Thread: Spread Option a viable offense?

Originally Posted by rcsodak

Rav, you were embarrassed on sunday?

Mobile Post via http://Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums

Seeing that our offense couldn't pass, but had to choose to run the college "option" offense? I would say it didn't make me proud. I'm not going to change my perspective on what this season is about from game to game. This was a time to evaluate the QB to see what we would have and see if we need to draft a QB in the upcoming April. If we are running the "option", then that doesn't exactly prove anyone that says he's "our future" correct.

I get some want to change their mind from game to game, depending on the score. But I'm not looking at short term, here. One game doesn't really mean much. Even Jamarcus Fat-Butt won some football games.

Originally Posted by Ravage!!!

So you are saying that the ex-players/QBs don't understand, but we, the guys on our couches watching and talking on a message board..... "get it?"

It hasn't been done in 35 years in the NFL, they haven't done it, so what do they know?

The spread option can be very effective for our offense as a wrinkle, like the wildcat is for some teams. NOT as a primary offense. Defenses are too good in NFL for it to work on a consistent basis. But every now and then it can be deadly.

I really dont mind Tebow running the ball like crazy this season, and even a couple years if hes our franchise guy (I still highly doubt it). But he will eventually have to turn the corner like Vick, and hopefully if he doesnt, he goes to prison for a couple years and thinks about his game.

Originally Posted by rcsodak

Everybody acknowledges Dline has a large learning curve, cane.
doom is in his 3rd new scheme in 4yrs? And mcCoy, by his HC's words, was becoming a play disruptor until his torn bicep.
and did you forget about Suh?

Mobile Post via http://Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums

I think you misinterpreted what I was getting at RC, I'm not demeaning the position...just showing the value of the position and what teams will pay to get to the quarterback, even if such players struggle but have shown some capability in that area.

Suh is actually not on the top ten list, I'm sure he's rather high and might be closer to the top twenty, which is still riddled with quarterbacks.

Originally Posted by Ravage!!!

So you are saying that the ex-players/QBs don't understand, but we, the guys on our couches watching and talking on a message board..... "get it?"

Rav, it's the same thing that fans on a Miami message board said when they found a little success with the Wild Cat. Fans won't get it until they see it blow up in their faces. But, the same so-called experts are alright when they give Tebow credit!

And people are forgetting who runs this franchise, he's already said what he wants from the position...I don't see Elway being thrilled with a Spread-Option offense and having a quarterback that can not even complete 50% of his passes, let alone struggles to get over a 100 yards passing a game. No matter how many fans are enamored with it.

Originally Posted by Lancane

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.

I really hope you're wrong (though you may not be, of course) because the only thing more boring than watching Hail Marys on every down is watching non-stop dink and dunk. For all the praise it's gotten over the years, the need for major multiple rules changes to make it viable says something very negative about the WCO. I like the passing game, but don't think it should be the primary focus, because turnovers and incompletions are more likely when passing than when running. It was a grave mistake to change the rules so that defensive penalties are the most likely outcome when passing. That puts the outcome of games in the hands of officials, which I don't think anyone wants to watch.

What makes football interesting and fun for me to watch is the chess match, which is part of why I never enjoyed watching college teams that never pass OR those that never run. It used to be an axiom that, in football as in warfare, objectives cannot be won without boots on the ground. I don't think the presumption that overwhelming air power will obviate the need for a ground assault will be any better for American football than it was for the American military.

Reducing the NFL to the National Game of Catch League is not good for the sport in terms of either fan enjoyment or revenue. Part of what puts Tim Tebows and Vince Youngs on NFL fields is that many fans DO prefer watching them to the monotony of Brady and Mannings 400 yard aerial assault. The former bring a dimension of unpredictability that vital to preserving widespread interest.

Perhaps more importantly, the growth of passing using many receivers has produced defences with such aggressive speed that pure pocket passers are almost impossible to keep upright. Defences have, despite new rules protecting QBs, opted to just blitz more rather than using the added speed to cover check down men, TEs and backs. As a result, an elite pocket passer is no longer enough: Unless he has good toughness and mobility he will need an elite pass blocking line to be effective (hence, about a decade ago, offensive tackles suddenly became important to people who weren't offensive tackles or QBs.) Ten years ago, Dallas cut one of the best pure pocket passers in history because they couldn't or wouldn't keep LBs and DEs away from him and he lacked the elusiveness to avoid them.

Meanwhile, new rules over the past decade or so threaten to validate the snide comments rugby fans have made about American football for years: Football is turning into armored basketball on a 120 yard court. Some teams almost seem like they've forgotten HOW to run block, but with 2/3 plays being passes (counting "runs" out of the Victory Formation) perhaps that stands to reason. I've watched the game I grew up loving turn into a no-contact realm of thugs and prima donnas where very little actual football occurs. The one exception is when teams are foolish enough to still try running, but that is by nature temporary: Even though we've got a ton of new rules to protect passers and receivers, we have none to protect running backs, even with everyone knowing a top tier running back absorbs too much abuse to play at an elite level more than a half dozen years.

