the consequences of the spread

#101
#101
Orange_Crush said:
That same style team was beaten by a read option team last year.

Are we really comparing single games to define the veracity of systems in a conference?

The read option spread won two national titles at UF. It won one at Auburn. It beat Bama this past year.

Short of special pleading, you can't deny that the read option has been successful in the SEC. The best "knock" on it has been the quality of QB play needed to run the read option, which isn't a "knock" on it. Every system relies on quality play at specific positions to be effective, just maybe not the same qualities that a read option needs.

I'm not saying that the read option would or would not be a success at UT. I am saying that a lot of fallacious thinking has been used to "prove" that it won't.
Click to expand...

I did not say it was not successful. It is an offense that creates a numbers advantage in the running game. A&M beat Bama. A&M was good and Sumlin played to the strengths of his players by putting some of that in for his QB. That is not a typical Sumlin offense. Bama figured it out in the second half of that game but squandered several chances to score. NFL quality receivers and QB's tend to want pro-style or a pass oriented spread offense. I am just not a fan of the offense.
 
#102
#102
thebjd said:
I did not say it was not successful. It is an offense that creates a numbers advantage in the running game. A&M beat Bama. A&M was good and Sumlin played to the strengths of his players by putting some of that in for his QB. That is not a typical Sumlin offense. Bama figured it out in the second half of that game but squandered several chances to score. NFL quality receivers and QB's tend to want pro-style or a pass oriented spread offense. I am just not a fan of the offense.
Click to expand...

I can respect your preferences. :hi:
 
#103
#103
the consequences of running the spread at tennessee will be blowout losses to some of our bitter rivals. i think the spread will not work in the sec anymore. if we are going to run it we might as well go back to the single wing might have a better chance with it.
 
#104
#104
thebjd said:
The cocks are not a zone read offense. They use it some to keep the pass rush off his quarterbacks. Zone blocking running schemes are not zone read teams. Shannahan uses zone blocking for example but he is not a zone read team.
Click to expand...

Have you ever watched the gamecocks play?

Their entire offense revolves around the zone read. And yes I know the difference between zone and zone read. Saban runs zone. Chip Kelly runs zone read.
 
#105
#105
govols105 said:
the consequences of running the spread at tennessee will be blowout losses to some of our bitter rivals. i think the spread will not work in the sec anymore. if we are going to run it we might as well go back to the single wing might have a better chance with it.
Click to expand...

1. We ran the singleewing on the goalline last year. We just called it the wild beast.

2. The spread will not work anymore? Why not? Did they change the rules earlier today and get rid of the forward pass?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#106
#106
The spread/read option has been hugely successful. It is the reason that Oregon--a football doormat for decades--as become something of a powerhouse. Same for Boise State and others. It is hard to defend--just as the old Nebraska/bama/oklahoma triple option was very hard to defend. Bama beat florida with a pro-style offense--but really bama has been winning titles with an nearly nfl-ready defense, first and foremost. The spread naturally confuses defenses and put them on their heels--and when you combine the spread with good talent (see tebow, etc). it's very effectively. Look at T A&M: Expected to be bad in its first SEC season, runs the spread, beats bama.

One of the reasons UT has been bad is that we've been running a very PREDICTABLE, pro-style offense with mediocre talent for most of the last 11 years. This year we had considerably more offensive talent than we've had in a long time--and the pro-style was effective; we scored points. But we had unusual WR talent this past year, a big-armed QB and a good OL.
 
#107
#107
armchair said:
The spread/read option has been hugely successful. It is the reason that Oregon--a football doormat for decades--as become something of a powerhouse. Same for Boise State and others. It is hard to defend--just as the old Nebraska/bama/oklahoma triple option was very hard to defend. Bama beat florida with a pro-style offense--but really bama has been winning titles with an nearly nfl-ready defense, first and foremost. The spread naturally confuses defenses and put them on their heels--and when you combine the spread with good talent (see tebow, etc). it's very effectively. Look at T A&M: Expected to be bad in its first SEC season, runs the spread, beats bama.

One of the reasons UT has been bad is that we've been running a very PREDICTABLE, pro-style offense with mediocre talent for most of the last 11 years. This year we had considerably more offensive talent than we've had in a long time--and the pro-style was effective; we scored points. But we had unusual WR talent this past year, a big-armed QB and a good OL.
Click to expand...

