Page 2 of 6 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 ... LastLast
Results 16 to 30 of 82

Thread: Spread Option a viable offense?

  1. #16
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    The shadow of Pikes Peak (aka the lee of the stone)
    Adopted Bronco:
    Wesley Woodyard
    Posts
    6,936

    Default

    I agree with you, Cugel, for the most part.

    One of the reasons for QB longevity is that the rules have been changed to keep them upright. Leave the pocket, especially when looking to advance the ball, and the rules stop favoring you.

    That hasn’t stopped Carson Palmer and Tom Brady from suffering horrific in-pocket knee injuries, Peyton Manning needing neck fusion and Matthew Stafford from self-destructing at the first hint of pocket pressure.

    There’s a thought that the way you keep people from being injured when they get hit is by hitting them enough for them to be used to it. Wouldn’t help with the knee injuries, obviously, but there’s a line to walk between wrapping the QB in bubble wrap and letting him act as your fullback.

    Portions of the spread option included in the offensive game plan could be a nightmare for opposing defenses if run by the right offensive personnel. Part of it is that it can be damn hard to stop with a Tebow-type running it, and part is that it just isn’t seen much.

    When the Broncos were one of just a couple max-ZBS teams, others hated preparing for the cutblocks, and even though the trend in the league was “bigger, stronger lines on both sides of the ball” our little line crushed the Green Bay massive one. They didn’t see nearly as much of that from other teams, and our guys were the best at performing it.

    As more teams went ZBS, fewer bargains were there in the overlooked players needed to run an effective full-time ZBS system and teams saw it often enough that it wasn't scary-new…but there will come a time when the ZBS falls back out of favor and the few teams that do run it have perfect personnel to do so because no one else wants them for their schemes.

    Nobody in a “traditional” offense wants Tebow. If we’re going to use Tebow, then certainly at first and for parts of his entire career he’ll have to be used non-traditionally. That’s not to say he can’t win that way – he’ll be hard to prepare for, especially if we get an offense based around his skillset rolling.

    And we’ll have our choice of backup QB, as well, because nobody else is really using that offense at this point.

    But if Tebow succeeds, and Newton succeeds (and they incorporate more of his skills in their ongoing offense) and somebody like RGIII comes out and succeeds in a run/throw hybrid offense…

    Then you’re going to see a lot of articles on a new style of quarterbacking.

    IMO, the NFL has managed to slow the progression of offenses by changing the QB rules to maintain the high-percentage West Coast passing ideals that Walsh came up with because they liked how it changed the game and how visually appealing (as well as scoreboard appealing) it could be.

    But I don’t think they can crystallize it in this form forever, and I do wonder if putting special athletes with incredible size and strength at QB is a next step. It depends on whether there are enough NFL-caliber athletes who can play the position, obviously, but more and more of them are showing up in the farm system…er, college football.

    We’ll see if the NFL allows the game to be played that way. With defenses geared to stop pocket passers and get them on the move, having moving passers is especially important, and having ones who are dangerous in the open field is even better. One way to hurt a 3-4 defense is with a mobile QB. As 3-4 teams increase (because they’re a good way to hurt the pocket passing of Brees, Manning, Brady, etc) it makes it harder for those teams to contain a runner at the position. And even 4-3 teams aren’t used to seeing a QB run like Tebow or Newton can run.

    I agree, they also have to be able to perform from the pocket… but once that criteria is satisfied, how we move forward at the position will continue to shift, IMO, both to counter defensive adjustments and because nothing stays static forever.

    ~G
    "Dream as if you will live forever. Live as if you'll die today."
    -- James Dean


    My novels Mason's Order and its sequel Mason's Pledge are now available at Amazon in both paperback and kindle versions.

  2. The Following 3 Users High Fived G_Money For This Post:


  3. #17
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Fla
    Posts
    2,028

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Lancane View Post
    Don't count on it. I don't remember who said it, I believe it was Lou Saban who once said that "Football is to America what Gladiatorial games were to Romans. It was the fierce hitting defenses of old that popularized it with the American people, but what made it a world wide phenomenon was the introduction of the passing quarterback."

