12 coaches have produced consecutive seasons of 6 yards per

[USNAVYCANE]

[TABLE="width: 1018"]
[TR]
[TD]12 play-callers have produced consecutive seasons of 6 yards per play
[/TD]
[TD="align: right"][/TD]
[TD="align: right"][/TD]
[TD="align: right"][/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]
[TABLE="width: 1018"]
[TR]
[TD]Posted by: Pete Roussel on November 30, 2012
More coaches are valuing 'yards per play' over total offense because of the wide variety of tempos that offenses are utilizing.
Total yardage is essentially becoming less relevant because certain offensive coordinators are simply trying to run 85-90 plays per game, which obviously increases the odds of more total yardage.
Today, I discovered that only 12 play-callers in all of college football have produced back-to-back seasons of at least 6 yards per play.
The list includes Todd Monken, Art Briles, Kliff Kingsbury, Lane Kiffin, Chip Kelly, Blake Anderson, Jedd Fisch, Dana Holgorsen, Paul Johnson, Charlie Taaffe, Noel Mazzone, and Al Borges.
Only Monken and Briles have produced two straight years of 7+ yards per play. Oklahoma State and Baylor play on Saturday, so expect to see plenty of offense.
Kingsbury and Blake Anderson have produced over 6 yards per play at two different schools. Surprisingly, Clemson's Chad Morris didn't make the list. I thought he would, but Clemson averaged just under 6 yards per play in 2011.
(Sorry, the chart is not mobile-version friendly)
[TABLE="width: 993"]
[TR]
[TD][TABLE="width: 969"]
[TR]
[TD]Todd Monken[/TD]
[TD]Oklahoma State[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Art Briles[/TD]
[TD]Baylor[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Kliff Kingsbury[/TD]
[TD]Texas A&M / Houston[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Lane Kiffin[/TD]
[TD]USC[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Chip Kelly[/TD]
[TD]Oregon[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Blake Anderson[/TD]
[TD]UNC / Southern Miss[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Jedd Fisch[/TD]
[TD]Miami (FL)[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Dana Holgorsen[/TD]
[TD]West Virginia[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Paul Johnson[/TD]
[TD]Georgia Tech[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Charlie Taaffe[/TD]
[TD]UCF[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Noel Mazzone[/TD]
[TD]UCLA / Arizona State[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Al Borges[/TD]
[TD]Michigan[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]
[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]
[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]

 

[skyman]

Uh Oh Jedd haters not gonna like this...

 

[DaU83]

Uh Oh Jedd haters not gonna like this...

But he doesnt commit to the run!

 

[hoops156]

LOL...we have a great staff just need to give them the time they need and the players they need to run their system

 

[DeadPoets]

Fisch has done this with Jacory in year 1 and a buttload of inexperience in year 2

Give this man a raise.

 

[LuCane]

Unless he transitions the way New England has tried to, you are the same people who will ***** when we can't win big games because tough defenses keep us from converting red zone opportunities. It's nice to have great stats and fly the ball up and down the field between the 20s. That's going to get Andy Reid fired this year. That has led Scott Linehan's Lions to a 4-7 record despite extremely good talent.

No one is saying he isn't a talented play designer. Most people are saying he needs to evolve and focus so that his style is as effective in the tough games.

No one is going to question that the names on there have a common denominator? Just how many crucial games have been won overall?

Funny that someone like Al Borges is on there, as this is a description of him:

"Al Borges has spent the vast majority of this year running an offense that was never sure of what it was or what it had." http://www.freep.com/article/201211...rdinator-Al-Borges-dropped-ball-vs-Ohio-State

The bottom line is that Fisch is talented. Fisch needs to evolve because it's fun to put 52 points on Duke, but most of us prefer to see 31 points and effectiveness inside the 20 against FSU.

If we're going to have a discussion about this, please don't reduce this to a "you people think Fisch sucks" vs "Fisch is amazing" thread.

 

[CyberCane]

It's funny...I don't see anyone that has won an MNC on that list. Good list of guys, though.

