Game Dynamics and Football: Part I: Base Rules and Talent

Any type of true game is governed by principals and many of these principals apply across many games. There are principals shared in football, backgammon, poker, chess, basketball, and many others. If you look at games in depth enough it becomes easy to see how principals apply. In part I I will discuss 2 dynamics things that play a role in football and compare them to other games.


Dynamic I: Base Rules- Field Size & the Number of Players Effect on Scoring

Fundamentally, base rules have the most significant impact on the way a game is played and developed. Monopoly would change if the players started off with less money. Poker would change drastically, if 6 cards made a hand as opposed to 5. Basic rules are prior to any of the in depth strategies and tactics that influence a game. Two of the most basic rules in football are the size of the playing field and number of players.

In football the field size is approximately 100 x 53.4 yards (120 counting End-zones). At any time up to 11 players from each team may be on the field. The game that we work with and enjoy is fundamentally shaped by those two characteristics. Both of these things influence the number of points that can be scored on average. The relationship of these two factor has an immense impact on the number of points that can be scored in a football game.

Consider this example. If football was played on a 20 x 20 field, with 11 players the game would change dramatically. Passing would not be a big part. Offenses would look more historical, the single-wing, wing-t, power-I, and double-slot would dominate the scene. The game would be one long rugby scrum. Why? Because there would not be enough space to score quickly and throw the ball. The defense would load all 11 guys in the box to stop the run. It would be harder to find "holes" in the defense. The game would be drastically different than the one we see on TV today, just because of 1 rule change.

Now imagine that the # of players allowed on the field increased to 12 and the field size remained the same. Ceteris Paribus (all other things being equal) the amount of scoring would decrease on average. Adding a 12th player helps the defense tremendously because, they have an extra person to defend the same amount of space. The offense is in the business of creating unprotected space. "Holes" and "windows" are offensive words to describe unprotected space. Conversely, defenses are based around protecting space, by having "gap" assignments and coverage "zones." The basic struggle in football begins with the defense creating a plan to protect space on the field while the offense at the same time maneuvers to create unprotected space. With 12 players the defense would be able to better defend the field. The 12th player would not have an overall net-positive effect for the offense. Think about it. One of the time tested principals "the offense wants to trade the defense 1 for 1 with defense" is a principal for a reason. Trading one for one is a way of creating more space for the offense. The field size remains the same while the # of players active on a play is lower.

The principal holds true if you lower the number of players to 10. The offense would be able to even easier to find unprotected space, Especially in the passing game. If you have ever played 7 on 7 touch football on a full size football field, you will know what I am talking about. The defense would have more players stressed. The would be caught in position where they are needed to play run first and play a major part in pass coverage as well. Also, the limited number of players would make it easier for the offense to get single coverage on a WR. In short, reducing the number of players would allow points to increase.

Arena football is a prime example of this dynamic. Arena football had to create some seemingly bizarre rules to allow the sport to function properly. Why did these rules come into effect? Because there was a conflict with these basic rules of field size and the number of players. The field is essentially reduced 50% in size, but the number of players is only reduced 27%. This created a playing environment that had players defending less space than they would in typical football. Given the logic I presented earlier, Arena football would be a defensive game. However, it is not. Arena football is the exact opposite, a score-fest. Does this mean I was wrong about the previous statements. No! Other variables changed besides the field size and number of players. Rules were put in place to assist the offense. Some rules limited the defenses ability to defend space. For example, rules limit the sides a blitz can from, and until recently, severely limited the mobility of the "Jack Backer." Also, simple rules like forward motion gave the offense an added boost. These rules helped to equalize and overcome the fundamental advantage the defense had in the amount of field each player had to defend. Overall, the rule changes allowed the arena football teams to score more points on average than NFL teams.

Dynamic II: Talent Level Effects on Strategy and Tactics

I should not have to prove to anyone how big an impact the talent of a team has on its performance. Experience tell us that the team with more talent wins more that a team with less talent. No team, no matter how much more talented is a 100% favorite. I will admit at times a team might be around a 99% favorite, but there is always a chance for the underdog to win. What having a talent advantage does give a team, is winning chances above 50%, making them the favorite. Looking at talent in a vacuum, we can begin to approximate winning percentages. However, other factors like a teams overall strategy, tactics, and the level of proficiency a team has at those things can have an effect on a teams winning chances as well. Before taking into account those things we must first consider, the effect talent has on the development of strategy and tactics.

