[Fly Like a Duck]

I respectfully disagree with all you "guys"...

I think football1 has a valid point regarding the balanced offense. The more weapons you can call upon, the greater the opportunity becomes to catch the defense OFF balance and pehaps even out of position.

That said, this would open up huge challenges for the defense. And defense is where I think games are won. It does a team no good to score 100 points, if the defense gives up 101. If the offense is "modernized" as football1 defines it, then the defense must learn all new criteria in how to defend against the pass, option, run etc. It could do nothing but make them better and more ready for college ball.

Just one grandmother's humble opinion....

Granny,

No disrepect, but your thoughts are one of the reasons why having so many college and pro football games are such a bad thing for us common fans. There is such a thing as doing too much on offense. Most high schools get one day a week to practice "offense", because so many kids have to go defense and one day a week is devoted to that side of the ball, thus leaving Monday (typically used for lots of film work and introducing the weekly game plans and that leaves Thursdays primarily for walk through/review before the game on Friday.

My point in all of this? There is not enough time in the week for the vast majority of teams to do all of this offense, which is why you see so many teams build around a base offense and stick with it. You mention the veer option, which is a great offense, but do you realize the time that it takes to put that offense in? It's not something that you can just "some of the time", at least not planning on having results.

I don't think you have to have true 50/50 balance. I do think that you must be able to throw the ball when needed, though.