PDA

View Full Version : Spread offense adds new wrinkle to draft


mesaSteeler
03-08-2009, 10:15 AM
Spread offense adds new wrinkle to draft
http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/pittsburghtrib/sports/steelers/s_615052.html
By Scott Brown, TRIBUNE-REVIEW
Sunday, March 8, 2009

Scott Brown is the Steelers beat writer. He can be reached via e-mail or 412-481-5432.

Projecting which college players will make a successful transition to the NFL is hard enough.

A recent trend has added another trap door to next month's draft. It's the spread offense and, well, the spread of it in college football.

"It changes the whole evaluation process," Steelers director of football operations Kevin Colbert said. "It makes it more difficult, but the colleges have to worry about what they need to do to win games, and we have to worry about making correct decisions."

Penn State is an example of how entrenched the spread offense has become in college football. The Nittany Lions have long been associated with an offensive philosophy that is as conservative as coach Joe Paterno's political leanings, but they rode a wide-open attack to a Big Ten title last season, and quarterbacks coach Jay Paterno dubbed their offense the "Spread HD."

Florida and Oklahoma, who met in the BCS title game in January, also used the spread, and the Sooners added a twist.

"My first three years, we huddled up a lot," said Oklahoma wide receiver Juaquin Iglesias, who is expected to be an early- to mid-round selection in this year's draft. "But last year, we didn't huddle at all."

The no-huddle approach is a distinguishing characteristic of the spread. That is not to say it is exclusive to the spread some NFL offensive coordinators use no-huddle as a change of pace.

There are other aspects of the spread that also have become a part of the NFL, most notably the "Wildcat" package.

But the spread, several coaches and general managers said, never will take hold in the NFL the way it has in college. NFL defenses are too fast, and quarterbacks would be too vulnerable to use the spread on a regular basis.

"It's difficult to run a true spread with five receivers eligible all the time against the Steelers," Colts president Bill Polian said. "You'd better have a lot of quarterbacks if you want to do that."

Added 49ers general manager Scot McCloughan: "You open up your quarterback to too many hits."

The differences between spread and pro-style offenses make it all the more challenging to project how college players will do at the next level.

Colbert said evaluating offensive linemen has become more difficult since techniques they use in college may be different than in the pros. In addition, offensive tackles do not line up in three-point stances as frequently in the spread as they do in traditional NFL offenses.

The good news for Colbert: Quarterback is not a Steelers' draft priority.

Quarterback is considered the hardest position at which to project success at the next level and that was before the spread.

The added degree of difficulty can be attributed to quarterbacks taking shorter drops in college than in the NFL as well as the frequency with which they use shotgun formation.

The spread also affects defensive evaluation.

"If you flip it over," Colbert said, "the defense isn't doing things that they're going to be doing against conventional offenses."

The popularity of the spread in college has produced some benefits for the NFL. With teams throwing more, the draft pool at wide receiver and cornerback has gotten deeper and more ready to play.

"It used to be impossible to find a defensive back who had enough exposure to top passing attacks in college," Steelers defensive coordinator Dick LeBeau said. "You had to teach them everything, and that was usually a one- or two-year development process.

"(Now), you're getting a bunch of defensive backs that all they do is defend the pass against fast people spread out and talented quarterbacks. That's a plus for us."

While the spread has made scouts adjust, it has not altered their fundamental task of identifying players whose skills transcend schemes.

As Buccaneers general manager Mark Dominik said: "I look for athleticism, I look for intelligence, and I look for play-making ability."

Steeldude
03-08-2009, 10:23 AM
IMO, this is why you stay away(or be wary of) from NCAA QBs who ran a spread offense. people want pat white now...lol. will they ever learn? you would think by watching kordell, vick, v. young and so on over the years, would have opened people's eyes.

if for some reason the steelers draft pat white, it better be to play WR only. the steelers already have a gimmick QB/WR in dixon. why add another?

The Duke
03-08-2009, 10:42 AM
IMO, this is why you stay away(or be wary of) from NCAA QBs who ran a spread offense. people want pat white now...lol. will they ever learn? you would think by watching kordell, vick, v. young and so on over the years, would have opened people's eyes.

if for some reason the steelers draft pat white, it better be to play WR only. the steelers already have a gimmick QB/WR in dixon. why add another?

I agree

while I don't think it's impossible he'll be good, we already have a similar player in dixon. Seems like the idea is pat white is different. the next great thing

I'm not buying it

but it's not like we have other needs in the draft....

GBMelBlount
03-08-2009, 10:46 AM
...if for some reason the steelers draft pat white, it better be to play WR only. the steelers already have a gimmick QB/WR in dixon. why add another?

Ya, but what if he's the best player available? :wink02: :chuckle:

Steelman16
03-08-2009, 09:59 PM
Ya, but what if he's the best player available? :wink02: :chuckle:

Then it's a hearty round of :banging: :banging: :banging: for us here on the boards...

scsteeler
03-08-2009, 10:13 PM
IMO, this is why you stay away(or be wary of) from NCAA QBs who ran a spread offense. people want pat white now...lol. will they ever learn? you would think by watching kordell, vick, v. young and so on over the years, would have opened people's eyes.

if for some reason the steelers draft pat white, it better be to play WR only. the steelers already have a gimmick QB/WR in dixon. why add another?

