The Spread and Paul Johnson

DCirishfan

New member
Messages
1,188
Reaction score
40
To me it is clear now. Notre Dame is not now or ever will be a successful spread team. Why? Ask Nebraska why they were not a bill callahan west coast team. Paul Johnson's option is the way to go. We are a team that has always prided itself on having big uglies upfront and running the ball and stopping the run. All this pansy shotgun on 3rd and 1garbage will never cut it with our team. I like BK and believe he is a good coach, but , he needs to build his scheme to fit the players and not the other way around. We need to dominate the line of scrimage, until that happens enjoy never being close to what we used to be.
 

GoingGreen

New member
Messages
665
Reaction score
11
Three games of the spread being pretty successful and it's time to make a change?
 

zemaniak

New member
Messages
151
Reaction score
22
except this no-huddle spread is exposing OUR defense MORE then our opponents'!
 

IrishLax

Something Witty
Staff member
Messages
37,544
Reaction score
28,990
If we had caught the pass at the end of the Michigan game and not blown a fake FG would you be saying that? Or would you be saying "yippee we're 3-0! Go spread offense!"?

Serious question.
 

Jason Pham

Administrator
Messages
2,608
Reaction score
320
What is it about our personnel that makes running the ball in an option spread the most ideal? What is it about the spread that doesn't fit our players? How is it that a scheme for which we have not recruited and which has not been a part of the program for almost a decade has stuck? What is it about Florida that makes their transition to the spread workable and what is it about Notre Dame that prevents such a transition from taking place? What is it that makes it possible for Brian Kelly to install a spread offense at other schools with success and what is it that makes Notre Dame so different as to prevent such success? I'm just missing your causal logic here.
 
Last edited:

DirtySecret

Banned
Messages
1,420
Reaction score
47
What is it about our personnel that makes running the ball in an option spread the most ideal? What is it about the spread that doesn't fit our players? How is it that a scheme for which we have not recruited and which has not been a part of the program for almost a decade has stuck? What is it about Florida that makes their transition to the spread workable and what is it about Notre Dame that prevents such a transition from taking place? What is it that makes it possible for Brian Kelly to install a spread offense at other schools with success and what is it that makes Notre Dame so different as to prevent such success? I'm just missing your causal logic here.

Actuallly Florida is having problems of there own finding a offensive identity post Tebow. But I get your point..
 

RyCo1983

Formerly known as TheFlyingAlamo
Messages
3,596
Reaction score
191
Paul Johnson's triple option would be HORRIBLE for the Irish!!!

NO GIMMICKS
 

phgreek

New member
Messages
6,956
Reaction score
433
To me it is clear now. Notre Dame is not now or ever will be a successful spread team. Why? Ask Nebraska why they were not a bill callahan west coast team. Paul Johnson's option is the way to go. We are a team that has always prided itself on having big uglies upfront and running the ball and stopping the run. All this pansy shotgun on 3rd and 1garbage will never cut it with our team. I like BK and believe he is a good coach, but , he needs to build his scheme to fit the players and not the other way around. We need to dominate the line of scrimage, until that happens enjoy never being close to what we used to be.

I don't know Bro...what I can say is our QB seems to be upright most of the time, and our current o-line does not look like a sieve. Seems to me our o line is suited for this attack.

Players or Scheme supremacy...for a new coach, both is your answer.

No one ignores the talent they have, and the profile of the kid they get...

on D we are now in the right scheme based on what we have, and who we will get....no one would argue that..

On offense, we don't get the #s of big uglies we used to get. We do get smart guys that aren't the elite...as the '07 season showed you, if you do not have an O-line capable of executing the blocks...things go bad....did things get markedly better after that...Jimmy was a punching bag his entire career. Pro style didn't work...we don't get the big uglies to run the paul johnson option...so then what...

So based on our personnel, I think we have a great offensive scheme....
look back at the USC game of '05...the drive quinn&co put together when we were down like 14 to 7...quick reads, some times from a shotgun...2-3 count and out...unstopable.

The fit was there then...so I think if anything we have been denying our offensive identity for the last 6 years... (yea we put up #s, but our QB got killed, and we could not hold off defenses at the end of games to save our ***...for specific citation...go watch the Navy game from last year)

We are in the schemes we need to be in for the foreseeable future...as well these schemes seem to utilize what we have as well as any other...schemes are new on both sides so things will get better...

yea I'm pissed we keep losing but a sceme can't make your guys take care of the football, and wrap up on tackles...which BTW if we do those VERY fundamental things, we are 3 and 0.
 

mgriff

Useful idiot
Messages
3,525
Reaction score
307
I think the biggest negative of the system is its impact on our defense. They look improved on certain drives, but the same result is happening due to being on the field longer. The same results are happening because the chances are increased. I think it is working on the offensive side of the ball, but I think it is hurting our defense.
 

IrishinSyria

In truth lies victory
Messages
6,042
Reaction score
1,920
I think the biggest negative of the system is its impact on our defense. They look improved on certain drives, but the same result is happening due to being on the field longer. The same results are happening because the chances are increased. I think it is working on the offensive side of the ball, but I think it is hurting our defense.

Agree. The shock and awe 100+ snaps a game offense puts a ton of pressure on our D. We have to score at least an extra TD a game to justify treating time of possession as a stat to be scorned, and so far that has not happened.
 

DCirishfan

New member
Messages
1,188
Reaction score
40
We can all agree, until we get better athletes on d we will be average at best. Pretty simple. Weis did a great job recruiting offense not so much on defense. I still say running game and d = wins same as always. If you can accomplish that through open lanes in the spread so be it but it has to be done.
 

DCirishfan

New member
Messages
1,188
Reaction score
40
Paul Johnson's triple option would be HORRIBLE for the Irish!!!

NO GIMMICKS


With respect the triple option is hardly a gimmick. It is one of the foundations of football. I don't like it that much but historically we have been best with a real ball control offense and a punishing defense.
 

RyCo1983

Formerly known as TheFlyingAlamo
Messages
3,596
Reaction score
191
With respect the triple option is hardly a gimmick. It is one of the foundations of football. I don't like it that much but historically we have been best with a real ball control offense and a punishing defense.

What I meant was that it is outdated and not widely effective. Johnson seems to be able to make it work. Most can't.
I absolutely agree. We need a punishing defense...The incoming recruits (if they stay Irish) will go a long way into helping for that type of defense.
I'd much rather us run out of the I-form and jam it down their throats. I really would like to see Kelly have the boys, with Crist at QB, line up in the I a bit. I don't recall seeing them do that with Crist...they did with Montana a bit.
 

DCirishfan

New member
Messages
1,188
Reaction score
40
I am not allowed to talk about Montana lol but go back and watch the days when we had Reggie Brooks and Bettis, we didn't pass that well but I'll be damned if we didn't push people around. To me that is and always will be Irish football.
 

RyCo1983

Formerly known as TheFlyingAlamo
Messages
3,596
Reaction score
191
I am not allowed to talk about Montana lol but go back and watch the days when we had Reggie Brooks and Bettis, we didn't pass that well but I'll be damned if we didn't push people around. To me that is and always will be Irish football.

Oh absolutely. I have a dvd collection of a bunch of Holtz classics.
In the offseason I'll put a game in and break out a bottle of bourbon or Jack and enjoy.

I'd LOVE to see us pound the ball more...but the triple option is going to far. haha
 

zemaniak

New member
Messages
151
Reaction score
22
i was so gay for that team (bettis and company)

...and so very straight since!
 
Top