READ TODAY'S STORIES AND E-EDITION SUBSCRIBE |  CONTACT US |  SIGN IN
Sports Extra!



SPORTS EXTRA BLOGS

FOR THE RECORD
LOCAL PROS

ALL SPORTS

PHOTOS & VIDEOS

OUTDOORS

FIND A STORY

EMAIL ALERTS

SOCIAL MEDIA

RSS FEEDS

CONTACT US
BUY PHOTOS & PAGES

ADVERTISE ON SPORTS EXTRA


Print story only Print story with comments Email Twitter Facebook Pinterest
The Spread is Dead: Reason #16
Published: 7/21/2010 3:21 PM
Last Modified: 7/21/2010 3:21 PM

There are some 29 reasons why the spread offense has lost its gimmick appeal and has gone from surprising to cheesy.

We'll try to cover most of the reasons why you should implore the coach of your favorite team to man up before it's too late.

Chief among the reason why the spread should be buried like yesterday's bone is you can't run a lick. Look at Missouri. First and goal from the two, you may as well kick a field goal on first down.

Reason number 16 proving the spread is dead is: It ruins your defense. Look at Houston. Look at Auburn. Before Gus took the tiddleywinks offense to Auburn, the Tigers had one of the best defenses in the country. The games Auburn won last year, the scores were 45-40.

The reason why the spread ruins your defense is you practice against guys in tutus, people who can't run block or run. So when you come up a legit rushing game, it's hammer time, you lose. Look at your Alabamas, etc.






Reader Comments 17 Total
huricandeoro (3 years ago)
In 2008 Tulsa was in the top 5 of both rushing and passing offense. Clearly they could run the football.

The spread does seem to ruin your defense, but I'm not sure it's because of the reason you said. Most spread teams have terrible pass defenses as well.
hootie (3 years ago)
OSU has a pretty balanced "spread" offense and now that they have a GOOD defensive coordinator, their defense is improving! Right?
Kenmore (3 years ago)
OSU turning to the "spread" is either a stop-gap measure until the "big" talent is ready or the last act of the Gundy administration at OSU...or both.

However Picker, you should know that at T-Tech under Leach they had NO HOPE of getting any real talent (at least in the numbers needed to compete 'gainst OU or Tex) so they played the "spread" 'n won 7/8 games a year including beating OU 'n Tex on occasion. So throw in a few positives for the "spread"...
Tulsan in Exile (3 years ago)
I think the Picker is well aware of the spread's "positives." Actually, there is only one: it can keep a mediocre team in a game a lot longer than they would be normally. Tulsa should keep running the spread. They have no choice. They will never have the talent to hold a good offense below 30 points, so they must score 35+ to be competitive. But it's like running a huge deficit to keep your economy afloat. It's all smoke and mirrors. Eventually, you get smoked, really badly, really regularly.
huricandeoro (3 years ago)
So I guess with that reasoning OSU should continue to run the spread as well.
Loki (3 years ago)
Three yards and a cloud of dust, the way God intended.

There may be a middle ground. The odd Adrian Peterson and DeMarco Murray would seem to offer balance. However, that balance has yielded something short of infallibility at the finish line.

The spread is dead, long live the dust.
MexiMike (3 years ago)
My gosh Pick, do you ever stop with this nonsensical broken record???

Houston had the number 1 offense in the country running the spread.

OSU led the Big 12 in rushing for the last 4 years while running the spread.

OSU was ranked 11th in country on defense against the run last year...while running the spread.

Florida won two national championships recently while running the spread.

Nearly every one of your points has been proven wrong time and time again. Please stop this delusional stance. It makes no sense!
The Picker (3 years ago)
The spread is the wishbone -- Kenmore and Exile are exactly right, it's what you do when you can't recruit big-time. T-Tech will find that out this season when new coach Tupperware tries to play it by the book.

MexiMike, if you think Oklahoma State had a good year last year, you've been playing too long without a helmet. Go ask coach Pickens if he'd take another like it.

The spread is fine for former powers looking to razzle-dazzle their way back from dispair, or for teams with no depth. As far as winning a national championship, not going to happen.
MexiMike (3 years ago)
Wow Pick, way to bypass all of the facts I stated that cleary disprove your claims and skip straight to a Boone Pickens joke. You must have been an ace on the debate team.

Let's try this again:

If the spread is just a cheesy gimmick, how did Houston finish #1 in offense in the nation?

If a team can't run while using the spread, how did OSU lead the Big 12 in rushing the last four years?

If the spread causes its team's defense to be weaker against the run, how did OSU finish 11th in the country against the run last year?

If a team cannot win national championships using the spread, then how did Florida do it twice in three years?

Care to comment on the specific questions or should I expect more dancing?
The Picker (3 years ago)
1. The Houston defense was horrific.
2. OSU had a rotten year.
3. OSU had a rotten year.
4. Florida was not a spread offense team, it was a single wing team.
MexiMike (3 years ago)
1. Dancing. They still had the best offense in all the land proving that the spread is not a gimmick.

