Was this man partially responsible for changing the game?This is a bit off the current topics of the season, but since it's Super Bowl week, I thought it might be appropriate. I was listening to the radio today and every radio show in America is being done from "radio row" at the Super Bowl and Tiki Barber was on. He was discussing the current state of the game and, of course, the upcoming game this weekend. And a point he made really resonated with me and made me wonder if it was possible that Joe Tiller had some hand in changing the way the game of football is played....nationwide.
Tiki was discussing the Super Bowl combatants and he commented on how Indy's rushing offense is 29th in the league -- and how that doesn't matter at all, because of how surgical Peyton Manning is. Fair point. He went on to talk about how the position of running back is quickly becoming less relevant to the point where he expects it to soon be less relevant than ever. This is because everyone runs some variation of the spread offense and bubble screens and quick outs and slants -- when done precisely -- are just as effective as a first down run play that used to be the bread-and-butter of every offense out there. You always ran on first down unless you were some wild-ass, Bill Walsh offense. And he was considered kind of kooky when he first ran it in the NFL.
So yes, the West Coast offense existed -- and succeeded -- for a number years, starting with those '80s Forty-Niners teams. But it's safe to say everyone else mainly relied on the tried and true method of success (and the "conventional wisdom" of many football lifers): run on first down, run on second down, maybe pass on third down. Oh, and the quarterback spent almost all of his time under center. The shotgun was a gimmick, sort of, and something that good defenses felt they could use to their advantage because it was almost always a sign of a sure passing down.
Then something funny happened over the past ten years or so. Spread offenses took over. They say football is a "copycat" sport (see the ridiculous proliferation of the dumb-ass, 1940s Wildcat offense) and so as spread offenses began to succeed more, more teams began to institute them. This spread (no pun intended) like wildfire, burning through the college ranks and down to high school, to the point where the guy currently referred to as maybe the best college football player ever can't get comfortable taking a snap from center. Crazy.
Joe Tiller came to Purdue in 1997 and immediately implemented a spread offense, infamously called "basketball on grass," a term that is still used by know-nothing commentators today, even when Purdue is running more plays on the ground than in the air. But think back -- Cowboy Joe's system in 1997 was a lot more revolutionary than it would be in 2010. Now, everybody runs a version of the spread. In 1997, approximately zero Big Ten teams ran such an offense. For years (up until his retirement, in fact), Tiller was cited as the reason that the Big Ten's offensive statistics and approach changed. Tiller began passing on first down and frequently "using the pass to set up the pass." We all loved it, of course, because it completely baffled Big Ten defenses (remember, that 1997 team was coming off a 3-8 1996 and didn't even really have the personnel for such an offense) and allowed the Boilers to race to a 9-win season. It was amazing.
Before long, more offenses in the Big Ten opened it up, as did many offenses around the country at that time. Just prior to that, what kinds of teams won national titles in college football? Teams like Nebraska, running the effing OPTION. Now what kinds of teams win it? Teams like Florida and Alabama and USC. Sure, they're not all overly pass-happy teams, but the threat of their passing attack is one of the keys to making them successful. Nebraska used to win titles with quarterbacks who had no business even being referred to as quarterbacks.
Whereas winning Super Bowls at the NFL level used to be done with running game and crushing defense, the St. Louis Rams of '99-'01 showed that you could be very successful (and win a Super Bowl) by passing the sh-t out of the ball and playing defense once in a while. The Rams did what nobody had ever been able to do -- outscore everyone.
So the question I ask you is this: Did Joe Tiller play some significant role in changing the way the game is played? Clearly, I'm not silly enough to think he was the cause, but is it fair to say that what he brought to the Big Ten helped make the pass-happy, spread approach more mainstream?
Well, the 29th-best rushing team in the NFL is playing against Joe Tiller's first big recruit and the man who ran his offense better than anyone.
8 comments:
Every time I read a somewhat glowing post about Joe Tiller on this blog, I can't help but think how bad you guys wanted him out as Coach.
Because for all the innovation he brought to the game in 97, from my perspective at least he was phoning-it-in in later years. Let's respect him for what he did and acknowledge his head and heart wasn't in it toward the end. That's not inconsistent is it?
I love the fire and passion, the energy Hope has brought back to our team. Maybe he'll be an innovator, maybe not. But he appears to have his head in the right place and is focused on excellence in execution. There's a lot to be said for those qualities.
I think the numbers speak loudly. JT was 10 games over .500 in Big Ten play in his 12 years as head coach.
