Originally Posted by Revering4Blue
I agree with your general assessment of Big Ten Football for the most part. That stated, I'd like to address a few points.
Michigan/RichRod-The commonly accepted story line regarding RichRod's tenure at Michigan is that RichRod was a horrible hire from the start because his offensive scheme was a disaster and never had a chance of succeeding in the Big Ten. Therefore, Hoke is a better coach because he'll run a Pro-Style offense.
Bottom line: Frankly, I believe that ponying up 750,000 to pry DC Greg Mattison away from the NFL--RichRod was only alloted 250,000 for a DC-- is a much bigger factor in the Wolverines' resurgence, if you wan't to call it that, than Hoke as a head coach.
Heck, Alabama wanted RichRod in '06, and I guarantee that the Tide certainly would have ponied up enough to hire a quality DC, knowing full well, that with the right personnel, RichRod's offense, much like Urban Meyer's, is much tougher to stop than most, if not all, cookie-cutter NCAA Pro-Style Offenses out there. The man didn't become an idiot overnight.
Nebraska-How ironic it was that the former doofus Nebraska AD Steve Pederson fired Frank Solich and hired Bill Callahan as HC in '04 because he felt that Nebraska needed to run a Pro-Style offense to "keep up" with Texas. Well, we all know how it played out... Callahan's tenure was an unmitigated disaster and Texas merely won a National Championship running virtually the same offensive system that Nebraska currently utilizes--a multi-faceted smash-mouth approach.
That is Nebraska's identity, and that shouldn't change. Whether or not Pellini is the long-term answer is a fair question.
As far as Big Ten Conference Recruiting as a whole is concerned, I do not believe that there is a discernible difference, compared with the SEC, in speed at the skill positions, but rather a speed difference between the opposing OLs and DLs, where most games are won and lost.
|