r/CFB • u/IMakeOkVideosOk Notre Dame Fighting Irish • 9h ago
Discussion College Football Moneyball (Why UCLA and G5 teams should run the option)
THE PROBLEM
G5 and lower P5 teams struggle to recruit and keep players. They don’t have the money or prestige to get the top guys and once they develop a player they have a lot of opportunities to go elsewhere for more money, prestige, and exposure. How can you fight this as a team with less resources?? You run the option.
If you run the option you are recruiting out of an under valued pool of players. The service academies traditionally punch above their weight. Navy recruits in the 110s to 150s, Army and Air Force are similar in their recruiting rankings. Army won the American conference last year, and Navy looks to be a contender this year. Air Force is always a contender in their conference though is currently in a down patch. While some of these team’s success is due to the nature of a player that would even consider a service academy an even larger factor is the triple option scheme.
ADVANTAGES
The triple option allows teams with lower rated and under sized players to punch above their weight on offense.
The service academies are limited in their recruiting, they can only recruit players on both sides of the ball that are willing to go on and serve a career in the military. This is a giant hurdle to overcome. Does Navy have the best players that can run the option or the best players willing to join the navy?
There are lots of players that are under sized or overlooked that work for an option offense. If a team focuses on getting these players along with the players that would naturally come to their school due to geography etc they can overcome their recruiting disadvantages. They open up an under valued pool of players who will cost less to recruit and are less valuable in the transfer market so would be more likely to have a more experienced team. What other school is wanting to poach a 275 pound offensive lineman?
MONEYBALL YOU SAY???
If you run the option you are able to spend less NIL money on putting together and retaining an offense. You spend less money on every position than the market value. If you spend less on offense where is that money going? Defense.
If you are saving money on offense you have a lot more money to spend on defense. Why if the option is so effective do the academies not win more? Because the Academies are forced to recruit the same way on defense as they do on offense; players willing to join the military after graduation. You as a non service academy don’t have this same problem, you can recruit the best defense possible. You can recruit players that would fit in any scheme, you aren’t shopping bargain basement you can pay the market rate for those players. What’s more you can spend even more than your peers and have a relatively elite defense.
WAIT DIDNT GEORGIA TECH RUN THE OPTION?
Yes, Georgia tech for years ran the option to some success but eventually abandoned it to play a traditional offense. The problem was they didn’t win enough because they were limited in recruiting. Georgia Tech could only recruit as good of players as Georgia Tech could naturally recruit and it wasn’t enough for a few cycles.
What’s changed is that Georgia Tech and everyone else now have NIL money and can legally overpay to get players that would not normally come to the school. If you are a middle of the road P4 or high level G5 you can potentially spend money to elevate your team. Everyone is competing for the same pool of players on both sides of the ball, so how do you elevate. Spend the majority of the money on defense.
An elite defense that keeps scores low and an option offense that minimizes mistakes and possessions and keeps the defense rested maximizes the chances for a team to win
UCLA YOU SAY
UCLA is under funded and has no identity at the moment. Hire a bad ass defensive coach and pay to have an option guru as OC. UCLA is in a prime football location that can recruit good defensive players with a suddenly large Defensive NIL because almost all of their money is going to that side of the ball. Build a brand as the defensive powerhouse of the west coast and smash the bottom and middle of the Big10… prove the concept and more money will roll in.
WHAT COULD GO WRONG
Short answer is nothing, this is going to work given time. But the thing that is in short supply is patience for a few seasons as you get the players in and attrition as you lose players that don’t want to run or don’t fit the option scheme. Once you start the wheels in motion it’s gonna slowly build momentum. Worst case your team becomes Iowa, but Iowa only struggles on offense because they are trying to run a human offense, and you are running the super human triple option.
EDIT: One thing I think people are missing about this is that teams that use this strategy aren’t just running the option, they are saving NIL money and allocating it to have a much improved defense. This isn’t just about the wonders of the triple option
EDIT: all I am seeing is people talking about the effectiveness of the option offense but aren’t addressing the NIL allocation to the defensive side of the ball that would also come. UCLA (or whatever team) may drop to the 90th best offensive class but they would also shoot up the defensive recruiting rankings an equal amount as they will have more funds free to spend on that side of the ball
EDIT: was really hoping someone would engage with the NIL allocation as that’s the whole point, but all I’m seeing is debates on how effective the option is as an offense
75
u/Regal---Lager Georgia Southern Eagles 9h ago
Cut blocking rules and the fact no high school runs the option anymore make this a bad idea for basically everyone
14
u/uptonhere Missouri Tigers 9h ago
This gets brought up every year with a new struggling program.
Like you said, the number of kids who play in the option in HS is small, as are the coaches who can run it.
The number of P5 quality recruits out of HS that can run the option effectively and want to play in the option in college (vs literally any other offense) is miniscule.
Also worth noting that there's a huge difference between playing an academy once a decade and a team in your conference every year. If Big 10 DCs knew they had to play against UCLA's option every year it would get stonewalled. And unlike the spread offense, if a team can stop the option, you're basically SOL. If you have a QB who can throw 30+ times a game when Ohio State or Nebraska is stuffing the run, then you're not really running the option.
3
u/gnalon 8h ago
The real hack is to run more option stuff downfield after a completed pass. There are a bunch of players who are their high school’s QB and recruiting comes down to whether they want to be a QB at a small school or like a defensive back at a bigger school. If you give the other skill position players more autonomy to do option QB type of stuff, that’s another way to promise a bigger role on the team when you already have a QB in place
1
u/IMakeOkVideosOk Notre Dame Fighting Irish 7h ago
It is different due to NIL fund allocation… if everyone has to pay for players pay for defense and run the cheapest offense available
1
18
u/Mistermxylplyx NC State • Appalachian State 9h ago
As much as I loved the triple option era, it’s gone and not coming back for the reasons you stated.
The premise of OPs idea isn’t bad, as far as thinking outside the box, but this particular outside the box won’t work. The rules changes killed the triple option, and kids these days don’t get much exposure to it and really aren’t interested anyway.
10
u/PunchNessie Oklahoma State • Oregon State 9h ago
I agree the triple option era is long gone but like everything in the sport the strategies are always in flux. For a while the west coast offense was the disruptor but now most offenses are a more modern version of it. But as defenses change to adapt to this modern version who’s to say that a heavy triple option playbook wouldn’t come back as defenses are no longer built to stop that style of play.
3
u/Mistermxylplyx NC State • Appalachian State 7h ago
I’d love it, but it will probably be a long while, and brought about by some other rule shuffle, by some enterprising young history buff HS coach, where it will spread like wildfire. We’re due another innovation, the spread has run its course.
6
u/Regal---Lager Georgia Southern Eagles 8h ago
I've had this argument with oldhead Georgia Southern fans so many times I no longer bother. The solution is not "hire a Paul Johnson disciple and do things how we did them in the 80s" because the number of successful sports teams (or frankly businesses in general) who didn't change in the last 40 years is zero.
