re: What ND Defensive Coordinator says about Canada

quote:

---

quote:
But...but...Gimmick Offense!!!


Seriously I trust a seasoned DC who has to scheme against this system over some fat fool on here that doesn’t know what a 3 Tech or a Shade is
people believe these types of quotes when it fits their agenda and ignore them when they don’t.

---

I hate the word gimmick. First of all, it's in the eye of the beholder and relative. Secondly, is it based on being conventional or effective? Most here seem to do exactly what you said... apply when it suits them and don't when it doesn't.

Under many poster's definition (when it fits the narrative), Aranda's defense is gimmicky and a RPO is a gimmick offense.

For the record, I consider myself just as guilty of apply/don't apply as anyone else. But frankly, I don't think it belongs in the verbiage. If it works, fine. If it doesn't, don't do it. I'm about net results (NOT judged on one play or game at a time).

In my book a reverse is a gimmick where a jet sweep is not. Sweeps have been a mainstay of football for years and a jet sweep makes sense, especially the way we run them close to the LoS. 1 or 2 reverses a game is not a "gimmick offense", but 7 a game is (by my relative definition). But if you run 7 a game and every one gained yards AND you ran routes/plays based on that as strategy, it is no longer gimmicky. Again, eye of the beholder.