Read Option

[dwmyers]

Really? Your going to drag the conversation down to this? Tell me you even had a clue who he was prior to that post.

You know, I have a football blog, and on it I wrote about Don Faurot and the spread option..

http://codeandfootball.wordpress.com/2011/10/28/is-the-spread-option-merely-a-single-wing/

To quote:

Consider the running game, from single wing to now. The single wing excelled in power off tackle running, perhaps exemplified by the cutback. Blocking was sustained, double teams by the wingback and tackle forming a crucial part of the game. Once the Shaughnessy T was introduced, blocks weren’t nearly as enduring. Away from the play, brush back blocks were enough. Because the blocks were fast, and the play started earlier (blind hikes), the game became faster.

The single wing cutback later formed the archetype for the Green Bay sweep. But nuances introduced around this time span include area or do-dad blocking, and the whole notion of running to daylight.

The option itself dates back as far as Don Faurot and the Split T offense he developed for Missouri. With Don’s notion of keying off unblocked defenders, and getting the ball to the man the opposition can’t defend, football now had a running game that resembled a 2 on 1 fast break in basketball. This was only reinforced when the wishbone triple option, created by Emory Bellard, became a dominant offense in the late 1960s – early 1970s. Adding zone run concepts a la Alex Gibbs (check out, for example, John T Reed’s zone run entry in his dictionary) to unblocked keys leads to the zone read

Another good article is this one, by Chris Brown:

http://smartfootball.com/spread/did-the-spread-really-evolve-from-the-single-wing

Run and Shoot, IMO, is important in the development of the spread, but the zone read is a horse of a different color.

This link I've just found, seems pretty interesting. I had heard Northwestern was in on the beginning of the spread, and in Chris Brown's opin, this was the "shot heard round the world", so far as the spread was concerned.

http://smartfootball.com/spread/the-legacy-of-the-most-important-game-in-spread-offense-history

crucial point here is this:

The gateway for the ubiquity of the spread — by definition, a system with multiple receivers — was not by appealing to every coach’s impulse to be Mike Leach and throw it 50 times a game; believe it or not, most coaches do not want to be Mike Leach. Instead if you could show them how to run the ball for 300 yards and score 54 points against an historically great rushing defense, that is something people will sign up for.

D-

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

You know, I have a football blog, and on it I wrote about Don Faurot and the spread option..

I see. So basically, what your telling me is that you have enough knowledge of the game and you are old enough to know about Don Faurot and how and where the modern spread came from but you still felt like that comment was going to add anything to the discussion?

I see.

BTW, the connection with Vick and Atlanta is Pete Mangurian, OC and OL under Dan Reeves. He learned under June Jones and Jerry Glanville, who as you know, were disciples of Mouse Davis and were also still connected to the Atlanta Falcons Organization when Vick was drafted.

Further more, Roger Staubach ran the Single Wing at Navy. Dan Reeves played with Roger, who Tom Landry coached and used the Shotgun with in the same offense with Dan Reeves on the sidelines. You know that the Single Wing and the Spread are evolutions of the same principles. How are you going to be confused as to how Vick came to learn the Spread?

Also, I did not say he ran the spread. I said this. "Each played in offenses that had elements of Read Option in them." and that statement is true.

It really isn't that hard.

http://codeandfootball.wordpress.com/2011/10/28/is-the-spread-option-merely-a-single-wing/

To quote:



Another good article is this one, by Chris Brown:

http://smartfootball.com/spread/did-the-spread-really-evolve-from-the-single-wing

Run and Shoot, IMO, is important in the development of the spread, but the zone read is a horse of a different color.

This link I've just found, seems pretty interesting. I had heard Northwestern was in on the beginning of the spread, and in Chris Brown's opin, this was the "shot heard round the world", so far as the spread was concerned.

http://smartfootball.com/spread/the-legacy-of-the-most-important-game-in-spread-offense-history

crucial point here is this:



D-

All of this is great but really, all you have to do is go back and watch Sammy Baugh. Before RG3 was making the spread famous in his rookie year, Sammy Baugh was basically doing the same thing in Washington but in those days, they called it the Single Wing. Same principles. Make a decision and then do what the defense gives you.

