I formation or Spread?

To spread or not to spread?

  • Total voters
    0
#51
#51
I do however think that using the Spread Option as your base offense will fade out sooner than most people think.
 
#52
#52
emainvol said:
I voted yes to the spread only because I want to see some of the formations continue to be implemented into our existing offense.
Click to expand...
I have no problem with having a "G-Gun" type of package or something like that.

emainvol said:
I do however think that using the Spread Option as your base offense will fade out sooner than most people think.
Click to expand...
agreed.
 
#54
#54
oklavol said:
That loss was the worst defeat since 1981 vs Georgia I believe. I doubt it would be worse.
Click to expand...
The score wouldn't have been as bad, but we would have been beaten more physically. Tebow/Newton/Other RBs would have had 400+ yards rushing.

Also, UF didn't throw the ball much at all in our game. UF actually runs the ball much more than they pass it. Putting another corner in that will be playing man coverage is not going to help that.
 
#55
#55
iceman9 said:
And you look at WV, and Oregon, when the QB goes down, they cant score. Takes a special player to run it, and you take someone like Tebow, who is a beast, even he had some nagging injuries toward the end of the year. Say most "mortal" QB's would have a hard time making it thru the season in this league.
Click to expand...

Took the words right off my keyboard
 
#57
#57
vols kick balls said:
The score wouldn't have been as bad, but we would have been beaten more physically. Tebow/Newton/Other RBs would have had 400+ yards rushing.

Also, UF didn't throw the ball much at all in our game. UF actually runs the ball much more than they pass it. Putting another corner in that will be playing man coverage is not going to help that.
Click to expand...

Actually passing, Tebow was 14-19 for 299 yds and 2 TD's against UT. Tebow was 18 for 67 yds rushing, 3.4 yds/carry.

Tennessee vs Florida (Sep 15, 2007)
 
#58
#58
oklavol said:
Actually passing, Tebow was 14-19 for 299 yds and 2 TD's against UT. Tebow was 18 for 67 yds rushing, 3.4 yds/carry.

Tennessee vs Florida (Sep 15, 2007)
Click to expand...
and UF as a team had 250+ yards rushing. If we would have been in a 3-3 they would have had 350+ easily and possibly 400 yards. They wouldn't have had to throw the ball the whole game.

Yes, switching to the 3-3, nickel, dime, whatever could help in pass coverage but it wouldn't matter because we would get destroyed on the ground.
 
#62
#62
tvolsfan said:
Whatever works best for the team running it.
Click to expand...

61 posts, and the kid is the one that makes sense.:rock:

Sherlock Holmes once said that it is folly to theorize before one has facts, because inevitably one begins to twist facts to suit theories rather than the other way around. In football, it is the height of foolishness to implement an offensive or defensive system before assessing the entire body of personnel and building around what maximizes their strengths and minimizes their weaknesses.

The whole idea of "the I formation" and "the spread" as systems in themselves is dumb, mostly because you're talking about alignment and not any actual plays. It's no different than if I start prattling on about a 3-4 versus a 4-3; one has no inherent advantage because there is no information presented about:
1) What my personnel is, or
2) What I will do with my personnel

I can draw up an I-formation attack that will involve 100% passing, and a shotgun/"spread" attack that never passes the ball. I can win with either one. The base alignment matters not at all; I will find a matchup somewhere and destroy you with it.
 
#63
#63
You said it perfectly. The term "Spread" can mean anything from what Hawaii does to what West Virginia does.
 
#64
#64
If you want to hear of something dumb, I coached against a team two years ago that ran the wishbone with no option plays.

Boy, was that an easy night defensively....
 
#66
#66
I'm no fan of the spread even if the team has a mobile QB, the priority should be scrambling to wait for a something to develop or at the last instance running if there is an obvious opening. The QB should be an aspect of the offense, not the whole of the offense, the way Oregon has folded after Dixon going down is a sure sign of the flaws.

I'm pretty sure SEC defenses next year will be focusing on removing hitting the QB every down as a way of blunting the effectiveness of this offense, if the QB is rattled the offense is rattled
 
#68
#68
I've seen some very good points in this thread.

The spread is a fad, namely the spread option. As I have posted many times the spread option like Florida runs is long term suicide. Many thinking coaches figured out a long time ago if you keep running your QB you will get him killed, then your offense dies.

A regular spread that just adds receivers onto the field and spreads out the defense is much better.

