forums

We should hire a spread coach

CanesAreAble said:
GhostofVenice01 said:
Hey OP, when can we expect that "top 30 defense and possibly record defensive turnaround in a season"?
Click to expand...


Sheeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeit.

We might end up top 30 on defense, and 130th on offense.

Results is the same. Golden gotta go.
Click to expand...

while the defense looked marginally better for 3 quarters Monday night, that will change as we get down the stretch. other coaches will start exploiting them and the defense will quit
 
Advertisement
GoldenShowers said:
Oregon hasn't won ****. When they win a ring with that gimmick, let me know. I want a ring, not some flashy offense that can't win the big one.
Click to expand...



Not really sure you've seen a lot of Oregon. Yes, they are "high octane" but that's mainly because of the tempo. That O is based on inside running. They run inside a lot. They did under Kelly anyway, didn't see a lot of them last year.

A typical drive would be 4 yard run, to the line, 5 yard run, to the line, 4 yard run, to the line, then POP 26 yard run, to the line, PA TD. I'm just giving a quick example. Kelly would run James and Barner up the gut several plays in a row to set up other things or to tire the D out.


As far as spread and tempo being a gimmick, I don't think Saban would be using player safety as an excuse to slow down O's if it was a gimmick. If Saban is scared, I'm on board.
 
That Oregon offense did quite well in the Nfl last year ,Chip won the division his first year and was one of the best offenses in the league. But that " gimmick" offense wouldn't work in the big bad nfl. Defenses are too good , lol.
 
MisterBMFC said:
GoldenShowers said:
Oregon hasn't won ****. When they win a ring with that gimmick, let me know. I want a ring, not some flashy offense that can't win the big one.
Click to expand...



Not really sure you've seen a lot of Oregon. Yes, they are "high octane" but that's mainly because of the tempo. That O is based on inside running. They run inside a lot. They did under Kelly anyway, didn't see a lot of them last year.

A typical drive would be 4 yard run, to the line, 5 yard run, to the line, 4 yard run, to the line, then POP 26 yard run, to the line, PA TD. I'm just giving a quick example. Kelly would run James and Barner up the gut several plays in a row to set up other things or to tire the D out.


As far as spread and tempo being a gimmick, I don't think Saban would be using player safety as an excuse to slow down O's if it was a gimmick. If Saban is scared, I'm on board.
Click to expand...

This right here, tempo, is every bit as important here in this discussion as the concept of the offense you employ
 
Cribby said:
That Oregon offense did quite well in the Nfl last year ,Chip won the division his first year and was one of the best offenses in the league. But that " gimmick" offense wouldn't work in the big bad nfl. Defenses are too good , lol.
Click to expand...

And they did so with a pocket QB in Nick Foles...
 
k9cane said:
Cribby said:
That Oregon offense did quite well in the Nfl last year ,Chip won the division his first year and was one of the best offenses in the league. But that " gimmick" offense wouldn't work in the big bad nfl. Defenses are too good , lol.
Click to expand...

And they did so with a pocket QB in Nick Foles...
Click to expand...

Just imagine if he had his style of qb, all those rushing yards with no threat of Foles keeping it
 
Gimme somebody who'll run an offense like Texas A&M runs. They make it look **** easy. Whether they're playing scrubs or other SEC opponents.
 
Advertisement
GoldenShowers said:
CanesAreAble said:
DiegoCane said:
Not all spreads are created equal. I'm guessing you are referring to an Oregon type attack.

****, Coley has a spread background and we run a lot of our offense with spread concepts. Same with Fisch. There are very few teams left in college or pro that don't involve some type of spread concept into their offense.
Click to expand...


Yeah I mentioned Oregon in the first line.

Gus has always been my guy, but his coaching tree is non-existent at this point.

I love Petrino's power spread, but who's going to run it? Paul Petrino hasn't really had any success. We'll have to wait and see on Jeff Brohm.

I'm intrigued by Scott Frost. Chip Kelly was supposedly grooming him. That's from someone who follows Oregon closer than I do. He called plays last year and Oregon was just as ridiculous. Now that doesn't mean he can implement the system fresh, teach it to players as well as coaches, and run a program in general, but I think he's someone to keep an eye on.
Click to expand...

So you are in favor of the gimmick? Smh......it has never and will never win anything. You seriously think the answer to Miami's decade long deep rooted fundamental problems is hiring a one year OC that runs the biggest gimmick in football? Like seriously, think about the past coaches we had who were successful, and their backgrounds. In what world would hiring Oregon's 2nd year OC be in accordance with what worked?
Click to expand...

