Hmmm, I thought this remark by Wats was interesting

[Nexus]

From the 5:00-5:15 mark, he says "the spread game... the spread/run game... if you wanna call it that... but it's not really a spread anymore..."

Wats video interview

:dunno

Is this just coach speak or is there an actual shift in philosophy unfolding here?

 

[zoogs]

I think sometimes we just get caught up in the terms. You go back to a few years ago when "West Coast" was the traditional phrase and people were calling for a change to the spread. Now it's the "spread" that's old hat and people are all about the zone read option and power sets. I'm not sure that speaks to a grand change in philosophy. We've been multiple and we have an OC that adapts to what we have.

There are people who criticize him for that, but IMO it's just because they don't like him for whatever reason, because the old criticism was exactly the opposite - that we were stubbornly shoving a system down the team's throats, square peg round hole type stuff, unwilling to build the offense around the players. Now that we are doing those should-be-positive's, it's "we're trying to be mediocre at everything and good at nothing." I think the problem might be that we never wanted a coach that was willing to adapt, it's just that they were shoving the wrong thing (i.e, not option/power) down our throats. And that's what she said.

Right now, especially since it's Spring, everything is coach speak. Even straight-shootin' Bo Pelini says all the right things in the right way, and I admire and applaud him for that. Coaches just gotta handle the media easily and focus on doing what they do best for the team.

 

[Nexus]

I think sometimes we just get caught up in the terms. You go back to a few years ago when "West Coast" was the traditional phrase and people were calling for a change to the spread. Now it's the "spread" that's old hat and people are all about the zone read option and power sets. I'm not sure that speaks to a grand change in philosophy. We've been multiple and we have an OC that adapts to what we have.

There are people who criticize him for that, but IMO it's just because they don't like him for whatever reason, because the old criticism was exactly the opposite - that we were stubbornly shoving a system down the team's throats, square peg round hole type stuff, unwilling to build the offense around the players. Now that we are doing those should-be-positive's, it's "we're trying to be mediocre at everything and good at nothing." I think the problem might be that we never wanted a coach that was willing to adapt, it's just that they were shoving the wrong thing (i.e, not option/power) down our throats. And that's what she said.

Right now, especially since it's Spring, everything is coach speak. Even straight-shootin' Bo Pelini says all the right things in the right way, and I admire and applaud him for that. Coaches just gotta handle the media easily and focus on doing what they do best for the team.

Good point. I probably took the remark too literally. For some reason it jumped out at me the first time I heard it and I was like :WTH

 

[brophog]

"Spread" is a concept, not the name of an offense.

I remember one of Bo's first interviews once hired, there was a reporter who asked him how he was going to defend the "spread teams" in the conference. His answer was a little terse, and rightfully so. To him (and frankly, to anyone in the know) those were very different offenses he was going to be defending.

One has to define the term before you can decipher those comments, and in the case of Watson's time here, its difficult to describe his offense under even vague terms such as "spread" and "West Coast". It has been more like a movie mash-up, and I don't expect that to change.

 

[Landlord]

Spread doesn't really mean anything at all anymore.

 

[Big_Red_Boomer_169]

Your totally right about the termanology about offenses. Thats pretty much what it is. The mediocre offenses in the country have to put a label on themselves. Like Mizzou being a spread offense or k state being a west coast offense before snyber. thats all it is a label. The good offense's don't have a label. Nobody says that alabama has some special offense, or when cincinnati was putting up numbers, nobody was labeling there offense. I think wh

at Wats is doing with our offense is great. He tries to keep every team guessing. From what i've seen, thats what a team needs to do.

 

[husker B-rent]

"Spread" is a concept, not the name of an offense.

I remember one of Bo's first interviews once hired, there was a reporter who asked him how he was going to defend the "spread teams" in the conference. His answer was a little terse, and rightfully so. To him (and frankly, to anyone in the know) those were very different offenses he was going to be defending.

One has to define the term before you can decipher those comments, and in the case of Watson's time here, its difficult to describe his offense under even vague terms such as "spread" and "West Coast". It has been more like a movie mash-up, and I don't expect that to change.

actually the spread is not an offense or a concept.

the spread is a play to be used within an offense.

 

[jnkyrdoff6]

The Spread is definitely a concept LINK. I know a lot of people who think otherwise. I've met a guy from the south who tried to tell me the BIG 12 offenses didn't run the spread because they threw all the time. He was used to spread teams running a lot of option variants out of it. It doesn't really matter what plays you run. It's a concept based on spreading out the field. The O-line takes wider splits, and , I believe, it's the most versatile offense there is. That's why in a different thread I voted that I would like to see NU run the spread. The spread option and the spread are the same thing. The wildcat is run out of the spread. The possibilities are endless, and it's a concept that best suits a coach that caters to his personell.

