I agree and don't wholly disagree with your previous post about it working for us right now. As I just replied to cane since berth, I don't completely hate the spread element. I just dislike primarily being a spread offense. I'd always take a pro style over a spread, but I think the ability to implement spread elements are important for when you need them.
You still haven't given a reason as to why, though.
I can tell you a bunch of reasons why I prefer the spread. And that's coming from a DC.
I said it earlier,
they tend to look soft and get smacked in the mouth by more physical teams and generally due to running at a high tempo wear out their own defense. Urban Meyer teams are an exception here. It gets exciting because you find yourself in shootouts, but after awhile it gets to the perception (just like the Big 12 and Pac 12) that you are just playing inferior defenses which end up hurting you in the long run.
This is not an X and O thing. I'm not trying to pretend to know every in and out. I understand that it is a viable option and if run correctly (just like any offense) can be successful. I just personally don't like it for the reasons above and don't believe it would help us in the long run to primarily be a spread team. I ultimately think it would work against our selling point of pro canes as they would not adjust as easily to pro systems. Again not saying we couldn't still put kids in the pros or that it wouldn't work here, but it's just my opinion.
Ok, a few things about this...
1. Why would a scheme cause a team to be soft? What you're more than likely seeing is a difference in athletes. The only times where I' recall seeing the spread look soft is when they were playing against LSU and Auburn a few years ago, which at the time were loaded on defense. An Oregon offense is likely gonna look soft against an LSU, Auburn or Florida defense that's loaded with guys from the Southeast. It has nothing to do with scheme. Meyer's spread offenses never looked soft. Being soft is about personnel not scheme. You can run the same running plays out of the spread that you can out of the pro-style.
2. You don't have to run high tempo with the spread. They don't go hand and hand wither each other. Whipple ran a high tempo Pro Style. Right now Miami is running a slow tempo spread. Tempo and personnel have nothing to do with each other. FAU's high tempo spread caused all kinds of problems for our defense last night. Our guys couldn't get lined-up, they were tired, they couldn't get the defensive calls in time. The only defense that FAU's offense wore out was ours. (not their's)
3.Urban Meyer teams are the exception because of the athletes he recruits. Florida and Ohio State had studs on both sides of the ball during his tenure. (matter of fact, they were mostly on defense, as Meyer's offenses tend to make inferior offensive talent look better) Meyer has always had access to physical kids and elite defensive players.
The spread allows inferior players to succeed via match-ups. It allows less-talented QB's to succeed. It helps less-physical O-lines establish a running attack. A lot easier to run the ball when the defense only has 5 or 6 defenders in the box. A lot of easier for a QB to read what coverage the defense is in when they're all spread out.
Show me a Pro Style team that succeeds without superior talent. Alabama can run the Pro Style cause they always have elite talent at OL and RB. This causes defenses to stack the box and run Cover-3 (or Cover-1) which leaves CB's one-on-one with WR's like Amari Cooper.
You're not giving me a SCHEMATIC REASON as to why you prefer one over the other.
I never said it was a schematic reason, I said it was a preference that will ultimately hurt us in the end with pro style players (which currently is about the only selling point we have left). If it was a schematic reason, I would say it's not a viable option.
I already understand that its about mismatches and that it helps lesser qbs be more successful, but that is one of my biggest issues with it. Those lesser QB's get exposed against legitimate defenses, because they become over reliant on athleticism in spread options (I hate watching these QB's the most) and always want to run even when it's supposed to be a passing play. Those running just a straight spread will throw tons of picks and will lose you games against a real defense (again we are talking about lesser qbs). Keep in mind Cam Newton type qbs are not just falling out of the sky.
As far as being soft, I already said Meyer is the exception because he recruits physical players. I understand this point is about the players you bring in. Meyer's success comes with big physical QBs like Tebow and Cardale. That's why them losing Cam Newton at UF was a big blow to them while he was there, because he didn't have a guy to replace that. But,
Meyer is an elite coach that can make it work with small fast athletes as well. Let's not act like we just have a handful of Urban Meyer's hanging out ready to come to Miami.
**** we wouldn't even have a Chip Kelly or a Mark Helfrich or Art Briles and when one of those guys do pop up, the right school has to give them the opportunity and they have to generally want to go there. As good as their teams are, they are generally finesse, not physical. Also, I do understand the same principle applies to pro style coaches. You say that an Oregon will look soft against an LSU, but when you're at a championship level, you are going to play teams like that.
I also understand you don't have to run uptempo, but as I said before, most of these teams do run uptempo. Again Meyer is an exception. You mention Whipple with a high tempo pro style, but god it was often hard to tell if Jacory just loved throwing bombs that he didn't have the arm for or was that what Whipple wanted to call. I feel like it was partly on Whipple wanted to call it which is why he wanted Morris who could actually fit. As far as FAU, their drives were not 4 or 5 play drives. They were sustained drives with some big plays. Furthermore, their defense wasn't going to get worn out when they are forcing us into 3 and outs or short drives. I believe we were 1 for 7 on third downs at one point. Our guys on the other hand were tired because they were facing sustained drives, followed by a short offensive drive and right back no the field (the same result as if we were running a successful uptempo offense).
Again Urban Meyer is an exception not just because he recruits physical players. He's the exception, because he's an elite coach that knows what players are going to win him championships. There's a reason Urban is one of the only coaches who is winning titles with the spread (Malzahn could enter that picture of elite spread coaches though). Urban has a physical offense as well as always has a great defense and as you mentioned he controls the tempo.
Lastly, you point out that it makes lesser players players better and that pro style teams need good players. Guess what, at the University of Miami, we get good players. We are in the best recruiting ground in the US. We even get good players in the trenches as is evidenced by the guys we have been putting in the NFL. So we have the good players needed to make a pro style work. Why change to a system that's best at making lesser player look good when we don't have lesser players? We don't need that. I want to have a team that forces players to stack the box leaving guys 1 on 1 with Amari Cooper. We need to be at the point where we always have the guys like Amari Cooper again, a guy who came out of our back yard. How many teams in college truly have superior talent than us? This is the worst we have been in a very long time and we are still arguably more talented than 80% of the country and 95% of the teams we actually play. We just don't have the coaching to be successful and switching to the spread won't fix that.
