Arkansas HS receiver: 421 yds in one game!

That's a lot of yards

What offense you run IS dependent on what you have. I have always thrown the ball 15-20 times per game as a rule.
However, this year's team we have an offensive line that is larger than anyone we play and I had all my receiver but 1 transfer in June.

So, we have been blessed to be able to run the ball for over 300 yards per game ave. while I'm working on the passing game in practice. QB isn't happy, but at least we have a chance in our games.

If I had alot of receivers I would be throwing the ball also.
The kind of kids you need are those who are playing basketball, they will NOT stalk block all day at practice, they will simply pick up their basketballs and go home.
If you got 'em, be smart and use 'em.

That being said, most spread teams we face are trying to be trendy, and you can tell they don't practice blocking or tackling, but man...they have 60 passing plays.

OJW

yeah
no kidding
what if you are a lineman?

look
we run a modular gun offense that spreads it out and does various things based on what we have talent wise

but

to me
the TEAM winning is the most important thing

this crap about the kids wanting the drills and stuff to have meaning and how that is accomplished only if they actually get to touch the ball is what is killing this country







here is an example
a spoof article
that has a lot of truth in it, that's why it is so sad and funny all at the same time




Democrat presidential nominee Barack Obama today unveiled a new facet of his education plan: a progressive tax on grade point averages. The move dovetails with Obama's long term plan to "spread the intelligence around", and could open up scholarship possibilities for students currently in danger of failing their next class. Campaign officials say the tax would only affect the smartest Americans, and that 95% of mediocre students would remain unaffected.

"My opponent, John McCain, thinks it's perfectly OK for some students to carry a 4.0 - or even higher - while other students struggle to maintain a 1.5." said Obama, campaigning at a remedial math tutoring session at Georgia Tech. "I don't think that's fair. And I don't think it's what the founding fathers had in mind when they created the Department of Education."

According the details of the plan posted on Obama's website, 50% of grade points above 3.0 and 100% of points over 3.5 would be taxed, and pooled into a general fund. Less fortunate students can qualify for the points by failing any number of standardized tests. Students with no grade point average at all can still qualify by applying for an earned GPA credit.

"I don't understand how it works, but I like it." said Jeremy Spencer, a functionally illiterate public high school valedictorian who has struggled to adapt to an unjustly difficult college curriculum. "I'm not sure, but I think that if I had more grade points, my grade point average would be higher, as long as I don't have to multiply or anything."

we had a kid run for 492 yards here in central florida this past friday. I think he only had something like 24 carries too, and he sat for most of the fourth quarter.

You beat me to it, Tog. I was a guard. I never got ANY touches.

Excellent posts made by everyone who replied. A blanket statement about "spreading the ball around" in the original post is about as closed minded a statement as I've heard. With the wide receiver accounting for 80% of the offense as mentioned already, how in the heck is that "spreading the ball around"?
As far as stating that kids "want to go to practice" because the kids know that their drills will have carry over in the game- you're not worth squat as a coach if you have your kids doing drills that have no correlation with what you do as an offense.
I've seen spread teams that do a great job of getting their athletes in space and I've seen flexbone/veer/double wing teams do the same. It's not the offense that does it- it's the coach.
Just like it's the coach's job to get the kids to do their job to the utmost of their abilities regardless of what offense you run-you shouldn't have to "bribe" kids by switching offenses. Pampering athletes by promising them to "spread the ball" around will hurt you in the long run.

I played college ball with a guy that NEVER won a high school football game. NEVER! He said the coaches always tried to make practice fun. Because if the kids aren't having fun they won't keep playing. He said practices were fun until about week 3 when they were 0-3, with 3 straight butt kickins. No matter how fun you make practice, if you don't win, practice sucks. Why does JV have to be fun? I coach JV and we work our tails off. WHy? BEcause if you don't you don't get better.

All drills have a point. You think having a lineman hit a sled is pointless? If your kids do, it's your fault. Tell them why you're doing this drill. Show them the players that do the drill well are the same players that make plays! Lots of people making plays means the team wins! When you win you have fun!!

In a perfect world as coaches and players we'd all like to have fun and win at the same time. Will I trade team victories over having fun in a spread offense? NO. This has nothing to do with the system. It could be anything, as long as the kids are all involved. Just like the previous coach said. Why can't everyone be involved in wing-t? And he's right. I just thing the spread would provide OUR guys the best opportunity at success.

