Urban Meyer Already Starting to look

[Whiskeyjack]

Spread formations aren't gimmicky by nature. NFL teams incorporate Spread principles into their offensive schemes more and more with each passing year. Several Super Bowl winners in recent years are known as primarily Spread teams.

The Spread Option isn't viable in the NFL because of the Option, not the Spread. A pass first Spread like Kelly's can produce NFL ready prospects just as well traditional pro-style teams.

Now, some players are better suited for pro systems, especially RBs and QBs, and they should go to colleges that have systems that fit their games (and that includes spread-type players as well).

This is one of the few situations where I think it's legitimate to prefer one system over another.

 

[pkt77242]

QUOTE=Whiskeyjack; Spread formations aren't gimmicky by nature. NFL teams incorporate Spread principles into their offensive schemes more and more with each passing year. Several Super Bowl winners in recent years are known as primarily Spread teams.The Spread Option isn't viable in the NFL because of the Option, not the Spread. A pass first Spread like Kelly's can produce NFL ready prospects just as well traditional pro-style teams.
This is one of the few situations where I think it's legitimate to prefer one system over another.[/QUOTE]


My emphasis. Look at the NE teams that won Super Bowls and the Colts. The spread works at the pro level just not the spread option. To bad for Cam Newton.

 

[NDinL.A.]

I think having two players, #1 and the #2 (only a few votes behind the winner) voted DPOY is a pretty good ratio of current success.

We can go back and forth all night on what USC players have been good and which ones have been busts. You guys have had so many players recently drafted high that there is a great sample space for it. Your DPOYs could be countered with Matt Leinart, Dwayne Jarrett, Mike Williams (recovered nicely this year though), etc. And you could counter with guys as well. Sadly, we haven't had nearly as many draftees recently

 

[Rocket89]

Two words I hate which are used in CFB: gimmick and relevance.

What the heck is a gimmicky offense?

Let's say the ball is snapped, and the quarterback holds the ball but does a dance number as he drops back. His running back goes down on his knees and barks like a dog. The receivers each turn to the sidelines and act like their painting on a canvas.

THAT sounds like some sort of gimmicky offense.

I hate the word gimmick. It's just an ugly word, it sounds stupid, no one uses it correctly, and it's brought up way too much in college football.

 

[beryirish]

Meyer's Liar Antics.....

You can't blame the guy. It's like any othe job. You start at the bottom. You gain your experience. You start to perform well and the boss promotes you (raise) or other bosses come and offer you a better opportunity. But if you are looking around you don't tell your current boss. He'd be more then willing to let you go and not care.

Meyer is no different. Started at BG. Went to one of his camps in high school..I thought he had pretty good charisma. He started to perform well....a better opportunity came at Utah. Best for him and his career and his family..he took it. He started to perform well at Utah...a better opportunity came to progress his career and make more money for his family to support...he took it.

I don't blame Urban for his history one bit because it's what everyone else does he is just in a national spotlight.

 

[Trojan Princess]

Meyer's Liar Antics.....

You can't blame the guy. It's like any othe job. You start at the bottom. You gain your experience. You start to perform well and the boss promotes you (raise) or other bosses come and offer you a better opportunity. But if you are looking around you don't tell your current boss. He'd be more then willing to let you go and not care.

Meyer is no different. Started at BG. Went to one of his camps in high school..I thought he had pretty good charisma. He started to perform well....a better opportunity came at Utah. Best for him and his career and his family..he took it. He started to perform well at Utah...a better opportunity came to progress his career and make more money for his family to support...he took it.

I don't blame Urban for his history one bit because it's what everyone else does he is just in a national spotlight.

The problem with CUM is...he consistently lied about it. Over and over.

Bottom line, he is a good coach, there are many programs out there that would love to have him. I don't, and thankfully, many of my fellow Trojans agreed.

Wouldn't mind seeing him across the field every year though.

 

[Rocket89]

There's only one man with the integrity and upstanding character to guide USC in their post-Kiffin years.

