Which is better?

[FootballFinatic11]

If the accurate, less mobile qb has really good receivers - I'm going to go with them over a great spread back with a couple of caveats.

1. The qb and the receivers have to be able to see the field and read defenses.

2. The receivers and qb have to be on the same page with respect to route adjustments.

But I've never seen such a combination in 6-man.

This is all that ACHS does in their offense. Line receivers up and let them run routes according to the defense. Dallas the Covenant also has a good QB that has decent receivers. If you split 2 receivers out with good speed, good field vision, and good route running, and pair it with a QB that has a good arm that's accurate with throwing time then it's pretty hard to stop. ACHS has those weapons. I have yet to see someone figure out how to stop that, and all they do is pass. But then again, if you prepare yourself well enough for a passing team like that, then you have a good chance to stop it. Just my two cents.

 

[FootballFinatic11]

no need to blitz three. I would only blitz one since he cant get away and take my chances that I can cover long enough to get a sack, which would not take long. If your lucky you will get a chance to punt before we get the safety.

If I've got three blockers, and you send one - my qb will destroy you. If I'm in a spread, and you send one, I still have an up back to block your guy.

I wouldn't take a direct snap, I'd always give my qb the option to run. But with 2 talented receivers, there's no way you are going to be able to defend the entire field against timing routes. It's just not going to happen.

You guys are taking one good spread back over an excellent qb and two talented receivers? how in the world does that possibly give you more options? I would take all the talent I could get.

I completely agree. There's no way you can defend 2 very talented receivers that have chemistry with a QB. It's just near impossible. In 6 man there's just to much open field and not enough people to cover it. It's basically a one on one matchup every time, and if you have a good QB and good receivers... Well good luck stopping that.

 

[justobserving]

I completely agree. There's no way you can defend 2 very talented receivers that have chemistry with a QB. It's just near impossible. In 6 man there's just to much open field and not enough people to cover it. It's basically a one on one matchup every time, and if you have a good QB and good receivers... Well good luck stopping that.

Spot on Mr. Rain. Let's be honest here. The 6 man offensive passing game is a well intentioned, organized and a designed panic fire drill. So many times the designed play is almost immediately turned into a scramble. This is more blatantly put on display in the spread. If one block is missed, 3 rushed, bobble snap or the primary receiver is jumped and covered the fun begins.

The fact of the matter is that if you don't have a mobile passer in either set of the offense you are in trouble. Nature of the six man game. Mobility is paramount in the game. I always point back to the most recent history of speed and mobility winning out over fair speed and brawn in the Strawn / GC championship game.

To me there is no question is to which you would rather have - passer or runner - to be successful week in and week out the team requires both.

Saw a prime example last night at Borden County. Mr. Ritchie running for his life several times because of different breakdowns, defensive schemes and such. His movement and speed bought him the time to use his arm. The same was true for Batla from GC. This happened in the spread and under center. It is the combo you need and have to have in order to survive.

Just my humble observation ...

 

[Dogface]

no need to blitz three. I would only blitz one since he cant get away and take my chances that I can cover long enough to get a sack, which would not take long. If your lucky you will get a chance to punt before we get the safety.

If I've got three blockers, and you send one - my qb will destroy you. If I'm in a spread, and you send one, I still have an up back to block your guy.

I wouldn't take a direct snap, I'd always give my qb the option to run. But with 2 talented receivers, there's no way you are going to be able to defend the entire field against timing routes. It's just not going to happen.

You guys are taking one good spread back over an excellent qb and two talented receivers? how in the world does that possibly give you more options? I would take all the talent I could get.

I completely agree. There's no way you can defend 2 very talented receivers that have chemistry with a QB. It's just near impossible. In 6 man there's just to much open field and not enough people to cover it. It's basically a one on one matchup every time, and if you have a good QB and good receivers... Well good luck stopping that.

This is a dream team.
2 very talented receivers
and an accurate QB?
2 very talented defenders
cover said receirers for2-4 sec.
and BAM
non-mobile QB is on his head.

 

[rainjacktx]

This is a dream team.
2 very talented receivers
and an accurate QB?
2 very talented defenders
cover said receirers for2-4 sec.
and BAM
non-mobile QB is on his head.

The original question in this discussion merely asked which you would prefer. I gave my caveats.

Even the most talented defender is playing at a distinct disadvantage to the talented receiver.

And you guys act like the qb is anchored to the ground. Show me where it said the qb could not move at all.

Additionally, if a receiver can't get space in four seconds in 6-man - he is not really a talented receiver.

 

[SimplyPut]

Show me where it said the spreadback with limited passing skills can't throw the ball?

 

[High Plains Drifter]

you got me OBK

 

[rainjacktx]

Show me where it said the spreadback with limited passing skills can't throw the ball?

I've not seen anyone make that assumption.........yet.

 

[Dogface]

And,
limited QB mobility
is also pretty vague/subjective.

Overall,
it's an interesting question and answer session.
No one has even called anyone else a poopoo head.

 

[CowboyP]

And,
limited QB mobility
is also pretty vague/subjective.

Overall,
it's an interesting question and answer session.
No one has even called anyone else a poopoo head.

Rainjack is a poopoo head.
Is that better dogface?

 

[Jedi]

I would take the spreadback and I want him to be just like #13 from Richland Springs. Tyler Ethridge one of the best if not the best I have ever seen play. He was pretty good on defense also.

 

[kenlen]

Never actually saw Ethridge play. I guess from what I've heard, he must have been one of the best. Probably the best spread back I ever saw was Jamie Humphries from Panther Creek. He did some amazing things. He just didn't have the supporting cast that his younger brother had.

 

[CoachJackson1]

Qb has to be a leader. That is a must. He does not have to have a great arm but he does have to be able to make checks and read the defense. The Spreadback needs to have a better arm but he to has to be smart. I could careless if ever throws the ball, but he does have to make the D think he is. A Qb, Sp combo that can work together is what you are looking for.

 

[Dogface]

Well said Coach.
It is after all
a team that we hope to build.

One of the best I've seen
had at least 3 guys
who could take the snap, run,
pass the ball,
and then 2 others who
got carries too!
You never knew who was gonna get it!