What a job...sooo impressive...so proudd of myself...
yeah right...
I just performed the mosttt embarassing job ever....
Plus it was tiring, and i feel ashamedd like i never feel ashame before....
guess what??
I just bought a set of toilet roll, which the cashier said no plastic bag...no plastic bag attt leasttt to cover the whole toilet roll....then i have to walk maybe 150m back to office carrying it, to let everyone see, that i amm too a normal human being, espeacilly the cute guys sitting in Mcdonald having their lunch....haha...so embarrassing....
"When someone follows you all the way to the shop and watches you buy toilet roll, you know your life has changed." Quote By Jennifer Aniston
Luckily, no one follows me, andddd... im not a Hollywood star...hehe..
In case u are wondering?????
I have no idea why i stupidly volunteered to buy...maybe so that i can go out....or MAYBEEEE, the cleaner forgottt to buy yesterday...and today she's not working....
I started to think that I really do have a guardian angel taking care of me...
Last night, after cooking, the ventilator turned off while i was washing few dirty plates....as if to remind me to turn off the ventilator and its lights, when i checked the switch, of course the switch was not turned off yet...
Today, i woke 4am just to set my alarm,
Yesterday I woke 30 mins early, ya bcos my alarm was not set, well after the alarm was set of course i went back to sleep...heehee
and few days ago....when i slept reall late, in my sleep, i heard in my head like a dream....
...maria k... maria k...
as if meaning to say " maria k maria k... u checked your hp sound and the volume...but you didnt set the alarm....maria k...maria k..." saying my full name over and over again...
my eyes opened. Blinking wearily,wondering what time it was... faint light coming from the neighbor's kitchen contributing lights to the darkness of my room, and first thing i said to myself...
"my guardian angel just woke me up..."
Few weeks ago...i forgot to set my alarm clock....my guardian angel woke me up by switching on the TV with loud music from the astro radio...or maybe it was me who forgot to turn of the TV and astro...but i doubt i forgot...
and now i truly believe it was indeed my guardian angel...hmmm...just hope that its true
Im sure everyone have their guardian angel...its whether u let your angel influence u or not...but so far my GA only make sure that I wont be late...
ESPN is doing some kind of spread week, and they have posted a bunch of Q&As with coaches from around the country chiming in on the spread, what they do, and how to stop it. There's some chaff but also some good stuff, so I thought I'd provide the excerpted highlights (with links):
How similar is what you do to what Urban Meyer and Rich Rodriquez do?
PJ: I think it's very similar. . . .
Why do you think then, that most college football fans, when they think of your offense, probably don't automatically think of what Urban Meyer and Rich Rodriquez do?
PJ: Because one is under the gun and the other is under the center.
That's it?
PJ: Yeah, and most fans, quite honestly, couldn't tell you what plays they ran out of the gun. It's like anything else -- if you're successful and you have big plays, then it's great. If you're not moving the ball and you're not scoring then it's no good. If you look at last year with what Rich did at Michigan, it's the same offense they ran at West Virginia, but it was a learning process, different personnel and they didn't have near the success. In fact they had very little success. But nobody was questioning whether it would work or not. As soon as we have one game where we don't score 30 points, boy it's like, I told you this wouldn't work, everybody figured it out. That's what drives you nuts.
How about with receivers? Does the spread require different things out of them than if you were lining up in a pro-style set?
SD: Yeah, definitely. The quarterback and receivers have to spend a lot of time getting on the same page. If you run the ball, guys are going to try to sneak more guys in the box. When they do that, you need to find a way to get the ball on the perimeter, whether it's throwing the [bubble screens] or whatever, to try to get the ball away from the guys packing the box. When you're doing that, it looks like an easy throw, but it's something that requires quite a bit of timing and work between quarterbacks and wide receivers. If you're going to spread it out and do that, your quarterback and receivers have to spend a lot of time developing a feel for each other. . . .
One way guys recruit against spread teams is they tell recruits that if they play in a spread offense they are not going to get the respect from the NFL in the draft. What do you say to that?
SD: It's weird. Remember [the University of] Miami was one of the first teams running the one-back and running a spread offense with three receivers on the field? They were doing it with guys like Bernie Kosar and Vinny Testaverde and all of those guys were getting drafted. Back then, Miami was using it as a real advantage -- hey, we're spreading the field and throwing the ball. That's how you get into the NFL. What's happened is the spread has changed and there are a lot of different kinds of spreads. You've got what Penn State was doing last year which is more traditional type stuff. And then you've got the stuff that is way out there, the run-and-shoot stuff, what Tech's done. I think anytime a quarterback can drop back and throw the football, that's important. All that does is make him better, whether he does it under center or out of the shotgun. I don't see how a quarterback can be faulted when he takes a snap, avoids a rush, shuffles in the pocket, goes through reads, finds a receiver, throws an accurate ball and does all the things you have to do to drop back and throw. I don't see how he becomes a better quarterback by being under center and handing it to a running back. There's been a little bit of a knock, but I think that's just because of the personnel. If you're Texas Tech, you don't have to recruit 6-foot-6 quarterbacks who can stand in the pocket and throw the ball. And those are the guys the NFL is always going to like. Now, some of those guys don't work out and guys like Tom Brady do, who's not very big and doesn't have a particularly strong arm. They're just good players. Whether it's college or pro, the important thing for a quarterback is just finding a good fit.
