I think these new offensive innovations make football much more of a chess match. The days of defenses dominating all game are long gone IMO.
Offenses today are a ***** to stop. Even against a dominant defense, the defense wins some reps and the offense wins some reps. I think we've seen a lot of very close games lately between good offenses/good defenses. Even programs like Bama, who have been the standard for defensive play lately, have had to fight tooth and nail with good spread offenses.
I don't think you can ever truly stop them, you can only slow them down and make them uncomfortable. Offense has always been the more the innovative side of the ball IMO. A lot of smart nerds coaching offense in this country. I think it's forcing DB's to be a little smarter and more innovative. I enjoy the challenge when we play a good spread offense.
Remember all the dummies calling the spreads a " gimmick offense "? Those calling them that have never tried to defend one.
Yup. My favorite statement is one I've had to debunk quite a few times.
"Spread offenses don't win the national championships."
Woops!
Thing is, though, spread option teams (where the argument against spread offenses usually revolved) put themselves at a disadvantage to win meaningful games unless they have a transcendent QB. That's a lot of pressure to find, recruit and develop a single player. Now, I know you know better than most that "spread offense" and "spread option" aren't the same. New England has hopefully proven that much to everyone.
Interestingly, it all boils down to one thing: can you convert on third and 3 and shorter.