ADVERTISEMENT

The spread isn't dead, but it's rapidly reaching maturity

kybobcat

Moderator
Moderator
May 29, 2001
22,919
2,799
113
In the shadow of Bowman Field
Necessity was the mother of revolution.

When Rich Rodriguez installed a beta-version spread offense at Salem College in 1988, the first-time head coach's blueprint was based on his own successes and failures as a defensive coordinator. The two-minute drill gave me the most difficulty, Rodriguez thought; let's just do that, but all the time.

[...]

Step by step, these offensive minds developed and honed a system that can only be described as revolutionary — radical, even, as the most football landscape-changing development of its era. It evened the playing field, bringing offensive ingenuity to the forefront at the expense of defensive production, and ushered in an era of scoring proficiency unmatched in the sport's history.

And that version of the spread — four wide receivers, one quarterback, one running back, full-speed tempo — is, if not dead, no longer a viable conduit for success. During the past decade, the offense has gone through so many iterations and overhauls, on an annual and even weekly basis, that the term "spread" has become a catch-all phrase for any offense of a certain spacing, speed and tempo.

"There is no 'spread' offense," said Nebraska Coach Mike Riley. "What people call spread is the quarterback in shotgun and receivers spread all over the field. You'll hear it. 'That's the spread.' But they're really way different from each other."
USA Today College Football
 
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT

Go Big.
Get Premium.

Join Rivals to access this premium section.

  • Say your piece in exclusive fan communities.
  • Unlock Premium news from the largest network of experts.
  • Dominate with stats, athlete data, Rivals250 rankings, and more.
Log in or subscribe today Go Back