How hard is it for a receiver to learn a spread offense with so many different options going on?
HH: I think it's a lot simpler because what you're trying to do is you're trying to create one-on-ones. And I know that you're trying to do that in about every offense, create one-on-ones. But in the spread, because you have people spread out so much, it's a numbers game ... So, in most spread offenses, the beauty of it is that it creates a lot of one-on-one opportunities for wide receivers. That's all a guy really asks for.
What type of player are you looking for at the skill positions? Dan Mullen: The first thing we look for is a guy who's multi-talented, a guy that can play a crossover position or hybrid position. You want a receiver who can also line up at tailback or a tailback who can flex into the slot or move up to the fullback position. Guys who have multiple skills make it hard for defenses to match up on you. . . .
When you have several of these hybrid players, why does it make it so difficult for the defense?
Dan Mullen: One thing we're hoping to get to here at Mississippi State is where you don't have to change personnel groupings very often. Everybody has the same skill set, which makes it harder for the defense to pick up on what you're doing. You don't have to substitute to run different things.
How much has the talent you guys have accumulated over recent years provided you the opportunity to make your offense different from one season to the next?
David Yost: Coach [Gary] Pinkel is a very direct guy and he thinks things through and doesn't fly by the seat of the pants. And that's the beauty of this offense.
When we had [former Missouri quarterback] Brad [Smith] we ran him more. Then we got Chase Daniel in here who could run the football, but also could also lead us to more passing because of his talents. That helped us transform our offense into more of a passing philosophy.
At one time when we had [tight ends] Chase [Coffman] and Martin Rucker, we were running a lot of two-tight end offenses. Then we had a set of receivers, but not necessarily ones that would be as suited to running the spread. Then, we started recruiting guys like Jeremy Maclin and stopping using as much two-tight end sets.
Now, after losing Coffman and Maclin, we'll be a little thinner at wide receiver this season. Because of that, we're kind of adjusting what we're doing. We'll be using three wideouts and our tailback more as a rusher and a receiver.
We feel our offense gives us a chance to get our best 11 players on the field. And we can do things differently depending on the personnel we have on hand.
How do you prepare for it and what's your philosophy in going against it?
Al Groh: . . . .One of the things we have observed is that defensive teams have to be willing to take some risks in order to take the initiative back. When you're so spread out, and one of the features of the spread, and the spread offense is just a formation. Having been in conversations with people, the two things I noticed is, last year Missouri finished fourth in the country in passing and Oregon finished fourth in running. Both are called spread offenses. The word spread is no longer associated with specific plays. It's simply a formation that spreads the defense from sideline to sideline and in doing so creates some natural spaces in the defense. It's harder to go from far away to attack the offense and you leave yourself vulnerable to certain things. By the same token, what we're observing is defense are afraid to take any risks. They just stand there and they're a standing target.
What we do like about being in the 3-4 defense is the flexibility it provides because defense, so much these days, that fourth linebacker as opposed to a fourth defensive lineman in the 4-3, gives us significantly more options. What defensive coaching is now, no matter what the system, you have to find some ways to adapt to what the other team is doing. We think this gives us the ability to adapt and react. You'd like to be on the attack defensively and set the tone, but to a degree the offensive will always control that. You have to be able to adjust and adapt.
How different is what Georgia Tech does? It's the spread option. How does that make it a little more difficult to prepare for, or does it?
AG: They are in their own way, yes, they fall under that umbrella because while the plays are different, it's out of sync with what teams face on a repetitive basis. That's the only time that most teams see that offense every year. There's no accumulated familiarity by the coaches or players going against it. That's a big part of the difficulty of playing against that or any offense that isn't common to what the defenses generally see. There's different plays, but it accomplishes similar things.
You guys beat them last year. As a coach, you get it. But how do you get your players prepared for it in what, five days, when they never see it?
AG: You're exactly right. One of the things we thought that was very important in the presentation of it was to demystify it for the players. In some cases, players can get frustrated. For example, this Wildcat formation that's gaining some notoriety. Really, in a lot of ways, it's a reduced down spread. It's spread out, but a lot of times it's with a player back there getting the direct snap who's a real good runner, but is not a passer. Actually, in talking with the Patriots last year, and all of a sudden it got sprung on them by Miami. In doing so, the unfamiliarity of it really threw them off during the course of the game and they could never quite get it back and in talking with the coaches there, they had issues during the game with getting the players settled down because there was still a mystique to what they were up against. From that point on, they had a detailed plan, and the next time they played against it from other teams as well as the second time they played Miami, they fared much better. You've got to demystify these unique offenses for the defensive players.