Actually we ran from the pistol this year which uses a lot of spread principles. It was the same offense that the 49'ers ran except we did not have a running QB.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#109
#109
sometimes I think that if a fan of another team starts a thread then everyone will attack them no matter what...
 
#110
#110
Vol8188 said:
Have you ever watched the gamecocks play?

Their entire offense revolves around the zone read. And yes I know the difference between zone and zone read. Saban runs zone. Chip Kelly runs zone read.
Click to expand...

Yes I have. Spurrier runs a multiple offense. He is not lining up play after play running the two man option game. He runs the zone read but he also still uses his delay handoffs, screens and some of the fun and gun with the deep square in and fade routes. He is very diverse in his offense.
 
#111
#111
Ainge said JG was overheard saying he should have stayed at South Carolina...where they run a balanced spread option offense that looks a lot like Butch's offense. Bad analysis 99!
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#112
#112
Tennessee will be running what is called a power spread. Read as a one-back offense. Lots of 4 receivers wide, usually runs a zone blocking scheme, and like the name suggests, there is only one back in the backfield, no FB. The one-back (power spread) is run by Alabama, Florida, and is gaining traction as the most popular offense over the older west-coast pro style.

People see spread and think Tim Tebow. That is the zone read spread. While we will have zone read wrinkles in our offense to best involve our dual-threat QBs that we have on roster, it is not in the base offense, thus we are not the Oregon style, Urban Meyer style spread.

With the increase of super athletic players, the pro style as we know it is a dying offense that needed to be evolved and replaced. Butch, under Brian Kelly, learned spread concepts but was always a defense first, traditional style coach. With the OC MB (can't spell his name), Butch succesfully blended the new spread concepts and old I-formation concepts to arrive at the "power spread", a more versatile and adaptable version of the ancient one-back offense that is being reintroduced today.

In a perfect world, Butch is looking for a smart QB (dual-threat or pocket passer is irrelevant), a 1a-1b running back system (power-speed, preferably one super-athlete), two tall and fast outside receivers with two shorter and more sure handed slot receivers, and a versatile TE.

When looking at what kind of offense UT will be running on a year to year basis (run first or pass first) you will be looking at the TE position more often. A better blocking TE lends to a run first offense, a receiving TE gives an extra 5th receiver on 4 wide sets, a pass first style.

Hope I answered a lot of questions.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#113
#113
pualsline said:
sometimes I think that if a fan of another team starts a thread then everyone will attack them no matter what...
Click to expand...

If he made a thread that could be backed up with concrete evidence he would have gotten a slightly better response.
 
#114
#114
thebjd said:
Yes I have. Spurrier runs a multiple offense. He is not lining up play after play running the two man option game. He runs the zone read but he also still uses his delay handoffs, screens and some of the fun and gun with the deep square in and fade routes. He is very diverse in his offense.
Click to expand...

Unless he changed the offense some with the other QB, I know his running game revolved around zone read.

In 2011 Conor Shaw put on a zone read clinic against our defense.
 
#115
#115
thebjd said:
Yes I have. Spurrier runs a multiple offense. He is not lining up play after play running the two man option game. He runs the zone read but he also still uses his delay handoffs, screens and some of the fun and gun with the deep square in and fade routes. He is very diverse in his offense.
Click to expand...

CBJ doesn't run the zone read every play either. No team does. He runs delayed handoffs, screens, west-coast passing concepts, etc...
 
#116
#116
LurtzVol109 said:
Tennessee will be running what is called a power spread. Read as a one-back offense. Lots of 4 receivers wide, usually runs a zone blocking scheme, and like the name suggests, there is only one back in the backfield, no FB. The one-back (power spread) is run by Alabama, Florida, and is gaining traction as the most popular offense over the older west-coast pro style.

People see spread and think Tim Tebow. That is the zone read spread. While we will have zone read wrinkles in our offense to best involve our dual-threat QBs that we have on roster, it is not in the base offense, thus we are not the Oregon style, Urban Meyer style spread.

With the increase of super athletic players, the pro style as we know it is a dying offense that needed to be evolved and replaced. Butch, under Brian Kelly, learned spread concepts but was always a defense first, traditional style coach. With the OC MB (can't spell his name), Butch succesfully blended the new spread concepts and old I-formation concepts to arrive at the "power spread", a more versatile and adaptable version of the ancient one-back offense that is being reintroduced today.