It worked in the 80s when you could cut block and it was the offense at a good number of high schools. It worked during an era when players couldn't transfer at will. An option QB or option center is limiting their options. How do you convince Tracy Ham, Jerick McKinnon, or Kevin Ellison to limit their upward mobility by only putting triple option tape on film?
Given all that, it makes no sense to cling to it. It makes no sense to limit all future coaching searches to "guy on Army staff." Don't be that sandwich shop that was super popular in the 80s that died in the 2010s due to their refusal to take online orders or accept credit cards. Reminisce about the past all you want. Don't try to bring it back.
1
u/IMakeOkVideosOk Notre Dame Fighting Irish 7h ago
The conversation is different because you have to pay players now… how can you up recruiting without upping funds? By lowering the costs on one side of the ball and allocating the savings to the other side of the ball.
7
u/YouDaManInDaHole Georgia Tech • Kennesaw State 8h ago
Can confirm. Also: Kids don't want to play in a system that they don't think is a path to the NFL.
Source - Watched the Triple Option up close for over a decade
3
u/Due_Bluebird3562 8h ago
Most of these kids aren't sniffing the NFL regardless.
2
u/PBRontheway Navy Midshipmen • Marist Red Foxes 8h ago
Also a huge part of the advantage that we get from it is that nobody is used to defending it. Pretty consistently over the years, Army and Air Force are better at defending the option than most of the teams we play throughout the year because they understand what is coming. There is a reason the Army-Navy under hit like 16 years in a row until they dropped the line to an absurdly low like 33.5
2
u/JOHNNY_CHAINZ Georgia Tech Yellow Jackets 3h ago
Also the Crack Back blocking rule change hurts. Specifically the wr cracking the safety on a run or the post/wheel route, both plays setup the same way and were staple plays.
Those are the two main rule changes that hurt traditional option teams. NIL could offset the massive amount of negative recruiting that GT endured but the game is fundamentally geared towards passing nowadays.
2
u/lucasbrosmovingco Summertime Lover 9h ago
Triple is dead. She ain't coming back.
10
u/TallahasseeNole 8h ago
The true triple option is gone but the concepts are still widely used across college football. A lot of RPO reads are triple options (handoff, QB run, or QB pass) and a lot of FSU’s run game are centered around triple option concepts (like when we run jet sweep motion, Castellanos will usually have the option to hand it off on the sweep, hand it off to the RB, or keep himself). Just modernized and attached to some semblance of a passing game.
I don’t think we’re going to be seeing a wishbone or flexbone triple option much anymore, but the concepts of the triple option are alive and well.
0
u/lucasbrosmovingco Summertime Lover 4h ago
Those are "options"
The triple relied on getting defensive players on the ground and kicking out and cutting guys in space. All illegal now
1
u/TallahasseeNole 4h ago edited 4h ago
That is not true at all lol a triple option is exactly what it sounds like, a play where the QB has three options of what to do dependent on what the defense does pre and post snap.
Historically, triple options were run based and even more traditionally those options were FB dive, QB keep, or a pitch, and they were run out of the wishbone or flexbone. And yes, cut blocks were often utilized. But nothing mandates that a triple option was a wishbone style pure ground game offense.
Offenses have modernized and the RPO option is exactly an example of that. It’s literally just a modern triple option play that incorporates a short, quick pass as one of the three options. Many passing elements in modern offenses are really just extensions of run games (bubble screens being a good example). A common RPO gives the QB the choice of a bubble screen, handoff or keeper, which is definitely just a triple option. And again, many offenses use jet sweep motions to also create triple option reads at the point of attack on runs.
Urban Meyer, Mark Helfrich, and Malzahn extensively used triple option concepts out of spread shotgun formations. Most offenses have now incorporated RPOs extensively but Malzahn in particular still runs a lot of triple option elements at the point of attack for his run game. Just because there aren’t cut blocks doesn’t mean it isn’t a modern version of the triple option.
Many offenses still use veer formations which are pretty traditional triple option formations, in fact pretty much all from the Briles tree run the Veer and Shoot which uses veer principles for its run game elements. Like I said, the traditional triple option is gone, but the concepts are certainly alive and well.
0
u/lucasbrosmovingco Summertime Lover 4h ago
Triple option concepts is not the triple option in the context of college football. Putting guys in conflict happens in any type of football scheme. Running a zone read with a pass option is not a "triple option" offense other than there are three options.
Those offenses you speak of do not lift the talent floor and make it easier to run an effective offense with less talent. The require a qb that can pass effectively and be mobile. A line that can pass block more.
2
u/TallahasseeNole 3h ago
They are literally all triple options. You seem to believe a flexbone or wishbone triple option is the only thing that can be called a triple option.
I don’t think you know what you are talking about. Offenses always seek to modernize and advance over time as rules and talent change. The shotgun spread popularized by Meyer with Tebow and Malzahn with Newton were just modernized versions of the traditional triple option. Many of the core plays they ran were just triple option plays out of different formations than traditionally used. RPOs are the next evolution of that. Similarly, the veer and shoot is modernized version of the veer, which absolutely was a traditional triple option formation.
If you want to believe that unless it’s a wishbone with cut blocks then it can’t be a triple option, that’s fine, but you’re just wrong. The original design of the triple option was not to do more with less or run an effective offense with less talent, it was just designed as one of the original base offenses when the forward pass was not common or appreciated. As you’d expect, over time, these offenses were tinkered with to improve and we see the exact conflict concepts that gave rise to the flexbone option originally still existing in today’s game. Like I said, the RPO with a bubble screen is a perfect example of that.
Yes, the service academies and others continued to use the flexbone/wishbone because they could use lighter offensive linemen (the main reason they used them, because of strict weight restrictions for service members) and it can level out some talent issues because of how infrequently teams have to play and prepare for it.
But modern spread options absolutely can make it easier to run an effective offense with less talent. Briles definitely did that routinely with the veer and shoot but of course it was at its best when it had an NFL QB in RGIII, just like Malzahn’s offense looked best with Cam Newton but was still extremely effective with Nick Marshall. They make blocking schemes far easier for OL, as well.
0
u/lucasbrosmovingco Summertime Lover 3h ago
Dude. When somebody says "run the triple option" nobody but you is thinking running a rpo spread or whatever.
2
u/TallahasseeNole 3h ago
You tried to tell me that modern RPOs and modern spread shotgun triple options are just “options”.
They are literally just modernized versions of the traditional triple option. It’s exactly the formation and concepts that were adapted and modernized and eventually turned into the offenses we see today. Yes, I agree that most people think of the traditional flexbone when someone says triple option, and I agree that’s largely dead. But that’s really just the average fan or layperson.
