Jump to content

Do We Have To Change Our Offense

shaft

By shaft
in Mean Green Football

 Share

Recommended Posts

Side Show Joe Newbie

Side Show Joe

Posted
Posted

Are we going to be able to run a spread offense without a running threat at QB?

I think so. Canales is using more of the field then we have in the past. I'm impressed with what I've seen so far, but I've only seen it against our defense. I think we'll prpbably see 5 or 6 TDs in the Spring Game tomorrow; a few on the ground, and a few through the air.

I'm not knocking our D. With all the new guys and injuries, they need time to gell. I think this years defense is more athletic then last season's D.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
NT80 Grand Master

NT80

Posted
Posted (edited)

The offense is already changing, becoming much more multiple than last year just with plays. More motion, more variety of passes, more use of the TE, more mix of run/pass at different times. It is a lot less predictable than last year already and could be causing some of the problems for the defense.

Edited by NT80
Link to comment
Share on other sites
GreenStreet Newbie

GreenStreet

Posted
Posted

Are we going to be able to run a spread offense without a running threat at QB?

Sorry the Mean Green nation was confused. The Spread offense does not consist of every play being a QB sneak or run for a loss of one, nor a quick out that leads to an interception. The question should be, will our linemen block to allow our QB time to throw the ball down field or leave a gap to run up if pressure is on?

On a side note, this year will be the first year of the Dodge era that focus will fall on the WR and not the QB to make the plays. This year we will have more than a QB threat that will keep D's guessing. Every team that beat us last year, knew what play Dodge was going to call.

  • Upvote 1
  • Downvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
GoMeanGreen1999 Community Regular

GoMeanGreen1999

Posted
Posted

Sorry the Mean Green nation was confused. The Spread offense does not consist of every play being a QB sneak or run for a loss of one, nor a quick out that leads to an interception. The question should be, will our linemen block to allow our QB time to throw the ball down field or leave a gap to run up if pressure is on?

On a side note, this year will be the first year of the Dodge era that focus will fall on the WR and not the QB to make the plays. This year we will have more than a QB threat that will keep D's guessing. Every team that beat us the last 4 years, knew what play Dodge was going to call.

Fixed.

  • Upvote 1
  • Downvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
shaft Community Regular

shaft

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Yeah, I'm a dummy.

"Despite the multi-receiver sets, the spread option is a run-first scheme which requires a quarterback that is comfortable carrying the ball, a mobile offensive line that can pull and trap effectively, and receivers that can hold their blocks. The essence of the spread option is misdirection. Effectively, this is the old triple option except that it utilizes spread sets. In particular, the quarterback must be able to read the defensive end and determine whether he is collapsing down the line or playing upfield contain."

So if we lose our the running threat at QB, are we going to be able to open up the seams necessary to "spread" the defense?

  • Downvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
GreenBat Newbie

GreenBat

Posted
Posted

Yeah, I'm a dummy.

"Despite the multi-receiver sets, the spread option is a run-first scheme which requires a quarterback that is comfortable carrying the ball, a mobile offensive line that can pull and trap effectively, and receivers that can hold their blocks. The essence of the spread option is misdirection. Effectively, this is the old triple option except that it utilizes spread sets. In particular, the quarterback must be able to read the defensive end and determine whether he is collapsing down the line or playing upfield contain."

So if we lose our the running threat at QB, are we going to be able to open up the seams necessary to "spread" the defense?

Damn, we finally agree on something. You are a dummy!!!!!

  • Upvote 2
  • Downvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
MeanGreen61 Newbie

MeanGreen61

Posted
Posted (edited)

Yeah, I'm a dummy.

"Despite the multi-receiver sets, the spread option is a run-first scheme which requires a quarterback that is comfortable carrying the ball, a mobile offensive line that can pull and trap effectively, and receivers that can hold their blocks. The essence of the spread option is misdirection. Effectively, this is the old triple option except that it utilizes spread sets. In particular, the quarterback must be able to read the defensive end and determine whether he is collapsing down the line or playing upfield contain."

So if we lose our the running threat at QB, are we going to be able to open up the seams necessary to "spread" the defense?

So why are you concerned ? By your own posts you will not donate, will not buy tickets or have anything to do with the team until changes you want are made. The offense will be OK without Riley at quarterback. The program will be OK without Shafts support.

Edited by MeanGreen61
  • Upvote 2
  • Downvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
UNT90 Newbie

UNT90

Posted
Posted

Yeah, I'm a dummy.