How much has it helped you as a defensive coach to understand it and scheme for it because [new offensive coordinator] Gregg [Brandon] is on your staff now and that's the way he's thinking?
AG: Very much so. It's helped us to establish a significant period of experimentation. We put some things out there and run them, and we really haven't tried to defend our team so much as let's just run our stuff and see what we like and what we don't like. It has certainly been helpful to us in that degree. . . .
Do you think there's any benefit to preparing the guys for the NFL to run one particular offensive scheme or another?
AG: Not really. I think that if the players are well-trained fundamentally, those are the things that carry over from league to league. The fundamental skills of how to execute their job, how to defeat the player across from them. It's highly unlikely that most players are going to go - with only 32 teams in the NFL - it's highly unlikely they're going to go to a system that's exactly like the one they came from. They're going to have to make some adjustments system-wise. The big thing is they have the fundamental background that can translate to any system. If you can block guys in one system, you can block them in another. If you can beat blocks in the 3-4, you can beat blocks in the 4-3. If you get blocked in the 3-4, you're going to get blocked in the 4-3.
Makes sense. Why do you think more ACC teams haven't caught onto this?
AG: It gets trendy within leagues. What you have to go against, whether it's offense or defense, you have to prepare for those things. You kind of become influenced and spend more time looking at those things and become influenced by those things. And of course a lot of it has to do with the philosophical backgrounds and beliefs that coaches bring with them. And really your background, too. At a point, sometimes what you know how to teach best, what you know how to utilize during the course of a game is the best for a particular team as opposed to something that is intriguing, but when certain things happen during a game maybe you just don't have the wherewithal to make those in-game decisions because you don't have enough familiarity with the system. Therefore, a team would be better off with something they're really fluent in.
Do you think your players will be more comfortable playing Georgia Tech the second time around?
AG: They should have a certain element of confidence. Their circumstances should be a lot more positive than if we would have given up 40 points. Then you have to come back the next year and convince the players we can really do this. 'Well wait a second, last year we were completely bamboozled by it and we haven't played against it since.' Yeah, I think we don't have to overcome that type of situation to start with, but no matter what, they run those plays every day. Their opponents, and this is the value of being a little bit out of the norm, whether it's with your offense or defense, their opponents only practice against those plays for a week.
I remember in high school preparing for wishbone teams: It was pure assignment football. Is it like that preparing for a spread-option vs. a typical pro-style, multiple offense?
BG: Yeah, it definitely is. In the old days, you had three backs in the backfield and everybody was doing option defensive assignments and concerns. It's the same kind of deal. The quarterback can carry the ball. He can hand off. He can motion a guy around to be the pitch guy. It really is the same idea. You've really got to make sure you stop all those elements. And then they throw in the no-huddle with it, which most of them have, and that can slow you down a little bit more. So we talk about that with our guys -- it's assignment football. You can't be quite as reckless, unless it's third-and-long and then you can get into your normal blitz stuff.
More than a few defensive coordinators have said that when you have a running quarterback, it stresses a defense and makes it difficult to match up. Is the spread not effective when the quarterback is not a good runner?
BG: I don't think it is as effective. I think when you've got a guy like [Jeremiah] Masoli at Oregon -- or a Dennis Dixon -- man, that makes it even harder. If a quarterback is not a great runner, you don't have to worry about him keeping it. And even if he does keep it, he's not going to gain a lot of yards. You can kind of load up in the one aspect, whether it's defending the ball inside or the pitch guy coming around, you don't have to worry about the quarterback. But if the guy can run, it adds a whole different dimension to it and makes it more difficult. . . .
How about blocking assignments: is that an adjustment also?
BG: Yeah, because so much of it is lateral. You really don't see the downhill, power running game that you see with most two-back teams -- power with pulling [linemen], lead plays, that kind of thing. So much of it is lateral, with guys moving in one direction and the back has the ability to really cut back and wind it back. You've really got to be conscious of not running so far out with the offensive line -- the term we use is "getting washed." Sometimes you see a back cutting all the way back and part of that is a defensive line over-pursuing and getting washed past the holes and the gaps up front so a back can stick it back. It's tough stuff and it is different. A good offensive line, like Oregon, that is big and strong and moves well, can really work guys past that initial point of attack and a good back can just break it back against the pursuit of the defense.
First of all, what is the challenge like when you're going up against a spread offense?
Phil Bennett: I played for a guy at Texas A&M, Emory Bellard, who invented the wishbone. With option football, everybody says it's an equalizer. I think if you have that quarterback, then the spread can be an equalizer.