In a perfect world, Butch is looking for a smart QB (dual-threat or pocket passer is irrelevant), a 1a-1b running back system (power-speed, preferably one super-athlete), two tall and fast outside receivers with two shorter and more sure handed slot receivers, and a versatile TE.

When looking at what kind of offense UT will be running on a year to year basis (run first or pass first) you will be looking at the TE position more often. A better blocking TE lends to a run first offense, a receiving TE gives an extra 5th receiver on 4 wide sets, a pass first style.

Hope I answered a lot of questions.
Click to expand...

I would disagree with your analysis. CBJ is a Rich Rod disciple. He studied with Urban Meyer and Chip Kelley. To my knowledge, he never coached under/with or studied under Brian Kelley (Edit, My bad: Looks like he coached under BK at CMU in 2004.:hi:). He definitely did not learn spread concepts from Brian Kelley; again, that would have been under Rich Rod.

CBJ has shown that he prefers to rely heavily on the zone read, and recruits DT QBs so that he can rely heavily on the zone read. He is adaptable enough to fit his O to a drop-back passer tho.

The offense that we will probably see will be run-first, heavily relying on the zone read, with a West Coast, high percentage passing game mixed in.
 
Last edited:
#117
#117
yellcounty said:
Not trolling but this article has some intresting points about the spread... Well OK's spread

Sports Extra - Blogs - As long as Sooners run this kind of offense elite players
Click to expand...

I just got around to reading this article. Thanks. I recommend everyone go read it. What's interesting about that article is that the author apparently sets out to make one point, and proves the opposite point.

He claims Bama's success is about scheme and OU's problem is the spread. However, he then goes out and describes (literally) how Bama out-talents everyone, and that OU's spread only worked when it was really talented. Well... Duh! He poo-poos TAM's success with the spread/option in the SEC by stating that if they don't keep reloading with the talent they have now, it will fail. Well, duh!

He lists the mismatches that Bama can do on spread because of how they use their massive amount of talent, but never mentions that mismatches available in the spread.

Interesting article that makes a better argument for loading up on talent than moving to/from one scheme or another.
 
#118
#118
Orange_Crush said:
I just got around to reading this article. Thanks. I recommend everyone go read it. What's interesting about that article is that the author apparently sets out to make one point, and proves the opposite point.

He claims Bama's success is about scheme and OU's problem is the spread. However, he then goes out and describes (literally) how Bama out-talents everyone, and that OU's spread only worked when it was really talented. Well... Duh! He poo-poos TAM's success with the spread/option in the SEC by stating that if they don't keep reloading with the talent they have now, it will fail. Well, duh!

He lists the mismatches that Bama can do on spread because of how they use their massive amount of talent, but never mentions that mismatches available in the spread.

Interesting article that makes a better argument for loading up on talent than moving to/from one scheme or another.
Click to expand...


I used to believe that schemes played the bigger role. I changed my opinion several years ago. I don't think it has nearly as much to do with things as talent level does now. The biggest thing is that the talent you get matches the scheme you are running.

"Traditionally" the SEC is known for hard hitting smash mouth football and that is correct, but the SEC recruited players that fit that style of play too. In more recent years several SEC teams have gotten away from that style of play to varying degrees of success. The talent recruited at those schools in my opinion is the deciding factor in the success, or lack of, that they have had.

The real key in getting a new scheme off to a good start is to win "above" the talent level you have the first year. One or two games above the expected W/L's will make the next years recruiting a lot easier. This is not to mean we don't have talent on our team, it means that for the most part it is "Pro Style" Offense talent. With a decent to good season this year it will make it easier to recruit for our new scheme.

The bolded is the one thing i'm counting on. Butch is known for coaching teams to the one or two unexpected wins. I hope it works for him in the SEC too.
 
#121
#121
99gator said:
i wanted to let the board cool down a bit before posting this.

but, i think part of the reason tee martin and jay graham are not at tennessee is a direct consequence of the spread.

there are positives and negatives to everything.

the negative of the spread is that only a few run it and only a few coach it. some don't even want to coach it. they don't believe in it philosophically and if they rise in the coaching ranks that's not the route they want to go.

well, since tennessee has never run the spread, there is no vfl who is familiar with the spread.

this is a blessing in a way. it's one thing for players to adjust to a new system, but you don't want coaches to have to adjust to a new system.

it also ain't a picnic going back from the spread to a more traditional offense when the time comes.

don't be too hard on tee or jay. it makes a whole lot of sense
Click to expand...

I had similar thoughts as well. Reasonable speculation.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top