non factories with good non-spread offenses with defensive head coaches

[TheCusian]

:rolling: Don't tell him he won! You just set the OT forum back about 5 years!

I should just leave him down there arguing with himself

 

[skytop44]

why are you posting in this thread. i ask for good non-spread offenses from non-factories with defensive head coaches and you give me cutcliffe's w/l. thanks

IMO, I'll take what Stanford, Michigan and Utah do any day of the week over a spread offense that has a defense that gives up 40 pts a game. I don't want to be Texas Tech who scores 40 points a game and gives up 60. Give me an offense that scores points and a defense that is good. I could care less about what scheme it is as long as points are being scored. The attitude of Utah is defense. The attitude of Michigan is pound the ball and play defense. There are offensive coaches that are defensive minded because when it comes down to it, defense wins championships. Because if it was all about having an offensive minded spread coach, Oregon would have had 3 National Championships by now. I know it's a little off topic of what you were saying a bit but I disagree that you have to run a spread offense at a non football factory to win.

 

[Millhouse]

Threw out the spread? Explain

3 wideouts with a HB (ExpressBack) primarily receiving isn't a "spread" type offense?

our h backs do all sorts of things to try to confuse the defense. your typical spread offense lines guys up in the same place and has them repeat a few things over and over and they don't bring them in to line up behind the QB or block very much. this is more of a multiple offense, i guess. i don't really know what the hell it is.

most spread offenses have wide WR splits that force a defense to declare what they want to stop in an obvious way. we have pull our h backs in quite a bit, load up the box and run into a wall. makes it much more difficult to decide whether you want to run or pass. if you want to be stanford, bring everyone in, and try to run them over, fine, but it's not a spread.

most spread offenses have bubble screen options on every play as a way to get defenders out of the box so you can run. we don't do that.

 

[Millhouse]

IMO, I'll take what Stanford, Michigan and Utah do any day of the week over a spread offense that has a defense that gives up 40 pts a game. I don't want to be Texas Tech who scores 40 points a game and gives up 60. Give me an offense that scores points and a defense that is good. I could care less about what scheme it is as long as points are being scored. The attitude of Utah is defense. The attitude of Michigan is pound the ball and play defense. There are offensive coaches that are defensive minded because when it comes down to it, defense wins championships. Because if it was all about having an offensive minded spread coach, Oregon would have had 3 National Championships by now. I know it's a little off topic of what you were saying a bit but I disagree that you have to run a spread offense at a non football factory to win.

why are you talking about Michigan here? we are not a factory

as chip noted, stanford has a HC with an offensive background.

utah has dennis erickson as a RB coach and i think they might qualify as a spread offense anyway.

i think oregon has done pretty well. but they've only appeared in national championship games that's not good enough for us

 

[skytop44]

why are you talking about Michigan here? we are not a factory

as chip noted, stanford has a HC with an offensive background.

utah has dennis erickson as a RB coach and i think they might qualify as a spread offense anyway.

i think oregon has done pretty well. but they've only appeared in national championship games that's not good enough for us

I know that I got a little off topic. I hear what you're saying. But like others have said, spread can mean a lot of things. Utah runs the ball a ton, they might spread you out but they don't throw it all that much. I just don't like the notion that you have to run the spread offense to be successful because you're a non football factory. And I brought up Oregon because any time they get close and have to face a team that runs the ball and plays physical defense, they haven't been overly successful in that kind of matchup.

 

[Millhouse]

I know that I got a little off topic. I hear what you're saying. But like others have said, spread can mean a lot of things. Utah runs the ball a ton, they might spread you out but they don't throw it all that much. I just don't like the notion that you have to run the spread offense to be successful because you're a non football factory. And I brought up Oregon because any time they get close and have to face a team that runs the ball and plays physical defense, they haven't been overly successful in that kind of matchup.

spread doesn't have to mean throw all the time, people used to think that in the late 90s. baylor runs for a billion yards. i think it makes it easier to run.

 

[skytop44]

spread doesn't have to mean throw all the time, people used to think that in the late 90s. baylor runs for a billion yards. i think it makes it easier to run.

It can but you can't just flip from offense to offense. IMO you have to fit what the players can do. I'm not sure we're there yet with our personnel to go to a spread offense

 

[Ozcuse]

It can but you can't just flip from offense to offense. IMO you have to fit what the players can do. I'm not sure we're there yet with our personnel to go to a spread offense

I think that was the biggest problem McF@ckit had last season is he tried to make the players fit the system instead of fit the system to the players. It's like he bought the shiny new surround sound stereo system but didn't bother reading the instruction manual when setting it up.

It was so frustrating throwing a bubble screen to Broyld or West while the blocking receiver was the smaller, faster guy. What?

 

[skytop44]

I think that was the biggest problem McF@ckit had last season is he tried to make the players fit the system instead of fit the system to the players. It's like he bought the shiny new surround sound stereo system but didn't bother reading the instruction manual when setting it up.

It was so frustrating throwing a bubble screen to Broyld or West while the blocking receiver was the smaller, faster guy. What?

Totally agree. It was blatantly obvious that the system that we had wasn't working with what we had. You're not going to have the #1 offense every year but know what the guys do and do well and run what works for them, not what you want as a play caller.

 

[Millhouse]

It can but you can't just flip from offense to offense. IMO you have to fit what the players can do. I'm not sure we're there yet with our personnel to go to a spread offense

we'd be fine. people have it in their heads you have to be miami 2001 to run it

 

[Brooky03]

The spread offense is not the answer. It's not a guarantee to work and plenty of teams are more successful with other offensive schemes. I also don't see how we'll get the players to run it well against the big boys.