Every drill is supposed to have a point, yes.

Do I have the wet behind the ear rookie coach mentality? Yes I admit now that I can't change the world and be all to everyone and make it fun for everyone but I will try along with making it productive, and at the same time teaching players HOW to play the game and their position, and until I see that it can't or stops working this is what I'll do.

I'm not trying to convince anyone that this style works or doesn't work. It's just one person's philosophy.

This is great b/c it allows me to get opinions from all of you guys. It's all about working out the kinks and learning as I go along. I'm sure a lot of you guys had a grand ole idea that you'd turn the coaching world upside down with some new style of coaching but after a while you realized nothing ever changes. coaching is coaching is coaching. No matter what level, and the same things that worked before are the same things that are gonna work now.

Lots of things going on in this thread, some I agree with, some less so.

Any "spread offense" that loses and throws it to one kid to where he has 400 yards receiving is not "spread" at all. You spread like Mike Leach, who understands that spreading it about ball distribution as well as where kids line up.

And that goes for any offense. If I am an option team I need several backs who can run it. My least favorite offense is the middle-school/HS Power-I team that hands it to one guy every time. That said, I saw Boone County Kentucky play just this way when that one guy was Shaun Alexander, and they did pretty well.

The making football fun meme is lame, but the idea that things are so drastically different now is a bogeyman. Yes, today there are kids who think they are the best athletes and don't come out; they aren't men enough for football. But those kinds of kids existed, albeit in different form or style, back in the 40s and 50s and whenever else. It's not a new phenomenon.

I agree that you should coach to win, period, and that all this "make football fun" and get guys "touches" is lame, and you should only be spread if you think it will help you win. Not for any other reason. That said, I don't see the relevance of the spoof article tog posted.

Maybe the fine line is in "balanced touches".

For simplicity's sake, let's look at a 5 WR offense.

If all the rec.'s are equal, then we focus primarily on how much each guy touches the ball. If you have 5 Michael Crabtree's, they all get 20% of the touches.

However, If your Z is Michael Crabtree, and your F is me, you spread the touches out accordingly. Crabtree should get more touches than me.

However, the spreading around of the ball is maintained, when you make them pay for ignoring me. They go back to playing honest defense, and when all things are even, our Michael Crabtree's talent wins out.

Another point of interest concerns Mike Leach (always a point of interest). He doesn't look at spreading the ball around to players, but positions. He doesn't want to know how many catches Crabtree has, but how many catches Z or X has.

Part of the beauty of an offense like Leach's is you can have it both ways:

*Get your best the player the ball the most
*Maintain excellent distribution of the ball

Switching examples, Marshall Faulk, back in St. Louis' heyday, was going to get 20 touches a game. If he got those touches like Emmitt Smith got his touches, he probably would not be as effective. Instead, he ran stretch, then motioned out to the slot and worked a LB, then caught a screen, then motioned out to a WR and worked a CB, then started in the slot and motioned into the backfield and ran a draw.

Going back to Leach, he does this in a different way. His players know what one another are doing. Crabtree probably knows X,Y,Z, and H......maybe even F. So, we can strive for optimal balance of 20% between all the positions, but Crabtree is getting the lion's share of the touches.

If at halftime Z has no catches, and Crabtree has only caught 2 balls, then Crabtree is going to be playing a little more Z and there will be more Z plays.

This is overly simplistic, but you get the idea.

Two comments

1- BOTH TEAMS were 1 win teams??? bleh. One hates to be crass, but come on, being on a 1-7 team, and getting that kind of yardage against another 1 win club isn't really news worthy. Sorry.

2- Assistantcoach--I think a point that you might be overlooking is that blocking IS being involved in the offense. One does NOT need to touch a ball to be fully involved in the offense

Interesting, why the change of positions for him? It appears he understands what a WR needs to do for the Qb to get him the ball. How much does he credit to the position change? Good luck in the future.

But remember guys, its not the coach throwing the ball. If the receiver is open that many times a game, and the QB is going through his reads and not specifically looking for that receiver, why can the coaches be blamed for calling pass plays? Why can the QB be blamed for throwing to an open receiver (or at least one he can get the ball to)?

But remember guys, It's not the coach throwing the ball. If the receiver is open that many times a game, and the QB is going through his reads and not specifically looking for that receiver, why can the coaches be blamed for calling pass plays? Why can the QB be blamed for throwing to an open receiver (or at least one he can get the ball to)?