We've probably had this discussion before, but the halfway point of the season seems an opportune time to raise the question again. Can a dramatically unbalanced (pretty much all run or all pass) team bring home a trophy?

 

My opinion - FWIW - it's easier to do at the lower classifications; and probably easier for an "all run" team. Much tougher in 4A-6A to win game 15 of the schedule without some semblance of a balanced attack..

Yes, I believe it happens in other states a decent amount of the time.

Yes. Belfry.

Pretty tough to do, but possible.

 

I am most familiar with 2A football in KY. Green County and Murray are examples of two solid teams in the past couple of years that could run the ball all over the field, but couldn't get to the big game because they couldn't throw the ball.

 

Murray was undefeated last season and running the ball got them within 7 points of winning the region, but their lack of balance finally caught up with them.

Danville, particularly in '03.

 

Belfry in their 2 titles.

 

Ashland in '90 wasn't very balanced was it?

 

It's not very likely though. Without some threat of the other style of ball, it's too easy for great defenses, players and coaches to shut down a one dimensional attack. :thumb:

I believe if there is a very good defense then yes definately. Teams that have a great defense can play conservative on offense (play not to turn the ball over). It's a lot more difficult when the offense needs to win the game. Often passing will open up the run, where I believe it is harder for the run to set up the pass.

Simply stated? Yes, but difficult no doubt.

Yes, without a doubt.

A team running a one-dimenstional offense can (and has) won a state championship. A program a running multi-dimensional offense will win more state championships.

It all depends on the game matchups, frankly. Who would have considered the Jared Lorenzen-led Highlands team in 1998 to be unbalanced? Yet they actually won the title game over Waggener with a very UN-Balanced attack - and amazingly, they RAN almost every play in that title game. If memory serves, Lorenzen threw only six times in the championship.

 

It made sense against the opponent and the particular opponent's strengths and weaknesses... (Waggener).

 

In generaly, I think it definitely is true that a unbalanced RUNNING team has a better chance to go far than an unbalanced PASSING team. And I also think it is true that is easier to be an unbalanced offense and win at the smaller school levels, although I think that has a little less to do with it. Some would say that some of the recent St. X champions were pretty unbalanced, although I guess it depends upon how you define unbalanced...

Its not what you do but it is how well you do what you do.

A team running a one-dimenstional offense can (and has) won a state championship. A program a running multi-dimensional offense will win more state championships.

 

Totally agree. The one-dimensional offense is more the exception than the rule when counting championships.

Sure it can be done but generally speaking it takes superior talent (like Ashland in the early 90s).

Sure it can be done but generally speaking it takes superior talent (like Ashland in the early 90s).

 

Exactly. Which was the the point I was making. In the occasional year, a team will have the superior talent needed to win state with a one dimensional O. The corollary to your post is that you don't necessarily have to have the superior talent to win with a multi dimensional O, which means more state championship for a program.

Like others have harped it's more likely to happen in the lower classes, mostly because the opponent is less likely to have as many "athletes" on the other side of the ball to stop or cause problems for the offense.