Strategy deals with the overall view and philosophy of how to plan to win the game. Some teams prefer to run the ball, control the clock, and play field position. On the other hand some teams like to turn a game into an aggressive score fest. Tactics is the means by which a team executes their overall strategy.

An Example- Chess

The game dynamics of strategy and tactics play a huge and clear role in a game like chess. Consider a chess game where the black side starts the game with one less pawn. The person with the additional pawn (white), can be considered "more talented" in this example. Lets look at the overall strategy for each side in this example.

The white side wants to play a very straight forward and simple strategy. The best plan for white is to trade pieces off: a rook for a rook, a queen for a queen, and so on. His goal is to trade off enough piece that allow him to turn his extra pawn into a queen. Using the queen the white side will easily checkmate the black side. On the other hand, Blacks strategy is to prevent this from happening. Somewhere down the line, black needs to win a pawn back to equalize the game.

Tactically, both sides want to execute their desired strategies. What type of tactics would each side like to employ? First consider black. Black's will need to keep pieces protected and develop a complicated position. One where each move is difficult to decide. Black hopes that he can make better tactical moves than white can. In short, black wants to complicate the game and put more emphasis on decision making and less on the strength of each others pieces. There is a risk-reward to this plan. The reward is, this game plan will increase the likelihood of white making a mistake that will equalize the game. The risk is that black is more likely to make a mistake himself and get crushed by white. White wants to keep the game simple. He is content to move the game along and trade peaces off. His moves will seek to keep his decisions easy. Ultimately, white wants to avoid mistakes. His strategy will be more defensive and conservative. The goal for him is to keep decisions easy and rely on his advantage in pieces to win.

From chess a simple game strategy becomes apparent:

When you have an advantage, you want to keep the game simple and let your advantage take you to victory. When you are at a disadvantage, you want to complicate the game and lower the impact that your opponent's advantage has on the game.

For both players the goal is to maximize their chances to win.

Application to Football

Does this simple strategy apply to football? Yes, but not as simply as it does to chess. Unlike chess pieces, football players think for themselves separate from the people in charge of game strategy (coaches). Lets look how a talented team might put together a strategy, for an upcoming season. If this team will have a talent advantage over most teams, it would be beneficial to utilize a conservative football game plan. Offensively, this game plan should seek to protect the football by establishing the running game, and using passes only when necessary. The running game will be simple and favor match-ups over misdirection. They should deviate from this plan enough to mix up their calls to keep the defense honest. Defensively, the plan should be to play sound gap control zone defense will force the opposing offense to work to score. The idea behind this strategy is to limit mistakes and allow their talent to win football games.

The strategy for an under-talented team is different. From the opening kickoff the weaker team should be more aggressive. Onside-kicks, trick plays, 4th down attempts, and blitzes will all be a part of their game-plan. This type of team will need to do things to compensate for their lack of talent. If this team were to play the other team mentioned in the previous paragraph, these things would need to be done. If possible, on defense this team will need to be multiple and confuse the up front blocking assignments of their strong opponent. Creating situations where defenders are unblocked due to error, offsets some of the talent disadvantages. If this plan is successful, they will force the other team to throw more, in effect create more turnover opportunities. This is exactly what the stronger team wants to avoid. On offense the weaker team needs to be deceptive and creative. Misdirection, well-planned passes, and trick plays will keep the stronger team on their toes. This game-plan puts the weaker team in a position to get beat by a significant margin more often, but does allow them more of a winning chance.

This is not absolute by any means, and there many more variables that apply to game-planning besides talent. Things like continuity, mixture of personnel, player types, coaching philosophy, and system familiarity all influence the development of football strategy and tactics. Teams with weaker talent have won with a simple straightforward ball control philosophy and strong teams have been successful with aggressive, creative, and deceptive strategies.

The idea behind what I am stating is that talent can play a big role in the development of overall strategy.

If you have a talent advantage it is in your best interest to let it win for you; conversely, if you are at a disadvantage it is in your interest to limit the impact talent has on the game.

This is a complicated way of saying what all great coaches believe: Put your players in the best possible position to win. Teams like Boise State and SMU are examples of sound game-planning when you have a talent disadvantage.


Conclusion

Game dynamics are important to consider in all games. There are too many to consider, I have just touched on a couple of basic ones to illustrate that football is subject to the same dynamics as other games. In Part II I will discuss the game dynamics of the play-calling and scouting.

