We agree DanoT.DanoT wrote:Here is something that I was thinking about the other day: If a QB stays in the pocket he is a target and the only way to avoid a hit is to throw the ball. OTOH if a QB takes off and runs he can avoid a hit by running out of bounds, hook sliding or throwing the ball. So move the pocket and roll out damn it!
You often hear from OCs that rolling out cuts the field in half for the QB, but the CFL field is wide enough that there is still plenty of room for receivers to run their pass patterns.
BTW if Jennings had stayed in the pocket he probably wouldn't have been able to complete the pass to Manny for the winning TD.
Ok here is another pet peeve: 5 or 6 receiver formations. When does the QB ever have enough time to find a 5th or 6th receiver? Almost never unless he is flushed out of the pocket. I don't want the 5th or 6th guy downfield blocking after the catch, instead I want a TE or FB blocking for for the QB before the pass is made or run blocking at the line of scrimmage. :bang:un
However, its more difficult to roll out from the spread offence, unless the defensive end takes an inside route and usually you need play action to create that.
The spread offence began at the university level in the U.S. It was a way for less prestigious football programs to compete with the big boys like Michigan, Note Dame, U.S.C., Oklahoma, Texas, Ohio State, etc. who could recruit the best blue chip offensive lineman, tight ends and running backs.
The spread offence was first introduced as an innovative offence that would enable an underdog team to compete with more powerful teams at the college level. By moving away from a power running game, where an underdog team would struggle against a powerhouse defense, the spread offence gave less talented teams a shot at victory.
All the spread initially needed was a smart quarterback who would release the football quickly and some speedy receivers spread across the field. The fullback was removed from the offence and an additional receiver was added. Spread offences, at times, also took their tailback out of the offence and added another receiver to the mix. The concept was that the offensive line was mainly needed for pass blocking; the running attack was used sparingly to keep opposition defenses off balance, as the spread was mainly a passing offence.
With receivers spread across the playing field, the strategy was to find seams in the opposition zone defense and to find them quickly. The strategy also was based on the belief that it would be more difficult for teams to blitz, needing their linebackers to help out in defending the passing attack. The spread offensive philosophy also maintained, with fewer defenders in the box, that a fast tailback could break a running play for a long gain, once he got past the initial line of scrimmage.The quarterback lined up in the shotgun, enabling him to have already established his drop and to get rid of the football faster.
With smaller offensive lineman, they passed more and adopted zone run blocking, most often using smaller tailbacks to run cut back plays off the zone read run. If they had a mobile quarterback, they often used the zone read option, with the quarterback reading the defensive end and either handing the football off or keeping it.
The spread offence spread to the pros, with a number of NFL teams adopting the spread, including the New England Patriots, who were one of the first to see its advantages. In the CFL, John Hufnagel and Jeff Tedford, in Calgary, created the CFL version of the spread offence. Using five and six receivers, he was able to create mismatches with fast receivers being covered by slower linebackers.
The spread offence was first introduced in the CFL in Calgary by offensive coordinator John Hufnagel and quarterback coach Jeff Tedford. CFL defences were very slow to adapt and were stuck using a linebacker or two to defend against the fifth or sixth receiver. Doug Flutie could also take off, often with lots of room to run.
As Calgary enjoyed success with the spread offence other teams began to copy and soon the spread offence was being employed by all CFL offences.
In the NFL, the Pro Offence, or a version of it, had been in vogue for a long time. Offences usually had a tight end and a fullback. There were some exceptions such as Air Coryell and the Run and Shoot and Washington used the H back, a hybrid tight end/fullback for a period of time. Then the West Coast offence became popular after San Francisco was so successful. But in the last decade or so, the spread offence became the most popular offence to implement in the NFL. Ten NFL teams don't even have a fullback.
But many successful NFL teams have moved away from the spread offence. They use the spread formation for a lot of passing downs but the spread offence is not their offensive philosophy. New England introduced two tight ends back into their offensive philosophy. They will spread their tight end Gronkowski out at times. Tom Brady takes a fairly high percentage snap under center now and is not in the shotgun or pistol exclusively. Seattle often uses a fullback, tight end, two tight ends, and even ustwo tight ends and a fullback. The Packers, Jets, and Chargers also use their fullback a lot.
In the CFL, Chapdelaine of our Leos, began to use tight ends and fullbacks more often in 2011 and 2012. The problem was that we had a fullback in Lumbala but no true tight ends. So we often lined up Lumbala as a tight end or we used an additional offensive lineman. The problem is that the offensive lineman is not useful as a receiver and therefore doesn't pose a threat to the pass defence.
I really believed we were on the right track last season when we recruited two tight ends. The tight end could be used as a blocker for the run or pass game and he could also release to be a receiver. We could line him up tight or spread him out if we chose to. However, we never did. All we did was line him up as a slot back. Then we got rid of the idea.
This season, Khari Jones has often used a tight end or even two, but they are usually Lumbala, an extra offensive lineman or Lumbala and an extra offensive lineman. But we do use our fullback more than any other CFL team and have for quite a number of years.
I would love to see us go with a true tight end and four receivers. We could use Lumbala as a second tight end, a fullback, or take him out for a fifth receiver for the five receiver set on certain passing downs.
It would be more diversified for both the running game and the passing game. We could lead block with it, add a more diversified running attack, and still be dangerous with play action. Its difficult to run outside with the spread offence.
CFL defenses have adapted to the spread offence. They either blitz the hell out of it, or they drop 8 or 9 into coverage or both. They use zone blitzes and they most often use a nickel back, rather than a third linebacker and quite often use a dime back, either taking a second linebacker out of the game or a defensive lineman. Linebackers are fast now and their pass coverage skills are considered more important than their run defense skills. In the NFL now, using a nickel back has become a base defense against many teams.
Every CFL team is stuck in the spread offence and they have been for a long, long time now. Innovators are usually advantaged.
The time is more than ripe for a CFL offence to get away from the spread offence.
I thought I had missed your postgame thread. I'll always have something to say after a game and I love to quote stats but it takes me 90 minutes to get back to Langley after a home game. I hope someone steps in sooner with a postgame thread this week. I'll post when I can.
