Football Study Hall asks the musical question why doesn’t everyone HUNH, which leads to a debate as to whether HUNH is a tactic or strategy (pretty close to hair-splitting, IMO) and Gary Danielson calling Nick Saban’s observation that football was never intended to be a continuous sport stupid.
I do think Nick [Saban, one of the proponents of the 10-second rule] has a point: football was not originally meant to be a continuous sport. But I think it’s stupid coming from Nick, and I don’t understand why he’s doing it. He has the best players! He theoretically should have the most well-rounded players, and he could look more like the Seattle Seahawks than anybody else in college! But he fights it. Just swallow hard and put guys in there who can do a lot of things. You’ve got the better players.
The post goes on to explore the question in the context of Saban eschewing up-tempo stuff and speculates that…
So, Saban is making a conscious, strategic choice to be anti-HUNH because there are important tradeoffs. The HUNH might or might not be strategically superior, but there are certainly some benefits slowing things down too, namely in player attributes, scheme complexity, and play choice.
I think there’s something else in play as well. It’s something that HeismanPundit has mentioned – the value of taking a contrarian position with an offensive scheme. In the land of the HUNH, with its emphasis on isolating players, the power offense can wind up becoming king as defenses look to become smaller and quicker to combat offenses spreading the field.
But don’t take my word for it. Take Nick Saban’s.
“We’ve kind of gotten antiquated, and now we’re all of a sudden back. Everybody used to run the ball like we run it. Now people have a hard time stopping us, because they don’t play against teams that run the ball like we runs it. These used to be the basic plays that everybody ran.”