The Spread Is Dead

Is to have better players than the offense, and to be able to tackle in space.  Coaches arent idiots, as soon as the first spread team was on film, their were wyas to stop it.  Just like their isnt one perfect offense or formation, there isnt one perfect defense or formation.. there is only a perfect exectuion of a defense or an offense

Boy, good thing we ran that conservative offense last year then, otherwise Chad Henne might have been hurt for half the season.

Oh, wait.

I don't think there's any evidence that spread QBs get hurt more.  Teams suck in any offense when they have to go to the backup unless their starter wasn't good in the first place.

and knocked out of the game, it improved his team's chances. He sucked balls. One in a long line of ball sucking Lion quarterbacks.

And, also, can media nitwits please stop saying things like "But the installation process obviously takes time". No one would be talking about the "installation process"if we had the starting 11 for the Dallas Cowboys lining up for us on Saturdays.

He plays your dad's version of Football. I think he implies alot, or rather the subtext of what he's really saying is more or less that he does not like the spread. Maybe he is, in his mind, a football purist of sorts. To him, it must be a fad. I think some of the older QB's believe, or must believe that the spread, as a formation, does not develop QB's. Or does not develop what he thinks a QB should be. And I don't know if that is true or not. No way really to test it. Kurt Warner has run about every offense known to man in his career. He's 38 and starting over Matt Leinhart. He is almost 19 years older than Michigan's starting 19 year old QB Steven Threet. So I'd ask him or someone whose run a bunch of offenses as a QB what they think of it. I'm sure you'd get a mixed bag of responses. One thing I've noticed from listening to Griese all these years is that he always talks about rhythm passing and spread QB's. Against Wisconsin, I think it was Griese who kept talking about Threet's rhythm. I think it was on Brandon Minor's dropped pass that Griese said something like,"Steven Threet is in a really good rhythm and that was a perfectly thrown pass." So I often wonder, if the QB's of old, like Gary(with a silent r) Danielson sometimes hate the spread from a passers perspective. Could be wrong but I just wonder.

According to Phil Callahan over at umgoblue.com, the nickname "Dick Rod" is used by more than a couple of people in the athletic department  when talking about Rodriguez behing the scenes.....

just like the Wishbone WAS at its peak in the mid-70's. 

The problem is that he seems to be implying that the Spread is post-peak.  Just because teams are no longer shocked to see it does not mean that it is on the decline. 

Most of the successful teams are running the Spread, and will be for quite some time.  The underdogs and innovators by necessity will eventually come up with something else (they always do), but there is no heir-apparent right now. 

No need to burn that WVU playbook you downloaded of the internet just yet.

You have a point. if I had to pick Gary or Brent, I'd go with Gary. There is a lot worse than him.

Gary (color) + Brent (play-by-play) = brain damage to Blue Durham

If we run more plays, we get off more possesions, and that is like a longer game. In a longer game the better team is more likely to win than in a shorter game. If you tack two more quarters onto the end of Appy State,  Michigan probably wins by 10+. In a few years Michigan will be the more talented team on the field at least 10 times a year, and they will be less likely to blow games because of this.

Are you stupid you fucking dipshit?  time of possession is only important when applied to how worn down a defense gets.  And it might be overrated in that regard. 

It doesnt matter how fast the ball is hiked.  The ONLY thing that matters is the number of plays faced.  Who gives a shit if up-tempo offenses give less TOP for the offense.  Their D is still facing the same # of plays.  Actually, if a D faces the same number of plays in less time, it will get more tired.  time of possession is effing pointless and a slow pace has no helpful effect on tiring out a team. 

If the offense goes three and out... so what.  30 seconds difference isn't going to make a huge diff. in how much your D caught their breath.  Any 3 and out hurts your defense.  A fast tempo makes if tougher for their defense to catch their breath between plays ( defense runs more than the Offense during any given play) and makes it tougher to subst. different position groups into the game.

B/c the offense isnt going to hike the ball until they are ready anyways, there is NO downside to playing up -tempo

Brian's list of teams running the "spread offense" is not really what Danielson was talking about. 

For example, Oklahoma:

"Sam Bradford, The 6-4,
214-pounder showed maturity beyond his years and scary-good
decision-making ability. While he's a good athlete, he's not a
runner and he needs protection.

Not exactly the prototype "spread" quarterback.

Whooo, hooooo!

Hence my point about lists or statements about the "spread".

There are enough variations that any/all statements are meaningless because they are not specific enough to know which F'ing teams you are talking about!

I think only Chitownblue is using this line of reasoning (spread is a formation).

I presume most "folks" have a specific offensive strategy in mind when they say spread.

When talking about M, the term spread means the "option spread" requiring a running QB that often is not a very good passer and a "read" on the option.

Whereas Oklahoma uses the "pass-oriented spread" requiring a Pro-style QB that is not a good runner with no "read".