He also has an intimate knowledge of California and the ND-USC rivalry.

 

[Whiskeyjack]

Interesting that two of the teams you mention, NE and the Colts...their system is run by two HOF quality QBs....both of whom were nurtured and taught their skills as classic pro style QBs.

The spread wasn't predominant at the college level when Brady and Manning were playing in the mid to late '90s, so that's probably not a meaningful correlation.

I found a decent article about college Spread QBs v. college Pro-Style QBs in the NFL.

Of the 24 quarterbacks taken in the first or second round of the draft since 2005, 11 ran a variation of the spread offense in college. Despite starting fewer games in the NFL than their non-spread counterparts, their career statistics are almost identical.

Recent QB History
Quarterbacks drafted in first or second round career numbers, since 2005.

Spread No Spread
Players 11 13
Starts 256 341
Career win pct. .518 .481
Playoff W-L 5-5 8-6
Comp pct. 59.6 59.0
TD-INT ratio 1.22 1.39
Passer rating 80.7 80.4

The 11 spread quarterbacks had a slightly higher passer rating in the NFL than the non-spread quarterbacks. They also had a higher completion percentage and winning percentage.

It is reasonable to believe the players who ran the spread in college would struggle in their first year in the league. Again, that is not the case. Of the quarterbacks drafted in the first two rounds since 2005, 11 of them took 150 or more snaps in their rookie seasons. Of those players, the spread quarterbacks started fewer games but had a higher completion percentage and TD-to-INT ratio. However, the spread quarterbacks were sacked at a higher rate, which could point to an inability to read defenses and make decisions as efficiently.

It goes on to point out that the best rookie QB in 2010, Sam Bradford, came from the spread, as did several QBs for playoff teams. Furthermore, three of the four QBs taken in the 2011 1st round came from the spread.

Your point about pro-style offenses better preparing recruits for the NFL is still conventional wisdom, and it undoubtedly helps with USC's recruiting, but I don't think that's going to be the case for much longer.

There's only one man with the integrity and upstanding character to guide USC in their post-Kiffin years.

He also has an intimate knowledge of California and the ND-USC rivalry.

Available, he is. (Not sure why, but that picture of Willingham reminded me of Yoda)

 

[Trojan Princess]

The spread wasn't predominant at the college level when Brady and Manning were playing in the mid to late '90s, so that's probably not a meaningful correlation.

I found a decent article about college Spread QBs v. college Pro-Style QBs in the NFL.



It goes on to point out that the best rookie QB in 2010, Sam Bradford, came from the spread, as did several QBs for playoff teams. Furthermore, three of the four QBs taken in the 2011 1st round came from the spread.

Your point about pro-style offenses better preparing recruits for the NFL is still conventional wisdom, and it undoubtedly helps with USC's recruiting, but I don't think that's going to be the case for much longer.



Available, he is. (Not sure why, but that picture of Willingham reminded me of Yoda)

Thanks for the link...but I can also provide same in opposition. I was member of the ESPN National Board for a number of years, with representatives of the major conferences and their premium members...lots of great discussion and opposing opinions.

Michigan, Florida and other fans supplied links and articles to make their case. Interestingly, Oklahoma fans were adamant that they did not run the spread. I just think it's much too soon to make a claim to the long term success of the system and players at the next level. If and when, the spread is adapted throughout the NFL, then a change will happen at USC. I'm thankful we have kids in the most important position on the field, QB that want to play for USC, and they specifically mention the pro system as a reason.

You teach what gets your students a position at the highest level, then it becomes up to them to implement what they've been taught. They don't succeed, it's on them, you have provided the education.

 

[Whiskeyjack]

Thanks for the link...but I can also provide same in opposition. I was member of the ESPN National Board for a number of years, with representatives of the major conferences and their premium members...lots of great discussion and opposing opinions.

