Jump to content
Washington Football Team Logo
Extremeskins

Pro vs Spread


Devastate

Recommended Posts

Seems like we have a lot of threads throwing out formulas and numbers trying to predict who will be a good QB and who won't..

I'd like to ask those that are more knowledgeable than I in college Football if a list can be generated of the top 5 or 10 QB's of the last 10 years and the bottom 5 or 10 QB's in the same time period and compare where they came from, a pro or spread style offense? A lot of people throw both of those terms around in arguments for or against potential QB's. (IE Newton vs Locker) Would be interesting to see a recent historical perspective on the subject

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well lets look at it this way man,

2010 1st round QB's draft and offense run

Sam Bradford- Spread

Tim Tebow- Spread

2009

Matt Stafford- Pro

Mark Sanchez- Pro

Josh Freeman- Pro/Spread mix mostly Pro but had a few spread looks

2008

Matt Ryan- Pro

Joe Flacco- Spread that's what I've been told they ran but I could be a little iffy on this

2007

Jamarcus Russell- Pro

Brady Quinn- Pro

Just looking at 2007 to 2010 you can see the bulk of them are Pro style offense QB's but looking at that list more Russell is a bust, Quinn has busted. Ryan has been a great QB so far for Atlanta. The 2009 class is interesting because out of those 3 Freeman is playing the best. Stafford can't stay healthy and Sanchez hasn't been great or bad just meh

What you can see though is that teams look at spread and pro style offenses and make judgements as it translating to the next level. The thing though is that the spread offense is not great for translating to the next level but its not a bad thing. It helps develop accuracy on the short passing game and with guys like Gabbert who have the prototypical QB size and athleticism for an offense we run it makes sense as he's already got a lot of things we do as a team. You look at a guy like Locker and he's a guys who's played in a WCO offense at Washington before moving back to a spread look this year and was very good last year but is very raw and one of the riskiest picks in the draft. Then it comes down to the top question mark and that's Cam Newton. He plays in a very gimmicky offense and some will say Gabbert does as well but Gabbert doesn't run a majority of the time like Newton has this season, and its not a discredit to the athletic ability of Newton, its more to the worry of scouts who look at him and wonder if he can develop a full passing game and be a franchise QB with so little reps passing attempts. Sanchez didn't have a lot as well and he's struggled to be a franchise QB.

What I'm getting at here is that while the offensive system is important in looking at the prospects, its also the player itself that's important to look at, Bradford played in a spread but was deadly accurate and was a good transition to the next level and that's how I see Gabbert as well as an accurate QB who can make plays and has the arm strength to make plays down the field and has made some ridiculous throws that are just breath taking at times. Newton is a risk and one that you have to be concerned about taking. Mallett is a big no to us because of the slow feet and him having questionable work ethic issues and it leading to him being a late 1st round pick to mid 2nd round pick on some websites. Again this is a tough class to figure out but I feel very confident in Gabbert and kind of confident in Locker but not at #10

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A lot of what the Patriots do on offense is right out of the spread.

For me I don't care if the QB ran spread or Pro, it's about grading the physical ability, making a judgement on the intangibles and then projecting how he will fit in your system and transition into the NFL. Sometimes the way a system is run, the play calling or poor talent around the QB can make it hard to really make a sound judgement and that's why players like Newton and Locker come with more questions and are arguably risky picks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sanchez not a good QB?

WOW.

I'd take Sanchez any day. For not being such a great QB it's amazing he's in the conference finals. I'll take a mediocre QB everytime as long as he takes the team well into the play offs.

I'd take Sanchez in a second too. Dukes & Skins is being fair in his assessment however. Mark has indeed stuggled mightly at times, but I think he will become a very successful QB in the near future.