I think it equalizes the field. I know as a defensive coach, it can take the aggressiveness out of you, because you have to be so concerned with assignments, just like the option. I was nervous last year when we played South Florida and Matt Grothe, and then obviously West Virginia. Our ends are big get-off, speed guys, and it really makes your ends go into a different mode. I don't think with the spread, in the run game, that you ever just really have to mash a guy. If you've got a body on body, then it becomes assignment football. But then you work on it so much that it can take a little bit of aggressiveness out of you.
How do you go about avoiding that?
PB: One of the things I try to do is, I try to treat it like the option in the run game. I want obviously a guy on the outside end and an inside-out guy on the quarterback. In the passing game, the thing I think is the toughest is the play-pass, because you're geared up to stop the run. I watched West Virginia against North Carolina, and they were so geared up to stop the run that Pat (White) threw for 330 yards, and it was off of play-pass.
I go back to our disaster game last year against Rutgers, where I had our guys so steered in on the run the week before against Navy. That's the thing the spread does to you. Your front guys have to still be aggressive, and the secondary still has to play pass. I was very pleased in our last home game against West Virginia, because our secondary, instead of getting so caught up in the run (played the pass). And we let our front go. And that's the thing I think you've got to do.
And of course the other thing is down and distance. Just like against the wishbone, if you get a down and distance on a spread team where the play-pass is taken away, then you've got a great advantage. The other thing people don't talk about in college is hash marks. You look at every spread team and watch them, and they have tremendous tendencies when they're in the middle of the field and then tremendous tendencies when they're on the boundary. . . .
Do you think that, in general, defenses are catching up to the spread?
PB: You know, as soon as you say that, somebody will tear you up. Now, with the original spread teams, people are starting to say, hey we've seen this. I think we played (against) regular personnel, out of 880 snaps last year, I think we played 90 snaps. And the rest was one back and either one tight, three wides or even four wides. Everybody is so multiple and they're doing variations of the spread. Iowa came out against us, and they had two tights, two flankers, and lo and behold guess what they did? They flexed them out and ran the spread out of it.
I think the more you can focus on something, week after week, people will get better answers. The other thing is, there's a premium on skill players on offense. The thing the spread does is, it creates matchups. And if you got a 4.4 (40-yard dash) wide receiver against a 4.8 linebacker, that's a great matchup. You've got to be able to swarm the ball, and you can't have too many of those matchups.
There are so many versions of the spread offense. What do you think when you hear that somebody is running the spread?
Ellis Johnson: Everybody just refers to it in general as the spread, but it all starts with the quarterback and whether he's a good runner. If they run the quarterback, it's a whole different animal.
What makes it a different animal?
Ellis Johnson: If the quarterback doesn't run much and it's never more than the quarterback and the running back in the backfield at the same time, it doesn't present as many problems unless they've just got so many great athletes that you can't match up. But you've got problems with any offense that has that many great athletes. The quarterback being able to run presents that extra challenge back there that almost makes it seem like you're trying to defend a 12th man.
How have your triple-option roots at The Citadel helped you in defending the spread?
Ellis Johnson: One of the things that helps me when I'm drawing it up on the chalkboard is that everybody was running the option and the veer back in the 70s when I was coming up through coaching. I understand the loaded option with the extra blocker back there. A lot of younger coaches don't understand it, and obviously a lot of players don't. It's very difficult to get taught and understood how these things work.
How does your strategy change when you're going against a spread offense?Ellis Johnson: The thing we try to do is mix up our fronts as much as possible and keep the perimeter reasonably simple. If you blitz too much, it can be disruptive. But it's not going to be sound against option assignments. And reading linemen becomes extremely important. When they get in the shotgun and the quarterback's back there beside the running back, as the ball is traveling back to the quarterback, you really don't get any flow in the backfield, so you need to be heavily keying on the linemen.
How has the spread offense changed the way you put together your game plans?
Mike Hankwitz: It has changed things because in the past, you wanted to feel like you could be more proactive and try to dictate. You could stack up against the run and force teams to throw, or you could stack your coverage and dare 'em to run. The spread does literally what it says: It spreads the field, forces you to spread your defense out more and especially with the quarterbacks that can run and throw. There's all different types of blocking schemes in the spread, aside from just the zone read.
So how do you counteract all of that?
MH: We try to see what the strength of their attack is. Is it the running game? How good is the quarterback in the run game? Is he a better runner than passer? If he is, then we'll commit more to the run and try to make him beat us throwing the ball. Or if they're a better passing team, then we will play more coverages and try to make them beating us running the ball. The third element when they spread you out is the unscripted, the improvised plays with the quarterback scramble. You're spread out and you're trying to rush the passer and play coverage and all of a sudden, the quarterback that can take off and scramble, it's not easy to plan for that all the time.
How much more time do you devote to the quarterback run now versus 15 years ago?