    If you truly believe that the majority of NFL fans want to watch the likes of Tim Tebow or Vince Young over the likes of Aaron Rodgers or Tom Brady, then your sadly mistaken. The NFL favors what makes money and no one makes more for the league then the quarterbacks, from jersey sales to toys, the most popular players in the league has been and will remain the quarterbacks, particularly those who are as we would say elite.
    you are more than likely right about the game not changing.it makes me sad because I feel like the NFL is set up to only play half the game. I think it means the NFL is creating qb posterboys instead of QB heroes. would some of the Hero quarterbacks have the same legend if defenses werent allowed to cut them in half on every play like they used to. I think some of the legend is because the NFL was a MUCH more difficult place to play in the past. Just my 2 cents on that

    I'm not saying Tebow/young. I was trying to answer whether the spread could be effective, not so much whether Tebow was the one to run it. How about Newton(if he stays on pace) he seems fun to watch and runs the closest offense to the spread option currently in the NFL.

  4. #18

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by catfish View Post
    I disagree, I think a modified spread option isolates the defense and allows you to pick on the mismatch as well as giving you an extra player on the field by requiring a qb spy. (This whole thread is a mirror of the one whn Urban Meyer came to the SEC, just replace NFL with SEC)
    The problem is that the spread option was pretty much neutralized when Florida played Alabama in the SEC CG of 2009. Alabama contained Tebow and made him stay in the pocket and try to beat them with his arm. Tebow was pressured, sacked, and had an INT while in the pocket (I believe; I try to block that game from memory), and his receivers were not doing him any favors. The offense never really got it going.

    I would think that any DC would get a copy of Alabama's tape, Detroit's tape and design a scheme to beat Tebow.

    I'm a Tebow fan, but he has to improve from the pocket. That will (1) make the zone option more effective; (2) get the media/Elway off his arse.
    Last edited by TT15Superman; 11-07-2011 at 06:46 PM.
    XV knows touchdowns.

    "There's only one person carrying the ball right here." -Tim Tebow, 12/26/10, game winning drive

    "Just having that guy around, it makes us better men. I think he plays for us, and he makes us want to play for him." - Von Miller

    "There is not one person that will outwork me. I'm your guy. I'm going to win a championship. Let's do it together. Push me for greatness. Because I can get there." - Tim Tebow, April 2010


  5. #19
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Fla
    Posts
    2,028

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by TT15Superman View Post
    The problem is that the spread option was pretty much neutralized when Florida played Alabama in the SEC CG of 2009. Alabama contained Tebow and made him stay in the pocket and try to beat them with his arm. Tebow was pressured, sacked, and had an INT while in the pocket (I believe; I try to block that game from memory), and his receivers were not doing him any favors. The offense never really got it going.

    I would think that any DC would get a copy of Alabama's tape, Detroit's tape and design a scheme to beat Tebow.

    I'm a Tebow fan, but he has to improve from the pocket. That will (1) make the zone option more effective; (2) get the media/Elway off his arse.
    I agree that he need to improve, I also think Alabama was superior talent wise to Fla that year. IMO talent trumps scheme 9 times out of 10

  6. #20
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Adopted Bronco:
    Dave Anderson :(
    Posts
    238

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by TT15Superman View Post
    The problem is that the spread option was pretty much neutralized when Florida played Alabama in the SEC CG of 2009. Alabama contained Tebow and made him stay in the pocket and try to beat them with his arm. Tebow was pressured, sacked, and had an INT while in the pocket (I believe; I try to block that game from memory), and his receivers were not doing him any favors. The offense never really got it going.

    I would think that any DC would get a copy of Alabama's tape, Detroit's tape and design a scheme to beat Tebow.

    I'm a Tebow fan, but he has to improve from the pocket. That will (1) make the zone option more effective; (2) get the media/Elway off his arse.
    I distinctly remember him having absolutely no time at all to throw during that game. The FL O line looked like a bunch of Jr High kids against college kids.

    T. Tebow 20/35 for 247 1 TD/1 INT, plus 60 yards rushing on 10 carries - I wouldn't exactly call that contained, more like the rest of FL sucked, including demps dropping like 5 passes.

    To be fair, I think if you collapse middle, our zone read becomes an outside option and we are SOL. You don't even need a QB spy.

