forums

Would a Spread Offense Really be New to the U?

Advertisement
Liberty City El said:
It was Pro Style, it just was a different kind of Pro Style, but you have to remember back then the game was a lot different than it is now. The rules were different & the way in which offense was approached was completely different.

Gary Stevens & Bon Bratkowski were two very good Pro Style OC's who utilized the passing game in an era when Football was all about the Run game.

Coach Erickson was a great offensive mind for his time, before he came to Miami he was in places like San Jose St, Wyoming & Wash St where he developed his offense that was very cutting edge for its time which was right around the same time that Bill Walsh was developing the West Coast Offense at Stanford & San Fran with Mike Holmgren & Andy Reid.

Erickson was with Jack Elway (John's Dad) at San Jose St & at Fresno St, John Elway was running the very first Spread offense in High School at Granada Hills & when Erickson was at San Jose St as an OC he learned the One Back Spread from Cactus Jack Neumeier himself, that's why our Offenses looked like that with him as HC.

Since then, we've never run anything close to it, we've been nothing but Pro Style & while it worked through most of the 90's & early 00's, as the game exploded & expanded dozens of other teams evened the playing field & closed the talent gap by giving themselves a schematic advantage by continuing to develop & implement the Modern Spread offenses. We didn't, we got left behind & now we're actually behind the times...

The Pro Style offense still works, IF YOU HAVE THE PERSONNEL TO RUN IT. We don't & haven't had the personnel to run the Pro style since 02, but we simply refuse to adapt & adjust, and as the saying goes those who don't adapt, die.
Click to expand...
With the rpo rules and the fact lineman can get down field 3 yards and sometimes more it is foolish not to do it. It is an unfair advantage for offenses and if you don't use it you are behind the eight. That is why osu, Clemson, ok and even lesser schools have prolific offenses on top of the personnel. It is like cheating but it isn't.
 
TimeB0mb said:
The single back O definitely influenced the modern spread offense. There are some differences in the use of TEs and preferred receiver size, but probably the most noticeable difference is whether the base offense is run out of the shotgun or under center. If base offense is under center, then usually considered "pro-style." Spread is almost always shotgun or pistol.
Click to expand...

Your initial comment is on point, but the shotgun vs under center point is where you are a little off. If being in Shotgun or Pistol as your base is what constitutes a spread vs pro offense then, we ran a spread under Richt. That also means UGA is running a spread and many other teams. This is my biggest issue with most on this topic is everyone wants to cherry pick what constitutes a spread. Some want to say it as simple as being in the Shotgun or Pistol most of the time, but those same people argue against that we didn't run a spread under Richt or that UGA is not a spread offenes now despite both of those teams lining up in Shotgun or Pistol 85% of the time or better.

The other crowd say its alignment or personnel meaning having 10 personnel on the filed most of the time and lining up outside the hashes. Well Memphis uses a lot of 11, 20, and 21 personnel and most would say that Norvell is a spread coach for sure. LSU lines up on 10 personnel a lot but if you watch their games they actually use both bunch formation near the line and spread out using the hashes (granted all out of Shotgun). Case in point their second TD against UGA came from crowded bunch set similar to how we align sometimes. And despite the fact the Joe Brady said himself that he brought a lot of what the Saints run to LSU, which come directly form Sean Peyton who is no doubt an innovative offensive mind, the narrative in college says you must call that offense a spread even if most of the concepts are copied directly from Sean Payton. Why because Ed Orgeron, and Joe Brady said so and it sounds better to call it spread even if its mutiple, which the definition "is having several parts or elements to it". lol
 
canes1996 said:
I was well into a YouTube rabbit hole recently watching old UM games when I noticed that, especially during the Erickson era, we looked to be running a “spread-like” offense. Plenty of quick passes to both receivers and backs, 4 and 5 wide, etc. However, I am nowhere near well-versed in the nuances that go into offensive systems. As such, can anyone help me better understand how close that style of offense was to the current type of spread for which we are clamoring?

Also, if we were running something close to a spread way back then, why would it be so foreign a thought to do so now when it is so much more prevalent?

(Mods, if this can be incorporated into and already-existing thread, by all means....)
Click to expand...


Best thing you can do is go educate yourself with some reading. Draw your own conclusion based on what you read along with what others say instead of just the ladder. There are many variables pro spread, pure spread, tempo spread, and yes even multiple as a spread base, and etc.

You can start here.

www.footballstudyhall.com

Pro-style vs spread: What's the difference?

How do these systems differ in approach and is there a better option between them?
www.footballstudyhall.com www.footballstudyhall.com

en.wikipedia.org

Spread offense - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org en.wikipedia.org

www.football-tutorials.com

Spread Offense 101

The spread offense, or at least its core ideals, have been around in football for 50+ years. In today’s game, its most popular iteration is the shotgun spread
www.football-tutorials.com www.football-tutorials.com
 
Spread O doesnt guarantee us elite team status, but it probably keeps us solid in the Top 25, sometimes reaching as high as #8 going into the Clemson game. But thats where we need to be... I want some d@mn consistancy... give me three 10 win seasons in a row, then I'll talk about getting over the Clemson hump & Playoffs.
 
