Chiefs sticking with spread offense?

[SenselessChiefsFan]

I am sick of talking about Hali and DJ fitting into the 3-4 and whether the Chiefs are going to draft an ILB, a RT or an injured WR.... so, why not bring up something that will make Mecca's head explode.

First, I am not saying the Chiefs will use the spread offense as extensively as they did last year.

However, if you watched the Cards under Haley last year, they used a ton of the spread.

And, if you watched the Pats, Cassel played his best from the shotgun in the spread offense.

For those of you who don't think the spread has much of a future in the NFL... much of what the Pats have run over the last two years has been based on the spread.

In fact, after further examination, I think Cassel and Thigpen's playing style is more similar than it is different. Cassel is clearly more polished and tended to make quicker better reads, and of course is two inches taller.

But, he was more comfortable in the shotgun, similar to Thigpen. He is also a scrambler, similar to Thigpen. And, he was the most comfortable using the spread formation, simialr to Thigpen.

Could the Chiefs have picked him up BECAUSE he will make a good spread QB?

Gailey and Haley are very similar in that they will not force the issue, they will do what their players do best. I think the spread will be a large part of the offensive package utilized in KC.

What I don't know is why the 'spread' has such a negative conotation. Teams have used versions of this in the NFL for a long time.

I have even come up with a name for the offense that I think we will see this year, the 'West Coast Spread'. I believe they will combine many of the pilosophies of the west coast sytem: Larger receivers, shorter passes, slants, etc. I think they will be a primarily zone running team. And, finally, I think that Cassel will see a larger part of the time in the shotgun spread formation.

Now, that I have laid out what I think will happen..... based on nothing more than what I think the talent on the team will be good at as well as what the coaches have done in the past.... you guys can flame me.

Yes... this is a stab in the dark. No, I am not an insider. But, frankly, I would rather get flamed on something new and interesting than continue to argue whether Hali can be an OLB or whether positional value should outweigh actual player evaluation.

[Sully]

Originally Posted by SensibleChiefsfan

See, I think you are under the impression that it can only be the spread if you use the spread option. That is not the case.

And, I believe in a few games, the Pats even ran the spread option in the form of the wild cat formation..... but that was not what I was talking about.

After this came up, I just googled spread offense.... Patriots spread offense, cardinals spread offense.

And, several things popped up from different people that supported my position. Most were mainly bloggers that don't have a done of credibility. But, I think now that you know where I am coming from you will agree that the Pats and Cards did run the spread.

You can be under the impression that I think that, but since I never gave you any evidence to think that, you'd be wrong.
And I don't agree about the pats and cards.

[keg in kc]

Both the Pats and the Cards ran primarily from the spread.

Steelers, too.

[Sweet Daddy Hate]

Originally Posted by Sully

You can be under the impression that I think that, but since I never gave you any evidence to think that, you'd be wrong.
And I don't agree about the pats and cards.

[Kyle DeLexus]

Heading to class so I didn't read all this, but wanted to throw out that it's hard to establish a running game from the spread formation. I believe that is what people dislike the most of it. When you get in the redzone, there is only so much you can do without having a running attack. So, I agree with whoever posted that there is nothing wrong with the spread formation in between the 20's. Yet, you can't be like we were last year and look like a Junior High JV squad when you line up behind center.

[keg in kc]

Originally Posted by MWagg72

Heading to class so I didn't read all this, but wanted to throw out that it's hard to establish a running game from the spread formation.

The Chiefs were in many ways a spread team from 2001-2005, and they ran the ball fine for the most part (the problem I mentioned earlier in the thread being the exception). Beyond that, some would argue that the types of passes emphasized by spread routes are basically an extension of the running game - short passes geared towards giving receivers a chance at yards after the catch. As we saw a lot, you can also exploit aggresive defensive tendencies by using traps, draws and throwing in screen passes. What you can't do is power run, because you don't have the right personnel on the line (no TE or a pass-catching TE spread wide) and often no FB. And generally, the teams that run it go for athletic linemen over drive blockers, which exacerbates the problem.

In other words, you can run, you just have to go about it a little differently...