  7. #21
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Missouri
    Posts
    22,211

    Default

    Running the option in the NFL, on a regular basis, is an embarrassment.
    (the previous comment was not directed at any particular individual and was not intended to slander,disrespect or offend any reader of said statement)

  8. The Following User High Fived Ravage!!! For This Post:


  9. #22
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Fla
    Posts
    2,028

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Ravage!!! View Post
    Running the option in the NFL, on a regular basis, is an embarrassment.
    so is the forward pass, if we are going to fight against change...real men run it up the gut 3 times in a row and let the ref sort it out

  10. #23
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Centennial (which is in Colorado)
    Adopted Bronco:
    Meck
    Posts
    27,001

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Ravage!!! View Post
    Running the option in the NFL, on a regular basis, is an embarrassment.
    More or less embarrassing than losing on a regular basis?

  11. The Following User High Fived wayninja For This Post:


  12. #24
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    N. Colorado
    Adopted Bronco:
    Mark 'Dirty' Sanchez
    Posts
    9,307

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by catfish View Post
    you are more than likely right about the game not changing.it makes me sad because I feel like the NFL is set up to only play half the game. I think it means the NFL is creating qb posterboys instead of QB heroes. would some of the Hero quarterbacks have the same legend if defenses werent allowed to cut them in half on every play like they used to. I think some of the legend is because the NFL was a MUCH more difficult place to play in the past. Just my 2 cents on that

    I'm not saying Tebow/young. I was trying to answer whether the spread could be effective, not so much whether Tebow was the one to run it. How about Newton(if he stays on pace) he seems fun to watch and runs the closest offense to the spread option currently in the NFL.
    Of course it won't change Fish, every year they change the rules to favor the passing offenses and protect those same said quarterbacks. In fact, it's understandable if you look at Cugel's assessment of protecting their investment at the position. Out of the top ten highest players in the NFL for 2011 only four - Haloti Ngata, Elvis Dumervil, Gerald McCoy and Richard Seymour are not quarterbacks. And it would be fair to say that McCoy and Dumervil are not worth the combined 26.8 million they're receiving. Whereas Ngata and Seymour are worth the combined 26.5 million that they'll receive.

    It's a shining example of the focus at the position, six of the top ten paid players are the quarterbacks the four defensive players on the list are those paid to get in the backfield and stop them.

    And I wouldn't say there are no hero quarterbacks, it's just that with the era change that the aspect of the definition has undergone change regarding the position, even though we considered Denver's victory over Oakland to be a good game, if you ask the majority of football fans which games were the best the answer would be New York/New England, San Diego/Green Bay, Baltimore/Pittsburgh and New Orleans/Tampa Bay...and why? Because it showcased quarterback duels of those teams quarterbacks - that's the standard.

    Denver's Super Bowl win, XXXII is still considered one of the greatest and why? Because it featured two elite quarterbacks in a duel of wills and even though neither had great statistics, the game was in a sense a shootout between their respective offenses.

    In short, not only is the spread option offense hard to maintain at a successful level, but it endangers the quarterbacks for which the league relies on in many different aspects.
    - Doesn't bother me what people think, the mere fact what I think seems to bother others speaks volumes about them more then myself! -

  13. The Following User High Fived Lancane For This Post:


  14. #25
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    N. Colorado
    Adopted Bronco:
    Mark 'Dirty' Sanchez
    Posts
    9,307

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by wayninja View Post
    More or less embarrassing than losing on a regular basis?
    That would depend, do you actually think that a spread option can win more then lose at this level?

    Beating Oakland and Miami are one thing, beating Green Bay, New England, New York (G), New York (J), Pittsburgh, Baltimore and so on is different.

    If people think a spread option would bring victory against such teams then they lying to themselves. Using the spread option would require people to be happy with just beating the weaker, more mundane teams. Which I guess is fine in our division, but I wouldn't start counting on the team to be a true contender.
    - Doesn't bother me what people think, the mere fact what I think seems to bother others speaks volumes about them more then myself! -

  15. The Following User High Fived Lancane For This Post:


  16. #26
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Fla
    Posts
    2,028

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Lancane View Post
    Of course it won't change Fish, every year they change the rules to favor the passing offenses and protect those same said quarterbacks. In fact, it's understandable if you look at Cugel's assessment of protecting their investment at the position. Out of the top ten highest players in the NFL for 2011 only four - Haloti Ngata, Elvis Dumervil, Gerald McCoy and Richard Seymour are not quarterbacks. And it would be fair to say that McCoy and Dumervil are not worth the combined 26.8 million they're receiving. Whereas Ngata and Seymour are worth the combined 26.5 million that they'll receive.