Football and Strength Training Part II: The Power Clean

The power clean has been considered the ultimate lift for the football athlete. It is a full body exercise that requires speed, explosion, and strength. It has been said that the best athletes can power clean a lot. I agree with some of this. However, the power clean is not as important as many believe. In my opinion it is not even necessary for building great football players. I believe this because of some fundamental problems I have with the power clean as a training tool.

Elements of the Power Clean

Let’s begin by analyzing what it takes to be “good” at the power clean.

1. Great Form
2. Explosion
3. Quickness
4. Strength in the hips and legs

First and foremost is great form. With a lot of practice, an athlete can develop the proper muscle memory to pull the bar up, explode underneath it and catch it in a good front squat position. The people that excel at the clean do a great job of getting underneath the bar and catching it in a solid position. Second, is explosion. An athlete must be explosive in order to get a good amount of weight moving off the floor. Third, is quickness. Once an athlete explodes the bar off the floor, he needs to be quick at getting underneath the bar. Finally, the athlete needs to have good strength in the hips and legs to push the bar to a finished position.

From what I have seen, athletes, regardless of size can excel at the power clean if they possess these 4 attributes. In short, a good solid athlete that develops proper technique will be able to excel at it. Many argue that there is a good correlation between teams with players that have good power cleans and a team's winning percentage. However, I believe that the correlation is founded on the fact that the team has good athletes. Athletes with good form can power clean, period! The power clean can serve as a good assessment of athleticism, especially at the higher levels. However, the proposition that the power clean can be at the core of football training in the weight room, is not valid.

Problems with the Clean

First, consider what it takes to implement the clean properly into football weight programs. Much time must be dedicated to developing proper form. This can take a great deal of time, especially for lesser athletes. Flexibility, explosion, quickness, and flexibility must all be fine-tuned to allow this to happen. Getting these things to sync up is a challenge. The major requirement here is the close monitoring and training by a coach whom is knowledgeable about the lift. Finding a steady group of coaches whom are well schooled at the clean is a difficult thing to do. For the most part, strength and conditioning coordinators that want to implement the clean into their program properly must spend a good deal of time training the coaching staff to monitor and correct the athletes properly. Probably the biggest flaw with the power clean is the resources and time a team must commit to it. Time is always against us, and the more time we have to dedicate to something means less time to work other things.

Second, the claim that through the power clean an athlete can become significantly better is suspect. Again, consider the 4 qualities I discussed at the beginning. I have already discussed the problems with developing form. Next, consider the development of explosion, which is developed by moving a reasonable weight faster. This can be done with your own body weight, resistance bands, or free weights. Beginning athletes don’t have the coordination down to properly move the bar off the floor with a reasonable weight. So the weights they begin working with don’t really push their bodies to exert the force needed on the field. I am not saying the power clean does not help an athlete become more explosive, but the amount of explosion developed is not optimal given the time it requires. Third, consider the development of quickness. Even if an athlete has the coordination to clean properly, can cleaning weights through repetition make an athlete quicker? I don’t think it can to the extent many believe. Finally, how much does the clean to do to develop strength in the hips and legs? A good power clean for a person weighing 140 pounds is 250lbs. A good squat for the same person is 400lbs. If a person is working out on a 5x5 plan with 75% of the 1-Rep max, then the bar should be loaded with approximately 190lbs for the clean and 300lbs for the squat. Which weight load would be more developmental for the hips and legs? Obviously the squat weight. The full workout for the clean would tax the body with 4,750lbs of weight, while the squat workout would tax the body with 7,500lbs of weight. When the body is stressed by heavier weight it is forced to get stronger. That is why as an athlete's workout loads must increase in order for their max to increase. The clean does not put enough pressure on the body to develop strength in the hips and legs to the highest levels.

As football coaches, what do we want our athletes to get out of the weight room? In general, we want their bodies to get stronger, more explosive, and less susceptible to injury. A strength coach can put together a workout plan that accomplishes these goals much more effectively than a program built around the power clean. For developing strength in the hips and legs, the box squat is very effective and takes a fraction of the time to teach compared to then clean. An added bonus from the box squats is the heavy stress it puts on the glutes and hamstrings. Most high school athletes are underdeveloped in this area. Another bonus from box squats is the development of explosion. As athletes begin to get stronger in the box squat, they begin to move weight faster. Also, explosion can be developed through plyo-metrics and weight exercises like box jumps with dumbbells. Quickness that translates to football performance can be better developed through various agility drills that most coaches employ during off-season.

