at WV? He never really ran the option at FSU, nor did Miami when 1980 came around.
-
it certainly helped Nebraska to be one of the only option teams in the 90s - not many better places for an option QB
but, Vick went to Va Tech and of course Frost went to Stanford until he realized he didn't have an NFL arm
back in the 70s and 80s the derned Sooners and Horns and Wolverines took many option QBs, recruiting competition was tough
-
Tennessee was a strong program back then, did the Vols ever run the option?
the Big 8 was OU and NU and the other 6 that didn't run it or didn't run it well
I don't remember any PAC team running the option
When Kansas beat OU's eventual MNC team in '75, I believe that the Jayhawks were running the wishbone triple-option. Nolan Cromwell was the KU QB.
John McKay started calling USC's offense the I-option.
I don't think that there's really a very bright line between Yeoman's veer and Bellard's wishbone. The principles and blocking assignments are very similar. The wishbone just adds a fullback.
Oklahoma State ran the wishbone for a season or two under--IIRC--Jim Stanly, the "Stanley Steamer." That was about the time that oSu changed their orange color to the burnt shade.
-
A little off-topic, but....
There have been a ton of QBs who gain meaningful yards, but didn't run the option. This has stuck in my craw in pondering it for Whoa Nellie.
QBs who are so elusive that a good chunk of the playbook becomes 'run around and make a play' - and I'd go so far to say HCs and/or OCs become a little lazy when they have such a luxury. They call pass plays they know the QB isn't likely to progress through, because they know he'll escape and scramble for 7 yards.
Vick was like that, and Vince Young. But so, too, were Michael Bishop, Shawn Moore, Major Harris, Brad Banks, Doug Flutie, Don McPherson, Kordell Stewart, Rick Mirer, Kevin McDougal, and Charlie Ward. Perfect read-option guys before the read-option (80s and 90s guys).
It's tricky to call a pass, then have it be a run, and in a good way. Hard to mimic in game form, anyway.
-
Did Fran Tarkenton run much--either by design or necessity--at Georgia?
-
I think he's in the camp with Stabauch and Archie Manning, where they were running for their lives.
I draw some distinction between them and the group I listed out in that back then, pass-pro wasn't great across the board, so those 60s/70s guys were more scrambling than not, on called pass plays behind porous OLs. The more modern 80s/90s guys had better pass pro, but you'd notice some awkward plays where it's a pass play called, their first read wasn't there, and despite good pass pro, they're ready to run.
Maybe I'm imagining it, but I do believe it to be a real difference, if not a minor one.
-
I though K-State did some option in the Bishop days.
UW has never been hardcore option, but they’ve done some. I think the McClain teams worked it in there. Morton obviously did. Barry threw in some option with Samuel and Bollinger. Not an offensive base, but maybe enough to count. I’m not digging pre-McClain because UW wasn’t work a wet rag between 1963 and him.
-
Back in the day, it was rare that a freshman QB would start, and it meant you had a problem. Today, QBs out of HS are far better prepared to pass than they were ca. 1975. If you want to recruit passing QBs, you need to pass a fair bit. Same with WRs etc.
Elite QBs want to play in a system that preps them for Sundays.
A team like GaTech that runs a version of the option (or used to) is at a disadvantage.
-
Does anyone know what Bowden ran at WV? He never really ran the option at FSU, nor did Miami when 1980 came around.
http://smartfootball.com/grab-bag/the-throwin-game-is-like-a-disease#sthash.AgtYyy8i.dpbs
As the OC in the late 60’s under Jim Carlen Bowden ran the veer at WVU basically because Carlen told him to. As the article details, when Bowden became the HC he started opening things up more.
If you have ever watched the movie “We Are Marshall” the scene where Bowden allows the MU coaches to come to Morgantown to study film of the veer is true.
-
the sooners back in the day had some frosh QBs that started and did well.
Wasn't much passing to get them in trouble
Osborne wasn't a fan of allowing freshman to play at any position
-
Yeah, but passing freshmen QBs were much more rare.
-
yes sir, they could turn the ball over
-
A little off-topic, but....