 

[zoogs]

How is the wildcat run out of the spread? I thought it was a power set.

 

[M I K E]

How is the wildcat run out of the spread? I thought it was a power set.

I believe the wildcat is run out of the shotgun with three or four wide receivers (one of them the QB), therefore is out of the spread. It might still be considered a power set also based on the type of plays run out of a wildcat formation though.

 

[jnkyrdoff6]

How is the wildcat run out of the spread? I thought it was a power set.

-Snippets-

Wildcat - ...The general scheme can be instituted in many different offensive systems, but the distinguishing factor is a direct snap to the running back and an unbalanced offensive line. The wildcat is an offensive formation rather than an overall offensive philosophy or 'offense' (for example, a spread-option offense might use the wildcat formation to keep the defense guessing, or a West Coast offense may use the power-I formation to threaten a powerful run attack).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wildcat_formation

Spread - ...The fundamental nature of the spread offense involves spreading the field horizontally using 3, 4, and even 5-receiver sets (some implementations of the spread also feature wide splits between the offensive linemen). The object of the spread offense is to open up multiple vertical seams for both the running and passing game to exploit, as the defense is forced to spread itself thin across the field (a "horizontal stretch") to cover everyone. There are many forms of the spread system. One of the extremes is the "Air Raid" pass-oriented version...The other extreme version is the spread option, consisting of the slot receiver and tail back as well as a speedy quarterback...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...A third version of the spread offense is the Pistol offense...Professional teams have also used various versions of this scheme beginning with the former Houston Oilers, the Atlanta Falcons, and Detroit Lions. The 2007 New England Patriots utilized the spread with quarterback Tom Brady and wide receivers Randy Moss, Wes Welker, Donte Stallworth, and Jabar Gaffney. In addition, the San Diego Chargers (1980s) and the various West Coast schemes developed by Bill Walsh and the San Francisco 49ers (1980s) stemmed their offenses, in many ways, from Ellison's and Davis' designs. In addition, a new offense known as the "spread-flex" is emerging among many programs. This offense combines the flex-bone and the spread offense together in order to cause confusion for defenses and to take advantage of mismatches. This dynamic offense has worked its way up into the smaller colleges and universities such as Air Force who use it very effectively. It can be effective in many ways to spread the ball out to the wide receivers as well as using a lot of pre-snap shifting and motion to run the option zone read plays. Imagine combining the offenses of Navy (a heavily run-oriented option offense that has led the NCAA in rushing in every season since 2003) and Texas Tech (one of the most pass-oriented college offenses) and you have the "spread-flex". The 2008 Miami Dolphins are the most recent team to implement some form of the spread offense in their offensive schemes. Lining up in the "wildcat" formation, the Miami Dolphins, borrowing from Gus Malzahn's college spread offense, “direct snap” the ball to their running back, Ronnie Brown.[5] Brown is then able to read the defense, and either pass or keep the ball himself. Thus far, defenses have had difficulty stopping this new-look Miami offense—an offense which stunned the New England Patriots at New England and the San Diego Chargers at Miami during the 2008 season, although some teams were able to adapt.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spread_offense

Sorry to make this such a lengthy response, but I wanted to try to clear up misconceptions, as I see them, about the Spread and Wildcat. I think this will probably answer the question by itself. There are further examples though. I say the Spread is a concept because, as this points out, it's just an idea based on spreading out the field. It's not a play, a set of plays, or a set of formations. It's an approach. I think it's clear that Nebraska has been running the spread since about our 4th game in 2008. In 2008 we'd air it out because that's what our personell was suited for, but in 2009 we transitioned to running out of it, and eventually running the Wildcat out of it because that's what our personell dictated.

The Wildcat is basically just the idea of lining some other skill position player up at qb and trying to mask the formation to make it look like all the other formations. Teams make substitutions and play calls based on who's in the huddle. If the qb is still in there, they'll think there's nothing strange going on. Then when you line up, they can make changes, but they have to be quick. Teams like the Broncos last year added more complexity to this by lining Orton up at WR and sometimes motioning him back in at qb. This means that a team can't know what will be run until it's run. This makes for huge mismatches. Although, the Wildcat originated from the Wing-T, it can be run out of anything.