I'm sorry, that's what it comes down to and it's been around since the 30s.

 

[dwmyers]

ABQ, what you said was:

They both ran read option offenses, practically from the time they came into the NFL. Each played in offenses that had elements of Read Option in them.

There is no ambiguity in that first sentence, no "elements of". As the read option wasn't part of either the Falcons or the Hokies offense, insisting that sentence #2 is really what you meant is misleading.

About the only places the "read option" was being run in 2001 was Northwestern, maybe Bowling Green, and West Virginia. And even then, Vick didn't graduate from any of the "read option" schools of the time.

And since you can't tell the difference between a split T option and a read option, you have no memory of any consequence of Michael Vick running the read option in college or the pros.

All you can do is allude to Michael Vick perhaps using the shotgun/spread, which, as Dan Reeves was his professional coach, no one is arguing about.

What I am arguing about is the presence of the zone read option play in professional ball in 2001, and on the Hokies in 1999-2000.

I haven't seen any compelling evidence on your part that anything of the kind existed.

D-

 

[cowboys2233]

The 49ers are about to win a Super Bowl running the read option pistol formation offense. This offense is the future of the nfl due to the post snap ability to read defenses that it gives qbs. Impossible to stop

The 49ers are about to win the SB because...

1) They have the best offensive line in the NFL

2) They have the best defense in the NFL

3) They make very few mistakes (penalties, turnovers, etc.)

This read option is going to go by the wayside because it puts your QB at too much risk. Yes, it can be effective, but only until your star QB gets hurt. And then your team is done.

 

[dwmyers]

Ok, just tweeted @smartfootball, and this interesting response emerged, which may account for ABQCOWBOY's asssociation of Vick and the zone read..

FoodNearSnellville ‏@FoodNSnellville
.@smartfootball @sc_dougfarrar You two might know: first known use of the zone read option in the NFL?

@FoodNSnellville @sc_dougfarrar Atlanta dabbled in it with Vick when Alex Gibbs was there. Very basic stuff but Vick had 1,000 yards.

@FoodNSnellville @sc_dougfarrar During wildcat frenzy of 2008 the Dolphins, Ravens and even the Jets did a bit of it too w/ wildcat types

This of course means that, as best Chris Brown can remember, Vick was the first to ever run the read option in the NFL, but not with Dan Reeves. Rather, it was with Jim Mora Jr, for whom Alex Gibbs was his line coach.

2006 was the year Vick ran for 1,000 yards.

D-

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

ABQ, what you said was:



There is no ambiguity in that first sentence, no "elements of". As the read option wasn't part of either the Falcons or the Hokies offense, insisting that sentence #2 is really what you meant is misleading.

Misleading to who, to you? Fair enough, I consider you mislead. What I said is very clear. From the time Vick entered the NFL, he was using run/pass options to put pressure on the outside contain of opposing offenses. That's basically the same thing you have in the spread. You are dancing around the fire here. If that is what you want to do, that's fine but it doesn't change the fact that this is what was going on in Atlanta at that time.

About the only places the "read option" was being run in 2001 was Northwestern, maybe Bowling Green, and West Virginia. And even then, Vick didn't graduate from any of the "read option" schools of the time.

And since you can't tell the difference between a split T option and a read option, you have no memory of any consequence of Michael Vick running the read option in college or the pros.

All you can do is allude to Michael Vick perhaps using the shotgun/spread, which, as Dan Reeves was his professional coach, no one is arguing about.

What I am arguing about is the presence of the zone read option play in professional ball in 2001, and on the Hokies in 1999-2000.

I haven't seen any compelling evidence on your part that anything of the kind existed.

D-

Maybe that's what I would say if I were you too but probably not. I would probably be more interested in learning the info that I had not previously know and expand on that discussion. I guess that is where you and I differ.

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

Ok, just tweeted @smartfootball, and this interesting response emerged, which may account for ABQCOWBOY's asssociation of Vick and the zone read..

FoodNearSnellville ‏@FoodNSnellville
.@smartfootball @sc_dougfarrar You two might know: first known use of the zone read option in the NFL?