Hurricane23 said:
To run the offense that Miami runs today, your Oline has to absolutely be or close to elite, the thing about our offense is we dont play to our strengths we actually play to our weakness which is dumb. Running more of a spread would mask some of our deficiencies, specifically on the Oline
Click to expand...

We just need David Yost as OC.

Go Canes
 
It's a start, that all I'm asking for, UM has not had a food offense for about 2 decades now, becuase of ****** coaches and thier love for the pro offense.
 
Dude said:
Spread O doesnt guarantee us elite team status, but it probably keeps us solid in the Top 25, sometimes reaching as high as #8 going into the Clemson game. But thats where we need to be... I want some d@mn consistancy... give me three 10 win seasons in a row, then I'll talk about getting over the Clemson hump & Playoffs.
Click to expand...
Specifically I want a run heavy spread. Something like Chad Morris' or Urban Meyer's system.
 
Advertisement
canes1996 said:
I was well into a YouTube rabbit hole recently watching old UM games when I noticed that, especially during the Erickson era, we looked to be running a “spread-like” offense. Plenty of quick passes to both receivers and backs, 4 and 5 wide, etc. However, I am nowhere near well-versed in the nuances that go into offensive systems. As such, can anyone help me better understand how close that style of offense was to the current type of spread for which we are clamoring?

Also, if we were running something close to a spread way back then, why would it be so foreign a thought to do so now when it is so much more prevalent?

(Mods, if this can be incorporated into and already-existing thread, by all means....)
Click to expand...
Former FSU coach Manny Diaz would have to fire Enos and get a coach who lives by spread offense.
 
Last edited:
I don't think the spread is the only offense that works today, but it would do 2 things to help Miami's offense.

1. easier reads for the QB
2. get our playmakers the ball in space

I think just those two things could make our offense much more potent.
 
canes1996 said:
I was well into a YouTube rabbit hole recently watching old UM games when I noticed that, especially during the Erickson era, we looked to be running a “spread-like” offense. Plenty of quick passes to both receivers and backs, 4 and 5 wide, etc. However, I am nowhere near well-versed in the nuances that go into offensive systems. As such, can anyone help me better understand how close that style of offense was to the current type of spread for which we are clamoring?

Also, if we were running something close to a spread way back then, why would it be so foreign a thought to do so now when it is so much more prevalent?

(Mods, if this can be incorporated into and already-existing thread, by all means....)
Click to expand...
In that OF it was one of our most productive output from receivers as well as RBs. It was more of a 1 back OF. But receivers were split wide from one end of the field to the other, inturn giving our backs lots of room to run.

We were use to the 2 back "I" formation and now and then split back. When Erickson came in announcing his change to a 1 back offensive I didn't like it. If it isn't broke don't touch it. Erickson's OF flourished and seem to fit better with what we recruit from SFL. The same could be with the spread or whatever they want to call it. Manny need to make a change either way.
 
cleverjdub said:
Your initial comment is on point, but the shotgun vs under center point is where you are a little off. If being in Shotgun or Pistol as your base is what constitutes a spread vs pro offense then, we ran a spread under Richt. That also means UGA is running a spread and many other teams. This is my biggest issue with most on this topic is everyone wants to cherry pick what constitutes a spread. Some want to say it as simple as being in the Shotgun or Pistol most of the time, but those same people argue against that we didn't run a spread under Richt or that UGA is not a spread offenes now despite both of those teams lining up in Shotgun or Pistol 85% of the time or better.

The other crowd say its alignment or personnel meaning having 10 personnel on the filed most of the time and lining up outside the hashes. Well Memphis uses a lot of 11, 20, and 21 personnel and most would say that Norvell is a spread coach for sure. LSU lines up on 10 personnel a lot but if you watch their games they actually use both bunch formation near the line and spread out using the hashes (granted all out of Shotgun). Case in point their second TD against UGA came from crowded bunch set similar to how we align sometimes. And despite the fact the Joe Brady said himself that he brought a lot of what the Saints run to LSU, which come directly form Sean Peyton who is no doubt an innovative offensive mind, the narrative in college says you must call that offense a spread even if most of the concepts are copied directly from Sean Payton. Why because Ed Orgeron, and Joe Brady said so and it sounds better to call it spread even if its mutiple, which the definition "is having several parts or elements to it". lol
Click to expand...
So in short, Enos just sucks.
 
I just want to turn on my TV and know we are going to (at the very least) look capable of scoring 30+ points. We're not asking for 50 ppg like Ohio St, but even something like 30 ppg would give our defense a chance to hold down the fort.
 
Advertisement
UMFarArcher said:
Keep in mind - it was Butch Davis that was doing the bulk of evaluation and recruiting for JJ.

Just saying . . .
Click to expand...




truth.gif
 
Back
Top