Do We Have To Change Our Offense

[shaft]

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

[MeanGreen61]

Yes

[GoMeanGreen1999]

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

Don't worry....this team will be golden.

[GreenBat]

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

Why Are You worrying, you don't support the team?

[Side Show Joe]

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.

[NT80]

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 April 11, 2010 by NT80

[GreenStreet]

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.

[GoMeanGreen1999]

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.

[UNT90]

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

One of the dumbest posts ever.

Which leads me to believe that you were just trying to draw the above response.

[shaft]

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?

[GreenBat]

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!!!!!

[MeanGreen61]

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 April 12, 2010 by MeanGreen61

[UNT90]

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.

[UNT Mean Green]

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 April 12, 2010 by UNT Mean Green

[MeanGreenTexan]

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...

[Mean Green 93-98]

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 April 12, 2010 by Mean Green 93-98

[KRAM1]

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.

[MEANGREENMAN!]

The spread doesn't work without running QBs. Which is why big, fat Chase Daniel was a Heisman candidate.

[UNTLifer]

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.