Why would Reggie Bush sign a contract to be an A-Back?
Why would any runnning back sign a contract to be a B-Back?
What does it do for their future profssional contracts?
I've seen many NFL defenders in effect play both men on an option it's when they hesitate and sit on their heels that the plays work really well.
What I mean by in effect is at least slow down or force early decisions.
And I don't mean any of this to deter people from thinking what college system they play in affects their draftablity much more than a hill of beans because I don't.
But I do believe that a professional team would have to run the option against the wishes of agents, potential draftees, and in many cases their fans so it would very much be an all-in proposition that a college frankly doesn't have to deal with.
This is a fascinating thread and I agree with several points made by both sides. PJ knows football more than anybody and if he says it would work, it could.
But just look at the backlash against option football in the NFL. It's not just cognitive dissonance on a mass level, which is definitely there in spades -- it's out and out hostile.
The NFL successfully changed the narrative of the Broncos 2011 season to that of a dim-witted, laughable religious nut who played worse than your grandmother and 100% lucked his way into the playoffs, instead of the real story -- which was that a last-place club implemented a "college" playbook mid-season and led the league in rushing, exhausting defenses by the 4th quarter, with a QB who brought an Urban Meyer acumen and attitude to the position. Make no mistake, other coaches, executives, media hated it...and still take it out on poor Timmy.
After the 49ers' Pistol offense rushed for 300+ yards to beat the Packers in 2012, Pete Prisco wrote a column the next off-season called "NFL Option QB's Prepare To Get Blasted." He was salivating over QB's getting concussions because he personally disliked the style of plays they ran. Especially given the changing culture toward head injuries, it stands as one of the most vicious, unethical and mean-spirited sports columns ever written. Not to mention he was also
wrong -- Kaepernick & Griffin have been racked, sacked and banged up five-fold since their coaches inexplicably phased out the 11 x 11 running game.
The Carolina Panthers offense has been called "unwatchable" on ESPN after last week's playoff win, because they essentially ran Oregon's offense. Never mind they scored 27 points on one of the best defenses in the league.
What strikes me most is the randomness and bitterness of how/when the subject even comes up. On a recent Inside the NFL, during a discussion of Aaron Rodgers, Boomer Esiason suddenly got this sour little-kid look on his face and said "You gotta throw the ball down the field. All that option stuff, that's a lot of crap." Never mind that read-option nightmare Russell Wilson and the Seahawks just beat Peyton Manning in the Super Bowl by 100 points.
And the most ridiculous part is the constant implication that run-heavy, option style offense has to be boring. You know what's boring? Watching two tall, slow white guys compete to see who can stand in one spot and complete more generic 8-yard out patterns and button hooks. Tebow was beloved around the world. Kaepernick was a sensation. So was RG3. It was only after those players were stuck in ill-fitted, outmoded, in-vogue offenses that their play diminished, and so did their fanbases. Self-fulfilled prophecy.
I noticed that there was a "hire Paul Johnson" thread on Atlantafalcons.com last week;
it was deleted by a moderator.
So a PJ (or PJ disciple) hire by an NFL team wouldn't just be dealing with problems on the field -- there would be a (mostly media-manufactured) outcry and call to arms from the league establishment and their legions of influence. Cut-blocking, which is borderline taboo in the pros already, would probably just be banned in response after one season of wild success.
"Illegal Flexbone formation, on the offense, 15 yards and loss of down."
