dink and dunk at the NFL level
NYT article about the New England Patriot offense:
https://www.nytimes.com/2010/12/04/sports/football/04patriots.html?hpw
Its "spread" features are noted in the article.
So, I guess it's maybe not true that the spread won't work in cold weather and that it's a gimmick offense suited only for mediocre college teams. /s
- - -
Another NYT article, on Oregon football, that made me think of RichRod's offense (and its potential):
https://www.nytimes.com/2010/12/05/magazine/05Football-t.html?hpw
Why is it, again, that people are so in love with SMASHMOUTH football?
December 4th, 2010 at 9:08 AM ^
December 4th, 2010 at 9:25 AM ^
It would never work in the NFC Central.
December 4th, 2010 at 9:35 AM ^
signed Mike Martz and Gary Danielson
December 4th, 2010 at 9:38 AM ^
There is no NFC Central anymore. Sorry if that was a joke my sarcasm detector is broken on saturday mornings.
December 4th, 2010 at 11:41 AM ^
Yes, sarcasm detector was broken, but good point on the Central. That's what I get for not watching the NFL for six years.
December 4th, 2010 at 10:12 AM ^
......quite well there, thank you. Signed by Green Bay.
December 4th, 2010 at 10:57 AM ^
It is not their base offense.
December 4th, 2010 at 11:42 AM ^
/s
It's re: the spread offense in the Big Ten, which has roughly the same footprint as the (former!) NFL Central.
December 4th, 2010 at 10:22 AM ^
Most of the teams that incorporate the spread into their offense are more of a passing spread. I don't think there are that many teams that run the read option spread running attack from shotgun.
I can't remember the last time I saw an NFL team actually consistently run the read option like us or Oregon. It might work in the NFL, but I'm not sure since I haven't seen a team run a Michigan or Oregon like offense.
December 4th, 2010 at 1:49 PM ^
Michigan, Oregon and other spread college offenses run what is called a run offense spread. If I am not mistaken, Michigan was the leading run offense in the Big Ten this year.
A run offense spread in the NFL would require at least 10 Quarterbacks per team because of the punishment they would receive.
Which leads to another issue involving DR. Honestly, how long can he last running the Michigan offense? As OS players stated, the best way to neutralize DR is too hit him HARD time after time. I believe he left in the third quarter and asked RR not to be put in again because of injury.
Pat White was often hurt and he played against Big East opponents.
December 4th, 2010 at 10:54 AM ^
In fact, most NT squads the past 30 years have ran a pro style offense.
December 4th, 2010 at 10:59 AM ^
......big a range to use. Offensive styles, schemes, or whatever one terms them comes and goes in cycles shorter than 30 years.
Also, one needs to define what, exactly, is "smashmouth", or pro-style offense. Does the definition of "pro-style" change as the scheme is changed in the NFL? Does any run-first style offense get labeled as "smashmouth"?
December 4th, 2010 at 11:16 AM ^
To put in perspective, the top teams in 1980 looked like this. Things change all the time in football, and to equate what happened 30 years ago to what would work now is foolish. I'm fairly certain that if Oregon stepped into 1981, they would have run teams off the field. Conversely, a team like those Osborne-led Huskers teams would still be able to run over teams now with the option attack. It's all about having good athletes that fit the system you want to run. And with regards to Alabama, LSU, etc., those teams won because they had amazing defenses and offenses that didn't put them in bad spots. I'm fairly certain that if Alabama wanted to run a version of the spread, they probably could and still would have done well because they had a top-10 defense. Winning an MNC relies on numerous factors, not just the type of offense you trot out.
December 4th, 2010 at 11:22 AM ^
Winning football takes more than just one side of the ball being good.
December 4th, 2010 at 11:08 AM ^
Any person thinks the spread is a gimmick is an idiot.
<br>
<br>The way I see it, both offenses--if coached properly--can be dominant. They are just different ways of skinning the cat.
December 4th, 2010 at 12:23 PM ^
It's a phrase usually employed by those who don't like that kind of offense. Properly executed, it can work beautifully.
December 4th, 2010 at 1:23 PM ^
Thanks for flagging it.
Oregon actually had a sputtering start against Washington, which is not unusual. Kelly disdains some traditional football concerns, among them the need to jump out to an early lead. His teams usually gather steam as the game progresses and draw their confidence from knowing that the other team will wear down.
This one is interesting too:
So we have two things in common with Oregon. I wonder if RR has ever considered running his practices like Kelly does.[LaMichael] James did have one complaint [about Kelly's practices], having to do with the music: “The other day he had like ‘Hakuna Matata’ or some [expletive] from ‘The Lion King’ playing, which I don’t think nobody wants to hear. He needs to bump some Lil Wayne on there.”
December 4th, 2010 at 1:21 PM ^
The Lions are the worst at defending the Dink and Dunk !