I don't want us touching Cam with a 50 foot pole personally or any other QB at #10 for that matter. I'm almost of the opinion that we take Stefen Wisniewski at #10 if we cannot trade out of it. It's likely one of the safest picks there. I also like the Pouncey 'kid' too at OG because he and Stefen IMO would both make for outstanding ZB OL.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

From what I understand(correct me if I'm wrong), running a spread offense requires an elite offensive line, which is what makes it easier for college since so few defenders are elite. However, in the NFL, where all the top defenders from college went, it's seemingly impossible without the best blocking in the game.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

From what I understand(correct me if I'm wrong), running a spread offense requires an elite offensive line, which is what makes it easier for college since so few defenders are elite. However, in the NFL, where all the top defenders from college went, it's seemingly impossible without the best blocking in the game.

Well, running every offense requires an elite offensive line if you want to get technical. The spread isn't any different than West Coast, Coryell, etc. in that regard.

But I think you have the right idea. The spread offense is more effective at the collegiate level because speed kills. If you have a fast team you're probably going to be successful... For the reason that you suggest that defenders probably aren't elite (or in this case fast) enough to keep up with the speed of the offense. It's "easy" (in relative terms) to find small, fast, shifty guys. It's alot more difficult to find a 280 pound defensive end that can run a 4.6 and chase down the little speedsters. And even if you have that, do you have the linebackers that can do the same?

This is where the spread offense kills.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The QB runs to much in college spreads for it to work in the pros. Also in the spread you do not turn your back to the defense like you do in the pros. That is one of the biggest transitions. A QB who has not turned his back to the defense can struggle mightly to adjust to that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

From what I understand(correct me if I'm wrong), running a spread offense requires an elite offensive line, which is what makes it easier for college since so few defenders are elite. However, in the NFL, where all the top defenders from college went, it's seemingly impossible without the best blocking in the game.

Ahh, I see.

I came into this thread wondering why schemes work in college and not in the pros since it is, essentially, the same game.

Is this why the option doesn't really work in the modern professional game, too?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ahh, I see.

I came into this thread wondering why schemes work in college and not in the pros since it is, essentially, the same game.

Is this why the option doesn't really work in the modern professional game, too?

Yes, the speed of the game is the biggest difference from College to the NFL.

It is why QBs are so hard to predict. LB's and DB's will get to the ball carrier much faster in the NFL.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The pros and college are not the same game. Things that work in college simply will not work in the pros. The option is not viable in the pros as your QB would not last 2 games with 280 lb DE's getting free shots at them as they came down the line. Also in college plays that get the corner would never get the corner in the pros because of the speed of the lb's and safties. Further in college wr's get "open" by yards. In the pro's "open" is much smaller windows. College does not have to gaurd against alot of the field as most QB's do not have the arm to make the throws, while in the pro's alot of the QB's can make all the throws (Deep outs, Deep ins, far hash throws ect.). All you have to do is watch a couple games and you will see a massive difference.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You know what the probleme is with the college spread....it is very different from each other. The reads, audibles, reciever/tightend sets and options they run are very different.

So you should talk to the QB wich reads he makes and what the options are he goes through.

But the biggest probleme with the spread is the footwork and timing when you are dropping back to throw. Only way to find out if somebody can do that or can learn that is by trying it out...so keep your eye on the allstar games and workouts of the players.

I wouldn´t be supriced if we go to a more ´spread west coast´ passing game if we draft a spread QB and combine it with a more traditional rungame.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't really know the intricate workings of the difference between a spread QB and Pro QB. From recent Redskins history, though, Jason Campbell mostly came from a pro-style offense at Auburn (I'm pretty sure), and Colt Brennan came from a spread.

