is major wright the most overrated 95+ player on the game?

[Bama83]

Quote: Originally Posted by helix139

Neither is there any sort of discussion for the type of prejudice you are displaying toward non-pro style Quarterbacks and offensive systems.

I do have an admitted bias against non-traditional systems.

But, in this case, I don't think this bias is clouding my opinion.

Florida has an extremely talented team with an amazingly creative coach.

Quote:

Just because a player doesn't do it the NFL way does not mean he can't do it the NFL way or that doing it other than the NFL way is not correct.

I believe that QBs that do not learn to take snaps under center have a harder time adjusting to the pro-game. I don't believe it makes them incapable, but rather that they usually have to unlearn what worked for them in the past.

Quote:

Likewise, just because an offense doesn't line up with the QB under center, a fullback, and a tight end 90% of the time and chooses to make the defense account for the quarterback doesn't mean they have a gimmick offense or one that isn't based on sound fundamental football.

I never intimated this, I don't believe.

I think lumping all the spreads into one category is truly an unfair notion. They are not all created equal or utilized the same way.

Florida's offense, I consider "gimmicky" based on the use of the 3-tiered option NOT because it's spread based. Almost every play is based on a QB option of some sort. Most plays are based on a run read of the d-line rather than reading the safeties and backers.

Quote:

Like it or not, spread offenses are here to stay and will remain very prevalant for the foreseeable future. The NFL will be tasked with a choice of either continuing to try to force square pegs into round holes or adapting their offense to incorporate more of these spread concepts, though I doubt we'll ever fully see the zone read and spread triple option like it is used at the college level.

The NFL defenses, I believe, are too intelligent and too competitive to run a primarily spread based offense unless the offensive talent is ripe for the system. (something that is difficult to get)

My opinion of the spread is this:

Right now it isn't prevalent enough for all the top defensive minds to scheme it. I believe we are at the tipping point where these guys are going to be forced to think about how to scheme it. As it becomes more utilized and more prevalent, I think you'll see more new successful defensive schemes to attack it.

Further, I think the spread is something that has diminishing returns based on the skill level of the defenses. The spread is extremely effective in high school because the talent disparity between WR and CB is significant. At college, the spread is extremely effective against lessor defensive teams (due to lack of CB talent) and in general since there is still a disparity between getting good CBs and the ability to get good WRs. At the pro level, the spread is rock bottom. The difference in talent between most WRs and CBs is negligable. The pressure generated up front is more consistent and thus the spread starts to show where it fails.

That's my opinion, of course.

Of course, none of this discounts the current effectiveness of the spread. Especially more complex spread attacks such as Florida's. Nor does this discount the talent required to make a spread work.

Which brings me back to - Tim Tebow. The kid is quite the collegiate superstar. I wish he had signed with Alabama years ago when he was deciding between UF or Bama. I'd love to have someone of his intensity. I think his stats are inflated based on a system that confuses defenses. Add to this the offensive potency of Florida's skill players ... and you've got quite the opportunity to put up nice numbers. Even if you're a pedestrain QB (although, I think TT is more than pedestrian). Whether or not I believe he has a 70-yard arm is irrelevant both because I can't substantiate it either way as well as the fact that pro football isn't about tossing 70-yard bombs. It's about timing and touch and dink-and-dunk. I think TT has the natural ability to learn to be a great pro QB, but I think it'll take him 3-4 years of unlearning what made him the man in college. Again, this is my opinion.

[helix139]

Quote: Originally Posted by Bama83

I do have an admitted bias against non-traditional systems. But, in this case, I don't think this bias is clouding my opinion. Florida has an extremely talented team with an amazingly creative coach.

we can agree on the last point

Quote:

believe that QBs that do not learn to take snaps under center have a harder time adjusting to the pro-game. I don't believe it makes them incapable, but rather that they usually have to unlearn what worked for them in the past.

Fair enough, and there are some things they have to learn, but I think learning how to drop back 3, 5, or 7 steps are one of the lesser challenges they will have. I think the major problem is that many of these spread teams do not have developed downfield passing components and instead rely considerably on having superior athletes. Florida has superior athletes in many cases but that is not the sole reason for their success.

Quote:

I think lumping all the spreads into one category is truly an unfair notion. They are not all created equal or utilized the same way.

Agreed, and many of these spread failures are from systems that don't have developed downfield passing components and instead rely primarily on the short passing game.

Quote:

Florida's offense, I consider "gimmicky" based on the use of the 3-tiered option NOT because it's spread based. Almost every play is based on a QB option of some sort. Most plays are based on a run read of the d-line rather than reading the safeties and backers.

most run plays are based on a run read of the d-line, yes. The inside zone read option just allows Florida to run the ball with an unblocked defender. It still depends upon how the blocks turn out, unlike the true triple. I don't view that as gimmicky, but rather making use of all available personnel on the field. I consider something "gimmicky" when it is schematically unsound and/or not reliant upon execution but on technicality or deception. The A-11 is gimmicky. The spread is not gimmicky, but perhaps not "traditional."

Additionally, we ran far less true option last year than Urban ran at Utah or even in previous years. Tebow is adequate enough at running the speed, veer, and trailer options to force defenses to prepare for them, but they aren't his bread and butter. We ended up running many more designed zone gives, traps, blasts, etc. last year in an effort to minimize Tebow's beating. We tended to run those option plays when the defense was completely selling out and the option was too good to pass up, not as a primary component of the offense. The run game is not what potential pro-QBs are evaluated on, though, but rather their passing ability.

