DawgTalkers.net Forums DawgTalk Pure Football Forum "Pro Style" offense..a thing of the past?

Quote:

---

wouldn't the speed aspect of the pro's be a relative "neutral"? Only the fastest guys at ANY position get to the NFL, right?

Not loking for a fight, just a question.

---

I did post at least part of this on another thread here, but I think it's a good example that no, pure speed isn't a necessity to be among the NFL elite.....

Jerry Rice rans a 4.6 40.

Anquan Boldin, Larry Fitzgerald nor Chris Carter could break a 4.5 40.

The two fastest 40 times I've seen for Clay Matthews Jr. (LB Packers) were 4.7 and 4.52. And I'm thinking he's pretty good.

So in short, 40 times are often overrated according to the result of many great players past and present in the NFL.

But as to the subject of the thread, the spread is more the norm than the acception these days. Some use the spread strictly while others mix it up and use variations.

Quote:

---

Sorry my computer keeps crashing for some damn reason

Anyways my point is simple. Take the Florida vs. Alabama game this year. Florida's offense relies on having faster and better atheletes that the opposing defense can account for. Well Florida was severelly exploited against a very atheletic Alabama defense. So it's not hard to scheme against the spread. It's just a mix of the west coast offense with short passes. You just have to tackle in space and be disciplined. I would hope that NFL starters would be athletic freaks who can tackle in space.

---

Quote:

---

And how do you create that space Peen...? With speed advantages and trying to create vertical seams. Was it really a coincedence that Floridas offense was exposed against a defense just as atheltic as them?

---

Quote:

---

I defy you to tell me one coach, at any level, who seeks to have the slowest team

---

Eric Mangini

Sorry Peen I just don't see it happening just like I don't see Tebow making it as a QB.

Quote:

---

All the measurable's are just that - measurable.

Take Kosar - guy probably ran an 8 second 40. His throwing motion was terrible. His coordination was inept at best. (bet he never did the shuttle run). What did he do on the field? Produce.

You can take players that have ALL the measurables - speed, agility, power, and strength - and they can still suck in the nfl.

---

That would mean we agree 100%. How refreshing!

Quote:

---

And how do you create that space Peen...? With speed advantages and trying to create vertical seams. Was it really a coincedence that Floridas offense was exposed against a defense just as atheltic as them?

---

Quote:

---

That would mean we agree 100%. How refreshing!

---

Holy ........

This is more shocking than Toad admitting he was wrong!

Quote:

---

To counter what you're saying, why is it that so many NFL WR's who run a plus 4.5 forty able to get seperation and be so successfull without the blazing speed you are talking about?

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

All the measurable's are just that - measurable.

Take Kosar - guy probably ran an 8 second 40. His throwing motion was terrible. His coordination was inept at best. (bet he never did the shuttle run). What did he do on the field? Produce.

You can take players that have ALL the measurables - speed, agility, power, and strength - and they can still suck in the nfl.

---

That would mean we agree 100%. How refreshing!

---

It's good to see that I have educated you.

Welcome to the good side.

Quote:

---

It is a fact that even the slowest NFL players are faster than the guys at the college level.

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

To counter what you're saying, why is it that so many NFL WR's who run a plus 4.5 forty able to get seperation and be so successfull without the blazing speed you are talking about?

---

I'm not exactally sure what you're trying to debate here. I remeber people saying the wishbone offense would dominate the NFL. Hell I remeber when people said the WCO was unstoppable but then zone blitz was invented.

I read your one list of great WR's without 4.3-4.4 speed. They may not had elite forty times but they had another great quality to them. How many Jerry Rices do you see in the NFL right now or Peyton Mannings at QB

I agree 100% that having a mobile QB does help a lot. They don't even have to have 4.5 speed. Peyton Manning won't win any track races but he does a great job using his feet to buy him a little more time. Also I've mentioned twice that the spread offense is very similar to the WCO.

---

Quote:

---

j/c;

NCAA hashmarks are a lot further apart than NFL ones, so running to the wide side of the field gives your speed guy a much larger area to turn the corner.

Didn't see this brought up, but I'm sure that this makes a big difference. I still think the spread works, but those hashmarks work against it.

---

Quote:

---

On topic, the "pro style" offense isn't going anywhere. It will evolve and change as the game evolves and changes, but you're not about to see the majority of the teams in the league all of a sudden just change their systems entirely.

And the spread has been in the NFL for years, the patriots run a version of it very successfully. They have guys like Wes Welker who are perfect for it but not everyone has guys like that.

---

Quote:

---

On topic, the "pro style" offense isn't going anywhere. It will evolve and change as the game evolves and changes, but you're not about to see the majority of the teams in the league all of a sudden just change their systems entirely.

And the spread has been in the NFL for years, the patriots run a version of it very successfully. They have guys like Wes Welker who are perfect for it but not everyone has guys like that.

---

Agreed on both accounts.

Regarding the usage of the term "spread offense"............

The Run & Shoot was a "spread offense."

The Miami Dolphins in the Dan Marino era ran a "spread offense."