2. More dancing. They still ran the ball effectively enough to lead the Big 12 in rushing 4 years in a row which destroys your claim that you can't run out of the spread.

3. Horrible 80's dancing. They still were the 11th best team against the run in the nation which destroys your claim that spread teams' defenses are weaker against the run.

4. Yes they were. Everybody acknowledges it but you.

Geez Pick, this argument is senseless. It's like I'm trying to convince a 5 year old that 2+2=4 and he keeps coming back and saying "nope, it's 17." Haha!
AwayFromHomeTulsan (3 years ago)
Good job Mike. And Picker, lousy attempt at answering direct questions. Thought about a career in politics? I wouldn't usually jump on but OSU certainly didn't have a rotten year. Their losses were due to depth issues and missing (1) Dez, (2) Hunter and (3) Lemon. Such is life.

Still....I have to say that unconventional offenses like the wishbone and the spread can look pretty terrible when another team begins stopping them. It often starts looking like men against boys. Plus....sometimes it's necessary for ANY good team to be able to put the QB under center and grind it out. I've witnessed too many dangerous clock stoppages when a spread offense doesn't know how to effectively burn off time and/or rest their defense.

I think the pro-style is the most sound but you have to win the match-ups at nearly every position. When a coach knows that he doesn't have dominant athletes, he usually opts for a more wide open game plan (i.e. Tulsa's version). Not sure that's going to win very many NC's. Florida's version worked because they were bigger and faster. They probably could have won using the pro-style, too.
The Picker (3 years ago)
Boomer Sooner Sam: Alabama, USC, Penn State, LSU, Iowa, TCU, etc.
dumbokie (3 years ago)
A broken clock is right twice a day. If the picker keeps saying the same thing he figures to be right sooner or later. Let's just stir the pot and rile some folks up.
I'm sure that if a team running "the spread" is successful, the picker will figure a way to claim he predicted it.
tulsandn (3 years ago)
A team's poor or prolific offense can indeed ruin a defense or make them look bad by the numbers....

The game starts & your offense immediately turns the ball over & the other team only has to "drive" 30 yards for a score....

Your defense is on the field for a long drive & they finally get off the field then your QB drops the ball or throws an interception.... No rest for your "d" & they are right back on the field....

Your offense is a fast break offense & they score in a play or two, your defense gets no rest & back on the field they go....

More scores for your offense leads to more opportunities for the other team.... Bad offensive turnovers results in positive field position & momentum for your opponents....
Glenn616 (3 years ago)
Pick, part of it is that defenses have
adjusted to the spread. Therefore, offenses
need to make adjustments and
run more power formations.
G-Block (3 years ago)
As AwayFromHomeTulsan so elegantly mentioned, to run conventional "pro-style" offenses effectively, you must over power your opponent in nearly every position. Otherwise, your eleven will be worn out by the middle of the 3rd Quarter against superior athletes.

And with so many high schools running the spread, there aren't too many quality tight-ends and full back players anymore. However, there are infinitely more quality tail backs and wide receivers available. So the goal becomes to put your best eleven players on the field - regardless of position. Therefore, for many schools, the spread is alive and well. It all comes down to execution and player depth - as it is with any offensive scheme.
17 comments displayed


To post comments on tulsaworld.com, you must be an active Tulsa World print or digital subscriber and signed into your account.


Out Pick The Picker

The Picker began entertaining – and infuriating – sports fans in 1993. Each week during football season, he writes about his picks of college and NFL games in his Thursday Sports column. He's never afraid of sharing his opinions about the game and the personalities who play it. Readers have a chance to go against him each season in the Outpick the Picker contest. He welcomes the competition.

Follow The Picker on Twitter

Subscribe to this blog


Archive

Past Articles By The Picker

1/31/2013
      The Picker: Super Bowl merely a distraction from OU woes
 
The Picker's Blog Archive:

2/2013  1/2013  12/2012  11/2012  10/2012  9/2012  
8/2012  7/2012  6/2012  5/2012  4/2012  3/2012  
2/2012  1/2012  12/2011  11/2011  10/2011  9/2011  
8/2011  7/2011  6/2011  5/2011  4/2011  3/2011  
2/2011  1/2011  12/2010  11/2010  10/2010  9/2010  
8/2010  7/2010  6/2010  5/2010  4/2010  3/2010  
2/2010  1/2010  12/2009  11/2009  10/2009  9/2009  
8/2009  7/2009  6/2009  5/2009  4/2009  3/2009  
2/2009  1/2009  12/2008  11/2008  10/2008  9/2008  
8/2008  7/2008  6/2008  5/2008  4/2008  3/2008  
2/2008  1/2008  12/2007  11/2007  10/2007  9/2007  
8/2007  7/2007  6/2007  5/2007  4/2007  3/2007  
2/2007  1/2007  12/2006  11/2006  10/2006  9/2006  
8/2006  





Home | Contact Us | Search | Subscribe | Customer Service | About | Advertise
Copyright © 2013, World Publishing Co. All rights reserved.