 

[VinnDogg]

Who was it that once said, "stats are for losers"? Who wants to dig into those coaches a bit more deeply and see the W's v L's in the same 2 year period. Because that is the only stat worth puffing our chests about.

just sayin

 

[LuCane]

Unless he transitions the way New England has tried to, you are the same people who will **** when we can't win big games because tough defenses keep us from converting red zone opportunities. It's nice to have great stats and fly the ball up and down the field between the 20s. That's going to get Andy Reid fired this year. That has led Scott Linehan's Lions to a 4-7 record despite extremely good talent.

No one is saying he isn't a talented play designer. Most people are saying he needs to evolve and focus so that his style is as effective in the tough games.

No one is going to question that the names on there have a common denominator? Just how many crucial games have been won overall?

Funny that someone like Al Borges is on there, as this is a description of him:

"Al Borges has spent the vast majority of this year running an offense that was never sure of what it was or what it had." http://www.freep.com/article/201211...rdinator-Al-Borges-dropped-ball-vs-Ohio-State

The bottom line is that Fisch is talented. Fisch needs to evolve because it's fun to put 52 points on Duke, but most of us prefer to see 31 points and effectiveness inside the 20 against FSU.

If we're going to have a discussion about this, please don't reduce this to a "you people think Fisch sucks" vs "Fisch is amazing" thread.

The reasons for those teams losing has nothing to do with the offense and everything to do with defense.

That's not how football works. Identity affects the entire football team. Here's a challenge: let's name wide open attacks (that reflect the names above) that also had outstanding defenses. Feel free to use the NFL also. Feel free to go back an entire decade.

 

[DaU83]

It's funny...I don't see anyone that has won an MNC on that list. Good list of guys, though.

fortunately, you need more than offense to win a title.. we will soon have good talent on that side of the ball and shuld be able to compete for MNC's

 

[LuCane]

Unless he transitions the way New England has tried to, you are the same people who will **** when we can't win big games because tough defenses keep us from converting red zone opportunities. It's nice to have great stats and fly the ball up and down the field between the 20s. That's going to get Andy Reid fired this year. That has led Scott Linehan's Lions to a 4-7 record despite extremely good talent.

No one is saying he isn't a talented play designer. Most people are saying he needs to evolve and focus so that his style is as effective in the tough games.

No one is going to question that the names on there have a common denominator? Just how many crucial games have been won overall?

Funny that someone like Al Borges is on there, as this is a description of him:

"Al Borges has spent the vast majority of this year running an offense that was never sure of what it was or what it had." http://www.freep.com/article/201211...rdinator-Al-Borges-dropped-ball-vs-Ohio-State

The bottom line is that Fisch is talented. Fisch needs to evolve because it's fun to put 52 points on Duke, but most of us prefer to see 31 points and effectiveness inside the 20 against FSU.

If we're going to have a discussion about this, please don't reduce this to a "you people think Fisch sucks" vs "Fisch is amazing" thread.

The reasons for those teams losing has nothing to do with the offense and everything to do with defense.

That's not how football works. Identity affects the entire football team. Here's a challenge: let's name wide open attacks that also had outstanding defenses. Feel free to use the NFL also. Feel free to go back an entire decade.

Let's start with the 2007 New England Patriots who have the best single season QB and WR performances, while also having a Top 5 defense in Total Yards in the same season.
2010 Packers that won the Super Bowl...the defense was actually better production wise, than the fast paced offense they run/ran (9th Overall Offense/5th Overall Defense)
2001 Miami Hurricanes averaged something like 2 minutes every touchdown drive and had one of the greatest defenses of all time
2007 Indianapolis Colts were 3rd in Total Defense, with Peyton Manning's no huddle attack

Your claims that having a fast paced offense prevent you from stopping the opposition are off base.

That's why I chose my words carefully: "that reflect the offenses above." Just because an offense is high-powered, it doesn't put them on that list. If you've been around these boards long enough, you'd know I'm a big proponent of going no huddle. I'm a big proponent of shifting gears overall. That list (original post) is packed to the brim with offenses that can fly up and down the field, but struggle inside the red zone when the field is cut short.

 

[Larry]

Do any of ya'll know what you're looking at before you post?

This year, those schools averaged an 8-4 record.
Last year, those schools averaged a 10-3 record with some ridiculous high end talent running those offenses. Oklahoma State had first round QB and WR. Baylor had a first round QB and perhaps two wide receivers, one of which (the QB) was the Heisman winner. Houston had one of the greatest statistical QBs in the history of college football. USC was playing with three first round skill position players. WVU is playing with a first round QB and two of college football's best WRs. And all of them lost important games that kept them from winning big games. When you are telling me you had that much talent, and you went 9-3 with a bowl game win...that's a disappointment.