Michigan, Florida and other fans supplied links and articles to make their case. Interestingly, Oklahoma fans were adamant that they did not run the spread. I just think it's much too soon to make a claim to the long term success of the system and players at the next level. If and when, the spread is adapted throughout the NFL, then a change will happen at USC. I'm thankful we have kids in the most important position on the field, QB that want to play for USC, and they specifically mention the pro system as a reason.

To be clear, I'm not arguing that the Spread does a better job at producing NFL-ready prospects than the Pro-style, or that USC should switch to the Spread. I was simply addressing your contention that a Pro-style offense better prepares college players from the NFL than the Spread; the limited research I did seems to imply that the system one played in college (at least for QBs, which is the position most commonly cited in this argument) has virtually no impact on how they perform in the NFL.

If you have any countervailing evidence, I'd be interested to read it.

You teach what gets your students a position at the highest level, then it becomes up to them to implement what they've been taught. They don't succeed, it's on them, you have provided the education.

The evidence shows that Spread offenses get players to the highest level just as frequently as Pro-style ones.

 

[Trojan Princess]

Wait, are you that lady SC fan/"writer" (if you want to call it that...) that has written blogs and stories? You kind of sound like her. I have read one or two of her paragraphs. Bipolar at best, and reminder that a little knowledge is a dangerous thing.

I just skimmed this thread, and you came in making all kinds of personal attacks on Urban. Not that I care, but then another poster got accused of getting "personal" with you when he was simply making a neutral statement. Hmmm. What exactly is your point of hanging out here? Are you that writer looking to get the inside scoop? I can tell you, I was not impressed by that writer. She sounds like a ticking time bomb.

If I'm wrong, then...um...carry on.

I have no idea who you're talking about...I post on WeAreSC, and get along well with Irish fans there.

They're welcomed on our board, and speak their mind.

Is Meyer an untouchable god here, or what?

 

[johnnykillz]

Is Meyer an untouchable god here, or what?

Hell no.

Absolutely not.

He is mud.

And Kiffin: sh it.

 

[johnnykillz]

Bruce Pearl:

"I've made mistakes, I clearly did, but what I was hoping for was that some other dumbass would get on the front page and take me off the hook,'' Pearl said. "I miss Lane Kiffin.''

Bruce Pearl: "I miss Lane Kiffin" | Ask Griff | GoVolsXtra.com

 

[NeuteredDoomer]

I have no idea who you're talking about...I post on WeAreSC, and get along well with Irish fans there.

They're welcomed on our board, and speak their mind.

Is Meyer an untouchable god here, or what?

Not for me. I consider coaches as coaches. Not gods. Like I said, I really don't care.

 

[ThePiombino]

I have no idea who you're talking about...I post on WeAreSC, and get along well with Irish fans there.

They're welcomed on our board, and speak their mind.

Is Meyer an untouchable god here, or what?

Firstly, I'm having a hard time buying all this. You say in one breath that you do not like UM because of his past of lying, yet you like LK because of his current keeping quiet, totally ignoring his past. Seems hypocritical...

Secondly, I don't understand how an offense (the spread and variations there of) can be considered a gimmick when so many teams implement it these days. There was a time when the forward pass was considered a gimmick, but that's because maybe a handful of teams were utilizing it at first. Nowadays, we would look sideways at a person trying to suggest that the forward pass is a gimmick. I hate to burst your bubble, but the time to refer to the spread as a gimmick has come and gone.

 

[NeuteredDoomer]

Thread doesn't have to become about Trojan Princess. As a matter of fact, she wrote so well with much football awareness and evidence to support her point that I did think she was a writer.

I too have called the spread "gimmicky." I have posted several times that I don't like the running game out of the spread. But you can't deny, the offense and variations of it are all over the place. As a matter of fact, it is hard to find a college team on TV that doesn't run it. Offense is constantly evolving.

 

[Trojan Princess]

Firstly, I'm having a hard time buying all this. You say in one breath that you do not like UM because of his past of lying, yet you like LK because of his current keeping quiet, totally ignoring his past. Seems hypocritical...

