i like 'em both
A question for fellow M fans:
My son is prepping for his soph year for his HS team. Most likely he will start at center and nose guard. In a weight room recently his coach (who historically has run a pro style offense for 10 years) has announced that they will begin changing to some form of a spread. The current players have been together since they were in rocket and have a tremendous amount of speed but lack above average size for the most part. I (along with others in the city) have preached this idea for some time.
Coaches idea is to begin now to educate these kids on the basics of the spread but for the most part does not have direct experience with it on the field. He understands that in order to successfully install this it will take patience and time with his players. The staff wants to start by studying.
Is anybody aware of any written materials on the subject that this team can begin reading now in order to mentally prepare for this change?
Just looking for ideas..........thanks for your input.
Oregon thinks so - they racked up over 600 total yards on the Trojans and they made it look easy. It's all about the players on the team + experience and as I watched (although their spread is different than ours), they have shiftier players than we do that are faster than ours. 47-20 in Eugene with the QB Masoli out-running the USC defense for 150 yards of rushing and out-gunning Barkley without having to look deep.
All of this vs. a top 5 team with top 5 talent, at 52 degrees, at night, & in the rain. Say what you will, but when you have a solid defense and the right personnel, the spread is incredible.
Anyways, I'm out. Happy Halloween everybody!
EDIT: Sorry for some of the double statements. I was a bit out of it when I posted but the thoughts still stand.
Has anyone else been surprised by the lack of option runs? I know we have other "option" plays, like the read option and the run pass option that Tate scored on against ND, but what about the more classic option with the QB and RB rolling out together? I was expecting to see that some, and thought that last year we just didn't see it because of our lack of running talent at QB. But I really thought that with Tate and Denard we'd start seeing it.
Remember a few years back after the 2007 Rose Bowl when USC DE/LB Brian Cushing said this about Michigan:
"We just knew what they were going to do. They're a traditional offense -- they're not trying to trick you. They rely on their players being better than yours. We had the better players today."
That statement made me cringe. It could have been some post-victory smack talk but I think most of us accepted this as truth about the old Michigan offense.
Those days are long gone, two ND linebackers had this to say regarding facing MSU one week after Michigan:
“It’s going to be easier for us this week because they line up in an I pro (formation) and they’re going to come at you and try to run between the tackles,” linebacker Brian Smith said.
“It ain’t as much razzle-dazzle and tricky,” linebacker Toryan Smith said. “Michigan State, what you see is what you get.”
Given those comments alone, which program do you think is on the rise and which on the decline (as if history and last weekend didn't say this loudly enough)?
If the spread is dead, then Notre Dame fears our spread zombies.
I'm looking for a little bit of help finding old spreads, specifically spreads for [all] bowl games after 1997 (so, all the bowl games since the BCS has been around in some form). I'm looking to do a comparison of the conferences (obviously focusing on the B10 and other "Big Six" conferences) to see if the general perception of conference rankings is correct. Hopefully by finding how many teams beat the spread I'll be able to do some sort of comparison to see how the conferences have looked these past couple of years.
One of the reasons I'm doing this is because I'm wondering just how screwed the B10 actually gets (if you couldn't guess, I'm not going to be completely unbiased going into this study, but I will try to be more objective than that sentence sounds) by having 2 teams in the BCS. My thought is, instead of looking at W/Ls, look at how many teams beat the spread. If the underdog was supposed to be by 10.5 but only lost by 3, obviously they're doing better against a superior team than the team that lost by 14 in similar circumstances. Thus, if we look at W/L adjust with the spread, we can get a better idea of how good each conference is.
I'm going to develop the idea further and go into more depth now, but I didn't want to spend too much time thinking about it if it's impossible to find the spreads on each game.
I'd also do this with interconference games but that would add a lot more work and I don't have that much time.
I've done a few Google searches [to find old odds] but haven't found anywhere with a real extensive listing. And I haven't found really anything for years before 2007.
Thus, fellow MGoBloggers, help me to find old spreads for bowl games and I will write a diary to entertain and educate you in the future.
I have been playing rugby for last two months with Nevada Reno team. I played in last game of season, on B side and experienced why a 150lb guy must try to tackle a 220lb guy coming in fast very low (ha, splat). Since then we have been playing touch rugby with local semipro team Reno Zephyrs.
There seems to be two modes of offensive in rugby: 1) power running on scrum side of field behind the big forwards, or 2) get ball out to backs (fast guys) in space and try to defeat the one defender in front of them. This initial penenetration is done by either jukieness, extreme acceleration, or drawing in defender and at last instant passing (back) to a support runner who then finds a hole.
The passing doesn't end there. It seems very common to continue to lateral L and R down the field to goalline to whoever has the least pressure on them. There are amazingly few fumbles.
Question to the football experts out there... In spread the idea is often to get ball to agile fast guy in space and have them defeat a single defender (seems so far like rugby). So... why not have a support runner or two on either side run up behind for a lateral and really blow by them? i.e. I wonder if this common rugby offense (proven effective ...)would have any application to football... more lateralling... ?