You can't have a super offense that is predicated on winning football games and then blame the defense when they give up 50. Your team is predicated on the other team scoring 50, hence why you developed an offense that could score 51.

There is kid-tested, mother-approved, time honored and successful formula to win football games at the highest level. Effective run game. Front seven defense and by proxy, stingy DB play. Anything else is window dressing and an effort to make up for a talent disparity because you can't make a team that does the aforementioned things.

****, Al Golden said as much in his final presser of the season. He knew his team couldn't stop anyone and would struggle on defense, so, he had Jedd Fisch go full ****** on offense. Cool story, bro, but that just tells me you know your team isn't built to win, so, you try and close the margin by doing what you can do on offense. That'll get you to a bowl game, but it won't bring you to a National Title.

 

[LuCane]

The reasons for those teams losing has nothing to do with the offense and everything to do with defense.

That's not how football works. Identity affects the entire football team. Here's a challenge: let's name wide open attacks that also had outstanding defenses. Feel free to use the NFL also. Feel free to go back an entire decade.

Let's start with the 2007 New England Patriots who have the best single season QB and WR performances, while also having a Top 5 defense in Total Yards in the same season.
2010 Packers that won the Super Bowl...the defense was actually better production wise, than the fast paced offense they run/ran (9th Overall Offense/5th Overall Defense)
2001 Miami Hurricanes averaged something like 2 minutes every touchdown drive and had one of the greatest defenses of all time
2007 Indianapolis Colts were 3rd in Total Defense, with Peyton Manning's no huddle attack

Your claims that having a fast paced offense prevent you from stopping the opposition are off base.

That's why I chose my words carefully: "that reflect the offenses above." Just because an offense is high-powered, it doesn't put them on that list. If you've been around these boards long enough, you'd know I'm a big proponent of going no huddle. I'm a big proponent of shifting gears overall. That list (original post) is packed to the brim with offenses that can fly up and down the field, but struggle inside the red zone when the field is cut short.

Now you're arguing red-zone offense and philosophy. The argument is over the affect that fast-paced offenses have on your defense and the cases I presented above, dispute that they are mutually exclusive. There's no reason that you can't have a top of the line defense, with a fast paced offense. If Oregon had Alabama's defensive coaching staff, and defensive personnel, are you telling me that they don't win National Championships, because they are too fast paced for the defense to be successful?

- 2007 Patriots were the anomaly that got burned down when they faced a serious DLine. That's the type of problem Chip Kelly's team faced in the NC game.
- 2010 Packers are a poor example. They actually won off of defense at the end, were 10-6 in the regular season, and scored 10, 21, 21 (Super Bowl) in 3 of their last 5 games. When **** got tough, they adjusted. That's my entire point! That's how we need Fisch to evolve.
- 2001 Miami team is an incredibly poor example. That offense is not what I consider a high-paced offense and had minimal similarities to the styles referenced above. In their tough games, as I noted, they grinded it out.
- 2007 Colts? Seriously? They scored 24 points and lost their first game in the playoffs.

Outside of the anomaly that was that nearly undefeated Pats team (which they later clearly adjusted away from and began to rely on the run a bit more inside the 20s), I don't see examples of offenses (that reflect the names on the original post) that have had the success we're looking for without evolving their style for the big games.

 

[Larry]

The NFL is a different animal. The NFL is predicated on elite QB play. Great QBs make back seven defenses helpless against anything they do or even try to do. Most defenses just sit back by the second half and hope the great quarterback makes a mistake. Great defensive lines are the only thing to really combat them, and in the NFL, there are what...2-3 great defensive lines? And those D-Lines ain't going to the dance without a great QB. It is why the Giants are two-time Super Bowl champs.

 

[NotoriousJJE]

There is no denying that we need to control the clock better. The only way we are going to do that is by running the ball more effectively.