Vick outside of the dog issue was a very successful QB so his name should be removed. Kordell, well was Kordell. Dixon has not started as a NFL QB so his name should be removed from this list.

Steeldude
03-09-2009, 08:53 AM
Ya, but what if he's the best player available? :wink02: :chuckle:

lmao :rofl: i forgot about that.

Steeldude
03-09-2009, 08:54 AM
Vick outside of the dog issue was a very successful QB

someone didn't watch vick play.

HometownGal
03-09-2009, 09:08 AM
Vick outside of the dog issue was a very successful QB

Though he wore the title of QB, I considered him a running back who threw the ball once in a while. He never broke 3,000 yards passing in a single season.

XxKnightxX
03-09-2009, 09:10 AM
someone didn't watch vick play.

Before Jim Mora was there, He was the team guys. Hate to say it but its true, sure he wasnt a succesful QB when he was forced to pass, but the guy made plays period.

vasteeler
03-09-2009, 10:32 AM
just courious what was Vicks completion %?
Cant imagine it was very high

Steeldude
03-09-2009, 10:56 AM
Before Jim Mora was there, He was the team guys. Hate to say it but its true, sure he wasnt a succesful QB when he was forced to pass...

huh?

MasterOfPuppets
03-09-2009, 11:08 AM
Before Jim Mora was there, He was the team guys. Hate to say it but its true, sure he wasnt a succesful QB when he was forced to pass, but the guy made plays period. and how did those "plays" translate to team success? the falcons looked better last year with a rookie qb, and micheal turner, then they EVER did with vick....:popcorn:

steelreserve
03-09-2009, 11:51 AM
and how did those "plays" translate to team success? the falcons looked better last year with a rookie qb, and micheal turner, then they EVER did with vick....:popcorn:

Well, Vick sure pissed me off when we had to play against him a couple years ago. Whatever he was doing in that game threw us off pretty bad, and it was also pretty damn frustrating to watch. From what I've seen of Vick, he seems like a good quarterback capable of taking over a game, but just maddeningly inconsistent. Which I guess is bad in its own way.

Anyway, I'm glad we don't need a QB or a WR in the draft any time soon.

The Duke
03-09-2009, 03:11 PM
Vick led his team to only 2 winning seasons and had one of the ugliest completion percentages in modern NFL

he was not successful at all

Hope no team picks him up again. I'd feel sorry for them

revefsreleets
03-10-2009, 10:56 AM
Vick could run.

He wasn't accurate, didn't make good throwing decisions, and couldn't read a defense to save his life. He had a rocket arm, but so do 10,000 other guys.

Did I mention he could run?

devilsdancefloor
03-10-2009, 11:33 AM
vick was a RB for sure wasnt accurate or dependable on the passing at all

fansince'76
03-10-2009, 11:37 AM
Vick led his team to only 2 winning seasons and had one of the ugliest completion percentages in modern NFL

he was not successful at all

Hope no team picks him up again. I'd feel sorry for them

You're nicer than me, Duke, because I wouldn't. IMO, anybody stupid enough to trade with Atlanta to acquire his $9 mil annual salary through 2013 deserves what they get.

4xSBChamps
03-10-2009, 11:55 AM
Vick could run.

He wasn't accurate, didn't make good throwing decisions, and couldn't read a defense to save his life. He had a rocket arm, but so do 10,000 other guys.

Did I mention he could run?

almost 40 years ago, another Left-handed QB, Bobby Douglas of the Bears (whom I believe held the single-season QB/rushing-mark that Vick broke), was evaluated in this manner:

"Douglas can run like a moose..... unfortunately, he also throws like a moose, too"

http://www.go4thestars.com/5139bd.jpg

some Vick career stats:
averages 12/23 passing per-game (53.8%), 155+ yards, 2.5+ sacks-per-game, 71 career TD passes/52 career interceptions
averages 7+ rushes-per-game, 52+ yards-per-game, and (interestingly) averages 1 fumble every 10 carries (55 fumbles in 529 rushes, losing 27 of them to the defense), averages 7+ yards-per-carry with 21 career TD runs

markymarc
03-13-2009, 06:15 AM
Though he wore the title of QB, I considered him a running back who threw the ball once in a while. He never broke 3,000 yards passing in a single season.

Totally agree HTG. Vick was nothing more than a RB getting paid like an NFL QB.

4xSBChamps
03-13-2009, 08:20 AM
Totally agree HTG. Vick was nothing more than a punk/thug RB getting paid like an NFL QB.

..... corrected for factual-content.....
:wink02:

The_WARDen
03-13-2009, 10:01 AM
and yet somehow, he still got his team to the NFC Championship game...much like Kordell did with the Steelers which also STILL has me perplexed.

:noidea:

vasteeler
03-13-2009, 10:08 AM
and yet somehow, he still got his team to the NFC Championship game...much like Kordell did with the Steelers which also STILL has me perplexed.

:noidea:

Kordell had a defense and vick played in a not so great nfc