The UF passing game is based on traditional pro-style concepts, and this is what separates it from many of the other spreads and what will separate Tebow from many of the failures. It features fully developed short, intermediate, and downfield passing games (Utah lacked significant downfield concepts). Tebow can already identify his keys, make the read, and go through the correct progression for that given concept and has been doing it since high school. Thus, learning the 3, 5, and 7 step drops and perfecting his play action fakes will be the greatest of his worries.

Quote:

The NFL defenses, I believe, are too intelligent and too competitive to run a primarily spread based offense unless the offensive talent is ripe for the system. (something that is difficult to get) My opinion of the spread is this: Right now it isn't prevalent enough for all the top defensive minds to scheme it. I believe we are at the tipping point where these guys are going to be forced to think about how to scheme it. As it becomes more utilized and more prevalent, I think you'll see more new successful defensive schemes to attack it.

On the contrary. I believe the spread reached its apex a couple of years back as a distinct offensive advantage. It used to be that it was exotic enough that anyone could have success with it based on novelty. It is at the point now, however, where defenses are successfully scheming it and winning games they are supposed to win. That is why teams like Auburn were abysmal failures running it. Now, from high school through college you're seeing more and more instances of bad teams trying to go spread simply to find they are bad spread teams and simply asking players to win 1-on-1 matchups they can't win.

Quote:

Further, I think the spread is something that has diminishing returns based on the skill level of the defenses. The spread is extremely effective in high school because the talent disparity between WR and CB is significant. At college, the spread is extremely effective against lessor defensive teams (due to lack of CB talent) and in general since there is still a disparity between getting good CBs and the ability to get good WRs. At the pro level, the spread is rock bottom. The difference in talent between most WRs and CBs is negligable. The pressure generated up front is more consistent and thus the spread starts to show where it fails.

The CBs are better in the pros, but so are the WRs, so I don't quite buy that argument. It does have the effect of compressing the field but in general the QBs in aggregate have stronger arms and athletes are better decision makers so I think that argument is also somewhat weakened. I think the biggest reason you won't see the full spread with the QB as a running threat in the NFL on a consistent basis is because of the investment the NFL has in their QBs. From a business perspective, Tim Tebow is worth the exact same amount as any other player: 1 scholarship. In the NFL, QBs are paid exhorbitant sums of money and a premium is put on protecting them. Thus, the NFL spends more time than anything developing pass protection schemes, at the expense of developing their run game. NFL teams run about 8 basic run plays: Inside zone, outside zone/stretch, power, counter trey, toss sweep, and iso. You may see some other wrinkles such as trap, etc. but for the most part that is what every team runs. Additionally, College rosters have 85 people on them and pro rosters are limited to 53 plus an emergency quarterback. Thus, you see incredibly complex protection schemes, and since the defense doesn't have to worry about too much in the way of exotic run concepts, they have specialized their personnel toward rushing the passer. It's no coincidence that the highest paid players outside of QBs are LTs and pass rushers. Additionally, the league is entirely too incestuous in its hiring and gives coaches little incentive to try something new. It's really become a viscious cycle at this point, but suffice it to say that if a couple of teams started trying it, they would see some wild success simply because the league isn't geared for it. Heck, Bill Walsh himself said one of his biggest regrets was not trying some single wing with Steve Young, as NFL defenses wouldn't have known what to do with it. But I digress.

Quote:

That's my opinion, of course. Of course, none of this discounts the current effectiveness of the spread. Especially more complex spread attacks such as Florida's. Nor does this discount the talent required to make a spread work. Which brings me back to - Tim Tebow. The kid is quite the collegiate superstar. I wish he had signed with Alabama years ago when he was deciding between UF or Bama. I'd love to have someone of his intensity. I think his stats are inflated based on a system that confuses defenses. Add to this the offensive potency of Florida's skill players ... and you've got quite the opportunity to put up nice numbers. Even if you're a pedestrain QB (although, I think TT is more than pedestrian). Whether or not I believe he has a 70-yard arm is irrelevant both because I can't substantiate it either way as well as the fact that pro football isn't about tossing 70-yard bombs. It's about timing and touch and dink-and-dunk. I think TT has the natural ability to learn to be a great pro QB, but I think it'll take him 3-4 years of unlearning what made him the man in college. Again, this is my opinion.

Youre right in that most passing in the NFL is indeed of the quick timing, dink and dunk variety. The QB still must be able to reliably throw the deep ball, though, to keep the safeties out of the box to keep the rushing game going, though. From a pure arm strength and accuracy standpoint Tebow has this and has shown it on the field countless times. His rushing stats, to be sure, are helped because the system he plays in gives him the opportunity to run and he takes advantage of it, but again that is irrelevant to evaluation as a pro prospect. His passing stats are the product of his brain and his left arm. This isn't the 1990's SEC with Spurrier's superior athletes going against defenses ill-prepared for the passing game, as you well know. The defenses range from good to great consistently and without much dropoff between the top and bottom team. To be sure, Tim is surrounded by great talent but I don't think that makes him a product of the talent or system he plays in. I think he would be successful in almost any system. He's that type of player and person.

Thus, the only thing I think Tebow will really need to "unlearn" is trying to run over everyone when he is scrambling. He demonstrated last year an aptitude for staying in the pocket until his progressions were exhausted. If he can get the dropbacks (and I don't see why he won't in short order) and is put in positions he can succeed rather than tossed into the fire and surrounded with decent talent, I think he has as good a shot as anyone. I don't expect immediate success as that is incredibly rare no matter what system the QB plays in, but I do think he has the ability to be an above average starter by partway through his second season and would have all the upside in the world to become great.