Spread vs Pro-Style

#1
gainesvol82

gainesvol82

Wifey scrunch face
Joined
May 7, 2008
Messages
8,715
Likes
15,017
#1
Who wants to see UT go to the spread and who would prefer to keep the pro-style offense? Personally, I would prefer to stay pro-style as UT is considered a "pro-factory." The spread can be dominated by good DL play as I think you will see in the SECCG. The only type of spread offense I could see working in the NFL is TT's due to the fact that it has so many elements of a West-coast offense and none of the zone read plays of the UF offense. I'd like to hear other's opinion on this subject.
 
#2
#2
I personally like the spread option style as it is much harder to defend...Pro style is run right at you smash mouth style football like We have been "Attempting" to play
 
#3
#3
Just say no to the spread.

See Michigan.

Our transition to it would be very rough.
 
#4
#4
Pro style I formation smash mouth offense. 3 yards and a cloud of dust go for it on 4th and 1. Dominate time of possesion and have a defense that gets off the field in 3 downs.
 
#5
#5
Love the spread. I think it's hard to defend when used right. Many options to get playmakers the ball. Allows quarterbacks to rack up crazy stats.
 
#15
#15
FulmersSidelineGrimace said:
Whoever invented the pro style, should file a class action lawsuit against us, because we are making it look like a faulty system
Click to expand...
:lolabove:
I absolutely agree.

I think pro style is the way to go. If you have the speed, incorporate some spread with it. Players who want to go to the NFL want to run pro offenses. It also gives you more options so you can adjust the offense to your players from one season to the next.
 
#16
#16
if the spread is run properly it is nearly unstoppable, but the transition period would take a while.

i'm for whatever works, spread, pro-stlye, or even the triple option.
 
#17
#17
jzvol said:
just say no to the spread.

See michigan.

Our transition to it would be very rough.
Click to expand...

there are different versions of the spread. The meyer, rich rod version i do not want. The leach, kelly version i would like to see. Either way i still want to be able to run the football.
 
#18
#18
It's pretty simple for me. All of them work with suitable personnel and focus on execution.

None of them work with QB's like we are fielding this season. Until that issue is addressed, we are not going to run any offense effectively.
 
#19
#19
BigPapaVol said:
It's pretty simple for me. All of them work with suitable personnel and focus on execution.

None of them work with QB's like we are fielding this season. Until that issue is addressed, we are not going to run any offense effectively.
Click to expand...

exactly.
 
#21
#21
I often wonder if UT did indeed give birth to the spread....If You remember in 2000 We played UF with AJ Suggs at QB in the shotgun beause of that UF linebacker who ate us up the year before and Travis Henry ran wild on them out of that formation....Maybe it was us to invented that bastard child of an option offense and We just didn't know it lol
 
#22
#22
Well when you say "spread" you have to specify whether you are talking about a "spread offense" or "spread option."

I'd rather see a "spread offense" than "spread option" basically because in order to run a spread option you have to have the right quarterback. Not many qbs can make it work. Tim Tebow, Dennis Dixson, Pat White have had success with it, others not so much.

With Wake and Cinncinatti it's more of a balanced spread, I'm not even sure you can call it a true spread because they both will line up with two tight ends on certain sets.

Texas Tech even there offensive lineman line up spread out further than most teams and you will rarely ever see them run. Yes this year they've had 1200 yards on the ground but that's not historically true of Leach's teams. But I guess he's figuring if he can pass that well it does wonders for your run game. The old adage used to be you have to run the ball to set up the pass. It's just not true anymore in the college game.

That said I am still and always will be a fan of the pro-style offense. Why can't we play good old fashioned kick your butt in the trenches football? Alabama is doing it. My favorite type of football is what i call Steeler football. Run first, if the run doesn't work run more until it does, throw the ball every once in awhile but above all things have a defense that is always an iron curtain.

But looking at the numbers that the teams that are running the spread well can put up...I mean even in the days of Peyton we didn't put up those kind of numbers, so I guess I'd do whatever it takes to win.
 
#23
#23
Pro style is helping the kid out more in the long run. I prefer a pro-style attack. Like BPV said its all about executing the offense. Either works if you do the one thing.
 
#24
#24
Rich Rodriguez changed the game of CFB when he was the O-coordinator at Clemson/Tulane (I think I am remembering all of this correctly) and he ran a spread offense that ran out of the no-huddle 2-minute drill all game long to keep the defense in its base set.

Even if we don't run a spread, I would like for us to use more no-huddle. QBs generally get in more of a rhythm and in their comfort zone in such a scenario, even when it isn't in the 2 minutes before a half/end of game (where the D is often in prevent). The QBs get to call whatever they are comfortable with. We had reasonable success with this in 2007, and I thought it was a pretty solid idea. I think it works a little better in the Spread Offense than in the pro-style because of the matchup problems.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top