Another goal that coaches have in mind from weight training is the ability to hit and drive (or tackle) opposing players more effectively. If you consider what it takes to hit and drive another person back you will see that it involves the uncoiling of the hips from the “football position.” This uncoiling is directed at the opposing player. To put it clearly, the power from the hips is exerted forward. In the power clean the little hip push that is used, is pushed near vertical. This is not the ideal angle for hit and drive. Again, box squats and machines like Hammer Strength’s Ground Based Jammer can work this motion much more effectively.

Conclusion

Even if you plan to use power cleans as a secondary lift, do you plan to teach the proper technique? Do you have the time to? Are the benefits worth the costs? Can the goals of a weight training program be accomplished without the power clean? To last question I believe yes.

I know the clean is a good test of athleticism and requires great skill to preform at the highest levels. I just don't think it is necessary for developing strength and power in football players.

I know many coaches might disagree with this, I have debated with many about this. I have just watched players work their tails off at the power clean and achieve minimal gains. Their development as athletes can be better done with other means. The time it takes to develop the power clean is not worth their minimal reward. Even the deadlift (another lift that takes a minimal time to learn) can produce good gains in the explosion and strength areas. If I decide to write about strength training some more, I will discuss the deadlift in more depth and the benefits it can have for the football player.

Attacking Empty Formations

Empty can be a problem for many teams. They force the defense to use coverages different from their typical 3x1 formation. Also, the defense can't be so worried about the pass, because modern spread offense will check to QB draws and kill you there. Many defenses will try to bring pressure at the unprotected QB. I once heard a successful defensive play caller say "I will man you ass and bring six". This is a good idea but vulnerable to the quick and screen game.

Edge pressure is inviting. However many offenses have taken the Texas Tech approach to things and have had their lines spread out to put your edge rushers further from the ball. This however has exposed these offenses to different blitz schemes.

A good adjustment to these types of teams is to place 6 rushers on the LOS and put your secondary into some type of man on the WR's.

The trap these wide split offensive lines put you in, is bringing pressure. They slide one way and then let one of your edge rushers go free from a wide angle, giving the QB time to hit a hot route or set up to throw vertical. The key is to not fall into this trap. Give the appearance of 6 rushers, but only bring 3,2, or even 1. This might sound nuts, but you can disrupt a teams empty formation package with just one rusher. The key is alignment.



If a team is gonna use wide splits, don't align your rushers in the gaps! Get your guys as far from the OL as possible. Put 2 guys on the shoulders of the Tackles and center. This makes it hard for the guards to get position on them. Teams don't want to man block this look. Why would they. The rules will put them into a slide protection look anyway. Give an empty formation team this look and they will slide one way or the other and cut one of the edge rushers loose.

The key to this stunt is in how your rushers blitz the QB.

Rule #1 if you are blocked and unable to get to the QB quickly Drop back and spy QB draw. Also, the droping rushers should play the QB on screens, and hot throws.

The Sliding linemen are stressed. The linemen who slide way across to a man not aligned on them will have a hard time getting to the rushers. The rusher that has the OL man turn his but to him, should hug the OL man's butt and get to the QB. The rusher that has the linemen turn to him should drop. This way the blockers are wasted on rushers whom drop to defend the pass.

In addition to the free rusher you have, you will probably get two more rushers up the middle that have linemen having to cover a long distance to block them. This gives you 3 man pressure with 8 men in coverage. This scheme will close the offenses splits (Allow good edge pressure) in empty or force them out of the package altogether(A plus for many).

The idea here is to use the empty wide splits scheme against them. Don't fall into the trap of getting in the gaps. This puts you close enough to the linemen to block you. Stress the o-line! They don't want to see that. Also, no matter what adjustments they make they will not be able to figure out which guys you have going and dropping because you are dropping based on their protection.

Robber Coverage Notes

I posted a reply on the Coach Huey boards about Robber Coverage. I will probably put a more detailed post with diagrams in the near future, but here is some more detailed technique on the coverage. This should be seen as a more in depth look at cover 2 (robber) technique from my original post on split safety coverage.

The biggest technique issues are for the the safeties: SS (Flat player) and FS (Robber).

VS Twin WR's

SS

Drop back and break to the flat if #2 releases outside. If number two release vertical past 8 yards, drop to flat and get under #1 and check if there is a back out (#3). If number #2 Releases inside get under #1 now and be aware of #3.

FS

#2 Release vertical, get in slow back pedal, if he passes 8 yards you have him man to man.