MH: Teams ran the triple option, and you had to be sound in your schemes and then you had to have the players who had discipline to take their assignment and not let somebody run free. The passing attack off that was minimal, but now, with the spread, you have that option aspect where you have to defend the different components of the run game: the read zone with the running back, the quarterback keeping it off the read zone and then bringing a running back in the backfield and bringing him out on a pitch. The bubble is another variation of it. [The receiver] becomes the pitch man. And then you have the jail-break screens, you have draws, running back draws, quarterback draws. It's more difficult to defend all that stuff.
You mention how dictating on defense was easier before. Has the spread allowed offenses to dictate more often?
MH: It makes it a lot harder on a defense to dictate or take away certain things, just because they've spread the field and they are doing more things. The offenses are trying to keep the defense from dictating to them. And then the other big part of the spread is the audible aspect of it, the coaches changing the plays. They're going no-huddle, they have more clock to work with and then they'll go up and show a formation and go through a cadence and try to get the defense to tip its hand. Then, they'll go back and change the play and try to get in a better play from what they've seen. You used to get some of that against passing teams. They would keep you from trying to substitute, but that was still relatively one-dimensional. You had some good one-back teams that could run and pass, but you didn't have to worry about the quarterback and the option.
When you arrived in Lubbock in 2000, Leach was the only coach in the conference running the spread. Now, seven of the teams run the offense as a base set. Did you ever expect it to be this widespread?
RM: I've definitely seen things evolve. The yards per game and points all have increased. I think it's because we've seen a development in the training of quarterbacks and offensive players through seven-on-seven camps and the like -- particularly here in Texas. Now, everybody is trying to get their wide receivers and running backs into space. And we're trying to do what we can to stop them.
Because of the way scoring has mushroomed in the Big 12, are you changing the way you judge the success of your defense?
RM: You've seen things evolve. Obviously, yards per game and points have increased. It's not three yards and a cloud of dust like it was when I was playing. We all realize these quarterbacks are pretty good and these offenses can move the ball. What we have to do is be patient and innovative with how we try to counteract their schemes. Points will increase, but maybe now we need to look at stats like third-down conversions and turnovers to determine how effective a defense has really been.
How much of a philosophical change has it been after the mushrooming of these spread offenses since you started your coaching career?
RM: When I started back at East Carolina with Pat Dye, I grew up facing the wishbone all spring and all fall. That was the offense that everybody was using and that caused problems. You saw more of a power game. Then, you saw people start using the West Coast offense to try to throw the football.
I miss those days, but I know the spread defense is here to stay for a while because of the development of the athletes to fit those offenses. I know everybody in our state (high school players) is out throwing the football, so the passing quarterback is out there. The receivers are out there, too. The guys that used to play basketball are all becoming wide receivers. I think the spread will be here for awhile, so both sides will have to keep developing.
1. Ben Cahoon gets all Tyrone Prothro on things. Great catch from the Montreal Alouettes' Ben Cahoon. Love the CFL's motion and super spread with the 12 men -- nothing like four wide while still two-backs in the shotgun. (Ht Shutdown Corner.)
2. "Out of the Blue." A documentary about the Boise State team that wound up upsetting Oklahoma. Quite good.
3. Three plays that shocked the world. Always worth a repeat view.
4. Brian Cook wants to pull his eyes out. ESPN's Lester Munson gets all hysterical and apocalyptic about the Supreme Court's upcoming decision in the American Needle case. The question involves whether the NFL -- composed of 32 different franchises under one umbrella -- should be treated as a "single-entity" for purposes of some of the anti-trust laws. If the NFL the Court deems the NFL a "single-entity" rather than a joint venture (as the lower courts did), it will be immune from some of this anti-trust liability. Munson thinks the world is ending; Cook takes a slightly more reasoned and calm approach, noting that the Supreme Court's ultimate decision is far from knowable (likely at this point even by the Justices). I'm with Brian, and for more insight check out SCOTUSBlog's explanation of the legal issues involved.
5. "A Beautiful Mind." Profile piece by Rob Moseley about Oregon's Chip Kelly. A good, thoughtful piece. Kind of buys into the "coach as genius" meme -- football is pretty simple, and players can always make you look smart -- but a good read.
In an interview Sammy Baugh gave to the Washington Post, years after he’d gone on to a Hall of Fame NFL career with the Redskins, one can even see a little of Dutch Meyer’s influence on today’s West Coast Offense:
“Dutch Meyer taught us. All the coaches I had in the pros, I didn’t learn a damn thing from any of `em compared with what Dutch Meyer taught me. He taught the short pass. The first day we go into a room and he has three S’s up on a blackboard; nobody knew what that meant. Then he gives us a little talk and he says, `This is our passing game.’ He goes up to the blackboard and he writes three words that complete the S’s: `Short, Sure and Safe.’ That was his philosophy — the short pass. “Everybody loved to throw the long pass. But the point Dutch Meyer made was, `Look at what the short pass can do for you.’ You could throw it for seven yards on first down, then run a play or two for a first down, do it all over again and control the ball. That way you could beat a better team.”
