The Aftermath And Some Clarity

It’s clear by the commentary in response to our pieces below that either (a) People don’t understand our line of argument or (b) they don’t want to understand and would prefer that we not make them actually have to think about things they’ve never bothered to think about.

Let’s start with our friends over at EDSBS. Their final response to this whole episode is to say: Give us offenses that protect the qb and the ball over whatever the hell sophistication is.

They then go on to link to a story on Jeff Tedford that basically gives a tutorial on the kinds of offenses that we’ve been talking about.

Funny how you can easily find laudatory stories about Norm Chow’s offense, and Jeff Tedford’s offense and Urban Meyer’s offense, not to mention those of Dan Hawkins and Bobby Petrino on the web. Can you say the same about Chuck Long, Greg Davis, Neil Calloway and Terry Malone? Of course, three of those mentioned in the first group were Coach of the Year finalists by American Football Coaches Monthly Magazine.

Yet somehow, tying together these five brilliant minds and pointing out that they appear to be on to some kind of new paradigm in college football is seen as a weird reach, even though their five teams went 55-2 against the rest of college football last year. Is that merely a coincidence?

We think EDSBS is a great site….they are the court jester of the college football blogosphere. We wish them luck in finding their nude pics of Rosario Dawson.

Meanwhile, Brian of Mgoblog has taken a break from partying and watching Dune to state his last piece on the whole subject.

As usual, our boy never bothers to actually make a case for any of his original positions (whatever those were). Instead, we get a promise to shut up, which is probably the smartest thing he’s ever written.

Says Brian, before actually shutting up: Respect from the MSM (and anybody, really) will come from actually doing good work with research behind it–and I don’t mean checking the top ten offenses last year to see which of them had really good seasons.

Since this blog is actually read by people in the mainstream media with regularity, I will take that into account. You know, maybe this whole brouhaha hasn’t been so bad after all: there’s a chance that Bruce Feldman actually knows that mgoblog exists now. We’ll be holding our breath for mention of it in his next blog entry.

And then we come to the various commentaries on our ‘Vinegar’ post below:

ny 1995 of I Blog For Cookies distorts our idea of the benefits of balance by saying:

did you know that last year Oklahoma, Memphis and Michigan State all averaged more yards/game AND had more balanced offenses than USC? In fact, USC’s offense was not balanced at all (100 yards/game more passing than rushing)

Of course, a team that runs for 100 yards a game and passes for 100 yards per game is also more balanced than USC was last year. But it surely wasn’t as effective. That wasn’t the point. It’s less about output and more about input on the offensive side.

Then the ever-popular Solon chimes in:

Do you think any of the other five teams would have gone to 2-9 SJSU last year and needed double OT to win (and a late FG block, just to get the game that far), or needed a FG on the last play of the game to beat 4-8 Tulsa? Hell, would Boise ’03 have? Just because Boise has a gaudy record and has scored a lot of points the last couple of years it doesn’t mean they are in the same class as USC, Cal, et al.

Well, here’s why the comparative score trick–a crutch depended on by those who lack the ability to dig deeper into the game–just doesn’t work. Stanford lost to USC 31-28 last year. USC beat Oklahoma, 55-19. Is Stanford better than Oklahoma? Look, as we said many times, teams that are familiar with one another and who play in the same conference (like Stanford with USC, like SJSU with Boise and like OU with Texas Tech) are more likely to have closer games with each other than teams that are NOT used to one another (USC vs. Oklahoma, Cal vs. Texas Tech, Boise vs. Oregon State), as we saw last year. As we noted earlier, conferences are like biospheres. Everything within that biosphere fights on a more even plane than those who come from the outside. It’s not only about scheme, but familiarity with scheme.

Then Brent of Paradigm Blog–yet ANOTHER Michigan blog–says:

I think the reason that 99% of blogs exist is because we’re dorks….We’re a bunch of guys (no females involved in all this yet right?) who are CFB-loving dorks. And until we become quasi-media, we’re as bad as the rivals board inhabiting cromags in the view of the general public.

I used to have a friend who, when he was in a group setting and didn’t understand what was going on, would say:

“It’s pretty clear here that NO ONE knows what is going on.” Looks to be the same case here.

I completely agree with the original assessment, though. 99% of all you bloggers are dorks. And, apparently, self-loathing ones at that.

Powered by

About Heismanpundit

Chris Huston, A.K.A. ‘The Heisman Pundit‘, is a Heisman voter and the creator and publisher of, a site dedicated to analysis of the Heisman Trophy and college football. Dubbed “the foremost authority on the Heisman” by Sports Illustrated, HP is regularly quoted or cited during football season in newspapers across the country. He is also a regular contributor on sports talk radio and television.

Follow HP

Find us on Twitter, Facebook and Youtube!

Comments are closed.