#2 Release inside, remain flat footed and read the depth of the release. If he releases under the linebackers, rob under #1. If he release above the LB's cut off and cover him now (think PAP/boot).

#2 Releases out-side. The eyes flash to #1. The key is to read the feet of the #1 WR. Most of the time one of three things will occur.

1. WR will buzz feet. FS Should rob curl to dig NOW.

2. WR will plant and drive at 45. FS Should roll into a position to cutoff the post.

3. WR Continues vertical. This is different from other peoples idea. The FS should flash his eyes to the QB and now "ROB" his eyes. Break on the ball. If the ball is thrown to the other side,break across the middle. The FS can't help the Corner when #1 releases vertical.

Football Video and Scouting Software

If you are a coach and have not used or been acquainted with DSV (Digital Sports Video) you need to get up to speed. I have been in charge of my program's video and scouting software for the past 3 seasons. I have used DSV and have had nothing but great results. DSV integrates video into your scouting and self-scouting plans. I am not gonna go through all the positives here, I just wanted to give some updates on the software.

In march DSV will be releasing the new version of their software 7.0. It has added many new features, the best is the ability to run breakdown reports seamlessly within your presentation window. The presentation window is the computer program that allows you to project and watch video from your computer just like you do from DVD and VHS. If you fully integrate your systems into DSV, you can actually eliminate the use of tapes and DVD's (the exception is filming). Trades can be done online. You can even email cut-ups to universities whom are recruiting your athletes. If you have a microphone, you can easily add voice over coaching to game or practice video. You can upload all of your videos to the internet and access it from any computer (windows based) connected to the internet. Finally, the rep from DSV showed me how the online video can be viewed from Iphones and Ipod touches. This service will begin next season.

I am not a representative of DSV in any way. For me DSV has made handling football video and scouting a much easier task. My school does not use tapes or dvds. In fact, the only tapes I had to make were for other schools that did not use DSV software. I am sure most schools use some form of video software. If you don't currently use DSV seriously consider buying it. There are other products on the market, but I have not used any of them. Most of the schools in my league use DSV.

Football and Weight Training Part I- The Squat

All of us coaches are concerned with how to make our athletes stronger and faster. In general, we are always trying to figure out how to produce a better athlete. There are multiple philosophies on how to develop strength through the weight room. Weight Lifting as a stand alone practice comes in two major forms: Power-Lifting and Olympic Style Lifting. Which one is better for football? Some coaches veer one way or the other and some people try to incorporate both. Many people believe the squat is the #1 lift for football training. I agree with this. The key to getting the most out of your squats is how your use it for training, and the technique you emphasize.

The biggest pet peeve I have for coaches in the weight room, is jumping in to squats right away without any attention to proper technique. I have seen coaches from other sports come into the weight room and bark and yell at their athletes because they aren't going low enough. For the most part if you have an athlete whom can't get down below parallel, then you have an athlete with poor technique and/or with weak hamstrings. The average athlete is quad dominant. Meaning they quads are considerably stronger than their hamstrings. When these athlete begins squatting, they usually push their knees forward past their toes when they begin descending. This is wrong, because the next thing that happens is they stick their butt out and bend over at the waist in an attempt to get lower. When they finally begin ascending their knees come in closer to one another and they finish the lift looking awkward. The athletes that try to lift like this will have a hard time getting parallel. In a final attempt to get parallel, the lifter will probably have their heels come off the floor to maintain balance (prevent themselves from falling.)

Does any of this sound familiar to you?

Why do lifters instinctively try to squat in this manner. They do this because they are trying to keep to the pressure of the lift on their quads. The most important muscles to develop in the squat is the hamstrings, flexors, and glutes. These muscles are the power muscles that influence speed and explosion.

In reality regular squats are not even necessary for the development of power and speed from the hamstrings and glutes. Many World record holding power lifters with insane squats don't even practice for competition with regular squats.




They use box squats. Box squats are excellent for developing strength in the hamstrings and glutes, and even for the overall development of speed and power. I have used a simplified version for beginning athletes (girls and boys). Typically 10 to 8 sets of 2 reps are sufficient tfor the core lift of a lower-body workout. I will usually have them do this for a month on lower body days before I even introduce regular squats. After a month the hamstrings should be strong enough to squat with proper form. The video from renown power lifting guru Louie Simmons demonstrates the technique of box squats.



The key is to sit back far enough that the knees are almost behind (if not behind) your feet. This makes the lift almost like a "leg curl". This is the exact opposite motion that the typical beginning lifter instinctively tries to do. It helps to get the lifter put their feet very wide too. This really hammers the hamstrings, glutes, hip-flexers, and groin.