Courtesy of Richard, one of the blog readers, and I believe the write-up is by the inimical coach Hugh Wyatt.
8. Why are we so fat? Elizabeth Kolbert weighs in (zing!) in the New Yorker, and Jonah Lehrer tells us that our brains are biologically wired to prefer more calories over fewer, even when the taste is the same. (P.S. That's not a good thing.)
I wrote a brief overview of the Nevada Wolfpack's pistol offense for Dr Saturday. One interesting play that I didn't have the space to mention was their "horn" play, which is kind of like a combination between the old counter-trey and the pin-and-pull version of the outside zone.
The mechanics are fairly simple. They always run it to the tight end side. The playside of the line (the side the ball is going to) basically alternates between "down blocks" and "pull blocks": the tight-end blocks down on the defensive end, while the tackle pulls and kicks out the outside linebacker; and the playside guard blocks down on the defensive tackle or nose guard, while the center pulls and leads (called a "fold block") up to the linebacker. On the backside, the line essentially steps down and seals off the pursuit.
In the backfield, the quarterback reverses out and the runner takes a few counter or delay steps before starting to the playside.
The idea is to get some misdirection but not to use full pullers like on counter-trey; that way the linebackers freeze and don't flow so fast to where the run is going. Relatedly, they get good angles on the playside with all the "down blocks" and kickouts. The runner can either cut it inside the tackle behind the pulling center, or between the tight-end's down block and the tackle's kick out, or take it completely around end. Below is a video clip of Nevada running this play. (And check out the effort the center gives, even if he doesn't actually block anyone.)
one..today is Tuesday, another 3 days until weekend. two..i am so sleepy, it's difficult for me to focus. three..there's nothing to do at work. four..another 4 hours until 6pm... five..i have to endure work at least two more weeks...
six..my hp inbox is full...and its hard for me to choose which one to delete..let it be for a while... seven..i wasted my money on lch...it didnt taste as nice as the other day... eight..19 jul is over have to wait at least 365 days... nine..thinking of christmasss..cannot wait.. ten..heiyaa...almost 2pm..
My daily motivation - 30th july...something to look forward to....
ESPN's Mark Schlabach has a piece up today on the rise and ubiquity of the spread offense, and it is probably one of the better pieces I've seen from them on it. Now, Schlabach does seem to draw a line from Mouse Davis of run & shoot fame through current spreads like Urban Meyer's, but he doesn't carry this too far:
Even now, Davis wonders why it took college football coaches so long to adopt the principles of his offense, which was predicated on spreading a defense so wide that it created vertical seams for both runs and passes.
"I think it took coaches a while to find out how really tough it is to defend four-wide and how difficult it is to defend with either run or pass," Davis said. "The spread offense is now more of an option orientation by a lot of teams. A lot of them are running our same routes, but they don't read them as much. A lot of them are more run-oriented."
In many ways, the spread offense is still evolving. Coaches often see something they like from another coach's offense, then add their own wrinkles, plays and formations.
"You steal what you steal and put your own stuff in it," Davis said. "It's all interwoven some way."
When Rich Rodriguez took his spread offense from West Virginia to Michigan, a reporter from a Detroit newspaper called Davis. Rodriguez had told the reporter that he'd stolen much of his offense from Davis.
"He didn't get his stuff from me," Davis told the reporter. "I don't know where he got it from, but he got it from somebody else."
There are plenty of versions of the spread offense to imitate. The spread offenses at schools such as Texas Tech, Missouri and Tulsa are built around high-percentage passing games and often rely on quarterbacks and coaches to make the right decisions at the line of scrimmage. Spread offenses run by teams such as Michigan and Oregon are run-oriented attacks built around slot receivers, tailbacks and dual-threat quarterbacks.
"The bottom line is every spread offense is different," Nebraska coach Bo Pelini said last year. "Florida's spread offense is different than Missouri, and Missouri's is different than what Kansas is trying to do."
I think that's right: we have had spread rumblings for at least half a century if not further back -- from Dutch Meyer's TCU spread, Tiger Ellison's and later Mouse Davis's run & shoot, the Jack Neuimeier/Jack Elway (and John Elway) one-back spread, to the Hal Mumme/Mike Leach Airraid, and the assorted spread-to-runs of Rodriguez/Meyer/Walker et al. -- but there was, for a time, an almost complete banishing of the spread from college ball, and the spread's return has resulted in the (re)birth of a thousand offenses, each with their own spin on an old concept.
"The hardest thing for your kids is to adjust every week," Texas defensive coordinator Will Muschamp said. "Back in 1985, every team lined up with two backs. Now everybody is running something different. That's why you see a lot of points scored now."
Several readers (including by email) have told me they thought I was not unfair to Rich Rodriguez in my recent post about Randy Walker's effect on the rise of the spread. First, I didn't write this intending to dig Rodriguez or take anything away from him. I've written continuously about what an innovator he was (and is), and as I wrote in my piece for Michigan's Maple Street preview guide, I think Rodriguez ought to be able to turn the Wolverines around. In other words, I think he's a very good coach.