The positions I'm looking at though, are mainly receivers from pro and spread. Pro style offense receivers need to block more, need to have that in their arsenal. If you're looking for possession receivers or big play receivers, though, look to the spread. Being mainly a passing offense, the receivers get the most work.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A lot of what the Patriots do on offense is right out of the spread.
I believe I see a definite trend toward more spread in the NFL.
For me I don't care if the QB ran spread or Pro, it's about grading the physical ability, making a judgement on the intangibles and then projecting how he will fit in your system and transition into the NFL...
Exactly right. NFL teams can't limit their search for the right guy out of concern for the college system.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

the pro vs. spread debate comes down to one very simple thing: QB vision. In a spread, the QB is usually in the shotgun formation, looking forward and scanning the defense. While a "pro" style QB, takes the snap from center, has to take his eyes off the defenders as he drops back, then refocus on the defenders.

This does not sound like much, but it can make all the difference in the world in terms of who will make a good NFL QB. In the tiny amount of time the QB takes his eyes off the defense, is exactly the time NFL defenses switch from their disguised package and run what they intend to run.

A recent example of this is the Arizona Pittsburgh SuperBowl with Harrison's pick 6: Kurt Warner says he thought Harrison was going to rush, which he faked like he would at the snap, but then pulled back into coverage, Kurt thought pressure was coming so he dumped it off quick to an area of the field he thought would be open and the rest is history. Now if a great QB like Kurt Warner can make a mistake like that, then what type of mistakes would a QB coming from a spread offense makes as he tries to adjust to a pro style offense? Being an NFL QB is hard enough when you can see everything at all times, and for a kid who is used to that, it takes a while to get comfortable in reading the D after taking your eyes off it. This is not to say that spread QB have bad vision, it is the processing of that information and how fast it can be done that makes the difference.

I take the pro guy every day over a spread guy if you want them to start right away, but if you have time to develop a QB, then you have time to work with a spread guy before Dick Labeau's defense give him nightmares that keep him awake at night.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ahh, I see.

I came into this thread wondering why schemes work in college and not in the pros since it is, essentially, the same game.

Is this why the option doesn't really work in the modern professional game, too?

That's pretty much the single biggest reason. Even the worst guy in the NFL is a better athlete, has better technique and a higher football IQ than most of the college guys. Also, they tend to hit harder and the option requires the QB to not commit before the defender does, so an option QB gets hit on almost every option call. You'll notice that when an option is called in the NFL, the QB almost always gets rid of the ball before the defenders commits.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's pretty much the single biggest reason. Even the worst guy in the NFL is a better athlete, has better technique and a higher football IQ than most of the college guys. Also, they tend to hit harder and the option requires the QB to not commit before the defender does, so an option QB gets hit on almost every option call. You'll notice that when an option is called in the NFL, the QB almost always gets rid of the ball before the defenders commits.

Alright, that makes sense. I've always wondered about that. Thanks for the explanation!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The pro style offense in college utilizes multiple formations familiar to NFL fans and the QB usually lines up under center. A pro style offense is more demanding of talent than other systems: a complete QB who can throw accurately down field and a solid offensive line.

Since talent at those positions are a lot harder to come by in college, there are alternative offensive systems that don't require either. Some of these systems are designed to be an equalizer for a team facing a more talented defense. Other systems exploit the lack of available talent on the defensive side of college teams. In the NFL, everyone in defense is talented. In college, maybe 3 or 4 are talented, even more so in the SEC.

These non-Pro Style systems don't prepare a quarterback for the NFL; thus a spread option QB for example is going to require a bit of development before seeing any regular season play time. A QB that has spent a few years in a pro style offense is going to require a bit less development than a non-pro style offense.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

...These non-Pro Style systems don't prepare a quarterback for the NFL; thus a spread option QB for example is going to require a bit of development before seeing any regular season play time. A QB that has spent a few years in a pro style offense is going to require a bit less development than a non-pro style offense.
That's correct. However, Joe Flacco proved that the adjustment doesn't take as much time as most think. Pressed into action because of injuries, he played well right from the start.

The first and most important question in selecting a college QB is -- How well does the throw a football? If he throws it as well as Joe Flacco, I don't care about the competition he faced or that he was never under center in college.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...