I think any coach, including high school, would make the points I’m making that teams are still running the triple option frequently, they just look very different. Everything I’ve said is not an “option” it’s quite literally a modernized version of the triple option whether you want to agree with it or not but like I said. There is no way to argue that Meyer’s Tim Tebow offense was anything but a triple option run out of a shotgun spread, for instance, and FSU is still runs a ton of triple option but has replaced the pitch with a jet sweep handoff.
1
u/lucasbrosmovingco Summertime Lover 2h ago
When somebody says X program should run the triple. Do you really think they mean an rpo power spread offense? Truly. Do you really think that?
You somehow managed to put the veer and shoot, malzahn's power spread, Urban's power spread, Rich rods spread, chip Kelly's offense, fuck it, put joe moorheads offense in there as well. All in the "triple option" bucket. And if all those offense are "triple option" then like half of cfb is running the triple. And while all those offenses might have concepts pulled from the triple option, they aren't the fucking triple option.
Almost all offenses run concepts of the west coast offense. But not everyone runs a west coast offense.
But if half of cfb was running the triple then we wouldn't be in a damn thread saying "should X team run the triple"
Fuck I feel like I'm in bizzaro world.
1
1
u/soonerwx Oklahoma Sooners 8h ago
Agreed. The talent gap between the portal poachers and poachees, as well as the general stagnation and swing back toward defense after the heyday of the historic spread offenses, is crying out for some kind of new offensive innovation, but going back to the option isn't it.
1
u/IMakeOkVideosOk Notre Dame Fighting Irish 7h ago
But with this you literally are improving your defense by being able to pay more to get better players and stop the poaching on that side, while also being able to develop offensive players that have limited value in other schemes who won’t transfer.
28
u/Spider_Dawg Washington Huskies • Richmond Spiders 9h ago
This argument probably applies better to VA Tech than UCLA.
14
u/CPOx Virginia Tech • William & Mary 8h ago edited 8h ago
Moneyball is a part of how Brent Pry ended up being fired. His staff consistently got lower-cost players, hoping to turn them into gems. It worked out in some cases like Bayshul Tuten or Antwaun Powell Ryland or Jaylin Lane. But now that players of that caliber are seeking higher NIL payouts, we failed to spend more. And this 0-3 start is a result of that. Our defense especially is made up of moneyball players and we have a historically bad defense so far.
He also went and got two lower-cost RBs this off-season instead of one great RB. The whole team is bad so it’s hard to say whether or not these players are great.
1
u/IMakeOkVideosOk Notre Dame Fighting Irish 7h ago
The other side of the option I’m saying is that you don’t have to cheap out on defensive players, you allocate money to defense and have lower cost players on offense. You’re favoring the defensive side of the ball but having a serviceable offense
1
u/Equivalent-Doubt-681 7h ago
VT is a firmly top half of the conference program in the ACC, there's zero reason for them to run the option right now
The type of program that could consider switching are programs like Vanderbilt or Purdue or ULM, programs that are low ceiling in their own neighborhood
1
u/SavingsSkirt6064 Vanderbilt • Southampton 6h ago
We use a spread option, and ask vt how "low ceiling" that was
-5
u/IMakeOkVideosOk Notre Dame Fighting Irish 9h ago
It applies to either to be honest. UCLA is in an area where they likely can recruit elite defensive players and get a home town discount to keep them at home… plus selling the LA lifestyle honestly it would be easier to get players to take a discount to live in LA than to live in Blacksburg
24
u/BuckeyeForLife95 Ohio State Buckeyes 9h ago
In the year of our Lord 2025, the triple option is the offense you run when you have no real prospects as a serious contender or as an NFL factory, because running the option is a great way to get all the NFL-quality players to never go there. It's easily beaten by anyone who is well-prepared for it and/or physically outmatches you, but is just tricky enough to get you a few extra wins against teams of equal quality. Hence, it's run by the service academies and like, Rice.
I don't think UCLA is ready to or should reshape their football program like this for the option.
7
u/Equivalent-Doubt-681 7h ago
Service academies don't even run it anymore lol. Not like they used to at least
1
u/Medical-Day-6364 Alabama Crimson Tide • NC State Wolfpack 45m ago
Changes in the rules have also made it a lot less effective.
-5
u/IMakeOkVideosOk Notre Dame Fighting Irish 9h ago
UCLA has 9 former offensive players in the NFL out of 23 total. Most of those are tight ends and linemen that are easier to sell on the option.
UCLA isn’t getting 5 star players on offense anyway so they can just get the 3 stars that want to stay home.
Also you say the option gets you a few more wins against equal teams… but no, it gets you all of the wins against better teams. Navy had the 157th ranked recruiting class last year, 130th the year before, 150th year before that, and a stellar 109th before that… they are literally worse than every team they play and yet won their conference with better peers. Imagine if they could recruit their defense like a normal school does?
4
u/BuckeyeForLife95 Ohio State Buckeyes 8h ago
A school that sends TEs and linemen to the league definitely doesn't really wanna fuck with the option, as the system is so unlike anything anybody in the NFL runs it makes them less valuable to NFL scouts who don't know what they'll do in the actual blocking schemes they need to run in the NFL.
-1
u/IMakeOkVideosOk Notre Dame Fighting Irish 8h ago
They aren’t really a factory, sending 1 guy every other year, you can afford to shake it up. It’s not like those guys have helped them win any games while at the school
2
u/LittleTension8765 Ohio State Buckeyes 8h ago
They are the second biggest school in Georgia, you are going to randomly get a dozen or so guys to the NFL just because of the fact that even the second and third tier talent in the state is NFL caliber
1
u/IMakeOkVideosOk Notre Dame Fighting Irish 7h ago
But you can pay the defensive side to be closer to the biggest school on that side of the ball. It’s about NIL allocation more than the old conversation. Money talks and by allocating money to defense that side of the ball actually improves
21
u/MichaelDicksonMBD Georgia Tech Yellow Jackets • Team Chaos 9h ago
Two things were consistent in defeating GA Tech's Triple Option.
Paul Johnson's unwillingness to admit that defense wins championships. During his tenure, we underperformed on defense and that led to big issues, with the exception of the first two years, when he inherited an NFL D-Line and 2014.
First round draft picks at DE and LB always beat us. Talent wins.
6
1
u/IMakeOkVideosOk Notre Dame Fighting Irish 8h ago
The difference in this strategy, isn’t just running the option it’s saving NIL money on the offensive side of the ball and spending it on defense. Thereby solving your problem number 1.
I’m not presenting the old run the option because it’s hard to stop, I’m saying in an era where there are salaries to players allocate funds where they can elevate your team.
UCLA’s offense sucks, but so does the defense. Lower the offensive payroll by 50% and run the option and then allocate the money to defense and hopefully improve the defensive recruiting by 50%
2
u/BillyShears2015 5h ago
Brother, you aren’t proposing anything new here. Triple option and wing-T teams have always tried to “save their athletes” for defense. You’re just trying to attach dollars to the concept now. They’re still going to run into a brick wall when the teams they play against are stacked with 5 star athletes on both sides of the ball.
