GatewayRedbirds.com

A Message Board Dedicated to Discussing St. Louis Cardinals Baseball!
It is currently December 18 17, 2:21 pm

All times are UTC - 6 hours




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 588 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 55, 56, 57, 58, 59
Author Message
PostPosted: December 6 17, 11:48 pm 
Offline
Everyday Player

Joined: August 27 15, 8:46 pm
Posts: 215
cardsfansince82 wrote:
stormspencer wrote:
The guy is a winner....and Tim, I really think you will enjoy his wide open offense in the SEC. Lord knows that conference needs a spark in offensive philosophy.


He'll hardly be the first to try it, and he'll find out just like everyone else that you have to run the ball and play physical in that league or you will get run the [expletive] over.


I've heard that tiresome argument before. That along with seeing SEC teams struggle in bowl games and in OOC against quality teams that spread them out. If you get the right QB and run the right system with good skill players, variations of the spread offense can [expletive] SEC defenses. Running a traditional 4-3 with 300 lb defensive tackles handicaps you against athletes in space....unless you have NFL outside LBs who can actually cover slot-type receivers....which almost no one has (outside of Bama and maybe Georgia). UCF/Auburn, and Louisville/Mississippi St will be interesting case studies this bowl season.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: December 7 17, 8:26 am 
Offline
"I could totally eat a person if it were a life/death situation"
User avatar

Joined: August 5 08, 11:24 am
Posts: 22106
Location: Thinking of the Children
Not sure that SEC teams struggle in bowl games. 21-12 over the past 3 years.

Obviously a few teams have tried the spread (Mizzou, Ole Miss, aTm) or variations of it (Auburn) over the past 5 years or so. And, if you look at how they have done, the results have been somewhat mixed. If a team has the athletes and, most importantly, the line needed, they can cause fits for teams like Alabama that run traditional defenses. Actually, I don't think there's any argument that Bama by far struggles most against spread offenses.

But outside of Mizzou, no team is greatly outperforming their recruiting classes. Getting quality recruits mostly equates to success on the field. And,if you look at teams that have given alabama fits, it's teams that have had not only good athletes on the outside but also solid lines up front (Ole Miss, Clemson, aTm). So, yeah, those teams are running a spread, but they're not succeeding solely because of the type of offense. They also have the bodies up front, quality QBs, and the athletes in space (or some variation) that would allow them to run any type of offense they wanted. If you want to see what a spread offense without top 10 talent looks like against Alabama or Georgia or whoever, look at Mizzou a couple years ago when they won the east. Got demolished by Georgia every year and got demolished by Alabama...and Auburn...and most every team that was good.

Speaking of Auburn, Malzahn is obviously a huge proponent of the spread/hurry up offense. But if you look at how he's had success, it's been through running the football and controlling the lines up front on both sides of the ball. I don't have any stats or time to look it up, but it seems like Gus has kind of transformed from more of a fast QB spread them out completely mentality to more of a misdirection, run a spread-lite offense that focuses more on controlling the ball and waiting for the big play. But, again, he's doing this with top 10 recruiting classes on a yearly basis. So....it's not like he's overperforming what should be expected from his players.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: December 7 17, 10:47 am 
Offline
Everyday Player

Joined: August 27 15, 8:46 pm
Posts: 215
AWvsCBsteeeerike3 wrote:
Not sure that SEC teams struggle in bowl games. 21-12 over the past 3 years.

Obviously a few teams have tried the spread (Mizzou, Ole Miss, aTm) or variations of it (Auburn) over the past 5 years or so. And, if you look at how they have done, the results have been somewhat mixed. If a team has the athletes and, most importantly, the line needed, they can cause fits for teams like Alabama that run traditional defenses. Actually, I don't think there's any argument that Bama by far struggles most against spread offenses.

But outside of Mizzou, no team is greatly outperforming their recruiting classes. Getting quality recruits mostly equates to success on the field. And,if you look at teams that have given alabama fits, it's teams that have had not only good athletes on the outside but also solid lines up front (Ole Miss, Clemson, aTm). So, yeah, those teams are running a spread, but they're not succeeding solely because of the type of offense. They also have the bodies up front, quality QBs, and the athletes in space (or some variation) that would allow them to run any type of offense they wanted. If you want to see what a spread offense without top 10 talent looks like against Alabama or Georgia or whoever, look at Mizzou a couple years ago when they won the east. Got demolished by Georgia every year and got demolished by Alabama...and Auburn...and most every team that was good.