 

[skytop44]

we'd be fine. people have it in their heads you have to be miami 2001 to run it

I just don't think that it is a priority for us to run the spread. We just need to be better in situations and coaching has a lot to do with that

 

[Millhouse]

I just don't think that it is a priority for us to run the spread. We just need to be better in situations and coaching has a lot to do with that

i think it's useful to look at other schools in our situation. we do everything the hard way

 

[phil77]

The spread offense is not the answer. It's not a guarantee to work and plenty of teams are more successful with other offensive schemes. I also don't see how we'll get the players to run it well against the big boys.

Actually I think we have the perfect offensive skill position players to run the spread...

Dungey- Dual threat QB with great touch and timing. Strong arm. Able to make people miss in space. Creative.
Fredrick - Great one cut runner with break away speed. Also able to make catches out of the back field
Ish - Tall WR able to battle down field for 50/50 balls.
Phillips and Estime - Great slot guys. Great speed. Elusive. Able to make guys miss in space.

Both Ish and Lewis are great blockers which would help bubble screen game.

I think our offensive talent is great for a spread offense.

 

[skytop44]

i think it's useful to look at other schools in our situation. we do everything the hard way

It is helpful, but we have a lot of differences that other schools don't have. We learned the hard way with GRob that a bad fit at Syracuse can set us back quite a bit.

 

[phil77]

It is helpful, but we have a lot of differences that other schools don't have. We learned the hard way with GRob that a bad fit at Syracuse can set us back quite a bit.

How do you know what we have right now is a good fit?

 

[Millhouse]

It is helpful, but we have a lot of differences that other schools don't have. We learned the hard way with GRob that a bad fit at Syracuse can set us back quite a bit.

Gerg was a defensive HC of a non-factory that didn't run the spread. so yeah

 

[skytop44]

Gerg was a defensive HC of a non-factory that didn't run the spread. so yeah

We were a pretty good football school when GRob took over. It wasn't that he didn't run the spread as much as he had no east coast ties and was a west coast guy and tried to install a west coast system on a team that was a power run team. Like I said the spread offense is good but it's more about the personnel and pushing the right buttons. Could we run it? maybe but our defense has to get a whole lot better IMO if you're going to go no huddle spread.

 

[TheCusian]

we'd be fine. people have it in their heads you have to be miami 2001 to run it

Mcit was bad at play calling, when to actually throw the bubble, and had managerial issues. I don't doubt that it can be run here and run well with the right guy.

 

[skytop44]

Mc. . . . it was bad at play calling, when to actually throw the bubble, and had managerial issues. I don't doubt that it can be run here and run well with the right guy.

That's my thing. We can have the personnel to do it, but if the wrong guy is pushing all of the buttons, then it could spell disaster for a team who doesn't have a great defense.

 

[skytop44]

How do you know what we have right now is a good fit?

The last thing I have to go off of that was close to running the spread offense was when we were running what McDonald ran. He obviously was not a good play caller. With the right guy, there's no doubt we can run the spread. With what I've seen this year I'm not convinced we would be able to run it but I would say that Lester is better than George.

 

[Millhouse]

We were a pretty good football school when GRob took over. It wasn't that he didn't run the spread as much as he had no east coast ties and was a west coast guy and tried to install a west coast system on a team that was a power run team. Like I said the spread offense is good but it's more about the personnel and pushing the right buttons. Could we run it? maybe but our defense has to get a whole lot better IMO if you're going to go no huddle spread.

pick a reason why robinson stunk, and you'll be right. i didn't mean to imply that's the only reason he failed.

if it's so hard to have the right personnel for the spread, less teams would use it and i think we'd have a bigger list of teams that match my criteria.

 

[Ozcuse]

pick a reason why robinson stunk, and you'll be right. i didn't mean to imply that's the only reason he failed.

if it's so hard to have the right personnel for the spread, less teams would use it and i think we'd have a bigger list of teams that match my criteria.

I think a reason that a lot non-power programs run it is because it's easier to recruit for than it is a pro-style or other traditional offenses. Skill players don't have to be as fast and linemen don't have to be as big to be able to spread teams out and exploit match-ups and/or create space. Sorta like Billy Beane & Moneyball, lesser teams were able to identify market inefficiencies- available, good football recruits and transfers that didn't quite fit the mold of Power Programs recruits and their traditional offenses. Teams like Oregon, Baylor and TCU have been able to exploit it further because they are P5 schools and can get the best of the best of these players that may not been recruited by traditional power schools before or under performed in a different system. As more and more teams evolve to this style and correct the market inefficiency, the weaker teams will have to come up with something else to compete.

If programs like Toledo, Western Kentucky, and Memphis can do it to great effect with their inferior talent and recruiting prowess then we should be able to do it with our slightly superior talent and recruiting ability. It just takes a commitment to the scheme, knowing when to call what plays and putting the right guys in the right places to maximize their effectiveness. Simple, common sense football stuff but we know that coaches don't always do common sense things.

 

[skytop44]

pick a reason why robinson stunk, and you'll be right. i didn't mean to imply that's the only reason he failed.

if it's so hard to have the right personnel for the spread, less teams would use it and i think we'd have a bigger list of teams that match my criteria.

I agree with you that the spread would be good. I think where I'm confusing you is I think of spread as throwing the ball a lot which might be just me. The only problem for me is our defense can be very vulnerable. My worry is that we can have this really explosive offense and our defense is going to struggle and force us to be in a lot of shoot outs where we'll have to score 50 to win. I don't want us to be Texas Tech. But I'm totally fine going 4 wides running and passing. The Dome can be a fast track but if you're talking run/pass almost equally out of the shotgun then I'm all for that, obviously with the right guy calling plays lol

 

[Czar]

The biggest reason to go to the spread is the fact that almost any half decent high school is running it nowadays.