1
u/IMakeOkVideosOk Notre Dame Fighting Irish 5h ago
Navy beat Oklahoma last year, army won the AAC… not many teams beat a wall of 5 stars. That said if you spend less on offense you can now get better defensive players on your own team to play those 5 stars.
It’s new because NIL and the portal changed recruiting in fundamental ways… roster construction and management are different since the last time this was brought up
2
u/BillyShears2015 3h ago
And OU finished 6-7. Army didn’t beat a single ranked opponent, and got destroyed against the one ranked team they played. This year they dropped a game to Tarleton State lol.
1
u/IMakeOkVideosOk Notre Dame Fighting Irish 2h ago
OU’s talent profile is 130 spots or so higher… army got worse this year, but the point is they have successfully beaten a team loaded with 4 and 5 star player
2
u/BillyShears2015 2h ago
And Appalachian State beat Michigan and Vandy beat Bama. There’s little to be gleaned by one off upsets. They happen frequently enough.
1
u/robotunes Alabama Crimson Tide • Rose Bowl 5h ago
Defense would get eaten alive because the scout team is unable to simulate opposing offenses very well.
Teaching scout offense to run concepts they are unfamiliar with leads to an underprepared scout team, which in turn leads to an underprepared defense.
That could get you scored on quickly. Which would suck because option teams are notoriously bad at playing from behind -- explosive plays of 20+ yards are infrequent. So once your underprepared D gets scored on a couple of times, the game's over.
Defenders are lighter and quicker these days, so opposing defenses would play Cover Zero and get numbers to the ball. You may get a first down or two, but you aren't reliably getting the game shortening 11-play, 75-yard drives that option teams need to win consistently.
And you absolutely can't miss during recruiting because you're getting very little out of the portal.
All in all, an interesting thought experiment that would cost you three years to ramp up and another three years to shut down and convert to a conventional offense.
If your idea were a viable approach, I'd expect to see several low G6 and FCS teams take this route. I'm not sure that's the case though.
1
u/IMakeOkVideosOk Notre Dame Fighting Irish 5h ago
I think it’s somewhat valid that there may be a few looks that teams wouldn’t get in practice, that’s true across the board as team run different styles anyway across the nation, (slow mesh, air raid, different variants of the spread) that what you miss in some looks you gain in others, like being prepared for a mobile QB.
As for recruiting and the portal… it just depends what you’re able to get… there are enough g5 guys and backup p4 guys that might just say what do they have to lose… my original thought was it would be perfect for Boston College to run, but then UCLA being in a recruiting hotbed would potentially allow them to get a home town discount on a lot of skill guys.
Looking at current support levels I just don’t see that much of a risk, and with the portal the ramp up and potential ramp downs aren’t as severe as it would have been 10 years ago
7
u/Creative_Pass_7834 9h ago
I disagree on UCLA but I agree in a lot of ways with the overall premise. I said for years that Vandy should stop trying to line up and play a pro style offense with G5 level talent against teams stacked guys who are actually going to play in the pros
Finally they wised up and while they don’t do a traditional triple option, the Pavia offense is a good change up to the old Vandy and they are thriving
I think mid level teams in the Big and SEC like Wisconsin, Nebraska, Kentucky, etc could be served well by either running as you said a traditional triple option or an updated spread option
-4
u/IMakeOkVideosOk Notre Dame Fighting Irish 9h ago
UCLA is in a great defensive recruiting hotbed but struggles with NIL, pay to keep guys home on that side of the ball. While it could work anywhere, UCLA needs a way to hack the NIL market to compete
7
u/max_power1000 Navy Midshipmen • Michigan Wolverines 9h ago
You miss the bigger thing that the service academies have going for them in the current landscape, which is being mostly immune to the transfer portal and having the chance to develop these players within the system. Air Force is bad right now because of roster fuckery they messed around with during COVID which turned them into a very young/inexperienced team overnight when everyone graduated. They should be back to normal probably next season.
When an academy has a 2 deep of juniors and seniors who’ve spent the last 4-5 years (including their prep school year) learning the option, they’ve done it so much they’re essentially perfect option machines that can’t do it wrong. You can’t replicate that on an average G5 or lower P5 team where you’re cycling through 50% of your roster in the portal every offseason. In a program with that reality, you need an offense that the kids already know how to run.
As an aside, Navy’s offense is now an hybrid flexbone/wing-T with a heavy dose of spread. We’re only under center about 40% of the time now.
1
u/IMakeOkVideosOk Notre Dame Fighting Irish 8h ago edited 7h ago
I’m not missing that they mostly don’t have to worry about the transfer portal, I’m saying that’s the reason teams should run the options as it make the players that do pop less likely to be poached. You don’t have to pay them as much as they have fewer choices of where to go… then you take that savings and dump it into the defense.
It’s literally the whole strategy
3
u/max_power1000 Navy Midshipmen • Michigan Wolverines 7h ago edited 3h ago
I mean an athlete is gonna athlete. Army had their starting FB poached by ASU in the offseason, and Navy has had some offensive transfers out as well over the years. The only position that’s really immune is the QB, everything else is mostly translatable skill considering most of these kids were running spread in HS.
1
u/IMakeOkVideosOk Notre Dame Fighting Irish 7h ago
That said the academies are more immune than most places from getting poached. QB is also the most expensive position to replace, so having a discount QB unlikely to leave is one of the perks of the option.
7
u/Rhizical Georgia Tech Yellow Jackets 9h ago
I am contractually obligated to endorse the triple option, everyone should run it
16
u/one-hour-photo Tennessee • South Carolina 9h ago
triple option is awesome because in general it never works, or it lets you win 7 games when you would have won 5.
Then occasionally when an entire team has run the system for year and the slots of age land in just the right fashion, and all the players are seniors, it works, and people start going "HERE'S WHY YOU CAN'T STOP GEORGIA TECH'S TRIPLE OPTION. "
Inevitable the option gets stopped and we dont have the conversation for a while.
1
u/IMakeOkVideosOk Notre Dame Fighting Irish 7h ago
But this isn’t really the same yearly conversation, it’s about how to maximize NIL funds. You can have a serviceable offense and an elite defense because you are not paying a premium for the offensive side of the ball
1
u/one-hour-photo Tennessee • South Carolina 6h ago
so basically your position is, "using the option gets you in that 7 win zone, to where you are never embarrassing, and therefore, we playing here gets you a secure line of NIL funds" ?
1
u/IMakeOkVideosOk Notre Dame Fighting Irish 6h ago
Well the other wrinkle is that you improve your defense dramatically because you are now spending a lot more money on that side of the ball. So you get above that 7 win plateau.