"Despite the multi-receiver sets, the spread option is a run-first scheme which requires a quarterback that is comfortable carrying the ball, a mobile offensive line that can pull and trap effectively, and receivers that can hold their blocks. The essence of the spread option is misdirection. Effectively, this is the old triple option except that it utilizes spread sets. In particular, the quarterback must be able to read the defensive end and determine whether he is collapsing down the line or playing upfield contain."

So if we lose our the running threat at QB, are we going to be able to open up the seams necessary to "spread" the defense?

Wow, and to think I really thought you were just being an instigator.

Ya, Florida had a real problem with this offense when it was run by Tim Tebow, who probably is slower afoot than Thompson, who WILL BE your starter this coming year. What you fail to acknowledge is that Riley could not throw the ball downfield last year. We now have that threat, which will more than compensate for a slight lack in mobility of the Quarterback this year vs last.

And speaking of the running QB, Derek Thompson will be a much bigger load to bring down than Riley. His size also makes him much more durable. He is a running threat, just a different kind of running threat.

Really one of the dumbest posts I've seen.

  • Upvote 3
  • Downvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
UNT Mean Green Proficient

UNT Mean Green

Posted
Posted (edited)

I believe there are different variations of the spread offense. For example; Brian Kelly (now Notre Dame HC) ran the spread at Cincinnati last season with a non running QB (Tony Pike). In contrast; your new offensive coordinator ran the spread at South Florida with a running QB (Matt Grothe and BJ Daniels).

Essentially, the spread offense is based on spreading the field with multiple sets/formations and delivering the ball to multiple targets. I'm sure the outcome of the offense (spread philosophy) will be a result of the personnel strengths.

Absolutely! Well put. Although Canales has said that Thompson is 'straight-line speed' as fast or faster than Grothe, who was a record setting QB at USF.

Edited by UNT Mean Green
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
MeanGreenTexan Grand Master

MeanGreenTexan

Posted
Posted

Are we going to be able to run a spread offense without a running threat at QB?

I think this is a fair question. I'm not sure what everyone's problem is...

However, you're thinking of the spread-option. If we're going to run the spread-option, not just the spread, then the answer is NO. We won't be able to run the spread-option effectively without a running QB.

I know that's the formation Canales used to be so successful @ USF, but he won't be able to use that here much. We will be straight-up spread next year. And we should, because our recievers (on paper) are probably the best group we've ever had here, at least since I've been watching...

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mean Green 93-98 Grand Master

Mean Green 93-98

Posted
Posted (edited)

Yeah, I'm a dummy.

"Despite the multi-receiver sets, the spread option is a run-first scheme which requires a quarterback that is comfortable carrying the ball, a mobile offensive line that can pull and trap effectively, and receivers that can hold their blocks. The essence of the spread option is misdirection. Effectively, this is the old triple option except that it utilizes spread sets. In particular, the quarterback must be able to read the defensive end and determine whether he is collapsing down the line or playing upfield contain."

So if we lose our the running threat at QB, are we going to be able to open up the seams necessary to "spread" the defense?

You gave us a quote about the spread option. North Texas runs a spread offense, but it is not a spread option. The spread merely refers to using sets spread across the field (east and west, not north and south) with more than 2 receivers. I guess I might mention that it is generally no-huddle run out of the shotgun, but the term "spread" refers to sets, not play selection.

Sorry to be so basic, but it seems you're missing something pretty basic.

EDIT: I should have read the whole thread before replying. MGTexan already said basically the same thing I did.

Edited by Mean Green 93-98
Link to comment
Share on other sites
KRAM1 Newbie

KRAM1

Posted
Posted

Speaking of the spread...I read an article recently where Mac Brown said they are going back to "under center" at Texas to more fully utilize the skill of his QB, and that it may be the the "spread" has pretty much run its course in D-1 football. The article quoted a few other D-1 coaches as well that noted a trend developing that moves away from the spread. Is this the start of the end for the spread as a "big time player" in D-1 ala the Wishbone??? Mac brown said they were going to more of a pro-set offense at Texas.

Interesting area to explore I think.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
UNTLifer Grand Master

UNTLifer

Posted
Posted

Yeah, I'm a dummy.

"Despite the multi-receiver sets, the spread option is a run-first scheme which requires a quarterback that is comfortable carrying the ball, a mobile offensive line that can pull and trap effectively, and receivers that can hold their blocks. The essence of the spread option is misdirection. Effectively, this is the old triple option except that it utilizes spread sets. In particular, the quarterback must be able to read the defensive end and determine whether he is collapsing down the line or playing upfield contain."

So if we lose our the running threat at QB, are we going to be able to open up the seams necessary to "spread" the defense?

You just don't make it much easier than this.

