The Myth of Balance: Challenging Football’s Longstanding Narrative

Phil Longo is gone! Hallelujah! RUN THE DAMN BALL!" *Insert Cliche Probably Misspelled, Likely an Acronym

"And with that, a mighty cheer went up from the heroes of Madison. They had banished the awful Air Raid offense forever, because it was haunted. Now let's all celebrate with a cool glass of turnip juice."

--Sweater Vested Retired Media Member

Like many things in life football can become over complicated and over analyzed to the point that the true essence of the sport is lost to numbers or a cleverly written poster. All offensive minded people can agree on one thing. That in order to win a game you must score more points then your opponent. It's no secret that throughout football’s long history the debate over football's best offensive strategy has been debated amongst the most revered intellectuals to the lowliest fan.

For some, football is all about establishing an identity often around a specific aspect of offensive football. For others achieving balance has been the holy grail. There's the magic word. Balance. But what is true balance in offensive football?

The Conventional Wisdom of Balance

Balance is defined as a state of equilibrium, an even distribution of weight or an amount. When used in the context of football many see it as an equal distribution of run and pass plays. The “50/50 split” is seen by many as a marker of offensive versatility that is praised by commentators and analytics experts alike and on paper the logic is sound. If a team has the ability to run and pass it can keep defenses guessing they should have an edge.

But it is this notion or variation of balance that is inherently flawed. Football isn’t a game of perfect symmetry. Consider a scenario where a team’s run game is thriving, consistently gaining five yards per carry, while its passing game is unreliable. Should that team aim for a 50/50 split just for the sake of balance? Of course not. Similarly, a team with a prolific quarterback and an elite group of receivers shouldn’t force unnecessary runs simply to appear balanced. Balance, in this traditional sense, often leads to inefficiency rather than success.

Mike Leach and the Philosophy of Balance

Few coaches challenged the traditional notion of balance as effectively as the late Mike Leach. Leach was unapologetically pass-heavy, and yet he believed his offenses were among the most balanced in football.

Leach argued that balance doesn't come from play distribution, but by ensuring every eligible player is a threat. His quarterbacks were trained to spread the ball around, often targeting 8–10 different receivers in a single game. This made it nearly impossible for defenses to key in on any one player or area of the field. By this notion the natural play makers will emerge, but forcing defense to play the rest of his offense honest.

Interestingly, and not surprisingly if you studied the man, Leach also admired systems offenses like the wishbone which relied almost exclusively on the run. Despite their lopsided play-calling, wishbone offenses were functionally balanced because they forced defenses to account for multiple ball carriers and diverse run concepts. This highlights a critical point: balance is about how an offense forces defenses to play, not how it splits its own plays.

Contributions Over Categories

Shifting the focus from the ratio of plays to the contributions of players requires a more nuanced view of offensive football. Modern offenses illustrate this principle through play design. For instance, in many systems, wide receivers run routes on every play, even on designed runs. If the defense overcommits to the box, the quarterback can audible to a quick pass, ensuring the receivers remain integral to the play. Similarly, running backs are frequently involved in the passing game, whether as check-down options or primary targets on wheel routes and screens.

Other offenses achieve balance by tailoring personnel groupings to their strengths. A team that employs H-backs or fullbacks instead of traditional tight ends might lean heavily on the run but remains versatile enough to create mismatches in the passing game. This approach doesn’t fit neatly into the 50/50 framework but achieves functional balance by forcing defenses to defend every potential point of attack.

How you attack the defense all falls under the mantra "take what the defense gives you". It may be simplistic in notion but clever in reality because only the strongest defenses have the scheme and athletes to defend an entire offense both vertically and horizontally.

The Efficiency Equation

If balance isn’t about equal distribution, then what is it? True balance lies in maximizing efficiency while maintaining unpredictability. This requires understanding not just your own strengths but also how defenses are likely to respond.

Imagine an offense that averages eight yards per pass and four yards per rush. While passing appears more productive, a predictable reliance on it allows defenses to adjust, potentially neutralizing its effectiveness. Constraint plays can loosen up the defense by creating conflicts of assignment.

Adaptability is the key. A great offense doesn’t strive for symmetry; it adjusts its approach based on the game situation, personnel, and opponent tendencies. Play-action passes, for example, are a staple of run-heavy teams because they exploit the defense’s focus on stopping the run, leading to high-percentage explosive plays.

Why Balance Remains a Myth

The enduring appeal of balance lies in its simplicity. It’s easy to quantify, easy to understand, and easy to sell as a universal ideal. But football is anything but simple. It’s a game of matchups, adjustments, and constant evolution.

A stubborn adherence to balance often ignores these realities as it prioritizes appearances over substance. This is leading to offenses that are predictable and inefficient. By contrast the best offenses embrace the complexity of the game, using balance as a tool rather than a goal. They adapt to exploit mismatches and create systems that defy traditional metrics.

The myth of balance is rooted in an outdated understanding of football. It’s a narrative that prioritizes symmetry over effectiveness, numbers over nuance. Balance isn’t about 50/50 play-calling; it’s about building an offense that maximizes its potential while keeping defenses guessing. Whether you’re a fan of the Air Raid, the wishbone, or anything in between, I urge you to think critically about what balance really means, and why it’s time to let go of the myth.