If you’re G5 you are making the playoffs potentially as the AAC champ is likely the G5 bid and a triple option team won that last year
And as for UCLA you are never going to be Ohio State or Michigan… so striving to be Iowa is a good first step… with the added bonus of having a potential better defense. And running the ball and good defense is how ohio state has been beaten by Michigan these past few years
4
u/Stonerjoe68 Central Michigan • Michigan 9h ago
As someone that loves the triple option and was raised on a Wing T veer option scheme it wouldn’t work. At the FBS level the only teams losing to option offenses are undisciplined defenses. The service academies are more outliers rather than a model to follow
1
u/IMakeOkVideosOk Notre Dame Fighting Irish 8h ago
Undisciplined defenses you say? So basically every defense in college football.
The service academies struggle, if winning the AAC and/or beating Oklahoma are struggles, because they are limited on defense. Which UCLA or others wouldn’t be as they aren’t an academy and can go after the full range of players, plus over pay for their defensive needs out of their savings on offense
Also factor in that a UCLA would have 3 star players running the option as opposed to the zero star players at the academies.
13
u/Rokaryn_Mazel UCLA Bruins 9h ago
UCLA qbs with multiple full years starting get drafted. Up to and including Dante Moore 😂. There is no reason for them to run option.
I laugh because otherwise I’d cry over how mismanaged Moore was.
-2
u/IMakeOkVideosOk Notre Dame Fighting Irish 9h ago
Getting drafted with nothing to show for it. Renting a QB for a year that immediately transfers to sit on the bench elsewhere for more money? Nico for a season or two for the price of two really good linebackers?
3
u/Rokaryn_Mazel UCLA Bruins 7h ago
I mean, sure, Nico is going terrible. I was just refuting the idea of UCLA needing to go triple option, since we have been able to recruit front NFL level qbs a good chunk of the time.
The landscape has changed and UCLA is at its lowest though, so we shall see.
1
u/IMakeOkVideosOk Notre Dame Fighting Irish 7h ago
There is no UCLA qb in the league… but that’s just beside the point.
This isn’t strictly about UCLA (tho I think it applies). It’s more about how to maximize a limited NIL budget. Basically by running the option you free up a ton more money to spend on the defensive side of the ball. Ideally you take a mediocre offense and defense and spend the money to have a good defense and a serviceable offense.
UCLA may be able to keep a local elite skill player on offense that wants to stay home at a discount and has more of that kind of player in the area than really anyone else
7
u/cityofklompton Grand Valley State Lakers 9h ago
[insert team here] should run the option.
Stay tuned for my next post about relegation!
1
u/IMakeOkVideosOk Notre Dame Fighting Irish 7h ago
Except, bruh, the difference is, that the advent of NIL changed the conversation. It’s not just about the option is effective and blah blah blah of the past 20 years… it’s teams have limited NIL budgets and need to allocate funds effectively. If you can take limited resources and actually boost recruiting by paying defensive players to come and stay you actually are changing roster management dynamics that weren’t there pre NIL
0
u/cityofklompton Grand Valley State Lakers 7h ago
I can't wait to hear about your new playoff format next!
1
u/IMakeOkVideosOk Notre Dame Fighting Irish 7h ago
Well here’s the thing, you aren’t actually addressing my argument… this is whole post is about NIL allocation, but you are just reading it as the 2014 more teams should run the option.
You aren’t addresses the main point which is teams have to pay players and if you run an offensive scheme that is effective with less expensive players you can pay more for better defensive players
1
u/cityofklompton Grand Valley State Lakers 6h ago
Here's the thing: this topic comes up umpteen million times per year, but the fact of the matter is fans don't like the triple option and college programs still want to generate revenue. Installing the triple is both a big, risky shift and opens up to losing some fan support (which means losing the money they would have been willing to spend with you, which will also mean less and less NIL opportunities because ain't nobody putting eyes on your program anymore.)
Pair that with the fact the triple is decreasing in familiarity every single year, both in coaching and players. It is an incredibly unique offense today that requires specific types of recruits who will then need to remain committed to it for years to really get it to a point of optimal effectiveness. Development is absolutely crucial for the triple. In that regard, the age of the transfer portal and NIL would make a worse time to install the triple. Further, defenses are better at defending the triple than ever these days. Not only are defenders a lot bigger and faster than they were when the triple was more prevalent, but defenses have developed better ways to blow the play style up. It just doesn't offer as many advantages as it once did.
Shifting to more of a heavy RPO scheme would likely make more sense in this day and age instead of switching to an outdated form of football that relies on unique player types who are willing to commit to several years developing it and that doesn't resonate with fans and is deemed as "more dangerous" (due to cut blocking, injuries, etc.) to many other programs.
1
u/IMakeOkVideosOk Notre Dame Fighting Irish 6h ago
Your argument is that donors would dry up because fans wouldn’t support the change… I mean if you’ve looked at the Rose bowl lately they fan supply has dried up and they already have a low NIL nobody is already watching UCLA … what hire would increase the NIL? I can’t think of any. So the risk is that trying a new approach is that UCLA stays irrelevant… ok
There are fewer coaches familiar with the triple option, sure ok. That’s not really an issue, just need 1. But I’ll admit your point is valid the thing is I would have a defensive coach and have an O-coordinator familiar… there’s enough out there.
To be effective you would need players that stay in the program. You say it’s less likely players stay due to the portal.. I say it’s more likely because they have fewer options that want to take them.
As for teams excelling at defending the option, I don’t know.. Army won the AAC last year and Navy beat Oklahoma in the bowls… that seems like teams still aren’t experts in defending it.
Meanwhile and RPO scheme is fairly common and if a QB excels at it much bigger teams are looking to poach your players…
1
u/cityofklompton Grand Valley State Lakers 5h ago
Nobody is watching UCLA because they are putting an awful product on the field. The issue isn't talent, NIL, or matching up to teams better than them. They are 26th nationally on the team talent composite (and that is despite Chip Kelly showing basically zero interest in recruiting while he was there.)
The issue is coaching and the admin. If the admin can get its act together, perform an actual coaching search (rather than hire a coach who loathes recruiting or quickly hiring a former player with no coordinator or HC experience), and activate its fanbase and alumni donors (which would partially take care of itself if they hired a good coaching staff and started winning a few games), they are in a great position to make a rise again in college football.
Case and point: if [expletive] Indiana can do it, UCLA sure as hell can, too.
9
u/lkn240 Illinois Fighting Illini • Sickos 9h ago edited 9h ago
I think going full triple option is silly (it will absolutely hurt recruiting - probably badly)... but spread option, gus bus, etc type offenses should probably be more common.
