Catching Up With The Spread
Note: I'm going to use the term "spread offense" to refer to lots of different types of attacks, though I'm aware of the differences between pass-first, read-option, and pistol schemes. Since the spread's detractors refer to the spectrum of schemes as "the spread," I'll debunk in favor of "the spread," and not a single implementation of it.
Ever since Rich Rodriguez came to Michigan, Wolverine fans have been bombarded with assertions by the media, opposing fans, and even the occasional opposing coach that college defenses have "caught up" to the spread offense. Like almost all criticisms of Rich Rodriguez, this will go away if he starts winning. But is there any merit to these claims?
Have Defenses Caught Up to the Spread Offense?
This is an easy debunk, one that's often cited on the internet. Behold: last year's top 10 offenses in the college game. I also included QB rushing yards, since the quote that prompted this post mentioned the quarterback run specifically.
Yds/Gm | YdsRank | Pts/Gm | PtsRank | Type | Run% | QB Rush | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Tulsa | 569.86 | 1 | 47.21 | 2 | Hyper-Spread | 62% | 292 |
Houston | 562.77 | 2 | 40.62 | 10 | Passing Spread | 40% | 314 |
Oklahoma | 547.86 | 3 | 51.14 | 1 | Mixed Spread | 53% | 38 |
Texas Tech | 531.00 | 4 | 43.77 | 3 | Passing Spread | 32% | -15 |
Nevada | 508.54 | 5 | 37.62 | t-12 | Spread 'n' Shred | 58% | 1140 |
Oklahoma State | 487.69 | 6 | 40.77 | 9 | Spread 'n' Shred | 64% | 585 |
Oregon | 484.85 | 7 | 41.92 | 7 | Spread 'n' Shred | 60% | 967 |
Missouri | 484.14 | 8 | 42.21 | 6 | Passing Spread | 42% | 312 |
Texas | 475.77 | 9 | 42.38 | 5 | Mixed Spread | 53% | 692* |
Rice | 470.92 | 10 | 41.31 | 8 | Mixed Spread | 46% | 700 |
(*Colt McCoy led his team in rushing yardage with 561 yards. Also, note that these stats count sacks and scrambles as passes and are slightly tilted towards the run.)
Zero teams that operate mostly under center appear (Nevada does use the pistol, FWIW), and half of the top ten saw their quarterbacks rack up over 500 yards on the ground.
It's clear that defenses haven't done so much of the catching up. Even if Tulsa, Houston, Nevada, and Rice are playing against worse defensive talent, are they not doing so with comparable offensive players? Also, take into account Florida, #15 in total offense and #4 in points scored last year. The SEC has a reputation for some of the toughest defenses in the land, yet the Gators managed to put up plenty of points with the spread offense.
The problem with Michigan's offense last year was not defenses "catching up" to the scheme, but rather a lack of talent and execution. Take it from Rodriguez: "This whole thing about catching up to this, it's all about execution."
Can Defenses Catch Up to the Spread Offense?
Now that it's established that the spread offense is not obsolete, we should determine whether that is even a possibility. Is the spread offense successful only because of its novelty? As Smart Football says:
"The book "Spread Formation Football," written by Coach Meyer, begins with the line: "Spread formations are not new to football." Very true.
Wait, I should have been more specific. "Spread Formation Football" was written in 1952 by Coach Dutch Meyer of TCU.
So, there must be an aspect other than novelty that makes the spread offense so successful. Why haven't defenses caught up to the spread yet if it's been around for more than 50 years - longer than the West Coast offense? Why is there no talk about how the West Coast offense is now obsolete? Other than the fact that it would be completely stupid, there isn't one.
Is there something about the spread offense that makes it easier to defend than pro-style attacks once you "catch up" with it? Since defenses haven't caught up with the pro-style offense, with all its tight ends and fullbacks (or at least, they're not bragging about it), there must be something about the spread that make it an inherently weaker scheme than the pro style. If you ask Anonymous Ohio State Coach, it's the quarterback run. But quarterback runs were a key part of the attack for half of the top ten offenses in the country last year. If they've caught up, they must have done it sometime after January.
The only other key aspect of the spread offense is the use of a lot of receiver-heavy shotgun formations. So this must be what enables defenses to catch up with the offense. The bigger, tougher athletes in the pro-style must be better able to move the ball than nimble spread linemen and skill players. Of course, the evidence shows that this isn't the case. Defenses can't "catch up with" competing against smaller players, or they would have by now.
There is no right or wrong answer as to which type of offense is the best in college football. It's all about creating matchups between players, and teaching them to execute well enough to win those matchups. The spread is here, and all evidence points to it being here to stay. The biggest factor in success, though, is execution.
August 13th, 2009 at 12:31 PM ^
August 13th, 2009 at 12:37 PM ^
August 13th, 2009 at 1:34 PM ^
August 13th, 2009 at 6:16 PM ^
August 14th, 2009 at 8:45 AM ^
August 13th, 2009 at 12:39 PM ^
August 13th, 2009 at 12:49 PM ^
August 13th, 2009 at 12:51 PM ^
August 13th, 2009 at 1:34 PM ^
August 13th, 2009 at 12:42 PM ^
August 13th, 2009 at 1:13 PM ^
August 13th, 2009 at 1:26 PM ^
August 13th, 2009 at 7:48 PM ^
August 13th, 2009 at 11:22 PM ^
August 13th, 2009 at 1:45 PM ^
August 13th, 2009 at 1:50 PM ^
August 13th, 2009 at 3:24 PM ^
August 13th, 2009 at 2:03 PM ^
August 13th, 2009 at 2:46 PM ^
August 13th, 2009 at 5:57 PM ^
August 13th, 2009 at 2:46 PM ^
August 13th, 2009 at 3:27 PM ^
August 13th, 2009 at 3:35 PM ^
August 13th, 2009 at 3:36 PM ^
August 13th, 2009 at 4:31 PM ^
August 13th, 2009 at 4:38 PM ^
August 13th, 2009 at 3:38 PM ^
August 13th, 2009 at 3:39 PM ^
August 13th, 2009 at 3:58 PM ^
August 13th, 2009 at 3:06 PM ^
August 13th, 2009 at 3:17 PM ^
August 13th, 2009 at 3:58 PM ^
August 13th, 2009 at 4:01 PM ^
August 13th, 2009 at 6:41 PM ^
August 13th, 2009 at 3:20 PM ^
August 13th, 2009 at 4:06 PM ^
August 13th, 2009 at 4:08 PM ^
August 13th, 2009 at 4:19 PM ^
August 13th, 2009 at 5:31 PM ^
August 13th, 2009 at 5:15 PM ^
August 13th, 2009 at 7:17 PM ^
August 13th, 2009 at 8:17 PM ^
August 14th, 2009 at 12:33 AM ^
August 14th, 2009 at 6:52 AM ^
August 14th, 2009 at 10:40 AM ^
August 13th, 2009 at 7:24 PM ^
August 13th, 2009 at 8:16 PM ^
August 14th, 2009 at 10:51 AM ^
August 14th, 2009 at 3:02 AM ^
August 14th, 2009 at 8:42 AM ^
Comments