There have been a ton of QBs who gain meaningful yards, but didn't run the option. This has stuck in my craw in pondering it for Whoa Nellie.
QBs who are so elusive that a good chunk of the playbook becomes 'run around and make a play' - and I'd go so far to say HCs and/or OCs become a little lazy when they have such a luxury. They call pass plays they know the QB isn't likely to progress through, because they know he'll escape and scramble for 7 yards.
Vick was like that, and Vince Young. But so, too, were Michael Bishop, Shawn Moore, Major Harris, Brad Banks, Doug Flutie, Don McPherson, Kordell Stewart, Rick Mirer, Kevin McDougal, and Charlie Ward. Perfect read-option guys before the read-option (80s and 90s guys).
It's tricky to call a pass, then have it be a run, and in a good way. Hard to mimic in game form, anyway.
Rasheed Marshall and Pat White were read option QB’s at WVU but gained a ton of yards on designed pass plays. I remember watching a game with a friend when Marshall was there. There was a pass play where he ran it and got a few yards.
I turned to my buddy and said, “I honestly think he only has one read on pass plays and if...” and before I could finish the sentence my buddy goes, “and if it isn’t there Rod tells him to tuck it. Yeah, I’ve thought that for a while.”
In interviews a few years later our suspicions on that were confirmed.
-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NbbF-nw7l1o (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NbbF-nw7l1o)
-
One thing I've discovered through creating so many teams is that many teams run the option a handful of times per game, but few (pre-2000) ran the option as a base (back into the 90s, excluding UNL and sevice academies).
The teams that blur the line the most in using the option the most without running it nearly exclusively were the Syracuse teams (late 80s, early 90s). They really sprinkled the option in throughout the game, instead of tiny spurts or one-offs.
The Pat White one-read-and-run has been much more prevalent under the shotgun, read-option teams. One reason I discount the greatness of Vince Young is that so much of his effectiveness was on called pass plays where he just took off. Yes, it's impressive that he COULD do that, but he was a limited passer and as a coach, you'd rather he effectively implement the offense.
Bishop at KSU (and later, Ell Roberson), probably ran called QB counters and sweeps as often as option plays. That's relatively rare and interesting.
-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NbbF-nw7l1o (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NbbF-nw7l1o)
I couldn't even beat out Greg Frey or Kent Graham..."
(https://i.imgflip.com/4dyi65.gif)
"...and then I lost a Bowl Game to Air Force."
-
I couldn't even beat out Greg Frey or Kent Graham..."
(https://i.imgflip.com/4dyi65.gif)
"...and then I lost a Bowl Game to Air Force."
When I read that, I thought, "Well, it was probably one of those hell on wheels AF teams that came around from time to time back then."
Friends, it was not.
-
I was trying to think through best/good option candidates in each conference. Here's what I got:
Big 10 -
Illinois - A program always looking for identity that seemingly never recruits all that well or has buzz.
Other ideas: Maybe NW, which has gone through a weird history of offenses. If it was at its pre 1995 success levels, this would be a given. Instead it became a power downhill team, then an early spread innovator and slipped into a spread that felt as stodgy as people consider the option. Since that offense has been bad for years and Fitz is a defensive coach, why not.
SEC -
Vandy - They need to be weird, though Andy Ludwig got them kinda good at pro style for a second
Other ideas: IF Kentucky hadn't gotten good with the current ground and pound, that would be the pick. Otherwise, you're looking for a team that would sacrifice the highest end ceiling and recruiting for some moments of glory. No one really fits unless Mizzou hits a big ole snag.
Big 12
Kansas: Already bad, get weird
Other ideas: K State. They used to run the option. They've basically always run a kinda single-wingish old-school spread. Not too much of a stretch.
ACC
The pick: Ehhh, it's tricky. I guess Syracuse? Duke and Wake would be options, but both have good coaches doing good things.
Other options: Pitt might want it given their normal identity. Tech might regret leaving it. Boston College has often been running offenses where the alternative can't be so much worse.