If I didn't explain something very well, or something still needs to be cleared up, please don't hesitate to let me know. I know these are only wikipedia links, but I have no doubt they'll do for the atmosphere of a message board. I understand that I might not explain this that well. To me it's clear, and it was before I read the wikipedia pages, but I didn't grow up before the Spread so, in some ways, I benefited from that because it was easier to make the connections. It's similar to the situation people face that grew up before computers came into their own. It's often hard for them to adapt and understand. I'm sure when I turn grey, I'll face many more problems than I can't even comprehend. This is kind of a reflection, though, and isn't really necesarry for explaining the question. I just didn't want to come off sounding condescending or anything like that. It's just that I hear these terms used in the wrong way pretty frequently, and I'm just trying to clear up any misconceptons.

 

[Husker_x]

In retrospect people were right when they said we were mediocre at everything and good at nothing but for the wrong reason. When you found out that the quarterback had a torn tendon and the team was having trouble putting a full practice squad of O-linemen on the field due to injury, it's hard to be good at anything. Everything begins with the line, and everything ends with the line.

As for terminology and such––small potatoes, IMO. The best offense is the one that scores the most points. That having been said, traditionally teams that win championships run the ball consistently and play excellent defense. Seems to me that pass happy offenses rely too much on one player (the QB) and have a b!^@h of a time managing the clock. You can win games doing it, but rarely anything grander.

 

[Enhance]

In retrospect people were right when they said we were mediocre at everything and good at nothing but for the wrong reason. When you found out that the quarterback had a torn tendon and the team was having trouble putting a full practice squad of O-linemen on the field due to injury, it's hard to be good at anything. Everything begins with the line, and everything ends with the line.

As for terminology and such––small potatoes, IMO. The best offense is the one that scores the most points. That having been said, traditionally teams that win championships run the ball consistently and play excellent defense. Seems to me that pass happy offenses rely too much on one player (the QB) and have a b!^@h of a time managing the clock. You can win games doing it, but rarely anything grander.

Exactly.

Just look at Missouri. They have tried for years to get by with a high scoring offense, inconsistent running game, and mediocre defense. With Daniel, Maclin, and Coffman, they had a perfect storm. But they have consistently struggled to beat any perennial title contenders (teams like OU and Texas). Their best season in recent school history was plagued by two losses to Oklahoma, a team that always has a good running game and great defense. And every time they play Texas, they are rarely competitive.

That isn't a knock on Missouri by any means, even though it might sound like it. However, it's just very noticeable. I can't think of ANY team that has won a NC with a non-top 25 ranked defense and an inconsistent running game. Even the best "spread" teams or heavy passing teams that win titles usually have very good running games, or running games that can at least throw defenses off a bit.

 

[nillie welson]

Spread - to open to a fuller extent.

The spread is a concept of putting people on "islands", meaning use the whole field and get playmakers in one-on-one situations more frequently. You can run from the spread AND you can pass from the spread.

Spread - an adjective to describe formations... in my opinion.

Roast away...

 

[GMoose]

In retrospect people were right when they said we were mediocre at everything and good at nothing but for the wrong reason. When you found out that the quarterback had a torn tendon and the team was having trouble putting a full practice squad of O-linemen on the field due to injury, it's hard to be good at anything. Everything begins with the line, and everything ends with the line.

As for terminology and such––small potatoes, IMO. The best offense is the one that scores the most points. That having been said, traditionally teams that win championships run the ball consistently and play excellent defense. Seems to me that pass happy offenses rely too much on one player (the QB) and have a b!^@h of a time managing the clock. You can win games doing it, but rarely anything grander.

Exactly.

Just look at Missouri. They have tried for years to get by with a high scoring offense, inconsistent running game, and mediocre defense. With Daniel, Maclin, and Coffman, they had a perfect storm. But they have consistently struggled to beat any perennial title contenders (teams like OU and Texas). Their best season in recent school history was plagued by two losses to Oklahoma, a team that always has a good running game and great defense. And every time they play Texas, they are rarely competitive.

That isn't a knock on Missouri by any means, even though it might sound like it. However, it's just very noticeable. I can't think of ANY team that has won a NC with a non-top 25 ranked defense and an inconsistent running game. Even the best "spread" teams or heavy passing teams that win titles usually have very good running games, or running games that can at least throw defenses off a bit.

PERFECT post and response. In some many words, I think that the spread places too much of a premium on QBs. (Texas, anyone?) And where would teams like Houston and Central Michigan have been last year without Keenum or Lefevour? Those guys were probably the difference of about 4 games to their teams, maybe more. And we all know what happened to UT without mighty Colt.

What I think is that all the offensive players should have more balanced responsibilities.