Historically, there has been an ebb and flow to pro offense and defense, with the rules committee acting annually to preserve the precision balance that made it possible for any team to beat any other team on any given Sunday. Currently, there is an extreme IMbalance in that equation that I fervently hope will be soon corrected before all the fun is sucked out of football.

Originally Posted by sneakers

It hasn't been done in 35 years in the NFL, they haven't done it, so what do they know?

They know what anyone that has played football knows, that there is a reason its been practically RUN OUT of college football! The offenses no longer have athletes that are sooo superior to the defenses that they can just run around therm. College football is putting the best athletes on the DEFENSIVE side of the ball, and that just progresses into college. The QB isn't going to out speed the DEs anymore (and certainly not Tebow). They most CERTAINLY are not going to out run the LBs!

The option will work as a "gimmick" (for lack of a better word) from time to time if you want to take advantage of a DE that is getting too agressive and crashing down early.... much like a reverse or bootleg. But you try to run the option as a regular offense in the NFL, it would get us MURDERED. That doesn't take "experience" of running the option to know that (and I do)... it takes simple understanding of how fast the defensive players are, and what makes the option actually WORK.

I would say they know a great deal.

Originally Posted by Joel

I really hope you're wrong (though you may not be, of course) because the only thing more boring than watching Hail Marys on every down is watching non-stop dink and dunk. For all the praise it's gotten over the years, the need for major multiple rules changes to make it viable says something very negative about the WCO. I like the passing game, but don't think it should be the primary focus, because turnovers and incompletions are more likely when passing than when running. It was a grave mistake to change the rules so that defensive penalties are the most likely outcome when passing. That puts the outcome of games in the hands of officials, which I don't think anyone wants to watch.

What makes football interesting and fun for me to watch is the chess match, which is part of why I never enjoyed watching college teams that never pass OR those that never run. It used to be an axiom that, in football as in warfare, objectives cannot be won without boots on the ground. I don't think the presumption that overwhelming air power will obviate the need for a ground assault will be any better for American football than it was for the American military.

Reducing the NFL to the National Game of Catch League is not good for the sport in terms of either fan enjoyment or revenue. Part of what puts Tim Tebows and Vince Youngs on NFL fields is that many fans DO prefer watching them to the monotony of Brady and Mannings 400 yard aerial assault. The former bring a dimension of unpredictability that vital to preserving widespread interest.

Perhaps more importantly, the growth of passing using many receivers has produced defences with such aggressive speed that pure pocket passers are almost impossible to keep upright. Defences have, despite new rules protecting QBs, opted to just blitz more rather than using the added speed to cover check down men, TEs and backs. As a result, an elite pocket passer is no longer enough: Unless he has good toughness and mobility he will need an elite pass blocking line to be effective (hence, about a decade ago, offensive tackles suddenly became important to people who weren't offensive tackles or QBs.) Ten years ago, Dallas cut one of the best pure pocket passers in history because they couldn't or wouldn't keep LBs and DEs away from him and he lacked the elusiveness to avoid them.

Meanwhile, new rules over the past decade or so threaten to validate the snide comments rugby fans have made about American football for years: Football is turning into armored basketball on a 120 yard court. Some teams almost seem like they've forgotten HOW to run block, but with 2/3 plays being passes (counting "runs" out of the Victory Formation) perhaps that stands to reason. I've watched the game I grew up loving turn into a no-contact realm of thugs and prima donnas where very little actual football occurs. The one exception is when teams are foolish enough to still try running, but that is by nature temporary: Even though we've got a ton of new rules to protect passers and receivers, we have none to protect running backs, even with everyone knowing a top tier running back absorbs too much abuse to play at an elite level more than a half dozen years.

Historically, there has been an ebb and flow to pro offense and defense, with the rules committee acting annually to preserve the precision balance that made it possible for any team to beat any other team on any given Sunday. Currently, there is an extreme IMbalance in that equation that I fervently hope will be soon corrected before all the fun is sucked out of football.

Absolutely. I Loathe the dink and dunk passing attack. I hate it even worse than, say, a College spread option. I can't bring myself to watch Eagles or Colts games because that kind of Andy Reid coached 70% passing attack is godawful boring. In my aged mind a proper football offense is balanced, 50/50 run/pass, and the passing attack should be focused on mid to long range "kill shots"

Pretty much what Shanahan and Kubiak ran here, come to think of it. Not a pure WCO, but neither was it a 3 yards and a cloud of dust ball control Dan Reeves snore-fest. The Texans offense is fun to watch, because they can hurt you with both a strong and explosive running game and a passing attack that can work any area of the field.

