Just because SU offense struggles it doesnt mean 90% percent of college football is struggling. lol SU's problem is development, play calling, S&C, game day adjustments etc.. Not the offensive scheme they choose to use. The teams that are beating us every year run similar schemes and concepts. So you can't say its the offense we run. Wake Forest took alot of Dino offense and since then have been hard to stop. You are better off just saying you have a Dino problem. Or you just dont like the way the game is played now. Then I would have to respect that.
Look at it this way: if in the past everyone wanted to have Butch and Sundance, the reason we don't have that now is because somebody decided to try something different. Things like the option and the nose tackle have appeared, disappeared and re-appeared. Most of what is done in any sport is invented early in its development. it's just repacked and re-popularized as the sport goes along and we call it 'evolution and thinks that that mans that anything we used to do must be bad.
I'm still amazed at what i see Michigan doing in the 1948 Rose Bowl. They seem to be running almost any play we have now. They are just doing it from the single wing. And they are doing a lot of things you don't see now at all. it looks far more sophisticated to me than Dino's "throw it to the sidelines and run up the middle" concept:
(3) 1948 Rose Bowl: Michigan 49 USC 0 - YouTube
I'm not saying we should adopt the single wing. I'm just saying that there are things they used to do that might work today because defenses won't be ready for them.
I like a balanced attack between running and passing. You can run pass plays to the halfback in a two back set that aren't dissimilar to the ones for the slot guy. And you don't have to be in the same set on every play. Trying to get all your rushing yards from one position works only with a dominant line or a dominant passing game that pulls the defense apart. We have neither. But we have a bunch of good running backs.
Our 1987 team got 614 yards from fullback Darryl Johnston which set us up to get 1,370 from Robert Drummond and Michael Owens at tailback. In 1998 we got 432 yards from Rob Konrad which set up Kyle McIntosh, James Mungro and Dee brown for 1,499 yards. In 2018, Eric Dungey essentially became our fullback, rushing for 949 yards, (754 net, with sacks), to set up Moe Neal and Dontae Strickland 1,484 yards. Last season our quarterbacks rushed for a combined 182 yards before sacks, there was no fullback and Jordan, Pierre, Tucker and Lutz totalled 1,058 yards. We were out-rushed 1,338-2,651 yards on the season. Now we've got Adams, Howard, Tucker, Lutz and Hough all stacked up at the same position with no fullback and we have no idea how much yards our quarterback will run for, (but it's unlikely to come close to what Dungey did).
Do we have five receivers as good as Adams, Howard, Tucker, Lutz and Hough? It will be great if we do - especially since we might see all of them on the field at the same time, not stacked up at a single position from which all the catches are supposed to come.