@FoodNSnellville @sc_dougfarrar Atlanta dabbled in it with Vick when Alex Gibbs was there. Very basic stuff but Vick had 1,000 yards.

@FoodNSnellville @sc_dougfarrar During wildcat frenzy of 2008 the Dolphins, Ravens and even the Jets did a bit of it too w/ wildcat types

This of course means that, as best Chris Brown can remember, Vick was the first to ever run the read option in the NFL, but not with Dan Reeves. Rather, it was with Jim Mora Jr, for whom Alex Gibbs was his line coach.

2006 was the year Vick ran for 1,000 yards.

D-

Was earlier then that. They used it when Reeves was in Atlanta. It may have been expanded on later, which would make sense. As I stated earlier, one of the big issues, with regards to Reeves and his vision for the offense and Vick was more of a drop back traditional offense. He worried that Vick would not last and looking back, I'd have to say he was right. Now, because Vick wanted to expand on this type of offense and Reeves did not, that was part of the reason Reeves was out in Atlanta. Once Reeves was out, does it make sense to you that follow on coaches would hold the line on Reeves' beliefs in a more traditional offense or does it make more sense to you that they would go along with an expanded role for spread offense?

Your wrong here but it's your mistake to make. It's fine. You've stated what you believe and I've stated what I believe.

We don't agree.

 

[jjktkk]

The read option, with these mobile qbs is a nice change up, but if you look at the final four playoff teams, you'll notice that 3 out of the 4 teams left, have pocket qbs. Its great to have a dual threat qb, but I imagine head coaches cringe every time their qb takes off and runs. Look at RGIII. Great talent, but already hes dealing with two major knee injuries, and hes just starting out.

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

The read option, with these mobile qbs is a nice change up, but if you look at the final four playoff teams, you'll notice that 3 out of the 4 teams left, have pocket qbs. Its great to have a dual threat qb, but I imagine head coaches cringe every time their qb takes off and runs. Look at RGIII. Great talent, but already hes dealing with two major knee injuries, and hes just starting out.

I actually think it's a must to have a QB who has mobility and I don't really even have a problem with a spread option element in your offense, much the same way you might run a series of the Wild Cat, for example. I have done a lot of thinking on this and for many years, I really subscribed to the theory that you need to develop a backup with the same skill set as your starter. However, now, I have been thinking that the way to go with a back up you are grooming to simply come in and back up (not your future starter because they are different in my mind) could be a guy who can come in and run the spread for you. Obviously, if you lose your QB for a long period of time, then you may need to consider other options but I think you would probably have to do that anyway.

Don't know.

 

[jjktkk]

I actually think it's a must to have a QB who has mobility and I don't really even have a problem with a spread option element in your offense, much the same way you might run a series of the Wild Cat, for example. I have done a lot of thinking on this and for many years, I really subscribed to the theory that you need to develop a backup with the same skill set as your starter. However, now, I have been thinking that the way to go with a back up you are grooming to simply come in and back up (not your future starter because they are different in my mind) could be a guy who can come in and run the spread for you. Obviously, if you lose your QB for a long period of time, then you may need to consider other options but I think you would probably have to do that anyway.

Don't know.

Agree. But if your mobile qb is your franchise qb, ex. RGIII, Newton, etc..., I would be worried about his longevity. But for a wildcat, change of pace qb, I would definitely be in favor of having a 2 qb system.

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

Agree. But if your mobile qb is your franchise qb, ex. RGIII, Newton, etc..., I would be worried about his longevity. But for a wildcat, change of pace qb, I would definitely be in favor of having a 2 qb system.

I agree. There are two schools of thought there. 1) Because College Programs are turning out so many spread QBs, it's easier to find good ones and the skill set is not physically as demanding as a prototypical Drop Back Passer so if they get hurt, you just go out and get another one. 2) it's to hard to replace your starting QB for more then just a few games so you don't really want to take too many chances in an offense like the Spread where you can expose your QB to hits.

I understand both schools of thoughts but I don't really agree with the 1st. I believe that it's more important to sustain stability with your starter and basically limit him as much as possible. Now, designed runs in very specific situations I can understand. As a staple of the offense, that I don't love.