Golden has said it numerous times in recent interviews that they made a choice back in May that they were going to go to a quick strike offense in order to try and outscore opponents in true shootout style. He admits to doing this to try and protect his defense which I guess he knew was going to get gashed. He admitted that he was never going to be a stats leading team this year, that is was going to be ugly because of the youth and personnel. It backfired in the red zone for sure, and when we couldn't sustain drives, we got the defense on the field too quickly.

 

[LuCane]

Let's start with the 2007 New England Patriots who have the best single season QB and WR performances, while also having a Top 5 defense in Total Yards in the same season.
2010 Packers that won the Super Bowl...the defense was actually better production wise, than the fast paced offense they run/ran (9th Overall Offense/5th Overall Defense)
2001 Miami Hurricanes averaged something like 2 minutes every touchdown drive and had one of the greatest defenses of all time
2007 Indianapolis Colts were 3rd in Total Defense, with Peyton Manning's no huddle attack

Your claims that having a fast paced offense prevent you from stopping the opposition are off base.

That's why I chose my words carefully: "that reflect the offenses above." Just because an offense is high-powered, it doesn't put them on that list. If you've been around these boards long enough, you'd know I'm a big proponent of going no huddle. I'm a big proponent of shifting gears overall. That list (original post) is packed to the brim with offenses that can fly up and down the field, but struggle inside the red zone when the field is cut short.

Now you're arguing red-zone offense and philosophy. The argument is over the affect that fast-paced offenses have on your defense and the cases I presented above, dispute that they are mutually exclusive. There's no reason that you can't have a top of the line defense, with a fast paced offense. If Oregon had Alabama's defensive coaching staff, and defensive personnel, are you telling me that they don't win National Championships, because they are too fast paced for the defense to be successful?

- 2007 Patriots were the anomaly that got burned down when they faced a serious DLine. That's the type of problem Chip Kelly's team faced in the NC game.
- 2010 Packers are a poor example. They actually won off of defense at the end, were 10-6 in the regular season, and scored 10, 21, 21 (Super Bowl) in 3 of their last 5 games. When **** got tough, they adjusted. That's my entire point! That's how we need Fisch to evolve.
- 2001 Miami team is an incredibly poor example. That offense is not what I consider a high-paced offense and had minimal similarities to the styles referenced above. In their tough games, as I noted, they grinded it out.
- 2007 Colts? Seriously? They scored 24 points and lost their first game in the playoffs.

Outside of the anomaly that was that nearly undefeated Pats team (which they later clearly adjusted away from and began to rely on the run a bit more inside the 20s), I don't see examples of offenses (that reflect the names on the original post) that have had the success we're looking for without evolving their style for the big games.

Packers won the Super Bowl 31-25
Patriots weren't an anamoly...they just so happened to run into three of the best pass rushers in this generation on their best day...and it STILL took a hail mary to beat them.
'01 Canes didn't grind out a **** thing. They scored quickly and scored often. In the BC game, they didn't score at all, but guess what, the defense was there to bail them out why? Because the defense was an All-Time defense and their being an All-Time defense had NOTHING to do with what the offense did on the other side.

Once again, I'll ask you, if you the 2001 Miami Hurricane defense, and match them with the 2012 Miami Hurricane offense...are you seriously telling me that they couldn't be as effective?

I'm going to be real with you here: you were how old during the 2001 Miami Hurricanes season? Are you sure you want to comment about their style of offensive play?

To answer your question, if you put the 2001 defense and match them with the 2012 Hurricane offense, the result you'd get is that defense allowing a lot more points and yards than they should. It'd also probably get us a loss or two (VTech and BC).

 

[skyman]

Do any of ya'll know what you're looking at before you post?

This year, those schools averaged an 8-4 record.
Last year, those schools averaged a 10-3 record with some ridiculous high end talent running those offenses. Oklahoma State had first round QB and WR. Baylor had a first round QB and perhaps two wide receivers, one of which (the QB) was the Heisman winner. Houston had one of the greatest statistical QBs in the history of college football. USC was playing with three first round skill position players. WVU is playing with a first round QB and two of college football's best WRs. And all of them lost important games that kept them from winning big games. When you are telling me you had that much talent, and you went 9-3 with a bowl game win...that's a disappointment.

You can't have a super offense that is predicated on winning football games and then blame the defense when they give up 50. Your team is predicated on the other team scoring 50, hence why you developed an offense that could score 51.