To answer your original post in this thread, the spread offense does not have to have a running QB to be successful. For example, Harrell at Tech or any of Tech's quarterbacks for that matter, and Chase Daniel at Missouri.

What you describe above is one play, the spread option, that can be run out of the thread offense, and yes, this play is much more effective with a running quarterback like Vince Young at UT or Riley running it last year for us.

So, to answer your question, No, we don't have to change our offense, but we probably will not utilize the spread option play as often as when Riley was our QB.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
 Share
Go to topic listing


  • Tell a friend

    Love GoMeanGreen.com? Tell a friend!

  • What's going on Mean Green?

    1. 27

      Spring transfer portal

      97and03 in Mean Green Football
    2. 4

      Ladies land Tech transfer

      Similar to the deceiving capitalization when our men’s recruit went to central Arkansas😂
      NT93 in Mean Green Basketball
    3. 12

      Doesn't seem new, but unlimited transfers

      Tim Pernetti's (new AAC Commissioner) remarks regarding exploring more corporate involvement seems interesting and innovative, sort of. Getting some heavy-hitter businesses on board with their big advertising/public-relations budgets. They get to splash their logos all over the AAC venues, ceremonies, uniforms, etc in exchange for some NIL type moola. I don't know, it all just feels weird and uncomfortable to this old fat guy.
      Greenrex in Mean Green Football
    4. 11

      The Athletic on DFW Football recruiting

      We have complained for years about being left in the dark. The Mean Green Club was promised quarterly meetings that never took place, now there is little to no coverage of the spring practices, player movement is constant so the days of watching a last second scholarship player developing in to a Hall of Fame performer are long gone ala Johnny Quinn, there is little to no fan engagement, etc... It just keeps getting worse and without a push to really involve the fans, I foresee a bleak future. They, the AD, has to create excitement around the team/program or Apogee will just become a waste of money, the new basketball arena will never happen and future adds like baseball will just be an idea that came too late. The days of the G5's are on their way out. It will be whittled down to the top 40 or 50 programs as D1. We might as well go back to our D1AA days and play at the FCS level. I am just about done with sports from a financial commitment position. The greed has ruined it for me. Their is zero loyalty towards the program by the players. It is all about them and how much money they can cram in their pockets and it appears our basketball coach encourages the lack of loyalty. I will watch on television, but that's about it, much like pro sports have become. I have no interest in attending a Cowboys' game live once the prices became ridiculous, same with the Mav's and Rangers' in that stupid new ballpark that was a waste of money. I had arrived at a point where I was only willing to invest in watching North Texas live, but the current situation has ruined that as well. The future of all of college sports is a disaster if some type of control isn't put in place. It is ridiculous and very sad. Guess I will end up spending my money on golf, fine food and drink, drugs, etc. and become a more interesting person.
      UNTLifer in Mean Green Football
    5. 0

      SB at Memphis (4/19-21/24)

      Opportunity to beat up on one of the worst teams in the country in Memphis (5-34, 1-17). Really can't let them steal one like UTSA did a few weeks ago. This could help solidify a top two seed (top two seeds would only need to win two games in the conference tournament to win the title) if Tulsa takes 2 of 3 from Charlotte this weekend. SCHOOL CONF CPCT. OVERALL PCT. HOME AWAY NEUTRAL THIS WEEKEND Florida Atlantic 13-5 .722 33-12 .733 19-6 11-6 3-0 vs. UTSA North Texas 12-6 .667 25-19 .568 15-8 7-9 3-2 at Memphis Charlotte 12-6 .667 26-16 .619 12-8 9-7 5-1 vs. Tulsa Tulsa 12-6 .667 27-15 .643 13-3 9-8 5-4 at Charlotte UAB 11-7 .611 20-22 .476 13-5 2-13 5-4 at Wichita State Wichita State 10-8 .556 19-18 .514 5-6 9-8 5-4 vs. UAB South Florida 9-9 .500 30-16 .652 23-11 7-5 0-0 at East Carolina East Carolina 7-11 .389 30-15 .667 21-7 5-8 4-0 vs. South Florida UTSA 3-15 .167 12-34 .261 3-10 2-14 7-10 at Florida Atlantic Memphis 1-17 .056 5-34 .128 4-16 1-13 0-5 vs. North Texas
      Matt from A700 in Mean Green Athletics

  • Popular Contributors

  • Member Statistics

    • Total Members
      15,382
    • Most Online
      1,865
    KeithSHU
    Newest Member
    KeithSHU
    Joined

WE BELIEVE IN THE MEAN GREEN!

News

Recruiting

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. Please review our full Privacy Policy before using our site.