Secondly, I don't understand how an offense (the spread and variations there of) can be considered a gimmick when so many teams implement it these days. There was a time when the forward pass was considered a gimmick, but that's because maybe a handful of teams were utilizing it at first. Nowadays, we would look sideways at a person trying to suggest that the forward pass is a gimmick. I hate to burst your bubble, but the time to refer to the spread as a gimmick has come and gone.

You don't have to "buy" anything, it's my opinion. I'm not stating it to change anyone's mind, I honestly don't care about doing that. I'm here to learn and study the current Irish mindset, what the fans feel about coaching, recruiting and other Notre Dame related issues - it has zero to do with agreement or disagreement, that's not my place. I could care less what system Notre Dame runs, I do care that this rivalry become competitive again, it's exciting and good for college football when it is.

As for Lane, his past involves 2001-2006 at USC...so, I would say we know the guy. I attended many USC practices during that time, and interacted with him on several occasions, and a few of your moderators can tell you that members of WeAreSC and FIghtOn247 (in addition to alumni groups and support clubs) get together regularly for "Meet 'N Greets" and we discuss our views and experiences with the coaching staff and players. The Kiffin that coached in the SEC was a different Kiffin at USC before, and now. I didn't like the SEC Kiffin at all...that guy is not welcome back home. I have no idea why the Vols put up with it.

The spread is still referred to as a gimmick in NFL circles, just not in the college game. Will the NFL change that? We'll see. Personally, I'm opposed to running it because I think it's unfair to our players...you can't just use them to win in college and bring in money, then not teach them a system they will be expected to learn from ground zero in the NFL. The coaches just have to work that much harder to win, and run the system utilized by the majority of the NFL.

Can QBs from the spread offense adapt to the NFL? | National Football Post

NFL: NFL draft: spread offense: quarterbacks: Texas Tech's Graham Harrell - ESPN

NFL says no to spread offenses | Sports | Football | PE.com | Southern California News | News for Inland Southern California

2010 NFL Draft: The Spread Offense Debate « NFL Mocks | Covering the 2012 NFL drafts, Mock Draft Database, Scouting Reports, and Fantasy Football

Just a small sample, quickly complied, there are persuasive arguments for the spread...I just "don't buy it", and evidently the majority of Trojan fans don't as well.

 

[beryirish]

You don't have to "buy" anything, it's my opinion. I'm not stating it to change anyone's mind, I honestly don't care about doing that. I'm here to learn and study the current Irish mindset, what the fans feel about coaching, recruiting and other Notre Dame related issues - it has zero to do with agreement or disagreement, that's not my place. I could care less what system Notre Dame runs, I do care that this rivalry become competitive again, it's exciting and good for college football when it is.

As for Lane, his past involves 2001-2006 at USC...so, I would say we know the guy. I attended many USC practices during that time, and interacted with him on several occasions, and a few of your moderators can tell you that members of WeAreSC and FIghtOn247 (in addition to alumni groups and support clubs) get together regularly for "Meet 'N Greets" and we discuss our views and experiences with the coaching staff and players. The Kiffin that coached in the SEC was a different Kiffin at USC before, and now. I didn't like the SEC Kiffin at all...that guy is not welcome back home. I have no idea why the Vols put up with it.

The spread is still referred to as a gimmick in NFL circles, just not in the college game. Will the NFL change that? We'll see. Personally, I'm opposed to running it because I think it's unfair to our players...you can't just use them to win in college and bring in money, then not teach them a system they will be expected to learn from ground zero in the NFL. The coaches just have to work that much harder to win, and run the system utilized by the majority of the NFL.

Can QBs from the spread offense adapt to the NFL? | National Football Post

NFL: NFL draft: spread offense: quarterbacks: Texas Tech's Graham Harrell - ESPN

NFL says no to spread offenses | Sports | Football | PE.com | Southern California News | News for Inland Southern California

2010 NFL Draft: The Spread Offense Debate « NFL Mocks | Covering the 2012 NFL drafts, Mock Draft Database, Scouting Reports, and Fantasy Football

Just a small sample, quickly complied, there are persuasive arguments for the spread...I just "don't buy it", and evidently the majority of Trojan fans don't as well.