The Bengals of just a few years ago ran a "spread offense."

And as you mentioned, the Pats were so bold as to say to Hell with tradition and go with Brady out of the gun on a huge number of passing plays on any down, which is of course their own version of the "spread offense."

So the spread in college that is a run-based option attack is nothing like the spread in the pro's which is based on passing. The reason I don't feel that it'll ever make it to the NFL is because of three fundamental issues:

1) The matchup problem.

Like the wishbone and option running attacks of the 80's and earlier, the spread-option attack works in college because of matchups which favor the offense. Those styles were never adopted in the NFL because the offensive advantages don't exist in the pro's. And because the advantages aren't there like they are in college, it leads me to my second point

2) The league is setup to favor passing.

The very real downside to teams that favor a ground-attack all have one serious disadvantage. When they are down and are forced to pass, they tend to have a very difficult time playing catchup. It's the age-old problem to a league that has constantly adapted it's rules and very game to throwing the ball. While the spread-option is based on mis-direction running plays, the effectiveness of the offense goes out the window when the team is forced to pass. So why is that so important? Teams which run the ball are forced to abandon the run and throw all the time. The answer is that the spread-option is a very complicated running attack which takes a huge amount of dedication and time to execute properly. If it falters and is abandoned during a game, the offense doesn't have the practical playbook or practiced-execution to run a complex passing attack that will fool a defense. In essence, it's a horrible offense to run when you need quick points or are trying to play catchup. Basically, because the offense is so complex, if the run-options fail, there's nothing to fall back on in terms of pure-passing. And because the NFL offensive game has become so specialized in terms of throwing the football, some form of option running attack would be severely disadvantageous for any team attempting to use it as their primary scheme.

I'd point to the demise of the "Chuck and Duck" (the ugly yet comical nickname dropped onto the Run and Shoot ) as an example of the failed matchup issues.

The offense killed it in college to the point where it was brought to the pro's. Sure, it worked for a few years, but it didn't take long for NFL defensive coordinators to learn how to beat even the best QB's and most well-executed R&S systems. Remember, two of the most gifted passers in the history of the NFL ran that offense: Moon and Jeff George. Each was the perfect guy to run that offense. Yet the R&S had two fundamental flaws: Protecting the QB and power-running.

3) Injuries to the QB by subjecting him to too many hits.

Teams learned that there was no way around giving up big chunks of yards, but all they had to do was be patient. Because the field was so spread out, it allowed rushers to get to the QB who had to drop from under center before he threw. If the first read wasn't there, nobody existed to pick up the extra blitzers. Like most offenses of it's ilk, it would work against inferior teams, but didn't work against the good ones.

The other issue was running the ball to finish games. Because the specialization of the offense was based on one thing, the option-routes out of a spread-type formation mixed with smallish receivers and a one-back set, a team didn't have the personnel or practice time to lineup in a heavy package and just pound the ball.

All that leads me back to why I don't feel the spread-option of college will work in the pro's. We can attempt to point to the Wildcat and say that proves college stuff can work in the pro's, but there's a fundamental difference: The Wildcat isn't a base-formation. It's a gimmick set that is used sparingly in games. It's the kind of thing that works as a "mix it up" style of offense, but in reality, the wildcat is just the spread-option brought to the NFL. It's been in the league for several years now, but you haven't seen a team even remotely install it as their base offense.

Why?

Because in a league that is based on the fundamentals of passing, it will always retain it's "pro-style" offenses. That means protecting the huge investments made into QB's, and no team is going to play a guy $80 million to run the ball and take a pounding. They'll sacrifice guys like Cribbs and Ricky Williams and Pat White and Seneca Wallace, but they won't do it with their "franchise" QB's.

The spread-option is already in the NFL. It has been for three or more years. But it won't supplant "pro-style" offenses because of the points I laid out. It can work as a gimmick but it's impossible as an offensive baseline philosophy. The risks are just too big.

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

It is a fact that even the slowest NFL players are faster than the guys at the college level.

---

That isn't a fact....that is some fabrication in your mind.....think about it...who is the slowest player in the NFl.....lets go with Shawn Rogers.....he can't even run 40 yards, so how slow is he......you're saying he is faster than the fastest of college player.


I'll give you a chance to clarify before I expound not so lightly.

---

Your comparing the slowest players in the NFL to the fastest players in college I'm not saying Rodgers is faster than Taylor Mays. I'm saying the slowest NFL players are faster than the slowest college players. Not only are they slower but obviously more talented. The majority of the players in college will never be NFL pros because they just aren't good enough. This is also the reason that the biggest thing for a rookie to get used to in the NFL is the speed of the game.

I'm not saying that the spread can't work on a limited basis. As has been discussed it already is a part of the NFL. I'm just saying that the offense that has taken over in college will never be the same thing we see at the NFL level. You will never see a team run an entire offense like we see from Florida with any kind of great success.

Now I do believe you can be very successful adding it is an a wrinkle like the use of the Wildcat and the way some teams use spread formations but not 100% of the time.