Just a reminder that the live chat is tonight at 7. Just click on the blog and there will be a link to hop right in and we can talk about all things Shore Conference football. Also, make sure to get your picks in for the Fans’ Top 10 by clicking here and pick all of the games this week by entering our Pick ‘Em challenge by clicking here.
Also, as I expected, we got some intelligent responses from the readers on my question from Tuesday of “Why don’t more teams run the spread?” like Howell’s spread offense. Here are two below.
- The ex-coach Says:
- September 15, 2009 at 7:29 pm |Interesting points Stump.
The spread offense certainly puts lots of pressure on defenses to defend the whole field. The QB in the Gun with a RB is now a 2 back set. If the defense plays 6 in the box……it only leaves 5 defenders to cover 4 receivers……which means only 1 Free Safety…….opening up the pass game. If the defense plays 5 in the box……it gives them a 2 safety look…..however only 5 in the box vs. 6 potential blockers…….which opens up the run game. True dilemmas for defensive coaches to ponder.
Having said all of that….you still need a QB to create these dilemmas. A one dimensional QB in the spread alleviates many problems for the defense. The defense can line up and play to the QB’s strength.
I have seen Howell up close and personal on a few occasions. They have been fortunate to have talented QB’s. Coach Davies also has done a great job (as you said). You are on point on all of your observations about their success.
It is not easy to consistently find dynamic players at the QB position. I believe this is why the programs who struggle may avoid this offense. As you pointed out, it is a lot of work to learn all the nuances and philosophies. Not to mention pass protection proficiency.
The spread is here to stay. It has “trickled up” to the NFL. The pro game would change if they were ever able to pay a QB like Tim Tebow a RB’s salary. Then each team could carry two “wildcat” type athletes and the fun would really begin.
- HFAA Says:
September 16, 2009 at 7:35 am I believe that your assessment regarding the QB position and the smaller schools makes the most sense.
For the most part absent the so called territorial lottery of being graced with a strong armed QB from a smaller population, Group I or II schools need to be successful “System Schools” (ie. Squan).
The Spread is so heavily QB weighted that High School with under 1000 students has a lower chance of lucking out statistically and having someone who can adequately run it.
Besides… this is North Eastern America. This is Power football county.