Do you think we go to the Spread Offense?

[arcane1229]

I know we recently lost our most reliable reciever however do you think we will try the spread offense.

The reason I am thinking this is because this may open up the running game. Its obvious we are a better pass blocking team than run blocking and we have a possession type QB who is best in the short passing game. With Ginn, Bess, Wilford and London we may be able to pull it off. I think this may open the running lanes for Ricky and Ronnie. Chad is making good decisions and prefers to throw the ball control short passes, once in a while he takes a shot and has done well with that too.

And just for those who say Penny doesnt have a strong enough arm I would say neither did Montana and he did well with the spread type offense.

What do you think?

 

[Nuno]

We Have been running the Spread Offense all year long, we line up and play that more then any other formation we use.

I'm not trying to be a prick, but how many games have you seen this year?

 

[arcane1229]

Well smarty have we been running a three reciever formation is that what you say is a spread offense? please explain it since you seem to understand it better than I.

 

[rickyfan85]

Well smarty have we been running a three reciever formation is that what you say is a spread offense? please explain it since you seem to understand it better than I.

It's ok i'll do it for him. We run 3 WR but our that doesnt eliminate the catching threat that all 3 of our backs and both of our TE's have. With those personnel we could line up in I-formation and shift to 5 wide empty back and that would still be considerd spread formation maybe just not traditional personnel.

We simply do not have the depth at the WR position to justify keeping the TE's out. And plus i think its a blessing in the sense that we have the element of surprise.

 

[Nuno]

Well smarty have we been running a three reciever formation is that what you say is a spread offense? please explain it since you seem to understand it better than I.

Thanks for calling me smart, even if it's coming from someone who has no clue what their team is doing on sunday.I'll still take it.

And if you really feel the need to insult others,please go to a pats fan site.

 

[nugzandjugz]

It's ok i'll do it for him. We run 3 WR but our that doesnt eliminate the catching threat that all 3 of our backs and both of our TE's have. With those personnel we could line up in I-formation and shift to 5 wide empty back and that would still be considerd spread formation maybe just not traditional personnel.

We simply do not have the depth at the WR position to justify keeping the TE's out. And plus i think its a blessing in the sense that we have the element of surprise.

LOL No one in their right mind would put wilford or london in over fasano or martin. I'm not saying our TE's are Gods, but they are better than what we have as far as 4th and 5th WR's go.

 

[arcane1229]

Thanks for calling me smart, even if it's coming from someone who has no clue what their team is doing on sunday.I'll still take it.

And if you really feel the need to insult others,please go to a pats fan site.

I think your the one with no clue, wont even waste my time with you and send your private messages to someone else I wont view or answer the one you sent, by the way how old are you 10?

 

[Nuno]

I think your the one with no clue, wont even waste my time with you and send your private messages to someone else I wont view or answer the one you sent, by the way how old are you 10?

Whatever you say man,

 

[Nuno]

LOL No one in their right mind would put wilford or london in over fasano or martin. I'm not saying our TE's are Gods, but they are better than what we have as far as 4th and 5th WR's go.

LOL your right, the thread starter is out of her mind.:hi5: