Navigation: Jump to content areas:


Pro Quality. Fan Perspective.
Login-facebook
Around SBN: Jeremy Lin Continues Rampage, New York Wins On Road

Why Rushing Matters More in College Than the NFL

Gregg Easterbrook took a look yesterday at how rushing is becoming less and less relevant in the NFL. He gives a nod to Football Outsiders' point about how an effective passing game is inherently more productive than an equally effective running game, but his theory is bigger.

Specifically, he contends that the ballooning weights of linemen leave fewer holes for running backs to go through. There just is simply less space to make headway. I don't doubt that there is some truth to that.

However, rushing games are still flourishing in college. Four of the last five national champions have finished in the top 12 in the country in rushing. Easterbrook himself points out that linemen are getting bigger in college just like the NFL (though not to the same degree), so if that's all there was to it, then rushing should be less important on this level by now as well.

I'll give you three reasons why rushing is still highly relevant to the college game.

1. The NFL's rushing game hasn't evolved much.

The Dolphins introduced the Wildcat to the NFL, but it's still seen as a bit of a gimmick. Prior to that, the biggest new thing in the NFL rushing game was the zone blocking scheme that Mike Shanahan and Alex Gibbs used to create a factory of 1,000-yard rushers in Denver. Of course, at this point that scheme has been subsumed into the mainstream.

Overall, the NFL really only has about five rushing plays that everybody runs. You can dress them up to look like different things, and NFL coaches are really good at it. Ultimately though, it's still just a set of five plays. NFL defensive coordinators are not fools, and they all know how to stop them. There's much more room for creativity within the NFL offensive model in the passing game, so that's where the focus is going.

2. The spread-to-run philosophy has not caught on in the NFL.

The spread-to-run philosophy has revitalized rushing games throughout the college level, and just about everyone uses it now to some degree. It helps to clear out the middle of the field a bit, creating more space where all those big bodies that Easterbrook talks of had been crowding it. With receivers talking up a lot of horizontal real estate, fewer guys can be dedicated to the area between the tackles. It's brilliant in its simplicity, and it works.

Star-divide

Some NFL teams have adopted spread-to-run elements, such as the Wildcat and the Pistol (which isn't a spread thing inherently, but works best with a spread formation). However, there really aren't any dedicated followers of the philosophy. Some of that has to do with the speed of NFL defenses, which counteracts a few of the advantages of the spread run game. Some of it has to do with the fact that a lot of people think you can't use the spread-to-run philosophy without a running quarterback (not true, though it helps). Regardless of reason the spread-to-run could breathe some fresh air into the stale NFL running game, but no one seems willing to commit to it yet.

3. College football doesn't have the talent homogeneity that the NFL does.

Because there are only 32 NFL teams, everyone can get really good players. Even the worst starters in the NFL could start for just about any college team. It's no surprise that the running game is seeing diminishing returns because there's less nuance to it than there is to the passing game. Yes blocking schemes and defensive fronts can be complex, but the NFL rushing game ultimately hinges on big guys pushing one another. The difference between everyone's big guys in the NFL has slowly become smaller over the years.

In college, you've got 120 teams in I-A and 66 teams in BCS conferences. There are plenty of programs to spread the top high school talent around to, and there's a larger spectrum of coaching prowess. You can create a talent and schematic disparity more readily in college, especially since the salary cap restricts the acquisition of talent far greater than the 85 scholarship limit does. Teams that don't use a spread-to-run philosophy much (Alabama, Georgia, Ohio State, etc.) can better succeed with pro-style running than NFL teams can as a result, so it thrives more in college than on the professional level.

Comment 3 comments  |  0 recs  | 

Do you like this story?

Comments

Display:

Good Post

I think another reason is the difference in the clock rules. College clock rules result in considerably more plays per game than the NFL, which means there is considerably more incentive to control the ball and the clock with an effective rushing attack. Controlling the ball and clock is of course critical in the NFL, but college games have what, 1/3 more plays on average? Just a thought.

"We are inclined to believe that if we have watched a football game or a baseball game, we have taken part in it." --John F. Kennedy

by Thinking Bulldog on Aug 25, 2010 10:37 AM EDT reply actions  

Good post

and here’s a few other points:
1) Easterbrook only raised that point because he had a larger one: the bigness of the players is bad for them. If he didn’t believe so much in the latter point, I doubt he would have lead his column with the former.
2) In college there is just sooooo much less time to practice and train than there is the the pros. This means you simply cannot install the unbelievably complex playbooks you find the in NFL. Most of those pass plays are incredibly difficult to execute successfully, and they only make it look easy because of an insaine amount of repetition. The most complex playbook in college is like “Go Dog Go” compared to the simplist pro playbook.
3) Running is so much tougher on the body than passing (see Football outsiders for stuff on how catching the ball by a runner doesn’t take the toll that running the ball does, for example). The NFL season is longer, and the players are fewer, and the bodies are bigger and stronger than in college. If an NFL team ran the ball as much as Alabama, there is about a 0% chance their RB and starting OL would still be healthy by the end of the season.

Unless the extremely unlikly events occur of the NFL expands their rosters by a lot or shortens their season, the NFL will continue to be a passing first league.

"It's not the size of the dog in the fight, it's the size of the fight in the dog." - Bear Bryant

by NJBammer on Aug 25, 2010 11:27 AM EDT reply actions  

Also to point out

NFL teams have to risk more, and can’t play conservatively. There’s 256 games each year in the NFL between 32 “equal” teams. Not so in college. You can play conservatively by running more often as you can schedule around 3-4 gimme W’s, which at some schools 7 win seasons keep the head coach their job. NFL coaches get no gimmes.

by Bobby Briggs on Aug 25, 2010 3:25 PM EDT reply actions  

Comments For This Post Are Closed


User Tools

Welcome to the SB Nation blog about the SEC

FanPosts

Community blog posts and discussion.

Recent FanPosts

Hatbeard__2__small
More Rumors on LSU Locker Room
X2_6e41244_small
Finally some proof that the SEC is the best conference
Small
College Revenues 2011
4238784107_small
Richt the Rule Breaker?
Small
A Fair Way to Determine the National Champion
Dool-aid_small
With Due Respect to Rick Reilly
Small
Playoff Idea: The World Cup of College Football
Coffee_small
Why is the BigXII (-4) getting so much love by the BcS computers?

+ New FanPost All FanPosts >


Managers

Gabalogo2_small cocknfire

Gator-f__custom__small Year2

Authors

Kleph_logo_copy_small kleph