There is kid-tested, mother-approved, time honored and successful formula to win football games at the highest level. Effective run game. Front seven defense and by proxy, stingy DB play. Anything else is window dressing and an effort to make up for a talent disparity because you can't make a team that does the aforementioned things.

****, Al Golden said as much in his final presser of the season. He knew his team couldn't stop anyone and would struggle on defense, so, he had Jedd Fisch go full ****** on offense. Cool story, bro, but that just tells me you know your team isn't built to win, so, you try and close the margin by doing what you can do on offense. That'll get you to a bowl game, but it won't bring you to a National Title.

See this is what I dont get, if jedd was told to do this, and then went out and accomplished what he was told to do, while replacing 95% of the production from the previous team while also being hamstrung by a terrible defense, why does Fisch get soo much hate?

Mind you I dont think Fisch is perfect or even close, but the way some talk its like dude isnt getting the job done. Yes he needs to improve in the redzone, yes he needs to be a little consistent with the run, yes he needs to chill with some funky play calls that he draws up but when he was hired and what was on his resume, I would say he has been a pleasant surprise for a young coordinator and he actually has miami offense exciting again. I am more encouraged by what I see because I feel he will continue to get better and learn as he grows. I liked what we did in '11 and seemed more adept to balance the run and this year he seemed to adjust and try to pass more. this is also with all new skill players. With the guys who have come thru the door the last 10 years at OC I am willing to take what Fisch has done and watch him grow. I cant sit here and blame him when its 3rd and two and our Defense is playing 8 yards off and say its the offense fault because they should hold the ball. Its the defense job to get of the field no matter how long we hold the ball.

 

[LuCane]

Do any of ya'll know what you're looking at before you post?

This year, those schools averaged an 8-4 record.
Last year, those schools averaged a 10-3 record with some ridiculous high end talent running those offenses. Oklahoma State had first round QB and WR. Baylor had a first round QB and perhaps two wide receivers, one of which (the QB) was the Heisman winner. Houston had one of the greatest statistical QBs in the history of college football. USC was playing with three first round skill position players. WVU is playing with a first round QB and two of college football's best WRs. And all of them lost important games that kept them from winning big games. When you are telling me you had that much talent, and you went 9-3 with a bowl game win...that's a disappointment.

You can't have a super offense that is predicated on winning football games and then blame the defense when they give up 50. Your team is predicated on the other team scoring 50, hence why you developed an offense that could score 51.

There is kid-tested, mother-approved, time honored and successful formula to win football games at the highest level. Effective run game. Front seven defense and by proxy, stingy DB play. Anything else is window dressing and an effort to make up for a talent disparity because you can't make a team that does the aforementioned things.

****, Al Golden said as much in his final presser of the season. He knew his team couldn't stop anyone and would struggle on defense, so, he had Jedd Fisch go full ****** on offense. Cool story, bro, but that just tells me you know your team isn't built to win, so, you try and close the margin by doing what you can do on offense. That'll get you to a bowl game, but it won't bring you to a National Title.

See this is what I dont get, if jedd was told to do this, and then went out and accomplished what he was told to do, while replacing 95% of the production from the previous team while also being hamstrung by a terrible defense, why does Fisch get soo much hate?

Mind you I dont think Fisch is perfect or even close, but the way some talk its like dude isnt getting the job done. Yes he needs to improve in the redzone, yes he needs to be a little consistent with the run, yes he needs to chill with some funky play calls that he draws up but when he was hired and what was on his resume, I would say he has been a pleasant surprise for a young coordinator and he actually has miami offense exciting again. I am more encouraged by what I see because I feel he will continue to get better and learn as he grows. I liked what we did in '11 and seemed more adept to balance the run and this year he seemed to adjust and try to pass more. this is also with all new skill players. With the guys who have come thru the door the last 10 years at OC I am willing to take what Fisch has done and watch him grow. I cant sit here and blame him when its 3rd and two and our Defense is playing 8 yards off and say its the offense fault because they should hold the ball. Its the defense job to get of the field no matter how long we hold the ball.

Sky, that's where I think some of you are misrepresenting what is being said. It's not "so much hate" to acknowledge that we have to adjust. It's not "so much hate" to hope he adjusts. It's not "so much hate" to say "yes, Fisch is a talented play designer, and now we hope he puts it all together into an identity."