From an article by Louie Simmons he says:

"The second reason is equally important. It is generally accepted that you should keep your shins perpendicular to the floor when squatting. With box squatting, you can go past this point (that is, an imaginary line drawn from your ankle to your knee will point toward your body), which places all the stress on the major squatting muscles- hips, glutes, lower back, and hamstrings. This is a tremendous advantage.
Thirdly, you don't have to ask anyone if you were parallel. Once you establish a below parallel height, all of your squats will be just that -below parallel. I have seen it over and over. As the weights get heavier, the squats get higher. This can't happen with box squats."

The big argument against this for football players is that football is not played with your feet wide. This seems logical, however, The football position is built on the field not the weight room. The weight room is for building the muscles that allow players to be explosive. Box squats, if done properly, allow your players to be more explosive. 40 times go down, verticals go up, and overall power shows a dramatic improvement.

Here is an example of how Box squats can even serve as an indicator strength and power. I worked with two athletes, one was a linemen the other was a running back. The linemen was very strong, but slow. He had squatted 715 lbs in a power lifting meet. Despite his strength he would struggle to properly box squat 225 2 times from a 12 inch box. On the other hand, the running back which was very explosive and squatted 480 lbs in power lifting meet had no trouble taking 225 off the same 12 inch box. I even put a foam box that stood a mere 6 inches from the ground to test the running back. The back took 225 from from the 6 inch box 3 times no problem. The linemen could not even sit on the box, he would fall over (WITH NO WEIGHT!). Flexibility played a role here. The point of the example was that the back had more explosive power than then linemen did, despite the apparent difference in strength (715 vs 480).

If you are looking for ways to develop explosive power in your players, try looking at some of the articles by Louie Simmons from west-side barbell. I read some of these a few years ago and implemented them into my weight lifting routines. I have seen nothing but good results from them. If anything, as a coach you can use them to teach the proper technique of the squat. I don't want to go to deep into proper technique, if you look at the articles by Simmons, you will get a great idea about what proper technique is.

In the next article I will discuss the role of the power clean. Here is a prelude: (I will probably be stoned to death by most coaches for what I will say.) I believe they do not need be a big part of the lifting routine of high school athletes.

General Football Philosophy Part I

I am often confronted about football philosophy, specifically between different schools of thoughts that surround offense, defense, and the whole team philosophy in general. I will discuss the extremes of the philosophies and try to avoid the standard "create a balance of both" position. On the offensive side, the debate centers on ball control vs passing. And on defense the battle is on Safe/read and react defense focused on not giving up the big play vs aggressive defenses can be at time greedy about giving up anything, not worried as much about big plays.

As a coach what side of the debates do you lean more towards? No one is 50/50. We all have a preference. Why do some coaches lean one way more than the other. Lets talk offense first.

Offense

The ball control school, wants to establish the run and control the clock. Shortening the game, keeps scores low, and creating chances to compete against more opponents. UT last two opponents are examples of this. Nebraska tried to play behind a good defense with ball control offense, and eventually lost on a last minute field goal in a 13-12 game. Many people thought Nebraska had no chance. The strong defense coupled with an offense that shortened the game gave Nebraska a chance many argue. The National Champion Alabama Crimson Tide ran for 205 yards and passed for a measly 58 yards, and won the national championship by 37-21. They stuck to this run first conservative philosophy that put the game in each team's defense's hands. Alabama was the better team going in, this philosophy seems to have allowed an over-matched team (Nebraska) and a favored-team (Alabama) to use a run-first offense as an optimal strategy vs Texas. Optimal vs Texas whom had the #1 Run Defense in FBS.

On the other hand you have passing teams like SMU that destroyed the #1 running team in football with a heavy passing game. Even Bill Walsh has been quoted saying that establishing the run (in my view) is overrated. The best passing down for him, are 1st down. Gus M. From Auburn made a living breaking the mold as well.

What is the best system? Its hard to tell. I equate it to poker. In poker you can play tight-Aggressive or Loose-Aggressive. Some people like to control the game of poker so the cards can do their work, and some like to play so their card reading can do their work. The difference of the preference in poker is skills. As a coach, if you can call great and anticipate the offense you can call more agressively. On the other hand, if you are behind in this respect you can play more base and rely on your players and your "technique coaching" to get you through the game.

More will come on this subject, I am not advocating one method or the other, just starting thought on this philisophical debate.