Originally Posted by CrazyHorse

Rest of article http://www.denverpost.com/broncos/ci...169?source=rss

From what we saw yesterday it CAN be effective at the NFL level. I'm not sure it's worth building around but I think it's something that should continue to be used even if sparingly to catch defenses off guard.

Originally Posted by MOtorboat

Two reasons it worked yesterday. One because Tebow completed that touchdown pass early and second because the Oakland defensive ends were selling out the dives to McGahee which was set up by his fantastic runs.

It will work, but not as the primary base of an offense. You have to have a lot of other stuff clicking.

I think the biggest thing is that quarterback takes way to many hits.

Originally Posted by TXBRONC

I think the biggest thing is that quarterback takes way to many hits.

Yea, but if it's hits by DB's instead of hits from DE's and LB's I'll take that trade.

Originally Posted by Cugel

Sure you can win a few games with that offense. But, NFL defenses can easily adapt to stop it, which is WHY the option hasn't been used much in the NFL for about 35 years.

How many shots do you think Tebow can take and still keep getting up? He's taking a pounding every game. Well, he's a tough guy, and he's holding up -- for now.

But, project that into the future. How many seasons will the guy last if he's taking hits like a RB? The toughest RBs normally don't last more than about 5 years in the NFL.

And they don't pay them $9-$15 million a year either.

I was more concerned with the hits he was taking in the pocket.

He took some tough hits running the ball too, but he got hit harder in the pocket IMO, taking shots to the chin.

Those hits in the pocket are concussion city...that will end your career faster than anything.

Originally Posted by NorCalBronco7

The spread option can be very effective for our offense as a wrinkle, like the wildcat is for some teams. NOT as a primary offense. Defenses are too good in NFL for it to work on a consistent basis. But every now and then it can be deadly.

I really dont mind Tebow running the ball like crazy this season, and even a couple years if hes our franchise guy (I still highly doubt it). But he will eventually have to turn the corner like Vick, and hopefully if he doesnt, he goes to prison for a couple years and thinks about his game.

I agree as wrinkle it's fine. But if you make it the base offense our quarterback will take a beating and think eventually it will catch up with your quarterback.

Originally Posted by catfish

I actually agree with you, I don't think the spread option will be a BETTER option than the west coast offense until the NFL changes the rules back to put more pressure on the passing game. ( I assume the pendulum will swing back towards Defense eventually)

Are you serious?

Check out Forbes Magazine's list of what NFL Franchises are worth! Pat Bowlen bought the Broncos for $78 million in 1984. Today Forbes estimates that his franchise is worth $1.1 BILLION!

And what is the biggest selling point for the league? Who puts fans in those box suites? Quarterbacks!

That's why this is a passing league and will NEVER go back to the "old rules" because 3 yards and a cloud of dust is BORING compared with 80 yard pass plays. The owners will protect their investment.

And the more they stiffen the rules to protect the QB the longer elite QBs will last. And the longer they last the more they are worth. And the more they are worth the more the teams must protect their investment.

Hence the endless cycle of keeping QBs in the pocket leads to a large number of pocket passing QBs leads to SBs being won by pocket-passing QBs, and round and round it goes.

And THAT is why Tim Tebow will NEVER be a "franchise QB." He's simply not an elite passer and never will be. His skills simply don't fit into the NFL financial and rules based system and the owners are NOT going to change that to suit the Tebowners.

Originally Posted by vandammage13

I was more concerned with the hits he was taking in the pocket.

He took some tough hits running the ball too, but he got hit harder in the pocket IMO, taking shots to the chin.

Those hits in the pocket are concussion city...that will end your career faster than anything.

First as Alfred Williams was pointing out on the Fan yesterday, they don't protect running QBs like Vick or Tebow the same way they do other more traditional QBs. Everybody knows they like to run so the refs tend to extend plays and let defenders get away with more hits on them that might be called penalties if it were a Kyle Orton.

Second, you can't avoid taking an occasional shot while standing in the pocket throwing the ball. It's a violent league and for all the rules that favor the QB in the pocket it's still legal to sack the QB after all.

Thus it is more important than ever for the QB to release the ball quickly to avoid taking extra hits. And Tebow does that very badly. He's not throwing to a spot anticipating where the WR will be before he makes his break, he's trying to wait until WRs get open and THEN throwing to them.

And you can't do that. It gives the defender too much time to react, and it gives them more time to hit Tebow.

Originally Posted by BigDaddyBronco

Yea, but if it's hits by DB's instead of hits from DE's and LB's I'll take that trade.

That's the typical fan reaction. The Tebowners just want to see Tebow "run around and make plays."

Pat Bowlen and Elway have a different perspective since they are signing the checks.