There are reasons that the option doesn't work at the highest levels of football (e.g., an expectation that RBs can block DEs), but at a glance the byu has a lot of the makings of an option team - a team with recruiting limitations and a lot of smart, quick, disciplined kids who can make up for some shortcomings with precise execution. All smack-talking aside, an option attack plays to the byu's ethos and advantages.Originally Posted by NorthwestUteFan
Sounds like a great idea.
"You have some impressive success against very long odds and with significant built-in challenges. You have over two decades running a specific scheme, and have patterned your team around that specific offensive scheme. We want to bring you in to run our team, but we also want you to implement OUR scheme and using a completely different type of athlete. And we want you to hit the ground running and continue the level of success to which we have become accustomed ..."
What could possibly go wrong? On the other hand it might be fun to watch a decade of bad byu football, just for the schafenfreude.
I get it that it's quarterback U and that Tanner M is the rill dill but, long-term, the option has possibilities. (Taysom Hill seems like he could be a great option QB). Especially with an independent schedule where teams don't get used to playing the byu every year, and the element of unfamiliarity is another advantage.
Plus, you can still chuck it a lot out of option formations. Hell, Joe Flacco played in a wing-t offense in college and they threw like crazy.
Reply With Quote