Pac-12
Oregon State: This is always the one floated because its the least resourced and its floor is always the lowest.
Other ideas: Cal? A school that is often not very good, bad on offense right now and mostly doesn't recruit well? I could buy it.
-
I was trying to think through best/good option candidates in each conference. Here's what I got:
Big 10 - Nebraska - haven't been worth a crap since Callahan scrapped the option
fixed
-
The teams that blur the line the most in using the option the most without running it nearly exclusively were the Syracuse teams (late 80s, early 90s). They really sprinkled the option in throughout the game, instead of tiny spurts or one-offs.
The thing that impressed me about those Syracuse offenses in that era was that they seemed to be able to do nearly anything reasonably well.
That is rare. For example, a lot of pass-the-ball-every-down teams are horrible at running to run clock to maintain a close lead late in a game. Similarly, a lot of power running and/or option teams look like a fish out of water if they get down late and HAVE to pass. It seemed to me, in that era, that Syracuse was pretty darn good at just about everything rather than having an identity. That had to be hell for an opposing DC to prepare for.
-
so, that's how one of the greatest upsets happened in 1984
Syracuse with 15 first downs, 118 rushing, and 106 yards passing
_________________________________________________ _____________
To say the least, it was an upset of major proportions. Syracuse, coming off a 19-0 home-field loss to Rutgers and looking like the same team which Nebraska had crushed, 63-7, the year before in Lincoln, played the No. 1-ranked Huskers to a standstill through three quarters then ground the visitors down in the fourth for a 17-9 win in the Carrier Dome.
The Huskers were without the nation's leading rusher, senior I-back Jeff Smith, but, said Coach Tom Osborne, "With or without Jeff Smith, it would have been tough. The name of the game for us is to be physical. They were more physical today."
The loss ended a 23-game regular-season win string for Nebraska.
-
When I read that, I thought, "Well, it was probably one of those hell on wheels AF teams that came around from time to time back then."
Friends, it was not.
Yeah, not even close. It was just Cooper's nearly complete inability to win games starting with the last one on the schedule.
That game dropped him to 0-2 in Bowls as tOSU's HC and 0-5 in games against Michigan or later in the year.
Some of Cooper's bowl losses were excusable, for example:
- In 1989 a mediocre (8-3) tOSU got matched against a better (9-2) Auburn team in the HoF Bowl. Losses suck, but I get it. Also note that while Auburn's two losses were both by one score to high-end opponents (by a TD to a TN team that went 11-1 and by eight to an FSU team that went 10-2), tOSU's three losses were not as close nor to as good of teams. Auburn was just better so it was a bad match for the Buckeyes.
- In 1994 a mediocre (8-3) tOSU got matched against a clearly superior (11-1) Bama team in the Citrus Bowl. Losses suck but that Bama team was one point (24-23 SECCG loss to UF) from playing for a NC while tOSU that year lost by 49 to PSU, by 14 to a bad Illinois team, and by 9 to a mediocre Washington team. Bama was just better so it was a bad match for the Buckeyes.
The HoF Bowl loss to Air Force in December of 1990 was nothing like that. Air Force came in 6-5 while tOSU came in 7-3-1 playing in a much tougher league. That Air Force team lost to Colorado State, Wyoming, SDSU (by 30), Notre Dame (by 30), and BYU (by 47). They had no business even being on the same field with a mediocre Big Ten team, let alone beating one. That is a strong candidate for Cooper's most embarrassing loss at Ohio State.
-
fixed
If they wanna go back to the option, I'd love it.
I felt like at times the Taylor Martinez offense approximated some option stuff. I guess mostly that first and third year.
-
Frost obviously has a lot of option remnants in his offense
mostly pass/run options for the QB
the only decent drive vs the Buckeyes last season in the trashing was a snd quarter drive running the triple option. 8 plays, 49 yards, then an INT at the OSU 26
after the game Frost was asked why it wasn't tried again?
Said they would definitely use it going forward, but didn't see it again all season
they have the QBs to run it, it wouldn't be a tough conversion for them
-
The thing that impressed me about those Syracuse offenses in that era was that they seemed to be able to do nearly anything reasonably well.