Personally, I don't think college should be considered just a stepping stone to the NFL. Some players have no intention or chance of playing in the NFL. Yet, they are still competitive and want to win. So I think its unfair to them that the team be forced to run an offense just to get some of the players on the team ready for the NFL. I'm more of a believer that the NFL doesn't care what offense is run in college. They look at athletes that can make it and run their system. As a college coach, my job is to win, develope great athletes, build a great college program and have a strong emphasis for the athletes to graduate school

 

[NDinL.A.]

I too have called the spread "gimmicky." I have posted several times that I don't like the running game out of the spread. But you can't deny, the offense and variations of it are all over the place. As a matter of fact, it is hard to find a college team on TV that doesn't run it. Offense is constantly evolving.

This is a great point that, in fairness, we cannot overlook. We all used to be proud of having a pro-style offense because it got players ready for the pros. Like Neut, I did not like the spread. But like I said, it wins. And Kelly's spread has many pro-style principles.

Now, Trojan Princess, as for preparing kids for the NFL, your point just doesn't carry as much weight as it used to. Kids in spread offense are making it in the NFL. Kids are getting drafted and making a lot of money, coming from spread offenses. In the end, it's about talent in the NFL. That talent is nurtured and developed in the college game. We had CW developing our QBs and they got drafted high. Tate did also. But the most of the rest of the offensive players, despite being in a pro-style offense, weren't drafted high. So either they weren't talented enough or they weren't coached up. System had nothing to do with it. If they get drafted and they are making money, well then, they were prepared for the NFL regardless of the system.

Let's look at this past year's draft, and look at the offensive players who were drafted high coming out of the spread offense:

* Cam Newton: 1st overall pick
* Blaine Gabbert: Ahead of several other pro-style QBs
* Mike Pouncey
* Nate Solder
* Danny Watkins
* Derek Sherrod

2nd Round:
* Andy Dalton
* Colin Kaepernick (pistol)
* Ryan Williams
* Kyle Rudolph (one yr in the spread)
* Titus Young
* Stefen Wisniewski
* Benjamin Ijalana
* Mikel Leshoure
* Torrey Smith
* Daniel Thomas
* Marcus Gilbert
* Randall Cobb

Do you see what I'm saying? That's a ton of offensive players that came from the spread or some version of a 'college' offense that won't translate to pro-style offenses. So the pro scouts can bemoan the rise of the spread all they want, but the truth is, they're still drafting spread players, and high in the draft. 2 yrs in a row, the #1 pick has come from a spread offense. And 3 yrs ago, the 2nd pick came from a spread offense.

Face it, it's changing...

 

[Whiskeyjack]

The spread is still referred to as a gimmick in NFL circles, just not in the college game. Will the NFL change that? We'll see.

We are seeing it. The NFL uses more Spread concepts with each passing year, they're drafting more players out of the Spread, and QBs that came out of the Spread produce just as well as Pro-style guys.

Personally, I'm opposed to running it because I think it's unfair to our players...you can't just use them to win in college and bring in money, then not teach them a system they will be expected to learn from ground zero in the NFL. The coaches just have to work that much harder to win, and run the system utilized by the majority of the NFL.

First off, let's be clear that QB is the only position for which this is even an issue right now. Second, as I noted above, the evidence shows that Spread QBs are producing just as well as Pro-style QBs when they get to the NFL, so I don't see how the Spread guys are being disadvantaged.