My point was simply that Walker made an important contribution. And keep in mind that the spread of the spread, so to speak, has in many ways been an interesting two-way dialogue between high schools and college -- and only now is the NFL listening too. True, when Rodriguez came out with the zone-read people came from all over to study it from, but Walker and Kevin Wilson really put their stamp on it and showed the way for coaches less inclined to be "spread guys" how to adapt their traditional offense to the new-fangled sets. And I do think it true that, until teams like Northwestern got going, Rodriguez hadn't quite focused on developing the shotgun run game into a robust "system."
At Tulane, the offense had the zone-read elements but Rodriguez and Tommy Bowden still considered themselves kind of pass-first guys; Shaun King threw for 3,495 yards and 38 touchdowns. His big innovation at the time was in throwing the 3-step quick game from the shotgun. It sounds quaint and kind of weird now, but at the time people really didn't think you could do it because of timing issues until they saw Rodriguez do it (along with Joe Tiller at Purdue). Indeed, no less a passing guru than Norm Chow, while he was still at BYU, visited Rodriguez to learn this funky technique, and for the first time in his career taught his quarterbacks to throw the three-step game from the shotgun. (And the BYU offense, which had slowly begin to wilt in the late '90s, saw a brief resurgence before Chow left for NC State and used the same techniques there with Philip Rivers.) These were heady days.
Moreover, in Bowden and Rodriguez's their first year at Clemson Woody Dantzler split time with Brandon Streeter, an incumbent fifth-year senior who was not mobile (he averaged 0.9 yards rushing on a meager 42 attempts). See the highlights below.
And in any event I wasn't saying that Clemson was some kind of disorganized mess when Rodriguez was there, just that, understandably, these were the early days of the spread, so a few big ideas were most of what you needed. As teams caught on Rodriguez stayed a step ahead, again, with the aid of Rick Trickett at West Virginia, an excellent offensive line coach. (Note that with Trickett the focus of the zone read changed from the inside zone to the outside zone, a subtle switch for the average fan that derived from the ideas and philosophy Trickett learned from Alex Gibbs, the Denver Broncos' famed line coach.)
All I was saying is that Walker played a very important role in this development. As Urban Meyer has said, back in those days the spread coaches were a small fraternity and they liked to swap notes. Rodriguez hit everybody over the head with his ideas, and then later, once guys like Meyer and Walker had put in full seasons running the stuff, they got back together and talked about what worked and what could be better. (And to one of the commenters who said that they never heard of anyone visiting Walker, that is just wrong: Meyer has said repeatedly that he visited Walker to learn what they were doing at Northwestern.)
So anyway, I don't think giving credit to one guy should be interpreted as taking anything away from another. These were some dramatic years for the spread, those years from 1997-2002 or so. A lot happened, a lot was learned, a lot was tried, and there were a handful of guys there at this birthing of a new style of offense. Rodriguez might be the father, but Walker helped pour the baptismal water.
1. Pistol meets flexbone? Last week I wrote a guest bit for Dr Saturday on Nevada's pistol offense, and I indicated that there were a lot of ways you could go with the pistol set. Nevada's offense is generally a mix of traditional power schemes with the spread zone and veer stuff, but that's not the only option. A reader passed along some video of Muskegon HS (MI), which runs the flexbone (similar to what Paul Johnson does at Georgia Tech) from the pistol set. As a result their shotgun is a bit shorter than Nevada's and the back lines up closer -- the mesh point in the veer all happens a bit faster. Worth taking a look.
2. Tebowliscious. Tebowlitude. sporting savant Dan Shanoff has launched a new blog that will be all-Tebow, all-the-time. Introducing, the TimTeBlog. Enjoy.
3. Rules, rules, rules. I recently mused about the differences in offenses between college and the pros, and Doc Saturday also recently chimed, in wondering why more teams don't use the triple-option, following the lead of the academies. There's much more to say on those topics, but one thing I didn't hit on much is the difference in rules at the various levels. One reason that the flexbone and the option offenses have been successful in college is that, in college, you can cut block downfield. In most states, cut blocking is illegal. (Texas being a notable exception.) See the video below.
Another notable rule that, in my view, limits the incentives for pro teams to be spread is the different rule for the ability of linemen to go downfield on screens. In college and high school, linemen may go downfield and everyone, receivers included, may block defenders right away, so long as the ball is throw behind the line of scrimmage. This leads to some pretty dynamic screen games, which is one of the advantages of being a spread team: you have lots of options for throwing quick screens, jailbreak screens, bubble screens, and even your more traditional ones to the runningback often work well because the defense is expanded out -- you can turn a regular play into a kickoff return. Indeed, screens are still probably the best weapon against the zone blitz.
