NJto FLA,
First of all, not trying to insult anyone, I like the debate. People take this stuff too personally.
I understand two minute drill is different than full time spread but the thread was asking if we had gone spread full time would we have been better, not whether or not we were running it at the time. My conjecture is that with our skill talent being what it was and Berlin being what he was (great in the no huddle, mediocre otherwise) we would have been very hard to beat that season.
Berlin was better in situations where he could make quick reads and quick throws. Period.
Obviously scoring more points wins more games and that team would have scored more points in the spread. There was no reason we couldn't have put 50 on the board against UNC or Clemson that season...this was still a HIGHLY talented team that way underperformerd.
The receivers weren't perfect but look at the receivers in successful college spread offenses...they excel at catching the ball in space, not fighting through traffic for the ball or running crisp routes to create windows. This is why NFL teams are still a little leery of the.
If anything, Leggett and Jolla might have been more successful in a spread; and Hester would have been in one on one coverage in the slot because there were simply too many weapons on the field, making the amount of learning he had to do less and the opportunity for him to impact the game on more than just special teams greater. And not to pick nits, but Moore was hurt that season, not suspended.
The way I figure, one of Leggett and Jolla would have been the deep threat...Moss, Parrish and Jenkins would have worked the underneath...Hester would have been the utility guy that you move around depending on matchups...and Olsen and Everett would have been major seam threats.
On the running backs...Gore was versatile enough to be great in any offense (in my opinion) and Moss, as you just said, was talented before he was a ******. They would be in single back formations and have HUGE holes to run through. It is why teams like Oklahoma State always have running backs among the nation's most productive.
If you look at the games we lost that season, we were held down to 28 and 17 points by crappy UNC and Clemson defenses, respectively, and 10 by VTech. We also would have lost to Louisville and NC State if not for Hester being a ridiculous return man.
To me, if we had used our weapons more effectively on offense it is not even close with UNC, Clemson, Louisville and NC State...and we probably beat VTech too. We were a very good team that year with a very good offense that was held back by quarterback play. If you played to the quarterback's strengths we would have gone all the way, because our defense was still a wrecking crew and 3 deep everywhere at the time.