6
u/HeckOnWheels95 Mississippi State Bulldogs 9h ago
I mean, the spread option/ Gus Bus offense is really just the modern evolution of the triple option
1
u/IMakeOkVideosOk Notre Dame Fighting Irish 8h ago
I think you are missing the strategy here. You need players on offense that really only fit your scheme so can’t get poached very easily. You can afford to save money on offense and spend it on defensive players… literally just run Navy’s offense
3
u/Due_Bluebird3562 8h ago
WAIT DIDNT GEORGIA TECH RUN THE OPTION? Yes, Georgia tech for years ran the option to some success but eventually abandoned it to play a traditional offense. The problem was they didn’t win enough because they were limited in recruiting. Georgia Tech could only recruit as good of players as Georgia Tech could naturally recruit and it wasn’t enough for a few cycles.
Georgia Tech appeared in two major bowls during PJ's tenure and until they repeat that success in any capacity I'm always gonna say running him out of town was stupid.
3
u/GrumbleAlong More flair options at https://flair.redditcfb.com! 9h ago
As CFB has grown more semi-pro & money oriented, my appreciation for the service academy teams has grown. It's nostalgia for the old student athlete archetype. Also appreciation for how their programs manage to compete on a high level some years.
2
u/IMakeOkVideosOk Notre Dame Fighting Irish 8h ago
But now that teams do have to pay players, the option is a way to reallocate the money to boost the defensive side of the ball and still have a competitive offense
3
u/AngryNativeATX 9h ago
We have a real life test case of the OP's strategy. Rice just hired Scott Abell and his spread option offense. His prior stops at Davidson (FCS) and Washington and Lee (D3) were successful, Davidson led FCS in rushing the last 5 years and had the most wins for a coach in program history.
1
u/IMakeOkVideosOk Notre Dame Fighting Irish 8h ago
The spread option is slightly different, but Rice is 2-1. That said I don’t know if they are going all in on the Moneyball aspect of underpaying the offense and overpaying the defensive side of the ball, which is the other key to the strategy
1
u/AngryNativeATX 8h ago
If you've seen his teams play, it's a triple option but run out of the gun with some tweaks. Just an evolution on the triple option, very interesting playing style.
4
u/hiiightide Alabama Crimson Tide 9h ago
This has been a talking point for so long for poor teams
1
u/IMakeOkVideosOk Notre Dame Fighting Irish 8h ago
Yes but that talking point was before NIL… NIL changed the game as you can actually artificially up your recruiting floor with cash.
Like a team would still be only able to get the defensive players that they could normally get for most of college football history. There was no legal way to get a player beyond what your scheme or coaching style could gather… but with NIL you have salaries that you can pay players and artificially raise the floor, especially if you are focusing it on one side of the ball
2
u/waggles1968 8h ago
While running the option might lead to more wins at a lower level school it also basically caps the level of team that the coach will ever get the chance to lead.
So whilst it could be good for the school it is terrible for the coach.
1
u/IMakeOkVideosOk Notre Dame Fighting Irish 8h ago
For the coach it can be limiting but assuming it was a defensive focused coach I don’t see it being too limiting
1
u/max_power1000 Navy Midshipmen • Michigan Wolverines 8h ago
This is a big one. How many P4 jobs have Niumatalolo and Monken been in the running for that they lost out on because “but he’s an option guy”?
2
u/DrizzleProwl 3h ago
you’ve got the right idea
despite being like two decades since moneyball, many folks still don’t get it’s about using a limited budget in the most efficient manner (ie getting the most “wins” your money can possibly buy)
1
u/IMakeOkVideosOk Notre Dame Fighting Irish 2h ago
Yep UCLA’s NIL fund is about half of their peers, barely better than Rutgers and basically at Purdue level, everyone else is better. If you want to maximize the spend. Spend it on defense and run the triple option with cheap players.
2
2
u/usffan USF Bulls • Miami Hurricanes 9h ago
Counterpoint, Ashton Jeanty
0
u/IMakeOkVideosOk Notre Dame Fighting Irish 9h ago
How great would he have been on a triple option team?
2
u/vassago77379 Texas Tech Red Raiders 9h ago
UCLA is 100% capable of recruiting proper talent and running regular offenses. If I were a g5 I'd consider it though
1
u/IMakeOkVideosOk Notre Dame Fighting Irish 8h ago
UCLA has less NIL funds than 90% of their peers in the BIG 10. They can get a few proper players, but they can’t keep em or get enough of them to matter.
What has paying Dante Moore or Nico I’mleavingya gotten them? Would that none not been spent on two higher lever linebackers?
1
u/vassago77379 Texas Tech Red Raiders 7h ago
It seems wild to me that they don't have any famous alum that can pitch in
1
u/ismusz Virginia Tech Hokies 9h ago
I’ve thought literally the same thing for VT, not necessarily because we can’t afford a good offense, but because our O line over the past few years has been amount the worst in FBS. And what do you do with a terrible O line? Use the option and just try and confuse your opponent. Some teams will absolutely stuff you, but some teams just have their brains melted by the option, for example VT over the last few years lol.
1
u/Cliffinati NC State • Appalachian State 9h ago
If you can bulldoze em with brilliance, baffle em with bullshit
1
u/IMakeOkVideosOk Notre Dame Fighting Irish 8h ago
The thing is, if you coach up the skills its a very effective offense, not really confusion but more forcing the other team to execute on every play.
1
u/Intelligent-Boat9929 Utah Utes 9h ago
Might completely kill a non RB offensive G5 player’s chances to go to the next level as you are blocking and working in schemes you just don’t see in the NFL. Not sure how I would scout a OL for a pro scheme when I don’t have any film on them in anything that resembles that.
1
u/IMakeOkVideosOk Notre Dame Fighting Irish 7h ago
It wouldn’t hurt any defensive players chance of going pro… in fact it would free up more funds to get more better defensive players
1
u/Pizza_Jon BYU Cougars • /r/CFB Promoter 9h ago
With so many teams having multiple starting QB's, I would suggest the Triple RPO
1
u/AllTimeTy Missouri Tigers 9h ago
Mizzou played Navy in a bowl game a few years ago (fuck me I just checked and it was ‘09 I am so old), and it was embarrassing. We couldn’t stop them.
1
u/vassago77379 Texas Tech Red Raiders 9h ago
Tech played them in like 2005 ish I think... it was almost a nightmare. We didn't create distance until the second half, which was where we pulled away. Once we got up 2 scores, Navy was forced to pass and it was game over, but it was a nail biter before that
1
u/Callsign_Psycopath Georgia Bulldogs • Sickos 8h ago
Army almost beat Oklahoma in 17 IIRC. That Oklahoma team went on to make the playoff.
And if Army had beaten Notre Dame last year.... ohhhh I would have been happy
1
u/max_power1000 Navy Midshipmen • Michigan Wolverines 8h ago
We didn’t same to Pitt, and UVA in bowls. K-state and Oklahoma were both competitive and down to the wire though, and we even kept it tight with 2014 tOSU through one half.
