That’s why you don’t introduce a thousand different plays with a completely new offense. You build a base of plays fitting the talent of the players you have & as the season goes along you add on as you’re able to train them your way. You recruit players to fit your scheme and based on how successful you are you can either go faster or slower. With more players for your style each year you can add more and more until your have your full offense installed. This isn’t gene splicing atom splitting rocket surgery. It’s the same thng you do if you take over a tire factory, a research lab or a group of Engineers. You establish a base and evolve from there. You don’t blow up the building & hope it all works out.
Disagree. Its more like redesigning a car. Sometimes you tweak the old one year to year. Sometimes you redesign from the ground up.
Almost always a total redesign means performance (quality) issues in year one. But if you want to be the best on the market, you have to make occasional step changes. Tweaking can only get you so far.
Going from PJ to a spread is like going from a car to a pickup.
The reason I feel tweaking was a poor option is that recruits wanted to, needed to, know that we were moving on. If you look out and see us running a bunch of pj-like plays that fit the pj personnel then do you believe? Better to run your plays and demonstrate the failure points showing how recruits would make the difference. This is particularly important for recruiting OL and WR. They want to see a commitment.