    It's a shining example of the focus at the position, six of the top ten paid players are the quarterbacks the four defensive players on the list are those paid to get in the backfield and stop them.

    And I wouldn't say there are no hero quarterbacks, it's just that with the era change that the aspect of the definition has undergone change regarding the position, even though we considered Denver's victory over Oakland to be a good game, if you ask the majority of football fans which games were the best the answer would be New York/New England, San Diego/Green Bay, Baltimore/Pittsburgh and New Orleans/Tampa Bay...and why? Because it showcased quarterback duels of those teams quarterbacks - that's the standard.

    Denver's Super Bowl win, XXXII is still considered one of the greatest and why? Because it featured two elite quarterbacks in a duel of wills and even though neither had great statistics, the game was in a sense a shootout between their respective offenses.

    In short, not only is the spread option offense hard to maintain at a successful level, but it endangers the quarterbacks for which the league relies on in many different aspects.
    I will concede your point that the spread option most likely will not become popular, we may just agree to disagree on whether it could be successful

  17. #27
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Fla
    Posts
    2,028

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Lancane View Post
    That would depend, do you actually think that a spread option can win more then lose at this level?

    Beating Oakland and Miami are one thing, beating Green Bay, New England, New York (G), New York (J), Pittsburgh, Baltimore and so on is different.

    If people think a spread option would bring victory against such teams then they lying to themselves. Using the spread option would require people to be happy with just beating the weaker, more mundane teams. Which I guess is fine in our division, but I wouldn't start counting on the team to be a true contender.
    I think if the talent levels on both teams are even, then yes a spread option can be successful, if you are asking can Denver beat Green Bay because they are using the spread option that is a whole nuther question

  18. #28

    Default

    I think it can work but ONLY if Tebow can make the defense pay when they shut the running down.

    It won't be too long before defenses can be geared towards stopping an attack that no matter what SOMEONE is coming out of the back field with the ball.

    He will HAVE to keep the defense honest by throwing the ball down the field and burning the defense when they leave someone wide open.

    Also the only way it can be a viable offense to build around is they will HAVE to have a backup QB with a similar style.

    The offense is geared towards one basic style what happens if Tebow does get hurt?

    Orton or Quinn going to run that offense?

    Who does THAT fool?

    For now so it can be used but if they go with Tim long term and they develop that offense along with him then next year they sure as hell better be bringing in another scrambler.

  19. #29
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Fla
    Posts
    2,028

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Rick View Post
    I think it can work but ONLY if Tebow can make the defense pay when they shut the running down.

    It won't be too long before defenses can be geared towards stopping an attack that no matter what SOMEONE is coming out of the back field with the ball.

    He will HAVE to keep the defense honest by throwing the ball down the field and burning the defense when they leave someone wide open.

    Also the only way it can be a viable offense to build around is they will HAVE to have a backup QB with a similar style.

    The offense is geared towards one basic style what happens if Tebow does get hurt?

    Orton or Quinn going to run that offense?

    Who does THAT fool?

    For now so it can be used but if they go with Tim long term and they develop that offense along with him then next year they sure as hell better be bringing in another scrambler.
    I don't think there is a prayer that that happens. I am hoping he plays his way into at least earning Denver a decent trade value

  20. #30
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Centennial (which is in Colorado)
    Adopted Bronco:
    Meck
    Posts
    27,001

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Lancane View Post
    That would depend, do you actually think that a spread option can win more then lose at this level?

    Beating Oakland and Miami are one thing, beating Green Bay, New England, New York (G), New York (J), Pittsburgh, Baltimore and so on is different.

    If people think a spread option would bring victory against such teams then they lying to themselves. Using the spread option would require people to be happy with just beating the weaker, more mundane teams. Which I guess is fine in our division, but I wouldn't start counting on the team to be a true contender.
    I think any scheme can win. As long as it's well executed and not overly predictable. So far we are 1-0 using it, so that doesn't exactly hurt the argument. Creativity trumps categorizing any day. I don't care what we call the scheme. If it works, use it.

    If there was some magical scheme that always worked and always resulted in a touchdown every time, that would be the scheme all teams used exclusively and all records would be 0-0-9 or 0-0-8

  21. The Following User High Fived wayninja For This Post:


Go
Shop AFC Champions and Super Bowl gear at the official online Pro Shop of the Denver Broncos!

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
status.broncosforums.com - BroncosForums status updates
Partner with the USA Today Sports Media Group