That is rare. For example, a lot of pass-the-ball-every-down teams are horrible at running to run clock to maintain a close lead late in a game. Similarly, a lot of power running and/or option teams look like a fish out of water if they get down late and HAVE to pass. It seemed to me, in that era, that Syracuse was pretty darn good at just about everything rather than having an identity. That had to be hell for an opposing DC to prepare for.
Definitely.
And I think some offenses try to do that and either can, for a time, or can't - and end up being a mess without an identity.
There are some offenses where you see the diversity of plays and think, 'wow, that's no fair', in an impressive way. SU had that then, I think GT had it under O'Leary....I felt that way when Tebow was a FR and threw the ball - it wasn't fair to the other team.
I'm not sure who else had that....maybe certain players - Charlie Ward at FSU comes to mind. They seem to be multiplying as of late - usually QBs who ran couldn't throw, and vice-versa. But to have both AND be able to wrap their head around a diverse offensive system is like hitting yahtzee.
For an OC to be comfortable when:
1 - he has 5-wide
2 - has called an option play
3 - is 3rd and goal at the 1 yard line
4 - behind with 2 minutes left
5 - is ahead with 4 minutes left
That's probably an elusive unicorn.
-
I think Arkansas should run the option. I don't think they've competed in the SEC while following all the rules at the same time. They came from the SWC....they'd gobble up the kids who still run the option from TX. I think it would work.
Now, they'd have some super-ugly losses to the Bamas and the LSUs where they'd set football back 40 years, but I bet their wins-per-season average would improve.
-
I think Arkansas should run the option. I don't think they've competed in the SEC while following all the rules at the same time. They came from the SWC....they'd gobble up the kids who still run the option from TX. I think it would work.
Now, they'd have some super-ugly losses to the Bamas and the LSUs where they'd set football back 40 years, but I bet their wins-per-season average would improve.
It couldn't get much worse.
-
it might for a season or two, until the recruiting and learning of the option offense caught up
-
Arkansas is a weird one.
They basically managed to hold their own through the late 1990s and much of the 2000s. Houston Nutt carved out a mess of solid seasons with unusual offenses, often profiting from the fact the SEC west wasn't what it is now. He got to 9-3 or 8-4 with a bunch of teams rated in the 15-20 or worse range (plus the weird Wildcat team). Petrino got the team to that zenith in the way only he can before it came down around him.
The Nutt era featured unusual offense. Going back to that wouldn't hurt. Weirdly the Bielema era featured some good offenses and one very good defense, but they rarely paired and the team was a hard luck team, robbing him of some crucial capital. Arkansas' issue is the same one everyone but UK and Vandy have in that league. They've at points been good enough to think they should be spending a lot on coaches and recruiting like a big boy. South Carolina fans know the talent they got in the early 2010s and thus won't admit bouncing between 6-8 wins with the occasional 9 or 5 would be good living. South Carolina is in the Arkansas lane of recruit just well enough and think just highly enough of themselves.
-
Arkansas is a weird one.
They basically managed to hold their own through the late 1990s and much of the 2000s. Houston Nutt carved out a mess of solid seasons with unusual offenses, often profiting from the fact the SEC west wasn't what it is now. He got to 9-3 or 8-4 with a bunch of teams rated in the 15-20 or worse range (plus the weird Wildcat team). Petrino got the team to that zenith in the way only he can before it came down around him.
The Nutt era featured unusual offense. Going back to that wouldn't hurt. Weirdly the Bielema era featured some good offenses and one very good defense, but they rarely paired and the team was a hard luck team, robbing him of some crucial capital. Arkansas' issue is the same one everyone but UK and Vandy have in that league. They've at points been good enough to think they should be spending a lot on coaches and recruiting like a big boy. South Carolina fans know the talent they got in the early 2010s and thus won't admit bouncing between 6-8 wins with the occasional 9 or 5 would be good living. South Carolina is in the Arkansas lane of recruit just well enough and think just highly enough of themselves.
