I fully agree with all the points you and @Thatguy are discussing. For me the most frustrating part is a combination effect. They don't necessarily recruit the best players for the system they want to run. Is that star gazing or bad recruiting evaluation, I can't say for sure. Whichever the reason, once they get them in, they seem no to evaluate the existing talent and force them into the scheme they WANT to run. As opposed to, figuring out what they CAN run and executing that aspect. That's clear this year and last. Since this is the Arch thread, crazy news. Arch has different strengths and weaknesses than Quinn had at QB. Yet even when the staff finds a game plan that works well for the QB and the other players around him, they seem determined not to stick with it and revert instead to what they WANT to run. That leads to an offense without and identity. The undefeated teams IU, OSU and even some one and two loss teams, Tech, ND, Oregon all have a clear identity.
To pile on top, IF a team has an offensive identity you can then focus how to adapt that identity to best align a game plan to differing defenses. For instance, GT is a heavy running identity team averaging about 200 yards per game. (What a dream that would be) However, what's usually worked wasn't going to against Georgia. So GT made adjustments and ended up throwing for nearly 200. It's not great, but they were badly outmatched and a very well coached D (miss ya homie) made a game of it.