[Goose]

but the Woody Hayes approach is a risky one.

Quite a few of us on this board are old enough to have actually seen a Woody Hayes team play. Anybody who thinks that Stanford under Shaw is similar to a Woody Hayes offense is downright silly. You might say it is too similar to a Pittsburgh Steelers offense, but even that would be wrong, as we don't use two backs very much. These days we are not even under center. So saying it is  a "Woody Hayes" approach is clearly incorrect. It is an attempt to associate what we do with a person and an offense that has been discredited. This association has no basis in fact. You might as well say it is a Darrell Royal approach. That would be no less accurate.

[Goose]

but the Woody Hayes approach is a risky one.

Quite a few of us on this board are old enough to have actually seen a Woody Hayes team play. Anybody who thinks that Stanford under Shaw is similar to a Woody Hayes offense is downright silly. You might say it is too similar to a Pittsburgh Steelers offense, but even that would be wrong, as we don't use two backs very much. These days we are not even under center. So saying it is  a "Woody Hayes" approach is clearly incorrect. It is an attempt to associate what we do with a person and an offense that has been discredited. This association has no basis in fact. You might as well say it is a Darrell Royal approach. That would be no less accurate.