Breaking down football myths

We all have our fallback options when we are bored. Some people watch the news. Some
watch soap operas. Others watch reruns of TV shows from their era.

Whether it’s the A Football Life or NFL’s Top Ten feature, the NFL Network is my Achilles Heel.

I confess to being a borderline football junkie. After all, that comes with the territory when you
are a University of Nebraska alum and followed the San Francisco 49ers dynasty.

The network was launched during the 2003 season and includes game broadcasts, up-to-the-
minute news around the NFL, and various features. Among those features are various “Top
Ten” lists, such as top ten quarterbacks of all time and so forth. The network aired a feature of
Top Ten Football Myths. The list primarily geared itself toward the NFL but definitely has a
degree of truth for the college game as well. We are all guilty of uttering these myths but
watching this show kind of made me re-examine the beliefs.

10) Tackle stats are accurate

On one hand, the statistic is important because after all, if the defender (or defenders) does
not make the tackle, the play continues but how valuable is someone if he is making most of
his tackles say 10 or more yards downfield? And if a running back goes straight into the line of
scrimmage greeted by a wall of defenders, who really made the tackle? When I cover high
school football, I keep tackle for loss stats and impact tackles (gains resulting in 0-3 yards).

Tackle stats cannot always be trusted. Each NFL and college team employs a stat crew for its
home games. That crew's final statistics are deemed official: yardage for rushing, passing,
receiving and various kick returns plus field goal and punting distances, sacks, interceptions,
touchdowns. However, most NFL teams and perhaps college too do not acknowledge the
press box tackle stats as official. Following games, defensive coaching staffs break down the
films on their own and award a new set of tackle numbers. Those are listed by each team as
its official tackle count.

9) It’s tough to repeat as Super Bowl or National Champions

There is a kernel of truth to this idea but more so as college football national champions. In the
Super Bowl era, eight of the 18 franchises that have won Super Bowls have repeated as
champions (the Pittsburgh Steelers did it twice in the 1970s). In college football, only three
teams have repeated as National Champions (1978-1979 Alabama, 1994-1995 Nebraska,
2003-2004 USC, 2011-2012 Alabama).

Repeating is harder in the college game because the most games that a team can afford to lose
and still have a shot at the National title is two games (i.e. LSU in 2007) and even that is an
aberration. Many times, even one loss kills a team’s National Title hopes. In the NFL, a team can
lose as many as seven regular season games, get hot in the playoffs and then raise a Vince
Lombardi trophy.

College or NFL, however, if a team has a proven formula that works as far as developing and
keeping its players, it is going to be good enough to win it all again. If anything, this phrase
should be changed to either “it can be hard to repeat” or “it’s hard to ‘Threepeat.’”

8) You should punt on fourth down

This theory has been put to the test with more video game like scores. I would say it mainly
depends on the type of game you are playing. If it’s a low scoring game (say 14-10) field
position matters. If you are in a 45-42 game, you need points. If the situation is fourth down
and less than one yard, you hear fans and commentators bristle, “If you can’t make a half-yard,
you don’t deserve to win.” That’s a philosophy that I champion but simple mathematics suggest
that regardless of your decision, the result will be a hit-or-miss proposition.

The outcome of a decision does not make it good or bad — what’s important is the reason
behind it. If a team faces say fourth-and-one from its own 20, it makes more sense to punt than
it would if the ball was at midfield or deeper into the opponents’ territory.The difference is that
at the 20, you risk giving the ball up to your opponent in prime scoring territory.

That said, I find it amazing how some coaches develop a reputation for being mavericks or
riverboat gamblers and taking the chance on fourth down more often than their rivals. The ones
that don’t fall into this category get labeled as ones with “no guts,” or something along those lines.

7) Dome teams are soft

The argument you frequently hear is that dome teams are weak and can’t handle the elements.
It is generally believed that upper management of dome teams attempt to build clubs that are
suited to play best in perfect indoor conditions but incapable of slugging it out in a postseason
street fight.

