Ga. Southern ran the option down Georgia's throat. Twisted Tiger, I thought you might like that argument better. :geaux:
I always heard that it was a great equalizer for teams w/ inferior talent (i.e. the service academies) playing against superior talent. The drawback, of course, is that if you fall behind early, it's a terrible offense to try to play catch-up with.
Take a look at these stats Navy is still an option team. http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/teamstats?teamId=2426
That's a stern statement . . . what exactly makes running the option chicken****? The option is just another style of offense. If you don't like it fine, but it's not chicken****. I don't like the vertical PAC 10 style passing attacks, in fact I think it is as close to chicken**** as you can come in running an O . . . but I wouldn't say it. Well, I guess I just did, still I don't see how running the option is chicken**** compared to other styles of offense. See, to run the option you need heady smart players with a little bit of guts. It is by no means a soft system, or easy. Players have to be able to take a hit, think on their feet, and execute. LSU ran a version of the option last year with Mauck, was that chicken****? Mauck would be in the shotgun formation, and decide on the fly if he would hand the ball off to the back or take it himself. I don't remember anyone thinking that was chicken****, yet in theory we were running a basic shotgun option. I don't care if LSU does run the option or not . . . I just don't see how the option is chicken****.
Well, in previous years Nick HAS used the option, on occasion inside the 20. He stated at the time that he likes to throw in a little option on offense to make the opponent's defensive coordinator have to practice for it and look for it during the game.
People need to remember that the option is an offense, not just a play you throw in at times. It is based on using inside runs by the fullback to draw in the middle linebacker and strong safety during the early parts of the game. Once the defense has made that adjustment, the outside game opens up because the numbers advantage the offense has--essentially, the outside linebacker has to stop both the QB and the pitch man. If you try to run the option without setting up the inside run, it won't work well. We can clearly see that the Saban/Fisher offense doesn't use the FB inside, so nobody is going to overcover that option. This offense is based on the QB and wideouts creating mismatches against the DBs--look at the first two TDs vs Auburn last year. In both of those plays, one DB was responsible for covering Clayton and Henderson--nobody could do that so Devery ended up making several rally big plays. Right now, we haven't had a QB or WR step up to create and take advantage of the planned mismatches on a consistant basis. Trying to throw the option in as a side note will take away from creating the type of consistancy the O needs to have. I am a fan of the option, but I know that LSU's history with the option has been questionable at best. GEAUX TIGERS (rattle, rattle, rattle, here come the cattle)
