**THE CHALK TALK THREAD..GIVE YOUR OPINIONS**

[KFDM COOP]

The Spread: Successes, Failures, Taste and Evolution Rating   

In the last few years we have seen many schools transform their offensive into a spread formation. With that being said, what in your opinion are the biggest successes and failures of the spread offense? What do you like and dislike about it? Give us detailed reasons. And finally, what do you see in the future of the spread formation in terms of popularity and its evolution?

[Mr. Buddy Garrity]

The spread allows you to get more of your athletes out on the field. It works if you balance your plays out. also if you dont have a mobile QB its a wrap, cause you will have to run the ball more and in the spread thats not good.

[shooter]

I have seen the spread provide great opportunities for schools over the past few years. The biggest drawback I've seen is that I think some coaches stay with it even when that type of personnel is no longer on their roster. For example, it requires a very unique quarterback in terms of athletic prowess and he must be a multiple threat. With all said, it's a very exciting offense and hard to defend when you have the  personnel to run it.

[swampdude]

The spread is the offense of the day.  More and more teams will adopt the spread as coaches learn to coach it. Somewhere down the road defenses and coaches will adapt and the spread will go the way of the Wishbone, the veer, the wing-T as the offense du jour.  It will never completely go away as some coaches will always have the proper personnel to run it well.  How many of you other old timers remember the berating Tom Landry took in the press for re-introducing the ages-old "shotgun" formation for Roger Staubach?  It all goes full circle! 8)

[SFA85]

With the popularity of 7 on 7, the spread gives the illusion of being successful but what the spread breeds is soft Olines and overall soft defenses.  With few exceptions(Southlake) most pass plays from the spread are either go routes or side ways passes.  Most runs are draws, delayed traps, or option plays.  Olinemen stay in a two point stance and they have to have quick feet and hands to be effective.  But just like the old run and shoot of Mouse Davis, the spread is worthless in side the red zone.  PAM is a prime example of red zone futility by staying in the 4 wide which leaves little room for pass routes.

Defensively, I've seen everything from base 4-3/3/4 defenses to nickle and dime defenses and they are beginning to catch up.  Most spread teams try to run so keeping 7 in the box is most effective(see WB vs. Central).  Some teams rush 3 and drop 8 when the run is not a threat.  It's my opinion most spread teams breed soft defense because that's all they practice against.  Anytime they meet up with a more traditional offense, they have problems---especially defending the run. 

[Mr. Buddy Garrity]

if you play a 3-3-5 D you can pretty much contain the spread O. only if you got athletes on the D.

[BMTSoulja1]

Central needs to trash it and  go under center.  Somebody tell the coaches that Brandon Williams is no longer there!  Also, it's pretty hard when the O-line dont' want to block.And if your going to be in the spread, how about actually PASS the ball! : : ;D ;D

[BMTSoulja1]

I have seen the spread provide great opportunities for schools over the past few years. The biggest drawback I've seen is that I think some coaches stay with it even when that type of personnel is no longer on their roster. For example, it requires a very unique quarterback in terms of athletic prowess and he must be a multiple threat. With all said, it's a very exciting offense and hard to defend when you have the  personnel to run it.

amen!

[Tiger90]

The spread is a "sexy" offense IF you have the athletes.  Offenses can put up gaudy stats and look unstoppable until that other team has speed as well.  Easiest way to stop the spread is keep the opposing team off of the field.  It is hard to beat an "I" formation and just ram it down the opposing team's throat.  You may not get the big score or the long plays but if your guys can block it is a steady 5 yards a pop.  Going into the 4 th quarter defenses are beat.  I always remembered PNG doing the "I" well.  Less talented teams can stay in games longer if they utilize a well coached/disciplined "I".  I believe a certain team last year would have prefered a couple "I" formations rather than the spread when they were within the 10 yard line.

[24 over par]

spread really good if you have a qb that is quick but it loses something close to the goal line

[AggiesAreWe]

I'll just sum this thread up like this:

It's not in the NFL, so it can't be all that great.

[ALLABOUTSTATE4BC09]

The Spread should work for most High School offenses, as long as you have a Quarterback that can handle it.you have to have a good offensive line, one or two capable wide recievers. The spread is a high reward, high risk offense if you ask me. The high reward is it's easy to get first downs, and it keeps the defense second guessing most times,the high risk are throwing interceptions, and having more turnovers on bad snaps, etc. I also think that the spread isn't good in bad weather,  the ball is wet and a little heavier to throw and thats when the reciever's tend to drop more passes than usual and that can hurt you ina close ball game. THe quarterback has to have speed, and has to contain his posie and not get rattled and just play his game. I like the spread for Bridge City...

[Gasilla]

I'll just sum this thread up like this:

It's not in the NFL, so it can't be all that great.

Several NFL teams run a variation of the spread offense in certain situations.

The spread is a great offense between the 10's. Like any offense, the effectiveness is determined by the personnel running it. I think that any team should have multiple offensive sets. In this day and age you can't be an "I" only or a spread only. The tempo of the game should dictate what you run.

No offense can make up for bad play calling.

[CoogTalk]

With the popularity of 7 on 7, the spread gives the illusion of being successful but what the spread breeds is soft Olines and overall soft defenses.  With few exceptions(Southlake) most pass plays from the spread are either go routes or side ways passes.  Most runs are draws, delayed traps, or option plays.  Olinemen stay in a two point stance and they have to have quick feet and hands to be effective.  But just like the old run and shoot of Mouse Davis, the spread is worthless in side the red zone.  PAM is a prime example of red zone futility by staying in the 4 wide which leaves little room for pass routes.

Defensively, I've seen everything from base 4-3/3/4 defenses to nickle and dime defenses and they are beginning to catch up.  Most spread teams try to run so keeping 7 in the box is most effective(see WB vs. Central).  Some teams rush 3 and drop 8 when the run is not a threat.  It's my opinion most spread teams breed soft defense because that's all they practice against.  Anytime they meet up with a more traditional offense, they have problems---especially defending the run. 

some good points, But Crosby Runs the spread with a balance (ask PNG), as for soft lines, although teams with soft lines use this good or decent lines do exist in the spread. Running is exceedingly effective with a fast RB now if ur PN-G you should run like a power I with that big ole boy Hennings. But Spread with lots of roll-outs lots of Play actions and lots of out routes/ drop off routes make it an incrediably effective offense.

Case and point PN-G knew we were running the ball in the third quarter when Durran Starks went out, but our RB's were fast enough to get to the outside and break tackles, it gives them wiggle room they dont have in an I-Form or one running back set or even a pro-set.