Spread Offense

Submitted by Enjoy Life on

When RR was hired, there was serious concern about whether the spread offense (in all its various forms) was viable in BCS football.

Is this just a learning curve?

Did RR tell Martin, et al that it would take 2-3 years to implement the system and that winning seasons before that were improbable?

As Brian has pointed out in the freeze frames, there are just more defensive guys at the point of attack than offensive. No amount of "execution" is going to solve that.

I don't think M talent on the field was worse than Toledo on Saturday. I think M's talent was significantly better.

Out coached?? If so, why??

chitownblue (not verified)

October 12th, 2008 at 10:39 AM ^

When RR was hired, there was serious concern about whether the spread
offense (in all its various forms) was viable in BCS football
.

 

Using last week's poll:

#1 Oklahoma is a spread offense (and have won a NC running said offense)

#2 Missouri is a spread offense

#3 LSU is a spread offense (and have won a NC running said offense)

#5 Texas is a spread offense (and have won a NC running said offense)

#6 Penn St. is a spread offense

#7 Texas Tech is a spread offense

#8 BYU is a spread offense

#12 Florida is a spread offense (and have won a NC running said offense)

#13 Utah is a spread offense

#15 Kansas is a spread offense

#16 Boise St. is a spread offense

#17 Oklahoma St. is a spread offense

#22 Northwestern is a spread offense.



So, 13 of the top 25 teams run a spread, and 7 of the top 10 (considering that Florida will be in the top 10 this week, we can nor bump that number to 8 of the top 10).

 

If you think that this is an early season anamoly, let's look at last year's final top 25:

 

#1 LSU, #5 Missouri, #6 WVU, #7 Kansas, #8 Oklahoma, #10 Texas, #14 BYU, #16 Florida, #17 Hawaii, #18 Illinois, #20 Cincinatti, #23 Texas Tech, #24 Oregon all ran spreads.

 

So, I take issue with your statement.

 

As to the second portion - I don't think we have bad talent. I also don't lay the blame for our poor performance on coaching. We had massive attrition last year - we return a single offensive starter (Steve Schilling). We had one would-be starter on the line transfer (Boren) and another quit (Mitchell). We had both would-be starting receivers (Arrington, Manningham) go pro. Our would-be starting QB (Mallett) transferred. Another would-be started at QB (Forcier) transferred the year previous. A 4-star would-be starting guard (Corey Zirbel) tore his knee. A primary backup (Ciulla) quit. Justin Schifano (a 4-star recruit) who saw game action in 5 games as a RS freshman in 2006 quit.

 

Our top passer, runner, and WR are RS Freshman/True Freshman/True Freshman. The veterans have never run this systems before.

 

So, what this means is that we have no depth, due to the attrition. Little experience, because our depth is made up of freshmen. What experience we have has no experience with this offense.

 

That's not bad coaching. That's not even bad talent. It's just a shitty circumstance, and it's where we are.

LJ

October 12th, 2008 at 10:52 AM ^

Perhaps he's referring to the spread option-style that RR runs, heavily involving the zone read, QB runs, and less vertical passing game.  Many of the teams Chitown listed (like Oklahoma, LSU, Texas Tech, BYU) don't run this type of spread.  Even so, this offense has been shown to work at a BCS level through:

- WVU beating Georgia in a BCS bowl

- WVU beating Oklahoma in a BCS bowl

- Florida winning a national championship using a very RR-like spread

- Utah dismantling everyone using this type of spread

- Northwestern keeping up with the Big 10 despite abysmal talent levels using a nearly identical attack to RR

 

I think we've seen this attack shred us enough times to know that it's "viable at a BCS level".  It's time to get on the train, or get off for good, because this staff doesn't need to be second-guessed right now, in the first half of the first year of a difficult transition.

 

Jay

October 12th, 2008 at 11:55 AM ^

LSU runs a pro style offense. They had a spread package when Perrilloux was there, but, that's about it. Texas, Texas Tech, Missouri, Oklahoma, and Oklahoma St. run different versions of the "spread" than Rodriguez runs. I'm not sure that those are a good comparison.

jamiemac

October 12th, 2008 at 10:54 AM ^

The entire Big 12 runs the spread....man, I just watched the OU-Texas game on DVR, and watched OSU-Mizz last night.....i saw a whole lot of spread offense, and a whole lot of spread offense working.

Chitown pretty much broke it down in the first post of this thread.

One thing I would add to the perspective: In the late 1990s and earlier in this decade when we first started seeing upstart teams making strides and pulling off upsets, the conventional wisdom was the spread offense was evening the field with the big boys. This meme reached its height in 2003, the year of the MAC, when the league pulled off several september upsets, BG-NIU hosted college gameday and the Huskies stayed in the top-15 through October. Utah in 2004 bolstered the thought.

However, during that time many big schools from BCS league had been installing various derivatives of the spread and since then it seems like most programs are running a spread something. Again, Chitown pretty much broke it down.

Therefore, to say the spread cant win the big ten or a bcs league or to say only lesser teams use it as a way to compete with the big boys are non starters for me and not valid arguments.

hat

October 12th, 2008 at 11:10 AM ^

Anyway, the argument that "lesser teams use it to compete with the big boys" is hardly a knock on the spread.  If it's capable of leveling the playing field between talented and untalented teams, it's got to be pretty good.

Magnus

October 12th, 2008 at 2:35 PM ^

I don't want to lay too much weight on one position...but our quarterback play has been atrocious.  I see open receivers on almost every play, but our QB's either don't see them, don't trust themselves to make the throw, or they make the throw and mess it up.  A good, accurate QB would have options galore in this offense.  We lost by three points yesterday.  Imagine if Threet hadn't pretended Moundros was Usain Bolt - that FB wheel route could have been six points.  In my opinion, that route is the second easiest throw to make (only behind a quick hitch).  You grow up making that throw on elementary school playgrounds and in the street with your friends.  Anytime you get your hands on a football, you say "go deep" and try to hit them in stride.  The inaccuracy of that one throw should have been enough to get Threet benched.

Enjoy Life

October 12th, 2008 at 2:52 PM ^

How much does Threet or Sheridan get to pass during practice? I'm guessing not much because of the reps in the spread option.

This could be one reason they are not improving in the passing game?

And yeh, I stand corrected. I meant the RR spread option where we seem to throw down the field very seldom.

ShockFX

October 12th, 2008 at 4:32 PM ^

We threw downfield a bunch in earlier games.  Didn't have much success outside of a couple PIs.  Now with Hemingway out, Matthews nicked up, Odoms out last game, Stonum out the game before, Clemons and Savoy have hands of stone...going downfield isn't that inspiring imo.

formerlyanonymous

October 12th, 2008 at 5:40 PM ^

The PI has been a michigan staple for 2 years now.  I don't see why we necessarily ditched it unless the refs are starting to realize balls 10 feet over the WR's heads are uncatchable... but that hasn't stopped them from calling it at least once per game.