Speaking of Auburn, Malzahn is obviously a huge proponent of the spread/hurry up offense. But if you look at how he's had success, it's been through running the football and controlling the lines up front on both sides of the ball. I don't have any stats or time to look it up, but it seems like Gus has kind of transformed from more of a fast QB spread them out completely mentality to more of a misdirection, run a spread-lite offense that focuses more on controlling the ball and waiting for the big play. But, again, he's doing this with top 10 recruiting classes on a yearly basis. So....it's not like he's overperforming what should be expected from his players.


Agreed that if you are strong on both lines, then you can likely run any system that you want. And it certainly helps to have elite talent and a very good QB. Having said that, I tend to disagree with the idea that you have to line up and run the football between the tackles to beat SEC teams. If you line up and try to play football "in a phone booth" against the likes of Bama, Georgia (and possibly Auburn), you are not going to be successful in most cases. This is why the type of teams like Wisconsin, Michigan State, etc. don't have a prayer against the SEC in most cases. I believe you need somewhat of a dynamic scheme which puts your best skill guys in space.....and then getting the ball out to them quickly. Along with good talent and a good QB, this is the gameplan most suited to counter the traditional SEC high quality defenses.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: December 7 17, 11:48 am 
Offline
is shooing asian children away from his fridge.
User avatar

Joined: May 17 06, 10:23 pm
Posts: 27283
Location: at the gettin' place
Shocking that a team with an NFL qb, running back, WRs and line might do well against an SEC team. Can't believe more teams haven't tried that.

The original discussion was about Arkansas and they won't ever likely recruit at that level to have those things. I've watched just about every Mizzou game and for all the yards and points they put up they are nothing if they can't run the ball. The biggest problem with a true hurry up spread is that whether a drive is successful or not it's always over quickly. You get crushed in time of possession and eventually your own defense is completely helpless.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: December 7 17, 2:01 pm 
Offline
"I could totally eat a person if it were a life/death situation"
User avatar

Joined: August 5 08, 11:24 am
Posts: 22106
Location: Thinking of the Children
Agree, there is an inherent need to control the ball. Control the ball = time of possession = rested defense. The easiest way to gain TOP is to run up the middle for 5 yard gains. Those types of drives result in just as many points as 99 yard bombs but take about 9 more minutes off the clock and about 20 more minutes in real life.

To be honest, I don't even know what a spread offense is anymore. It seems like everyone (except Arkansas) does it now and they all look different. In the beginning, it was easier. Linemen spread out more, more WRs in funky looking formations and an RB that would always flare out and of course no huddle between plays.

Now it seems like even that has evolved and everyone has picked up a part of the concept but doesn't fully commit to it (except the RPO which is annoying). I was watching some SMU highlights and it looked more like a normal offense than a revolutionary case of the spread.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: December 7 17, 4:01 pm 
Offline
Consider him admonished
User avatar

Joined: March 25 15, 9:59 am
Posts: 5519
Location: Charleston, SC via Arkansas
Arkansas went 4-8 last year, 1-7 in the SEC.

They got run the [expletive] over


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: December 7 17, 4:02 pm 
Offline
Consider him admonished
User avatar

Joined: March 25 15, 9:59 am
Posts: 5519
Location: Charleston, SC via Arkansas
SMU had a 1000 yard rusher last year
They threw it 453 times and ran it 444 times


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: December 7 17, 8:34 pm 
Offline
Everyday Player

Joined: August 27 15, 8:46 pm
Posts: 215
cardsfansince82 wrote:
Shocking that a team with an NFL qb, running back, WRs and line might do well against an SEC team. Can't believe more teams haven't tried that.

The original discussion was about Arkansas and they won't ever likely recruit at that level to have those things. I've watched just about every Mizzou game and for all the yards and points they put up they are nothing if they can't run the ball. The biggest problem with a true hurry up spread is that whether a drive is successful or not it's always over quickly. You get crushed in time of possession and eventually your own defense is completely helpless.


I never referred to the "hurry up".....that's a totally different discussion and has nothing to do with the spread. Some spread teams run hurry up, but you can run the "hurry up no huddle" virtually from any offensive concept. By incorporating spread principles, you are forcing the defense to defend the field on your terms. And it can be a tactical advantage against more traditional base defenses.....especially if you don't have the talent level in the trenches like a Bama, etc. But as you alluded, it also helps to have the best "jimmies and joes" you can find.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 588 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 55, 56, 57, 58, 59

All times are UTC - 6 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group