 

[Larry]

Do any of ya'll know what you're looking at before you post?

This year, those schools averaged an 8-4 record.
Last year, those schools averaged a 10-3 record with some ridiculous high end talent running those offenses. Oklahoma State had first round QB and WR. Baylor had a first round QB and perhaps two wide receivers, one of which (the QB) was the Heisman winner. Houston had one of the greatest statistical QBs in the history of college football. USC was playing with three first round skill position players. WVU is playing with a first round QB and two of college football's best WRs. And all of them lost important games that kept them from winning big games. When you are telling me you had that much talent, and you went 9-3 with a bowl game win...that's a disappointment.

You can't have a super offense that is predicated on winning football games and then blame the defense when they give up 50. Your team is predicated on the other team scoring 50, hence why you developed an offense that could score 51.

There is kid-tested, mother-approved, time honored and successful formula to win football games at the highest level. Effective run game. Front seven defense and by proxy, stingy DB play. Anything else is window dressing and an effort to make up for a talent disparity because you can't make a team that does the aforementioned things.

****, Al Golden said as much in his final presser of the season. He knew his team couldn't stop anyone and would struggle on defense, so, he had Jedd Fisch go full ****** on offense. Cool story, bro, but that just tells me you know your team isn't built to win, so, you try and close the margin by doing what you can do on offense. That'll get you to a bowl game, but it won't bring you to a National Title.

See this is what I dont get, if jedd was told to do this, and then went out and accomplished what he was told to do, while replacing 95% of the production from the previous team while also being hamstrung by a terrible defense, why does Fisch get soo much hate?

Mind you I dont think Fisch is perfect or even close, but the way some talk its like dude isnt getting the job done. Yes he needs to improve in the redzone, yes he needs to be a little consistent with the run, yes he needs to chill with some funky play calls that he draws up but when he was hired and what was on his resume, I would say he has been a pleasant surprise for a young coordinator and he actually has miami offense exciting again. I am more encouraged by what I see because I feel he will continue to get better and learn as he grows. I liked what we did in '11 and seemed more adept to balance the run and this year he seemed to adjust and try to pass more. this is also with all new skill players. With the guys who have come thru the door the last 10 years at OC I am willing to take what Fisch has done and watch him grow. I cant sit here and blame him when its 3rd and two and our Defense is playing 8 yards off and say its the offense fault because they should hold the ball. Its the defense job to get of the field no matter how long we hold the ball.

I didn't really hate on Fisch this year. I knew the deal before the season.

My concern throughout the season was I felt there were ways for this team to not cause unneeded stress on one unit or the other. It was a team philosophy issue moreover anyone's fault. Al Golden made the call and the result was a 7-5 season...I don't see that as a success, but I mean, that's relative on your pre-season thoughts. Golden obviously didn't think he had much with this squad and IMO, ultimately was a self-fulfilling prophecy of sorts.

 

[weownfsu]

Unless he transitions the way New England has tried to, you are the same people who will **** when we can't win big games because tough defenses keep us from converting red zone opportunities. It's nice to have great stats and fly the ball up and down the field between the 20s. That's going to get Andy Reid fired this year. That has led Scott Linehan's Lions to a 4-7 record despite extremely good talent.

No one is saying he isn't a talented play designer. Most people are saying he needs to evolve and focus so that his style is as effective in the tough games.

No one is going to question that the names on there have a common denominator? Just how many crucial games have been won overall?

Funny that someone like Al Borges is on there, as this is a description of him:

"Al Borges has spent the vast majority of this year running an offense that was never sure of what it was or what it had." http://www.freep.com/article/201211...rdinator-Al-Borges-dropped-ball-vs-Ohio-State

The bottom line is that Fisch is talented. Fisch needs to evolve because it's fun to put 52 points on Duke, but most of us prefer to see 31 points and effectiveness inside the 20 against FSU.

If we're going to have a discussion about this, please don't reduce this to a "you people think Fisch sucks" vs "Fisch is amazing" thread.

This, good stuff.

Re the question above about the 2001 Hurricanes, they lose the Boston College game or a game like it if they have this version of the offense.

You simply cannot point to a national championship that has not been very effective at running the ball.