2017 College Football Thread

A forum for non-baseball sports
Post Reply
stormspencer
Veteran Player
Posts: 553
Joined: August 27 15, 8:46 pm

Re: 2017 College Football Thread

Post by stormspencer »

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 mind-[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.

AWvsCBsteeeerike3
"I could totally eat a pig butt, if smoked correctly!"
Posts: 27273
Joined: August 5 08, 11:24 am
Location: Thinking of the Children

Re: 2017 College Football Thread

Post by AWvsCBsteeeerike3 »

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.

stormspencer
Veteran Player
Posts: 553
Joined: August 27 15, 8:46 pm

Re: 2017 College Football Thread

Post by stormspencer »

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.

User avatar
cardsfansince82
is shooing asian children away from his fridge.
Posts: 27873
Joined: May 17 06, 10:23 pm
Location: at the gettin' place

Re: 2017 College Football Thread

Post by cardsfansince82 »

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.

AWvsCBsteeeerike3
"I could totally eat a pig butt, if smoked correctly!"
Posts: 27273
Joined: August 5 08, 11:24 am
Location: Thinking of the Children

Re: 2017 College Football Thread

Post by AWvsCBsteeeerike3 »

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.

User avatar
Tim
Consider him admonished
Posts: 8350
Joined: March 25 15, 9:59 am
Location: The South

Re: 2017 College Football Thread

Post by Tim »

Arkansas went 4-8 last year, 1-7 in the SEC.

They got run the [expletive] over

User avatar
Tim
Consider him admonished
Posts: 8350
Joined: March 25 15, 9:59 am
Location: The South

Re: 2017 College Football Thread

Post by Tim »

SMU had a 1000 yard rusher last year
They threw it 453 times and ran it 444 times

stormspencer
Veteran Player
Posts: 553
Joined: August 27 15, 8:46 pm

Re: 2017 College Football Thread

Post by stormspencer »

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.

User avatar
BottenFieldofDreams
Perennial All-Star
Posts: 4502
Joined: June 4 17, 10:04 pm

Re: 2017 College Football Thread

Post by BottenFieldofDreams »

There are 80 people at these early bowl games. How is this working for anyone?

tlombard
tl;dr
Posts: 5053
Joined: May 21 09, 12:41 pm

Re: 2017 College Football Thread

Post by tlombard »

BottenFieldofDreams wrote:There are 80 people at these early bowl games. How is this working for anyone?
I guess for some reason advertisers and TV money still make up for the lack of attendance. They probably insist that anybody who wants a piece of the popular bowls has to pony up and sponsor a worthless one. It is insane how much money there is in the top level of college athletics. Other than looking bad on TV, I don't think they care one bit about butts in seats because they are making their money off of everything else.

Post Reply