There is a good article from Stew Mandel on SI.com about Tiller's football philosophy and how effectively he put QB's into the NFL.
If Danny Hope and the Purdue Football program aren't seizing this moment, they should be. The message to top recruits: Purdue can provide a path to playing in the Super Bowl for any player but especially for a QB or Wide Receiver. One area where Joe Tiller failed was not being able to build on our Rose Bowl appearance and our numerous NFL impact players.
J, to answer your question, I think Tiller had an impact on college ball, especially the Big 11. With more guys coming out of college that have experience playing spread offenses, it translates to the NFL, but I think the West Coast Offense had a little more impact on what they are doing now. But Drew Brees isn't the player he is today without being in Joe Tiller's system. So, yes, some indirect impact.
E -- this was a "glowing" post? I don't think it was. It was intended to be thought-provoking and to wonder if maybe he did have an impact on how the game was played. As Acacia eloquently points out, this doesn't change the fact that his teams did not achieve as much as they could/should have or that he wasn't going through the motions at the end.
Joe Tiller definitely change college football. I've written about this before. I think you have the story right, too. If we just limit ourselves to the 1997 through the Brees era, you saw huge change flow through college football and much of it began with Joe. His offense was basically the Dennis Erickson one-back (also used at Washington State by Mike Price when they had Drew Bledsoe and later Ryan Leaf), but from more five wide/no back sets and with more quick game/three-step drops.
Of course Brees deserves much credit, Tiller had great success against very talented Big 10 D's that were not ready for the spread, and Purdue never really had an NFL caliber receiver until Dustin Keller (Vinny Sutherland was a decent return guy for a few years).
The key was that Tiller's offense was based on short quick throws based on timing and rhythm, and he used all his spread formations to "dictate" where those throws would be. When you line up with no backs in the backfield the defense has to make some decisions, and Brees and Tiller were able to exploit this.
Keep in mind also that Joe had some help. He had a very good coaching staff. The old OC, Jim Chaney, is now the OC at Tennessee; Greg Olsen, another offensive assistant, is the OC for the Tampa Bay Bucs; and of course one of the line coaches was Danny Hope.
And you don't have to just ask in the abstract whether Joe was influential. Coaching info travels in back circles, and you had a lot of schools and coaches visiting Joe and his staff back then. Urban Meyer, in particular, visited Joe when he was at Notre Dame because they asked him to coordinate the third down offense and they couldn't pick up blitzes worth a damn, and later when Meyer went to Bowling Green and later Utah he and current Miss. St. coach Dan Mullen took repeated visits to West Lafayette to learn the passing game from Tiller. (He also visited others to learn the run game.)
But I also agree that it's part of the narrative that all this spread business was so successful that it caused Tiller to be a victim of that success. Every team began running spread stuff, and everybody got killed by it so much they had to spend extra time and recruit more speed. (One of my favorite Brees games was the game in 1999 I think when Brees had 500+ yards passing and Purdue beat a Nick Saban coached Michigan State something like 55-10. Of course the next year Saban focused on Purdue and they upset the Boilers 30-10, I think.)
So in later years the spreading and quick passes didn't work as well because Michigan, Ohio State, and Penn State recruited for speed and athleticism (both for Purdue and also to be ready for bowl games against the Big 12 or SEC teams, who had been influenced by guys like Mike Leach, Rich Rodriguez, and Urban Meyer). This isn't to say Purdue sucked, but probably the best Purdue years post Brees were some of the Orton ones, and there are 9 or 10 defensive guys off those teams who are still active in the NFL or starting for teams.
And then by the time we got to Curtis Painter, Jim Chaney and Greg Olsen were gone and in was Ed Zaunbrecher, who basically ran a different offense than the old one used with Brees. There were things I liked about Zaunbrecher's O -- which is one reason why they would blow out the bad teams and Painter would have 400/500 yard days against Minnesota and Central Michigan -- but the lack of screens and too many plays I think hurt them when they played the Michigans and Ohio States.
Anyway, that's a digression, but the upshot is that yes, Tiller is one of the maybe dozen or so guys that basically "changed" college football, along with the Urban Meyer, Mike Leach, Randy Walker at Northwestern (one of the first true no-huddle spreads, and one of the first run first spreads), and others.
I also think it's perfectly fair to say that a guy could come in and change the entire landscape of college football but that, by the time he retired, it was time. Good post.
Post a Comment