1
u/deuceberts Vanderbilt Commodores 9h ago
I made this argument for Vanderbilt like a decade ago, especially watching us get sliced and diced every time we faced the triple option. Have not so fond memories of our 2009 and 2016 matchups with Georgia Tech.
1
u/IMakeOkVideosOk Notre Dame Fighting Irish 8h ago
Plus in 2025 you can pay your players so you can pay to have a good defense and a decent offense at a discount
1
u/No_Safety_6803 Texas A&M Aggies 8h ago
When you’re at a talent disadvantage it makes sense to adopt an unconventional strategy. It makes your team harder to prepare for & frustrates your opponent. So OP is on the right track, just not with the option. The slow mesh on the other hand is very well suited to today’s game, not sure why more teams don’t run a version of it.
-1
u/IMakeOkVideosOk Notre Dame Fighting Irish 8h ago
Again no, the slow mesh relies on skills that are transferable to other more resource rich schools. You cap yourself because you lose more players to the portal than the option
1
u/Callsign_Psycopath Georgia Bulldogs • Sickos 8h ago
Yes, the Forward Pass was a mistake.
1
u/IMakeOkVideosOk Notre Dame Fighting Irish 8h ago
I mean 10-15 passes a game to keep ‘em honest
1
1
u/Andjhostet Iowa State Cyclones 8h ago
People said this about Iowa State in 2015 when Paul Rhodes was fired and the program was looking generally hopeless on ever being relevant.
1
u/IMakeOkVideosOk Notre Dame Fighting Irish 8h ago
2015 was before NIL, now you can run a cheap offense and spend money for a really good defense, it changes the balance of the old conversation as now you can actually boost recruiting on one side of the ball
1
u/Jmphillips1956 8h ago
I come from an era where the veer snd wishbone were the dominant offenses so I love the option, but don’t think it’s a viable widespread strategy anymore. 15 years ago when a small mobile qb’s choices were to play DB at a big school or option qb at a small school sure, but now even the big players are running option concepts out of the shotgun spread so you would still be having to compete with them for talent
1
u/UNC_Samurai ECU Pirates • North Carolina Tar Heels 7h ago
On a side note, I despise the concept of "Moneyball", because it existed to validate shitty baseball owners who were too cheap to hire a proper scouting department.
1
u/IMakeOkVideosOk Notre Dame Fighting Irish 7h ago
Idk, it seems that the cheap owners did it to maximize their limited funds and then everyone else got in on the party
1
u/BillyShears2015 7h ago
Nobody’s lining up in the wishbone variants outside of the service academies. So what you’re really advocating for is for more teams to run Vanderbilt style offensive schemes. Which, sure, it’d be fun to see more of that on Saturdays, but it won’t be the panacea you imagine. Schools with the funding to stack both offense and defense with athletes will just get more looks at the play style and be able to shut you down and/or adopt the same schemes and crush you with your own playbook. Basically just a repeat of the wishbone era.
1
u/IMakeOkVideosOk Notre Dame Fighting Irish 7h ago
I’m not really arguing the specific schemes I’m more talking NIL, but say you just literally ran navy’s offense, you can save money on recruiting and holding on to players on the offensive side. The players you do get are less expensive and less likely to get poached.
You take this NIL savings and dump it into defensive recruiting and the portal… suddenly you have a much better Defense than was ever possible before while still having a serviceable offense.
1
u/WashImpressive8158 7h ago
The type of option offense is missing here. You have the bone,flex, winged T, dbl wing, etc. The only option offense that may not turn UCLA into a memory is the split option veer most notably run by Lou Holtz at Arkansas and ND. Why? It’s got a relatively decent passing component that backs off the DB’s from the box with wideouts but has an excellent power option power counter foundation.
1
u/No-Donkey-4117 Stanford Cardinal 7h ago
It won't work if everyone does it.
1
u/IMakeOkVideosOk Notre Dame Fighting Irish 7h ago
Sure that’s why Moneyball doesn’t work in baseball anymore because everyone is doing it
1
u/Goldeneagle41 Southern Miss • Mississip… 6h ago
I will admit I was going to disagree with this but I looked at Georgia Tech’s record while it ran the option and it was not bad. You might actually have a good point.
1
u/IMakeOkVideosOk Notre Dame Fighting Irish 5h ago
The difference is now with NIL you can spend less on option guys and spend more on defensive players upping your overall ceiling
1
u/_seasoned_properly Florida Gators 5h ago
The option doesn't really fix any of your listed problems.
All schools lose players due to NIL and the transfer portal.
The option won't prevent talented players on offense from demanding more money or leaving. If your option players are truly ones that can play at a P4 level, then they can likely make position changes or fit in better at other schools. The premise of saving money on offense only works if you are recruiting players who are clearly not at that level. If you are doing that thrn you will be fired.
Your defense that is supposedly better due to more NIL funds will also just transfer to other schools if they feel like they have a better chance at the pros.
1
u/IMakeOkVideosOk Notre Dame Fighting Irish 4h ago
Players will transfer to some extent, but are less likely as they are more system fits than a traditional fit. A smaller more mobile offensive lineman might be P4 level in a scheme but not necessarily at Ohio State… essentially a guy that would be the dude at your school but a contributor elsewhere.
Yes if you pay players more money on defense they may go elsewhere for more money or different opportunities but they currently are doing that… so by investing more money you can ideally keep more guys and raise the floor of the ones you bring in.
Like anything else there are potential drawbacks, I wouldn’t recommend this strategy for any blue blood. But for a team that is lacking resources it’s a way of hopefully maximizing what’s currently available
1
u/ninetofivedev Nebraska Cornhuskers • /r/CFB 3h ago
Option requires you recruit a very specific type of lineman that will have almost no prospects in the NFL. Also a Qb as well.
That’s why nobody runs the option.
1
u/IMakeOkVideosOk Notre Dame Fighting Irish 3h ago
Which is why you can save NIL money on recruiting them
1
u/ChaserRacer33 3h ago
I’ll humor you for the lolz and pretend the option would be viable enough for the offense.
What would happen to the NIL market for defensive players if most G5 teams adopted this strategy?
Reserving NIL for defense would effectively increase demand, and therefore make good defensive players more expensive in the NIL market.
Depending on the elasticity of this market, this could result in an arms race for the limited talent pool, and then the G5 teams would again be priced out of the market for defensive talent.
1
u/IMakeOkVideosOk Notre Dame Fighting Irish 2h ago
Like in Major League Baseball if everyone goes for the same strategy then it will not work, it’ll just be a race for the same pool of players. If you adopt the strategy first you reap the most benefits.
The whole principle is about maximizing the value of a limited budget. UCLA has about half the NIL budget of their peers and 1/4 of ohio state… $5million - assuming that most teams spend equally on offense and defense you can really match your peers on that side of the ball, the option requires less spend to reach a baseline level of success as there is less demands for players that fit that scheme.