At a disadvantage in the postseason? More often than not yes. After all, dome teams have
never won a conference title game on the road. Soft, however, is only true in some cases. Most
people see teams like the Indianapolis Colts or the St. Louis Rams of the late 1990s-early
2000s as finesse oriented teams. However, Bum Phillips’ Houston Oilers teams played a
physical brand of football led by Earl Campbell. Jim Mora’s New Orleans Saints had plenty of
defenses that inflicted pain on opponents.

On the college side, Syracuse, Idaho, Minnesota, Tulane, and Houston come to mind as dome
teams but notice how none of those team are the “brand names” of college football.

6) Icing the kicker works

This strategy is employed by defending teams to disrupt the process of kicking a field goal just
prior to the snap. Typically, either a player or a coach on the defending team will call time out
just as the kicker is about to attempt a game-tying or game-winning field goal. This is intended
to make the kicker nervous and increase the likelihood of him missing the kick.

So is it effective? I would say more often than not, it doesn’t work.

What other job is a kicker thinking about throughout the game other than kicking off and kicking
field goals or extra points? I doubt he’s spending the game thinking about that Cover Two
defense or that “sluggo” route by the X receiver.

5) Quarterback needs a rocket arm

Anyone believing this idea knows about minus-10 percent about football. Granted, John Elway
and Brett Favre could throw a strawberry through a locomotive and had Hall-of-Fame careers.
However, guys Joe Montana, Tom Brady, and Troy Aikman didn’t wow anyone with their arm
strength and had Hall-of-Fame careers.

If quarterback success was based solely from physical attributes, players like Andre Ware,
JaMarcus Russell and Jeff George would be headed to the Hall of Fame. Nevertheless, finding
signal callers is becoming more about accuracy, intelligence and intangibles than it is overall
physical skills. There have also been plenty of strong-armed high school quarterbacks that
couldn’t cut the mustard in college.

4) You have to run to set up the pass

I believe teams need to have at least a presentable running attack but the fact that it sets up
the pass is an outmoded idea. There is truth to the idea that a team needs to have a genuine
running threat if it wants to win a championship..

If a team has a dominant quarterback, then the need for a dominant running game is not great.
However, if a team has a average or worse quarterback, then it had better have a strong
running game if it wants a chance to win.

3) A player should not lose his job to injury

What a stupid question. It’s one thing to have that rule in high school but pro sports and college
to a lesser extent are about a business, as much as some people hate to admit it. As a coach,
your job is to play the guy that gives you the best chance to win. If you buy this theory, then
Lou Gerhig should have his Hall-of-Fame induction revoked. While we’re at it, Kurt Warner and
Tom Brady should return their Super Bowl MVP trophies.

2) Defense wins championships

Given that that the rules of the game (both college and pro) favor offenses, this theory holds
less water than say 25 years ago but don’t kid yourself – defense matters.

You might not need a dominant defense to win a championship but until teams with soft
defenses win a championship for ten years in a row, I’m not buying the theory that the game
has changed.

As a whole, defensive teams tend to be more consistent, especially from year to year. QBs
have off days, conditions break down, etc. It's much easier to plug in a talented new defender
than it is to replace a QB or OL (especially multiple).

1) Prevent defense prevents you from winning

I’ve been very guilty of echoing this sentiment but I’ll back off to some degree. A true prevent
defense is a “Hail Mary” defense where you drop seven or eight defenders near the goal-line.
How many Hail Mary attempts actually work? One out of every 20, maybe.

Fans confuse a “soft zone” with a prevent. Well, it’s not the same. A soft zone means that all
the safeties and cornerbacks are playing back, five or ten yards off the line. The free safety
will often play as much as 20 yards back. There will be no jamming of receivers on the line.
The zone means that each defensive back is responsible for an area of the field, so they're all
watching the quarterback's eyes instead of running stride for stride with a receiver. It is very
easy for the offense to make short plays against this defense, gaining four to eight yards per
play, but it's almost impossible for the offense to make a big play of 20 or more yards
against this sort of defense.

I do, however, echo the sentiment that if your normal defense apparently was very successful
at stopping their offense and getting you to a place where the game is all but won. Why
change what is working in the last minutes? Still, one frequently sees the prevent defense
hauled out in the last few minutes of a game that is not close.