"Spend a few minutes reading College Football Resource" - Whit Watson, Sun Sports

"Maybe you should start your own blog" - Bruce Feldman, ESPN

"[An] Excellent resource for all things college football. It’s blog index is the definitive listing of the CFB blogosphere ... [A] must-read for fans." - Sports Illustrated (On Campus)

"The big daddy of them all, the nerve center of this twisted college football blogsphere" - The House Rock Built

"Unsurprisingly, College Football Resource has generated some discussion" -Dawg Sports

Top Teams 2008

After Week Seven

  1. Alabama
  2. Penn State
  3. Texas
  4. Oklahoma
  5. Florida
  6. USC
  7. Georgia
  8. LSU
  9. BYU
  10. Missouri
  11. Ohio State
  12. Oklahoma State
  13. Texas Tech
  14. Utah
  15. Kansas
  16. USF
  17. North Carolina
  18. Miami
  19. Boise State
  20. Georgia Tech
Display
RSS
Search CFR
Submission Corner
« Some new links | Main | Slate clean: Fiu's a nut »
Monday
Jun272005

Brouhaha

Last week, Heisman Pundit declared blogger revolution.  Soon others followed.  Things seem all well in bloggy-land.

Then things got crazy.

First, CFR and HP had their say on the upcoming Boise State/Georgia matchup here and here.  Then, mgoblog got batty and launched this broadside.

Then, the weekend came and everyone jumped into the water proclaiming skepticism of HP and also CFR.

This morning, HeismanPundit answered back extensively: vinegar.

For a condensed version of the above, you have EDSBS.

What does CFR think?

We think mgoblog was way off base in considering the thoughtful posts and backed-up justification of HeismanPundit shallow and facile.  I read both posts mgoblog pointed to and found them almost the complete opposite of what HP was being accused of.  Talk about facile.

Mgoblog takes offense to the creation of HP's Big Six, asking 'how would he know'? if they're really sophisticated.  Well, as HP said before, no less than Pete Carroll, one of the elite coaches in the game, was on record giving quite heavy praise for Boise, a team that for whatever reason is taking a beating as somehow unworthy of HP's Big Six.  HP also brought up those teams' records last year---just two losses that weren't head to head.

In response, I've also created the Big Six tracker on here just to keep tabs throughout this season.  Some of the things expressed by HP and CFR are awaiting the actual games to be played.  In the end are the outcomes we talk about predictions?  Well, yeah, since the games haven't been played.  But asking 'how am I to know', after having just read justification from the previous season and an offering of what will happen the next based on that justification, that's your answer.  Actually, your answer is to watch the games!

This sophistication argument is legitemate, and is not going away.  We've presented the outline this preseason, giving you, the reader, time to prepare and watch these teams and see what we're talking about during the regular season.

As far as using numbers or film as justification, I'm sure I'll try and get some film if I have any just sitting around and manage to load it on here.  Until then I don't think written play-by-play of what 22 guys are doing each quarter of a second is really worth your time.

I could sit around and use numbers, too, but I did that once and was accused of not having real justification.  Catch-22 here, if you ask me, from the fickle forever-cautious skeptic types who live what amounts to a fairly numb existence.

Lastly, part of helping people along to understand something is to get ahead of the argument, as HP and CFR have done.  Saying your say afterwards, and being right, has the unfortunate effect of making one a Moday-morning quarterback and people will still not believe you.  At least if your arguments are presented before, people have the time to watch them either develop or disappear and analyze their merits in real time.

PrintView Printer Friendly Version

EmailEmail Article to Friend

Reader Comments (4)

Just weighing in on this topic...there is something there but I'm not sure the six you've picked share the same sophistication...they're different.

Boise State, Louisville and Cal are three teams whose offenses are built upon multiplicity. They run the same plays out of different formations, personnel groupings and motions. These offenses give the look of complexity to a defense but yet are rather simple. Al Borges does the same thing at Auburn, Ralph Friedgen does something similar (but more complex) at Maryland, and Charlie Weis did this at New England and is bringing the offense to Notre Dame.

Norm Chow does something different. He's more about creating mismatches on the field. He's not about running the same plays out of different looks; he's all about creating match-ups for his talent to exploit.

Finally, there's Utah, Florida and Bowling Green (if you include Utah, you have to include Bowling Green since their HC (Gregg Brandon?) runs the same offense. This is the spread option. It's really simple but yet much different than the others. In fact, I don't think it's very sophisticated at all, although it has the appearance of complexity. The QB reads the defense; if there are 7 or fewer defenders in the box, they run and if there are more, they pass. The QB reads are pretty simple and not much is asked of the quarterback.

The truly sophisticated passing offenses are the ones that don't work in college - see Paul Hackett.
June 27, 2005 | Unregistered CommenterMichael
Bowling Green is probably the next in line.

Sophistication is a catch-all term for style of play, etc. These six teams have pulled away from the pack, whereas Maryland hasn't, and we don't think Notre Dame will (although it would be great for CFB if they did).
June 27, 2005 | Unregistered CommenterResource Admin
Maryland will be back, though. They just need a QB.

Also, why didn't you include Auburn and Borges?
June 28, 2005 | Unregistered CommenterMichael
Also, why didn't you include Auburn and Borges?

Probably because it's the same offense, for the most part, that he ran at UCLA, which was figured out by the Pac-10 after the 1998 season. It was successful in the SEC because they haven't seen an offense like that-- one that throws passes to the running backs that aren't just swing passes or passes to the flat. It's sophisticated for the SEC, but not necessarily sophisticated when compared to the Gang of Six.
June 29, 2005 | Unregistered CommenterTrojanRuss

PostPost a New Comment

Enter your information below to add a new comment.

My response is on my own website »
Author Email (optional):
Author URL (optional):
Post:
 
All HTML will be escaped. Hyperlinks will be created for URLs automatically.