In the pros, however, linemen may not release downfield on any pass until the ball is caught, and receivers too may not begin blocking until then either or else they will draw a penalty. Now, some teams like the Patriots have found ways to integrate the screens, but it is pretty evident that you can't run these plays as effectively if your linemen can't get downfield quickly and your blockers have to dance and shadowbox for a few counts before they actually start blocking somebody. A play like the TD below to LSU's Early Doucet, with linemen ten yards downfield by the time he catches the ball, would be called back in the NFL.
NFL teams have learned how to push this a bit, but it is still a rather important limit.
4. Juice Williams for Heisman? Bruce Feldman recently discussed Heisman hopefuls other than the "Big Three" (Tebow, Bradford, McCoy), and one name came up that caught my eye: The Illini's Juice Williams. Now, the idea that the owner of the largest noggin in college might win its most prestigious award might sound ridiculous to anyone has, you know, actually seen him play, I have thought about this and find the Juice-for-Heisman argument a legitimate one. One, his stats last year actually were not bad: 3,173 yards, 57.5% completion percentage, and 22 TDs, to go with 719 yards rushing. He did throw 16 picks, but the other thing you notice from the stats is that they definitely trend upward; he has a chance to be decent next year. And Feldman is right that Illinois has a chance to actually upset some of the other teams in the Big 10 -- the conference does not look to have any dominant teams. And, finally, as Phil Steele pointed out, the Illini's poor record seemed somewhat out of whack in light of the stats they put up; Steele pointed out that teams in similar positions tend to bounce back the next year as their won/loss record regresses to the mean. So who knows?
Q. Let’s start from the top. How much film did you watch in high school?
A. I was blessed to be at a high school where I had a good high school coach who knew football. We did watch some teams on film. I think it gave me an advanced knowledge of coverages and stuff coming into college. Still, you’re not prepared to come in here and to be able to read defenses and watch film correctly; not just watch as a football player and be like, ‘Oh, nice play.’ But you’re looking at technique and how you would play against them and all those types of things. That’s what I didn’t know and that’s what Coach Mullen has done such a good job of teaching me. In high school I did watch film, but it wasn’t with the same knowledge and diligence that I do now. . . .
Q. Coach Mullen was saying that it’s a three-step process. He watches all the games to get a feel. Then he watches the cut-ups for specifics. Then he re-watches the games to piece it all together.
A. Yeah, most of the time I do it all with him. As far as when we’re game planning for a team like we are right now. Like he was saying he watches it. Watches games to get a feel and then you splice it up and look at all the cut-ups. Then you watch all that. Then you have a good feel for them. Then you put all that back together. Then you can say, ‘This is low defense. This is under G. This is one-hole. This is why they’re doing this, because there’s a tight end on the ball. They’re doing this because there’s an extra slot.’ You can really get a better feel for it like that. If you just start with cut-ups, you wonder how this relates to a game. He’s got a really good method of doing it, obviously, with his success over the years. I try to follow it and learn and do what he does.
And this part sounds to me like a guy who has a reasonable shot in the pros as a quarterback:
Q. I imagine the translation now compared to your freshman year is drastic in terms of how you process things in your mind.
A. Yeah, I can process things a lot more. In a situation like this, my freshman year, I’d be trying to locate. Let’s look at this. (Tebow uses the laser pointer and points to the film he’s watching.) We’ve got a shade 5-9, is it under or are they calling it over to the boundary. The Sam is here, so I know that it’s field under. I know they’re calling the strength of the field, even though it’s double tight. Now I can do it so much quicker. It’s just boom. You see it and you know. It’s quicker, you process things quicker. You don’t have to think, you can just react. Especially the teams that bring pressure a lot and disguise it well. That stuff has gotten so much easier. The teams that do it well as far as changing their calls, disguising blitzes their defenses and bluffing. That has gotten a lot easier to pick up on. You can play fast and you can make a guess and you can go with that. If it’s not there, and you make a wrong call, you still have the ability and knowledge, ‘O.K., I thought it was no-deep and made a no-deep call and they bluffed out of it, all right, where’s my check down, let me go to it now.’ That type of thing. Instead of making the wrong call, and saying, ‘Oh shoot, let me make a play panicked.’ Now I really just know where to go. That’s something I thought I did a lot better in the L.S.U. game this year. That was one of my best times doing that. When they did something like that, this is where I’m going if they come or if they don’t come. Sometimes you’re having two thoughts in your mind. Depending on what’s going to happen.
5. Good web hosting service? The launch of smartfootball.com is nigh, as the overhaul of the site's design is almost done, as is the transition from Blogger to Wordpress. A question for web-savvy readers, though: Can anyone recommend a good (and cheap) web hosting service? I obviously want something affordable, reliable, and steady. My traffic numbers are okay but not ESPN.com levels, though I am wary of getting only the lowest bandwidth and and crashing out on peak days. This site obviously has a lot of graphics and that tends to inflate my bandwidth as well. Any advice would be appreciated.
