A few days ago I heard a college football coach make the statement that "the only way to
beat teams with better talent, is to have better ideas". By "ideas" he was talking about how
whatever talent existed was used-schemes, formations, alignments, decisions, personnel,
plays, etc,
That all seems obvious, but leads to some less obvious thoughts. If a team feels that it's
developed talent level vis-a-vis it's typical schedule is 4-8 and it wants to reach 8-4 results,
where does it start?
Defenses generally play close to their talent level because there are fewer variables. Some
adjustments may get them up to 6-6 but probably not beyond that.
On the other hand, offenses have many more options and thus opportunities for significant
improvement. With the right combination of plays, formations, decisions, personnel, they could
become a 10-2 offense. In the meantime, if the defense gets up to 6-6, the team result is 8-4.
It was pointed out that virtually every team that has had a significant upward movement has
done it primarily with it's offense. The defenses have moved up a couple of notches, but the big mover has been the offenses. Iowa' best teams (Evy, early Frye, KF in 2002) have featured dynamic offenses, Snyder built the KSU program, Boise St, recently Cincinnati and UNC. Where were ISU and Indiana 5 years ago? New England/Tampa Bay!
It appears that not putting a premium on developing a dynamic offense is giving up on an upward movement.
beat teams with better talent, is to have better ideas". By "ideas" he was talking about how
whatever talent existed was used-schemes, formations, alignments, decisions, personnel,
plays, etc,
That all seems obvious, but leads to some less obvious thoughts. If a team feels that it's
developed talent level vis-a-vis it's typical schedule is 4-8 and it wants to reach 8-4 results,
where does it start?
Defenses generally play close to their talent level because there are fewer variables. Some
adjustments may get them up to 6-6 but probably not beyond that.
On the other hand, offenses have many more options and thus opportunities for significant
improvement. With the right combination of plays, formations, decisions, personnel, they could
become a 10-2 offense. In the meantime, if the defense gets up to 6-6, the team result is 8-4.
It was pointed out that virtually every team that has had a significant upward movement has
done it primarily with it's offense. The defenses have moved up a couple of notches, but the big mover has been the offenses. Iowa' best teams (Evy, early Frye, KF in 2002) have featured dynamic offenses, Snyder built the KSU program, Boise St, recently Cincinnati and UNC. Where were ISU and Indiana 5 years ago? New England/Tampa Bay!
It appears that not putting a premium on developing a dynamic offense is giving up on an upward movement.