Can QBs from the spread offense adapt to the NFL? | National Football Post

NFL: NFL draft: spread offense: quarterbacks: Texas Tech's Graham Harrell - ESPN

NFL says no to spread offenses | Sports | Football | PE.com | Southern California News | News for Inland Southern California

2010 NFL Draft: The Spread Offense Debate « NFL Mocks | Covering the 2012 NFL drafts, Mock Draft Database, Scouting Reports, and Fantasy Football

The first link, which is the only recent article, basically conceded NDinLA's points-- that the Spread is becoming increasingly common in the NFL, and that raw talent vastly outweights "system" concerns. These articles are a great example of the power of conventional wisdom; common sense would seem to dictate that Pro-style QBs will be more successful in the NFL than Spread QBs, and indeed there are still plenty of people who cling that belief. Fortunately there's too much money at stake and statistical evidence in the NFL for such mistaken beliefs to persist very long.

Just a small sample, quickly complied, there are persuasive arguments for the spread...I just "don't buy it", and evidently the majority of Trojan fans don't as well.

Again, just to clarify, I'm not arguing that the Spread is schematically superior to the Pro-style set. I just get annoyed by the insistence that schools running a Pro-style system are somehow better serving their players than Spread schools; all the objective evidence I've seen on the subject (read: not some NFL blogger offering vigorous hand-waving or anecdotal evidence about "what is said in NFL circles") shows that it's bullsh*t.

 

[ACamp1900]

Drew Brees can't believe how funny this whole debate is...


anyway, I have a honest question for TrojanPrincess:

Are you happy overall wtih Kiffen?/Do you believe Kiffen is a good coach?

 

[BeauBenken]

Drew Brees can't believe how funny this whole debate is...


anyway, I have a honest question for TrojanPrincess:

Are you happy overall wtih Kiffen?/Do you believe Kiffen is a good coach?

Better yet, do you think he could win a championship?

 

[ThePiombino]

Better yet, do you think he could win a championship?

Or even better yet- can he win as many as UM?

 

[Trojan Princess]

Personally, I don't think college should be considered just a stepping stone to the NFL. Some players have no intention or chance of playing in the NFL. Yet, they are still competitive and want to win. So I think its unfair to them that the team be forced to run an offense just to get some of the players on the team ready for the NFL. I'm more of a believer that the NFL doesn't care what offense is run in college. They look at athletes that can make it and run their system. As a college coach, my job is to win, develope great athletes, build a great college program and have a strong emphasis for the athletes to graduate school

The 467 players drafted out of Notre Dame laugh at this.

DraftHistory.com

 

[BeauBenken]

The 467 players drafted out of Notre Dame laugh at this.

DraftHistory.com

College football national championships in NCAA Division I FBS - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Not at that though

 

[Trojan Princess]

Hmm, to answer the questions about Lane and others posed to me on this thread...better to answer on WeAreSC....our forum is open, with little to no moderation or word filters, you are free to ask any question bluntly, but there will be no holding back on replies that actually garner honest debate. We have so many opposing fans and trolls take advantage of this, but it also means we have learned that we must back up our arguments with facts, links and relevant articles in order to effectively defend our position.

I doubt anyone would listen here, or care, to what I have to say...it is your right. I think I'll stick to respectful Notre Dame football banter sans the system debate.

* I was told by moderators when signing here that this was a Notre Dame site for Irish fans, and to remember that. The only reason I posted an opinion on CUM was because he was not a ND coach, not affiliated in any manner with the university.

I am here because of Notre Dame football and not USC.

 

[johnnykillz]

Wow.

Touche'.

 

[Trojan Princess]

College football national championships in NCAA Division I FBS - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Not at that though

Lets see what happens under your new coach and system!

THAT Notre Dame is not the present, this one has to prove it is worthy of your tradition.

 

[ACamp1900]

Honestly asking if you feel Kiffen is a good coach is somehow not honest debate?? I'm just trying to understand Kiffen>>Meyer from your perspective...

anyway

 

[HereComeTheIrish]

Answer on your home forum? Wait a minute. You are the one who stepped onto this site. Fight your own battle. And regarding your statement that Urban has nothing to do with ND, well, he coached at ND from about 1996-2000.

Get your facts straight.

But let's not let facts get in the way....