Started By
Message
re: Everyone will be running the spread within 7 years
Posted on 1/17/13 at 7:53 pm to Roger Klarvin
Posted on 1/17/13 at 7:53 pm to Roger Klarvin
quote:
The wild success that the spread has had.
Yet, it's the pro style that wins out. It's not an offense that can sustain in the SEC. Tebow was built to run the spread and even he had to slow up by his senior year.
2
Posted on 1/17/13 at 7:55 pm to John Maplethorpe
Naive
Posted on 1/17/13 at 7:55 pm to LSUdm21
quote:
Yet, it's the pro style that wins out.
It doesnt always, thats the point
Posted on 1/17/13 at 7:57 pm to MikeHoncho
quote:
Just because YOU have a hard-on for your offense doesn't mean I have to.
I dont care if you like it, just that you realize it works.
Posted on 1/17/13 at 7:57 pm to TreyAnastasio
quote:Bama would beat the Pats? Hmmm...
Maybe at places that are talent deficient, but not at places like bama.
Posted on 1/17/13 at 7:58 pm to LSUdm21
quote:2010 BCSNCG?
Yet, it's the pro style that wins out
Posted on 1/17/13 at 7:58 pm to Roger Klarvin
quote:
It doesnt always, thats the point
UF won with Tebow and AU won with Cam. Both model spread QBs. Although Cam pretty much ran the drop back 10 steps and take off offense. He was built to take a pounding. Manziel will get hit next year. The target will be bigger than ever. Next year is gonna be fun times here.
Eta: This shite has been said since 2003.
This post was edited on 1/17/13 at 8:00 pm
Posted on 1/17/13 at 7:59 pm to Porker Face
The difference in the new spread is all relative to the speed you run your offense. Its a relatively new concept(last 7 years). Spreading your players out is really an old concept (20yrs). You could run HUNO from about any formation. It just wears the defense down more when you spread them out and therefore becomes more effective. The major negatives are impact to the defense and short yardage. I think what your seeing now are teams using parts of the offense. They run the read option and pull out the HUNO to get a spark or when their down a bunch. Once a team figures out the right mix - they will be tough to stop. However, it also boils down to the coach. The guys that call the games better - always win. Malzahn style offenses will win a bunch of games and fill stands because the excitement. This applies to any level. (until everyone catches on)
Posted on 1/17/13 at 7:59 pm to Roger Klarvin
quote:
I dont care if you like it, just that you realize it works.
Jesus, dude. It's like EVERY competent offense....it works until a defense stops it. EVERY offense can be stopped.
Posted on 1/17/13 at 8:32 pm to John Maplethorpe
Go ahead. And us pro style teams will keep winning championships.
Posted on 1/17/13 at 8:34 pm to MikeHoncho
quote:
Jesus, dude. It's like EVERY competent offense....it works until a defense stops it. EVERY offense can be stopped.
"Everyone has a plan until they get punched in the mouth"
Posted on 1/17/13 at 8:46 pm to TreyAnastasio
quote:
Maybe at places that are talent deficient, but not at places like bama.
Posted on 1/17/13 at 8:53 pm to John Maplethorpe
Even if you're right about the spread being a "sea change", what will happen is that defenses over time will have changes and new philosophies of their own to counteract these new offenses.
THEN, once these defenses get smaller and quicker and more able to stop the spread, they'll become more susceptible to power offenses and strong inside running. ..and then you'd see another wave of offenses returning to that.
THEN, once these defenses get smaller and quicker and more able to stop the spread, they'll become more susceptible to power offenses and strong inside running. ..and then you'd see another wave of offenses returning to that.
This post was edited on 1/17/13 at 8:54 pm
Posted on 1/17/13 at 9:00 pm to MikeHoncho
quote:
Jesus, dude. It's like EVERY competent offense....it works until a defense stops it. EVERY offense can be stopped.
I agree. Very talented teams can run whatever they want and it will work if executed properly, and anything can be stopped by elite defenses.
There are differences however. First, very talented spread teams tend to end a lot of games very early and it allows their starters to take less of beating over the course of a season. For instance, despite the total play differential Marcus Mariotta actually took less snaps than Zach Mettenberger this year and played in a total of SEVEN fewer quarters.
Second, lesser programs have routinely become fairly competative with the spread. The same is rarely true for traditional single back and I-form attacks at lesser programs.
The OP is wrong that Bama and LSU will run the spread. It's just that most everyone else will, either because it allows elite schools to truly dominate almost everyone without a great defense or because it makes lesser schools competative. The issue I take isnt that our scheme is better than yours but rather that in your prideful arrogance you cannot acknowledge the proven effectiveness of spread offenses to win at everyn level consistently. Hell, the best coach in college football is so scared of it he wants it banned because he is career under .500 against top level spread programs. That is indicative of it's potential.
This post was edited on 1/17/13 at 9:04 pm
Posted on 1/17/13 at 9:05 pm to Roger Klarvin
quote:
There are differences however. First, very talented spread teams tend to end a lot of games very early and it allows their starters to take less of beating over the course of a season.
Or you could take the Mack Brown approach and have "thud" practices.....meaning don't tackle with full force in practice.
It worked out well for Texas' defense this year.
Fresh bodies.....shitty tackling
Posted on 1/17/13 at 9:05 pm to AUX3
It wears out two defenses, not just the opponent's. Have at my friend, another BCS...wait just a minute.
Posted on 1/17/13 at 9:11 pm to americanrealism
quote:
Even if you're right about the spread being a "sea change", what will happen is that defenses over time will have changes and new philosophies of their own to counteract these new offenses.
Oregon has been playing like this for 6-7 years and nobody has consistently stopped it. Tech, a school with vastly inferior talent, ran Leach's offense for a decade and always finished top 5 in total offense.
The examples are numerous. Few defenses have the talent and secondary depth to stop it. It isnt about "figuring it out", the formula has been there for years. The reason the spread is so effective is that so few teams can stop it even if they know what to do because, ultimately, you HAVE to have LBs and safeties capable of playing solid coverage for an entire game while simultaneously not bailing our every play and leaving the run open against three man lines. It stresses defenses in incredible ways.
Bama, LSU, etc. can slow it because, but even then A&M put up almost 900 combined yards and 48 points.
Posted on 1/17/13 at 9:14 pm to MikeHoncho
quote:
t worked out well for Texas' defense this year.
Fresh bodies.....shitty tackling
Worked for A&M and Oregon too. Both averaged over 44 PPG, had 20+ point leads in the third quarter or earlier of 18 total games, won 23 combined games and finished #2 and #5. Neither suffered from less starting PT.
To deny the merits of the offense is to deny all reason.
Posted on 1/17/13 at 9:16 pm to nc14
quote:
It wears out two defenses, not just the opponent's. Have at my friend, another BCS...wait just a minute
Another spread myth. A&M's defense was on the field only 4.8 more plays per game than Bama's.
Scoring so much gets the other offense out of rhythm often and forces them to abandon their gameplan, forcing teams to throw the ball more than they want to and resulting in many short drives. Oregon was #2 in the country in three and outs defensively.
This post was edited on 1/17/13 at 9:17 pm
Posted on 1/17/13 at 9:17 pm to Roger Klarvin
quote:
Oregon has been playing like this for 6-7 years and nobody has consistently stopped it
Except the SEC... Not out fault the PAC doesn't play defense.
Page 6 of 8
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News