GoldenShowers said:
Call me when Oregon wins any game of note, or when the air raid spread does as well.

At the U of Miami, you cannot hire college coordinators and expect success. It has never worked. Young, green coaches, no matter how flashy they appear, are a consistent disaster for us. Learn from the past just a little bit.
Click to expand...

I'ver never read a more narrow minded post. You referring a spread offense as "gimmicky" is all I need to know of you as a knowledgeable poster. You probably said Meyer would never win anything at UF b/c of his gimmicky offense. Look at the pros and look at how many of them are incorporating spread/read option facets to their offense.

You point to national champions, stop being so obtuse. Look at the entire landscape of CFB and look at the teams that are winning year in and year out - Auburn, Oregon, TAMU, FSU, OU, OSU, etc. These are all teams that are either spread dominant or incorproate a LOT of spread/read option into their offense.
 
We should #revolutionize the whole coaching thing. Become the first school to crowdsource coaching and play calling using this new ipad app...
image.webp
 
LMAO people using the "Oregon hasn't won anything using the spread" not realizing they lost the national championship to a team who ran a spread offense.

I agree with whoever said they want a REAL coach, regardless of system. Once you start trying to argue that the spread is a fad or hasn't won anything of note, you're just being stupid.
 
ProjectMKUltra5 said:
LMAO people using the "Oregon hasn't won anything using the spread" not realizing they lost the national championship to a team who ran a spread offense.

I agree with whoever said they want a REAL coach, regardless of system. Once you start trying to argue that the spread is a fad or hasn't won anything of note, you're just being stupid.
Click to expand...

I happen to know that guy.
 
I don't want any system here that lends itself to conservative style football, even if that "system" got the coach wins at a lesser level of football. It simply does not work here.

We absolutely need a very, very good X and O coach. But we also need a guy who wants to drive a stake through the other team's heart from the kickoff. That's what the type of players we recruit respond to.

BTW just because Oregon and Auburn run a spread doesn't mean it is the same spread. One thing about Malzahn's version of the spread that I like is that he is always able to have a power running game. Oregon hasn't had that consistently over the years, and IMO a solid power running game is necessary to win a title. Every single title team in the BCS era has had it except maybe Texas, though arguments can be made about VY. If we got a guy who ran the Oregon style spread, I'd hope that he would incorporate more elements of a power running game. It's what can bail you out when nothing is going right. A good power running game can be the difference between 10-2 and 12-0.
 
Last edited:
Advertisement
HighSeas said:
Spread vs. pro-style isn't as important as good line play. You're not gonna run any kind of successful spread offense with the OL we have now - all big slobs who can't bend or keep their feet moving. Look at the OL that Oregon, TAMU, and Auburn had during their peak years and there's your answer for why those teams were contenders.

If we hire a spread-oriented coach and (OL) recruiting remains the same there would still be little to separate us from Duke, GT, and Louisville in particular. All those slow-developing misdirection and option plays would just make the offense even more self-destructive. I'd rather see us hire a coach who's not married to a scheme but adapts and adjusts it based on personnel, opponent, game flow, down and distance, etc. In other words, the opposite of what we saw on Saturday with the stubborn commitment to inside run game, quick screens, bootlegs and soft zone on D with 7-8 dropping in coverage.
Click to expand...

If you've got good line play (Stanford, Bama) why would you want to build your offense around creating one-on-one match-ups? You mass your power, knock people in the dirt and put more people at the point of attack than the defense can deal with. The spread is for schools who don't expect to win the trenches consistently and want as many one-on-one matches as possible then if you win the match help has to cover some ground.
 
Some people are so archaic and have no clue what the spread offense is really about.

There's no reason Miami shouldn't be primarily a spread team. There's a plethora on benefits to it. When you have speed across the board like we do the spread offense is a nightmare.

When we run 21, 22, and 12 personnel all we do is invite more defenders in the box. And since we have a shaky o-line, no real threat at TE and an unimaginative OC we have no way to exploit the packed box.

When you run spread you force the defense out of the box. Now instead of a subpar TE you have Stacy Coley or Herb Waters in the slot matched up against a LB, Safety or a Nickel. (which is the defense's 3rd string CB)

No. We'd rather use multiple TE's and have explosive WR's (that most programs would kill to have) sitting on the bench.
 
Back
Top