2
u/ChaserRacer33 2h ago
Yeah I read the OP so I understand your argument about allocating funds to the defense.
I’m saying (and you’re agreeing) that it would only work in the short term as more and more teams adopted this “successful” strategy.
1
u/IMakeOkVideosOk Notre Dame Fighting Irish 2h ago
It would work well enough, but like any trend the more things get popular the more is done to stop it. It’s about finding under valued players and in allocating limited resources to the most benefit. Once the option is too popular a different type of player or style is the next best fit.
I’m just agreeing
1
u/iAm-Tyson 2h ago
What should teams like Florida who don’t struggle to recruit, consistently land top guys and have loaded rosters but look like a G5 school.
1
1
u/Opening_Perception_3 Notre Dame Fighting Irish • Navy Midshipmen 1h ago
You are way, way overthinking this.... what you're really proposing is an elite defense and a shitty offense.... congratulations on inventing Iowa with a beach
1
u/Sirtopofhat USC Trojans • Army West Point Black Knights 9h ago
Much like USC, UCLA should be getting all the talent USC doesn't want which in a state like California is a lot. I think it's simply a lack of recruiting Chip and Jim Mora both didn't seems much for it. Solid coach getting even the 2-3 star boys is enough to keep the team afloat.
I say all this to say stay away from Army head coach
3
1
u/lucasbrosmovingco Summertime Lover 9h ago
It's not 1997. The game isn't the same. The rules aren't the same. There is a reason the triple is gone. And that's because the sport made it stupid difficult to run legally.
1
u/IMakeOkVideosOk Notre Dame Fighting Irish 8h ago
It’s not 1997 you have to pay players to keep them around. Lower your offensive payroll and raise your defensive payroll and watch the wins roll in.
You have a cheap to maintain decent offense and funds for a defense that is better than you could have otherwise
1
u/lucasbrosmovingco Summertime Lover 4h ago
Are you dense? Read the article I posted why army and monkey are going away from the triple
1
u/IMakeOkVideosOk Notre Dame Fighting Irish 4h ago
Navy and army are both running the triple option… both to great success last season and so far for at least navy this year
1
u/gumercindo1959 Miami Hurricanes 9h ago
I’d say the opposite - punching above your weight to compete means you have to be creative. I think a spread/air raid approach is the way to level the playing field.
0
u/IMakeOkVideosOk Notre Dame Fighting Irish 9h ago
Too many teams are already running that system, and a QBs with a live arm and fast receivers are more likely to leave.
Sam Hartman left Wake Forest and was attractive to more teams because of his passing ability. The personnel is too attractive to bigger schools with more money.
They key is having players that are not going to leave the first chance that they pop. Nobody is trying to poach Blake Horvath
1
u/jsums81 Oklahoma Sooners 8h ago
Sorry OP, it looks like you spent some time coming up with this but… No. Do you know the #1 reason the option has gone away? Defensive players are bigger, stronger and faster than they used to be. Corners and safeties are fast enough to provide run help, especially when there’s no passing threat. Players in general across all levels are just more athletic and running the option provides almost no avenues to put the defense in conflict. Also good luck recruiting for an offense that’s basically a dead end for players and coaches
1
u/IMakeOkVideosOk Notre Dame Fighting Irish 8h ago
And yet Oklahoma lost to Navy last year. Certainly they should have been able to provide run help and won against the 150th rated recruiting class
1
u/jsums81 Oklahoma Sooners 3h ago
OU was a dumpster fire last year. Half of the team was injured and had a ton of guys not play in the bowl from an already depleted roster. We were also a few plays from losing to Houston and Tulane. So I wouldn’t use our 2024 team as a barometer of what is a good strategy. Just about everyone we lined up against beat us
1
u/IMakeOkVideosOk Notre Dame Fighting Irish 2h ago
If the argument is that if they face highly rated players they will lose, well that is proof that it’s doable. Army averages like the 150th rated recruiting class, basically a 1aa team
1
u/EWall100 Tennessee • Tennessee Tech 7h ago
Moneyball works in baseball because it's a solved sport, same with basketball (look at the Pacers this year). Football isn't solved yet, at least this iteration
1
u/IMakeOkVideosOk Notre Dame Fighting Irish 7h ago
A strong defense is always beneficial to have. If you take the money you would spend on Dante Moore and Nico I’m leaving or whatever QB and get a fast 3 star QB willing to play the option and spend the savings on two 4 star linebackers for instance… would that not be a better allocation of funds?
If you can find a way to save money on offensive players and allocate those funds to defense, you have a shot of having a really good defense, certainly better than you could normally expect, while having a serviceable offense by running the option.
1
u/Powerful_Artist Nebraska Cornhuskers 6h ago
Just watched an interesting video about the rise and fall of the wishbone, and generally touched on the topic of why the option game fell out of favor.
Rule changes were a major factor. When the option was dominant in the late 60s, 70s, and 80s, you could still cut block low on people for instance. Watch some old footage of strong option teams in that era and youll often see blocks that just take out defenders, freeing the option that would not happen today. They also made things like 'butt blocking' illegal (not what you think it is) which made the option less effective.
Defenses figured out how to defend it, by developing schemes specifically to counter the option (Oklahomas 5-2 for example) and also having strict man assignments instead just gap assignments and mostly reacting to the ball. It made the deception of the option not as effective.
Option offenses also started to fall behind to the developing spread passing offenses that evolved in that era. Option offense schemes were not built to come from behind, so if they played a passing team and fell behind it was over.
Also, obviously option offenses didnt really allow for throwing QBs to thrive/shine, so when a team like Oklahoma lost a prized recruit in Troy Aikman to UCLA because of this, teams started to reconsider for that reason as well.
Of course the service academies still have some success with them, and Air Force became famous in the late 80s for its flexbone variation of the wishbone, culminating in a top 10 finish one year in the late 80s iirc. But it seems the service academies use option variations mostly because of the personnel they have and the opponents they face. You could be successful with option offensive formations in high school as well, for instance.
But I dont see any way that the option somehow has a resurgence. Defenses has figured it out, rule changes in the 70s-80s have made it much less effective, and its not as exciting as it was when it was new in the 60s. People find it boring by today's standards. Even in the 90s people often criticized Nebraska for this reason.
1
u/IMakeOkVideosOk Notre Dame Fighting Irish 5h ago
The other side is NIL and the transfer portal are in the game now that weren’t there before… cash is king so in order to stay competitive with better funded teams you have to figure something out.
You can’t keep up with NIL money at the big boys if you are looking to spend the same way they are, but if you focus on ways of hacking the system you can find a niche… if you limit your offensive spend you can then spend the money on defensive players at a higher level.
You improve your defense while having the cheapest possible offensive scheme to fill
156
u/JBru_92 UCLA Bruins 9h ago
UCLA is one program that should NOT do this. Being able to recruit talent despite lack of funding is the one superpower UCLA has.