Outscoring opponets 62-13 in the Spread. Offense helping Defense?

I like it. I don't know why it took 5 years to figure out Alex in the spread = the way to go? It's what he was great at when he was at Utah. But instead we have had multiple stubborn HC's and OC's make him try to run the I formation.

Originally posted by global_nomad:
It looks to me that we have run the spread for 8 quarters this season.

@ Hou- 2 quarters - outscored HOU 21-3
@ GB - 2 quarters- outscored GB 21-7
vs. Jax- 2 quarters- outscored JAX 20-3


The means we have outscored our opponent 62-13 in the spread!

Are those numbers right? While I would like to attribute all those numbers to the relaxed defenses we were playing, I think the most surprising factor is how our DEFENSE responds with the offense in the spread. Maybe we have less holding penalties and sacks from the spread that helps our d with field position or maybe its just swagger.

What do you thinK?

That was 4 quarters against Jacksonville not 2

I think Alex has found his calling. We need to play this way.

the O is what is driving this team, when the O plays well and moves the ball decently the D plays great. the O doesn't have to be spectacular (clearly) as evidence in the Bears game. They just need to move the ball and give the D a break and not put there backs against the walls by turning the ball over constantly.

Originally posted by global_nomad:
It looks to me that we have run the spread for 8 quarters this season.

@ Hou- 2 quarters - outscored HOU 21-3
@ GB - 2 quarters- outscored GB 21-7
vs. Jax- 4 quarters- outscored JAX 20-3


The means we have outscored our opponent 62-13 in the spread!

Are those numbers right? While I would like to attribute all those numbers to the relaxed defenses we were playing, I think the most surprising factor is how our DEFENSE responds with the offense in the spread. Maybe we have less holding penalties and sacks from the spread that helps our d with field position or maybe its just swagger.

What do you thinK?

Look I am all for the spread and I have been pleasantly surprised by Alex but what you are implying is a bit skewed. Teams are going to play a different type of ball when they have a good lead. While the D may not change much, the O generally does. Teams many times will work on milking the clock. This is what GB did, it is what the Texans did, and it is what we did against the Jags.

I do believe though that the spread allows our O to move the ball more efficiently which does help our D. It helps us win the TOP and field position battle as well as getting points on the board. The problem with these numbers is that other then the Jags game; these numbers are not exactly an accurate reflection of normal game time.

Of course the offense is helping out the defense. The last few games with Hill in we experienced a ton of 3 and outs which meant that the defense was tired by the middle of the 2nd quarter.

Now the defense have spots that it can rests. Sure we still have three and outs but the offense is starting to put long drives together even if it doesn't score.

Originally posted by Cuphalffull:

Originally posted by global_nomad:
It looks to me that we have run the spread for 8 quarters this season.

@ Hou- 2 quarters - outscored HOU 21-3
@ GB - 2 quarters- outscored GB 21-7
vs. Jax- 4 quarters- outscored JAX 20-3


The means we have outscored our opponent 62-13 in the spread!

Are those numbers right? While I would like to attribute all those numbers to the relaxed defenses we were playing, I think the most surprising factor is how our DEFENSE responds with the offense in the spread. Maybe we have less holding penalties and sacks from the spread that helps our d with field position or maybe its just swagger.

What do you thinK?

Look I am all for the spread and I have been pleasantly surprised by Alex but what you are implying is a bit skewed. Teams are going to play a different type of ball when they have a good lead. While the D may not change much, the O generally does. Teams many times will work on milking the clock. This is what GB did, it is what the Texans did, and it is what we did against the Jags.

I do believe though that the spread allows our O to move the ball more efficiently which does help our D. It helps us win the TOP and field position battle as well as getting points on the board. The problem with these numbers is that other then the Jags game; these numbers are not exactly an accurate reflection of normal game time.

Posters keep saying it was against a different type of defense Are you aware that Smith should have had another 3TD game???? And was that against another prevent defense When the announcers comment and say that the defenses are still attacking and not playing a softer defensive scheme then I will take their word over a "fan"

Originally posted by Cuphalffull:

Originally posted by global_nomad:
It looks to me that we have run the spread for 8 quarters this season.

@ Hou- 2 quarters - outscored HOU 21-3
@ GB - 2 quarters- outscored GB 21-7
vs. Jax- 4 quarters- outscored JAX 20-3


The means we have outscored our opponent 62-13 in the spread!

Are those numbers right? While I would like to attribute all those numbers to the relaxed defenses we were playing, I think the most surprising factor is how our DEFENSE responds with the offense in the spread. Maybe we have less holding penalties and sacks from the spread that helps our d with field position or maybe its just swagger.

What do you thinK?