[Red Dawg]

The spread limits the running game pure and simple. It's allows an offense to become predictable.

[Sweet Daddy Hate]

Originally Posted by Tuckdaddy

The spread limits the running game pure and simple. It's allows an offense to become predictable.

Tsk-tsk! It allows your Quarterback to become the rushing leader!

Win-win!

[keg in kc]

Predictable offenses are the result of gameplanning, not some inherent design flaw within a scheme. And nobody is going to run a spread 100% of the time any more than they'd max protect 100% of the time.

What an offense should have (in my humble opinion) are elements of different schemes and personnel formations built around generating exploitable matchups. We had that for a while under Saunders, but they couldn't do anything on the other side of the ball. Hopefully we can head that direction again, but with a more balanced overall team.

[SenselessChiefsFan]

Originally Posted by Sully

You can be under the impression that I think that, but since I never gave you any evidence to think that, you'd be wrong.
And I don't agree about the pats and cards.

The fact that you don't agree about the Pats and Cards demonstrates your ignorance, not mine.

You really haven't given me any evidence or logic for what you think. That is probably because you have none of either on this subject.

[philfree]

I would imagine that running "the spread" in college is alot different then a pro offense spreading out the D with some spread formations. In college the O linemen line up farther apart when theyrun the spread. I don't think NFL O linemen would line up near as far apart as the Mizzou linemen do.


PhilFree

[Sully]

Originally Posted by SensibleChiefsfan

The fact that you don't agree about the Pats and Cards demonstrates your ignorance, not mine.

You really haven't given me any evidence or logic for what you think. That is probably because you have none of either on this subject.

I've coached on a team that runs the spread for three years. I've sat in on clinics with mizzou and ku coaches, as well as met with a few of the teams that run it best in the area. I know a little bit about it. I'm not the be all end all on it, but so far I haven't seen you come near a convincing argument.

[Sweet Daddy Hate]

Originally Posted by Sully

I've coached on a team that runs the spread for three years. I've sat in on clinics with mizzou and ku coaches, as well as met with a few of the teams that run it best in the area. I know a little bit about it. I'm not the be all end all on it, but so far I haven't seen you come near a convincing argument.

[OnTheWarpath15]

Originally Posted by Sully

I've coached on a team that runs the spread for three years. I've sat in on clinics with mizzou and ku coaches, as well as met with a few of the teams that run it best in the area. I know a little bit about it. I'm not the be all end all on it, but so far I haven't seen you come near a convincing argument.

[Kyle DeLexus]

Originally Posted by keg in kc

The Chiefs were in many ways a spread team from 2001-2005, and they ran the ball fine for the most part (the problem I mentioned earlier in the thread being the exception). Beyond that, some would argue that the types of passes emphasized by spread routes are basically an extension of the running game - short passes geared towards giving receivers a chance at yards after the catch. As we saw a lot, you can also exploit aggresive defensive tendencies by using traps, draws and throwing in screen passes. What you can't do is power run, because you don't have the right personnel on the line (no TE or a pass-catching TE spread wide) and often no FB. And generally, the teams that run it go for athletic linemen over drive blockers, which exacerbates the problem.

In other words, you can run, you just have to go about it a little differently...

Exactly, I didn't mean you can't run out of it at all, but that it's harder to do. You have to be creative and have good playcalling. It is not designed with the running game in mind though. That is why you see the shotgun in obvious passing situations. I like the options that we could have using the spread as part of our offense, but not to the extent that some teams have taken it to. As you said, you can't establish a power run out of the formation. That is a problem. That power running game controls the clock and helps in the redzone. If we had a better running game to go with our spread, we could have been a completely different team W-L wise. I guess I agree with your other post that you have to find the right balance.

[SenselessChiefsFan]

Originally Posted by Sully

I've coached on a team that runs the spread for three years. I've sat in on clinics with mizzou and ku coaches, as well as met with a few of the teams that run it best in the area. I know a little bit about it. I'm not the be all end all on it, but so far I haven't seen you come near a convincing argument.

Then you really should pay closer attention at the clinics, or perhaps watch some of the Cards and Patriots film. I don't know which.

I hope your boss isn't reading this thread, because you may have just lost your job.