I still like a Pro-Set like Tennessee runs. It is actually more multiple than the spread and doesn't rely on a running QB. All types of QB's can be successfull in this type of offense that features the all important powerfull running game.

Defensively, to stop the spread I think that the 4-3 is fine if you have speedy LB's that can drop into pass coverage easily. I think that using a spy on the QB can be highly benificial, particularly at the middle LB position. If you have a good DL this would be all the more effective.

If your LB's are not good enough in pass coverage the nickle would be a better choice IMO.
 
#69
#69
norrislakevol said:
I've seen some very good points in this thread.
Click to expand...

I count two thus far, not including the guy who said "Good post" to me.:p

The spread is a fad, namely the spread option. As I have posted many times the spread option like Florida runs is long term suicide. Many thinking coaches figured out a long time ago if you keep running your QB you will get him killed, then your offense dies.
Click to expand...

They said the same thing about the T formation, the wing-T (which I hate), the single back set, the shotgun, the empty backfield, the wishbone, and pretty much any new formation.

Running your quarterback has no more risk than using a conventional running back, primarily because most of the time the offense that runs the quarterback creates one-on-one matchups for the receivers. This creates a much greater margin of error than a precisely-timed passing attack does. Want to stop Hawaii? Get on the line and hammer those receivers. Want to stop Navy? You can't do the same thing because they'll destroy you.

A regular spread that just adds receivers onto the field and spreads out the defense is much better.
Click to expand...

Only if you have the personnel to do it. Florida ran a lot of two-receiver sets this year with four guys in the backfield (basically a split single wing) and their offense was terrific.

I still like a Pro-Set like Tennessee runs. It is actually more multiple than the spread and doesn't rely on a running QB. All types of QB's can be successfull in this type of offense that features the all important powerfull running game.
Click to expand...

Anything can be "multiple" if you have a smart guy running the offense. There is nothing that is inherently more "multiple" than the next.

Defensively, to stop the spread I think that the 4-3 is fine if you have speedy LB's that can drop into pass coverage easily. I think that using a spy on the QB can be highly benificial, particularly at the middle LB position. If you have a good DL this would be all the more effective.
Click to expand...

Using a spy can be beneficial, but the purpose of the option is to leave certain players (reads) unblocked in order to create numerical mismatches. The word "option" can refer to any of about 30 different plays; a good option coach will find something that works and your best-drawn defensive schemes will be laid waste to.

If your LB's are not good enough in pass coverage the nickle would be a better choice IMO.
Click to expand...

Then you're creating situations where your fastest blockers (which is what option receivers are) can tee off on guys who are unwilling to be physical. Let's be honest here; a huge part of the success of the option is that defensive backs simply don't like to be hit. Having them get clocked time and again by receivers is a nice way to scare the crap out of them.

And if that fails, I have a play that involves a tackle pulling out to get the cornerback.:p
 
#70
#70
Ohio Vol said:
Anything can be "multiple" if you have a smart guy running the offense. There is nothing that is inherently more "multiple" than the next.
Click to expand...

There were times when Florida would line up with a slot receiver in so tight that it looked like they were running the Notre Dame Box. There just aren't a lot of things that haven't already been tried on a football field.
 
#71
#71
GAVol said:
There were times when Florida would line up with a slot receiver in so tight that it looked like they were running the Notre Dame Box. There just aren't a lot of things that haven't already been tried on a football field.
Click to expand...

Exactly. Most of what passes as "modern genius" is an amalgamation of things that became "obsolete" long ago.
 
#73
#73
I just wonder how beat up Tebow will be by the time he makes it to the NFL. It's a good strategy ON PAPER, but I just don't know how you can keep your qb healthy, esp. in the SEC.
 
#74
#74
volsforever27 said:
I just wonder how beat up Tebow will be by the time he makes it to the NFL. It's a good strategy ON PAPER, but I just don't know how you can keep your qb healthy, esp. in the SEC.
Click to expand...

One thing that I haven't heard anybody bring up is what would Florida have done if they had made the SECCG last weekend? Judging by the size of the cast on Tebow's non-throwing hand, he wouldn't have been running the ball at all.
 
#75
#75
The only "spread" we need is vertical! If we could challenge downfield, or at least occasionally shown we could pop a deep one if we wanted, it would make a huge difference. You can't be succesful with the "dink and dunk" as some like to call it, unless you can prove you can hit a deep one. Thats how you keep the DBs from lining up right on you and give the WR the chance to get YAC.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top