Wake and the option

[VaDeac]

That's exactly what the staff tried to do this season. But the growing pains of switching identity to the option were unbearable.

It isn't really, though. They said "Hey let's run the option." They didn't recruit this set of personnel with that decision in mind though. It was a commitment to the option without, well, committing to it. They half-assed the decision to go option and got results that reflected it.

 

[PhDeac]

I'm pretty sure they instituted the option with the mentality that they're going to make it work with this group and recruit for it going forward.

Do you think coaches should go around telling recruits that we are going to the option with actually showing it on the field?

 

[RiskyBusiness]

Not really. Better than Caldwell, better than we've done since, but mediocre in the conference and national landscape.

In 2001:
http://web1.ncaa.org/d1mfb/2001/Internet/ranking_summary/2001000000749.HTML

We had the best rushing offense in the conference and worst passing offense. We were 5th in the conference in total offense and 7th in scoring offense at 26.6. Remember it was a 9 team league back then.

In 2002:
http://web1.ncaa.org/d1mfb/2001/Internet/ranking_summary/2001000000749.HTML

We again at the top rushing offense and worst passing offense. We led the conference in total offense, but were 5th in scoring offense at 27.4.

With Calhoun, we ran hard and held onto the ball, even racked up a lot of yards in 2002, but we didn't throw up a lot of points on the board. I broke all this down awhile back on a thread I bump with relevant facts from time to time. I don't start many threads, so it should be easy to find. The most interesting stat is that Wake is one of only a handful of teams not to have scored 28 ppg in at least one season from 2001-present. We have one of the most consistently poor offenses in the country under Grobe.

I started reading your post this morning with a cup of coffee and started thinking about how the pure data does not support my recollection that Grobe's early teams had good offenses. I may be over thinking this, but here is my conclusion. A full analysis of an offense in terms of giving you a chance to win "might" be more than points scored. I am thinking that something like scores per possession might be a good way to look at this. TD counts as a score; field goal counts as 1/2 score. This thinking comes from my memory of watching our games with Navy and Army. Sometimes it came down to knowing that you need a defensive stop to win a game and knowing that a ten minute drive also reduces the opportunities that the opposition has to score. This thinking might end up supporting your original premise on points per game, but it might end up documenting a value of time of possession for a ball control team.

 

[VaDeac]

I'm pretty sure they instituted the option with the mentality that they're going to make it work with this group and recruit for it going forward.

Do you think coaches should go around telling recruits that we are going to the option with actually showing it on the field?

As often as we've changed offenses, even midseason, no I'm not convinced the option was a long term plan at all.
And even if they said they would, I wouldn't believe they could stick with it.
And as it turns out they didn't.

 

[PhDeac]

The changes aren't because the plans weren't long term. The changes are because the plans fail miserably.

 

[DeacDaddy]

Yeah, I got the sense it was a temporary gimmick to show impatient fans that they were trying to make a change, rather than an institutional, philosophical shift. Something to throw people off the scent of multiple losing seasons.

But then again I'm not sure how I could know what they were doing, when it's not clear they knew what they were doing.

 

[themuth]

I think that this year's defense would fit very well. Imagine how much better our defensive stats would be if our offense could control the clock and grind out some long drives on the ground? Also Lee demonstrates that you can recruit option QBs with both speed and strong arms.

Football as a whole is moving toward some form of the option with mobile running QBs. This is our best shot at competing year-in and year-out, IMO.

With our past and present history, Wake is going to have a hell of a time recruiting any kind of a QB......

 

[PhDeac]

I started reading your post this morning with a cup of coffee and started thinking about how the pure data does not support my recollection that Grobe's early teams had good offenses. I may be over thinking this, but here is my conclusion. A full analysis of an offense in terms of giving you a chance to win "might" be more than points scored. I am thinking that something like scores per possession might be a good way to look at this. TD counts as a score; field goal counts as 1/2 score. This thinking comes from my memory of watching our games with Navy and Army. Sometimes it came down to knowing that you need a defensive stop to win a game and knowing that a ten minute drive also reduces the opportunities that the opposition has to score. This thinking might end up supporting your original premise on points per game, but it might end up documenting a value of time of possession for a ball control team.

I can look at that tonight when I get a chance.