Look I am all for the spread and I have been pleasantly surprised by Alex but what you are implying is a bit skewed. Teams are going to play a different type of ball when they have a good lead. While the D may not change much, the O generally does. Teams many times will work on milking the clock. This is what GB did, it is what the Texans did, and it is what we did against the Jags.

I do believe though that the spread allows our O to move the ball more efficiently which does help our D. It helps us win the TOP and field position battle as well as getting points on the board. The problem with these numbers is that other then the Jags game; these numbers are not exactly an accurate reflection of normal game time.

If you watch the GB game, they were still blitzing in the 2nd half. They didnt let up on the pressure and he still picked them apart.

K. Lynch - Post Packers The first question asked by Brooks was if the Packers let up and they didn't.

Originally posted by darkknight49:

Originally posted by Cuphalffull:

Originally posted by global_nomad:
It looks to me that we have run the spread for 8 quarters this season.

@ Hou- 2 quarters - outscored HOU 21-3
@ GB - 2 quarters- outscored GB 21-7
vs. Jax- 4 quarters- outscored JAX 20-3


The means we have outscored our opponent 62-13 in the spread!

Are those numbers right? While I would like to attribute all those numbers to the relaxed defenses we were playing, I think the most surprising factor is how our DEFENSE responds with the offense in the spread. Maybe we have less holding penalties and sacks from the spread that helps our d with field position or maybe its just swagger.

What do you thinK?

Look I am all for the spread and I have been pleasantly surprised by Alex but what you are implying is a bit skewed. Teams are going to play a different type of ball when they have a good lead. While the D may not change much, the O generally does. Teams many times will work on milking the clock. This is what GB did, it is what the Texans did, and it is what we did against the Jags.

I do believe though that the spread allows our O to move the ball more efficiently which does help our D. It helps us win the TOP and field position battle as well as getting points on the board. The problem with these numbers is that other then the Jags game; these numbers are not exactly an accurate reflection of normal game time.

If you watch the GB game, they were still blitzing in the 2nd half. They didnt let up on the pressure and he still picked them apart.

K. Lynch - Post Packers The first question asked by Brooks was if the Packers let up and they didn't.

I don't have a video but ya you can even see on Alex's second td pass of the second half to Vernon that they were bringing the heat big time.

Originally posted by Aroh:

Originally posted by darkknight49:

Originally posted by Cuphalffull:

Originally posted by global_nomad:
It looks to me that we have run the spread for 8 quarters this season.

@ Hou- 2 quarters - outscored HOU 21-3
@ GB - 2 quarters- outscored GB 21-7
vs. Jax- 4 quarters- outscored JAX 20-3


The means we have outscored our opponent 62-13 in the spread!

Are those numbers right? While I would like to attribute all those numbers to the relaxed defenses we were playing, I think the most surprising factor is how our DEFENSE responds with the offense in the spread. Maybe we have less holding penalties and sacks from the spread that helps our d with field position or maybe its just swagger.

What do you thinK?

Look I am all for the spread and I have been pleasantly surprised by Alex but what you are implying is a bit skewed. Teams are going to play a different type of ball when they have a good lead. While the D may not change much, the O generally does. Teams many times will work on milking the clock. This is what GB did, it is what the Texans did, and it is what we did against the Jags.

I do believe though that the spread allows our O to move the ball more efficiently which does help our D. It helps us win the TOP and field position battle as well as getting points on the board. The problem with these numbers is that other then the Jags game; these numbers are not exactly an accurate reflection of normal game time.

If you watch the GB game, they were still blitzing in the 2nd half. They didnt let up on the pressure and he still picked them apart.

K. Lynch - Post Packers The first question asked by Brooks was if the Packers let up and they didn't.

I don't have a video but ya you can even see on Alex's second td pass of the second half to Vernon that they were bringing the heat big time.

Even the first TD pass to Crabtree...if the Packers were in a prevent...then that pass should have been easier to defend. At the end of the day you still have to make plays.

Great stat.

But whether the players want to admit it or not, being up 3 scores, they aren't playing with the same tenacity as when the game started.

Originally posted by FourNine49:
Great stat.

But whether the players want to admit it or not, being up 3 scores, they aren't playing with the same tenacity as when the game started.

true, but if the niners lined in the original sing/raye offense do you think we could have put up those points? Even vs a 'softer' defense?
I think that is the message of the OP.

I believe you forgot to mention the titans. You went from houston to green bay.

Originally posted by SanDiego49er:
I like it. I don't know why it took 5 years to figure out Alex in the spread = the way to go? It's what he was great at when he was at Utah. But instead we have had multiple stubborn HC's and OC's make him try to run the I formation.

Do you not remember "Mike Nolan" aka "Hitler".