Yeah, I think a couple of those teams feasted on down SEC Wests, when Alabama and LSU were going through some things. The one legitimately great team they may have had was 2006.
They were 10-4, but their losses were to USC, LSU and Florida, who were probably the three best teams in the country, plus a 12-1 Wisconsin team. LSU and USC finished the season 1-2 in S&P+, and Florida was #5, but won the NC. They had the #1 SOS.
They got blown out in that disaster of an opener where Nutt hired Malzahn, to get Mustain, and then didn't trust him to run his offense.
The season finale loss to LSU was that great game where LSU scored; McFadden had an 80 yard TD run the next play, then Holliday returned the ensuing kickoff for a TD, and LSU won by 5.
They gave Florida a much better game in the SEC title game than Ohio State did in the national title game. Percy Harvin scored late to open a 3 point lead into 10.
-
Definitely.
And I think some offenses try to do that and either can, for a time, or can't - and end up being a mess without an identity.
There are some offenses where you see the diversity of plays and think, 'wow, that's no fair', in an impressive way. SU had that then, I think GT had it under O'Leary....I felt that way when Tebow was a FR and threw the ball - it wasn't fair to the other team.
I'm not sure who else had that....maybe certain players - Charlie Ward at FSU comes to mind. They seem to be multiplying as of late - usually QBs who ran couldn't throw, and vice-versa. But to have both AND be able to wrap their head around a diverse offensive system is like hitting yahtzee.
For an OC to be comfortable when:
1 - he has 5-wide
2 - has called an option play
3 - is 3rd and goal at the 1 yard line
4 - behind with 2 minutes left
5 - is ahead with 4 minutes left
That's probably an elusive unicorn.
I agree with all of this but just want to add that it isn't just the QB. The QB is a BIG part of it, of course. In order to be able to throw every down like Spurrier's early teams and run the option you have to have a guy at QB who is capable of both of those things but it is a lot more than that. Spurrier's fun-n-gun teams practiced pass plays all the freaking time. They started practicing that in spring camp, practiced it all through fall camp, practiced it all week, every week, and did it every Saturday. By the time they got to FSU, the SECCG, and the Bowl, they were REALLY good at it in large part because they had LOTS of experience doing it. At roughly the same time the mid-90's Nebraska teams were doing the same thing with the option.
If you'd have asked Florida's offense to run Nebraska's system or vice-versa, even with the other team's QB it still wouldn't have been pretty because the rest of the players had little-or-no experience with it. Florida's mid-90's OL didn't know how to block for the option and Nebraska's mid-90's OL didn't know how to pass-protect. Same for their backs and receivers.
The option is more complicated than it looks. It takes a LOT of practice to be REALLY good at it. That is what impressed me so much about those Syracuse teams. They looked comfortable doing basically anything at any given time.
Sort-of on this subject, back in 2006 I thought that tOSU had a great personnel group for something that I thought would have been hell for opposing DC's, they had:
- They had a 6-2, 246 lb WR named Roy Hall who I thought could realistically have played TE
- They had a quality smallish RB in Antonio Pittman (5-11, 207#)
- They had a quality large RB in Chirs (Beanie) Wells 6-2, 229#)
I thought a great idea would have been to send a personnel grouping of the following onto the field:
- 5 OL
- QB Troy Smith
- WR Ted Ginn
- WR Anthony Gonzalez
- WR/TE Roy Hall
- WR/RB Antonio Pittman
- FB/RB Beanie Wells
Then see what the Defense sends out. If they go small (nickel/dime) line up with 2WR (Ginn/Gonzalez), a TE (Hall), a FB (Wells), and a RB (Pittman). If they go big to stop that power, split Pittman and Hall out as WR's in a single back set with 4WR (Ginn, Gonzalez, Hall, Pittman) and Wells as the single back.
I would think it would have been VERY difficult for an opposing defense to simultaneously have enough beef on the field to stop the power of that alignment as 2WR/TE/FB/RB and enough speed to cover that alignment as 4WR/1RB. Then, if you get what you think is really favorable match-up, go up-tempo to prevent substitutions.