Could Skins use "Wildcat" offense w/ ARE??

[SonnyJ]

To which I say "So What". If you're going to take a flag, break his neck.

There's plenty of ways to hit a guy without drawing a flag. Pummel his ribs, jam him in the throat, use your hand and drill him in the armpit of his throwing shoulder. Straight fingers into his guts. Get in close and sharply punch or knee him on the inner thigh or come down on it with your elbow. That hurts like crazy. 9 pounds of pressure breaks a collarbone, if he blocks take him down and try to land on it.

And seriously, if you're afraid of the big bad QB becoming a viable receiver, then defense is not your thing. No one who ever played defense is afraid of that. In fact, of all the guys reading this who played defense, I bet all of them had the same thought. QB out in a pattern? Throw it o him. Tee off on him. Leave him open for me to destroy. We salivate over that memory. If he's out blocking for a run, even better. Now i can do a whole lot of damage to him within the rules.

If any OC would take advantage of a guy not 'paying attention' to a play, he's going to have to do so without his starting QB. Or at least a starting QB who is good and beat up. And, understand there's two sides to that coin. He's making his QB vulnerable. So now I'M going to take advantage of that.

Defense does not fear the offense. Especially a QB split out wide. He's no match for a defensive player, especially a defensive back who is used to jamming guys who know what to do with a jam. A QB doesn't. He's going to get the snot knocked out of him.

~Bang

Perhaps. 'Course, why hasn't this been done to Pennington yet? It's not like the formation should have come as a surprise to the Chargers. Heck, I can't believe it didn't dawn on the Patriots, considering the thuggery on that defense with BB and Harrison. Heck, if this were such an effective strategy, why not do it receivers that are out there - give them a knee to their inner thigh at the start of the game, and you can effectively remove them from the remainder of the game. But it never happens.

I think the biggest thing to worry about is the QB hurting his hand fending off the defensive player. QBs take some big hits from guys moving at full speed while standing in the pocket. I don't think a little wrestling with a stationary defender of relatively equal (or lesser) size, when he can defend himself, is going to be any worse than that.

It just doesn't seem worth the effort when the only realistic way to reliably "hurt" the QB is going to draw, at least, a flag and a first down. It would probably also draw a fine/suspension, too. Not worth it, IMO, to stop a play that should be able to be handled without resorting to thuggery.

[Die Hard]

So, would you advocate using it with Portis taking the snap and handing off to Ladell or passing? Would you keep Campbell in or sub him out?

You'd have to utilize Betts as the other potential running threat.

Much like Pennington.... I think have a traditional QB on the field is a waste... so again you're playing with 10 men on the field.

If I'm coaching... I sub him out.

[Die Hard]

They'd have to take the QB off the field DH,, eventually one of them is going to get crushed, and bye bye Wildcat.

~Bang

sorry John, I can't say I truly understand you're reply.

Who has to take the QB off the field?

Eventually one of what is going to get crushed?

[Dance04]

everytime miami does it I feel like I'm watching Pat White. Maybe thats just me.

[Bang]

sorry John, I can't say I truly understand you're reply.

Who has to take the QB off the field?

Eventually one of what is going to get crushed?

You said in your reply that you agreed with my post, and that the Dolphins should take Pennington off the field completely.

what I'm saying is; I agree.. they're going to have to soon, or someone is going to kill him.

I get what you're saying about the effectiveness of the offensive set, but leaving that QB out there to get pummelled is asking for disaster.

As to SonnyJ.. yes, because it's worked twice that means it will work all the time.

In the entire history of football, here's a constant. Offense innovates, defense adapts. Offense gets a rules change to help overcome the adaptation, and innovates again. Defense adapts. and so on and so on.

Defense controls the evolution of football. It always has.

And in this case, it is merely a matter of time before someone running this thing gets their QB carted off the field.

And then you either won't see it again, or you will see wrinkles to protect the QB.

As to why no one has stopped it yet, you got me,, I keep seeing the QB standing there unmolested. Mash his ass. You've got the opportunity to legally bust up the most important guy on the field. Use it, and that offense will disappear. Why they haven't is a mystery to me. You don't have to hurt him badly, but he's got those little paper pads on ,, he'll definitely feel it if your 265 lb linebacker thumps his ass.

~Bang

[phishisthegreatstuff]

i wouldn't mind trying it once a game, but if Zorn doesn't like it then **** it....

[Hubbs]

Those of you who are arguing against this simply because "what we're doing now works" are the complete antithesis of how Jim Zorn coaches.

His single greatest asset is his openness to any new idea. And let's be clear - I said openness, not automatic acceptance. I'm sure he turns down dozens of ideas every week. But he also considers what Clinton Portis says when it's fourth and one and they want to keep the ball and run out the clock. He accepts input from Campbell when Jason says that he needs to be trusted. He'll try an option pass that the team only practiced once if he believes the pros outweigh the cons.

If Zorn has legitimate reasons to reject the implementation of a few "Wildcat" plays, I doubt anyone here would argue. But it's naive to think that Zorn would simply shrug off a new wrinkle for the offense. That's not him. He's always looking to stay one step ahead of the opposition, and always open to new ways to do that. I fully believe that Zorn would never, ever shoot down a new idea simply because the old ones haven't failed yet.

[Die Hard]

everytime miami does it I feel like I'm watching Pat White. Maybe thats just me.

Or McFadden.... or Tebow. 70% of the time they're going to run it. But they are also going to pass it to keep the offenses honest. And when they do pass.... they have to be efficient

[Die Hard]

As to why no one has stopped it yet, you got me,, I keep seeing the QB standing there unmolested. Mash his ass. You've got the opportunity to legally bust up the most important guy on the field. Use it, and that offense will disappear. Why they haven't is a mystery to me. You don't have to hurt him badly, but he's got those little paper pads on ,, he'll definitely feel it if your 265 lb linebacker thumps his ass.

~Bang

In the NFL... it couldn't be a primary offensive set. Simply because it is primarily a running-attack offense. In the NFL.... you need balance to keep the defenses on their toes.

That's not to say it wouldn't necessarily be successful... it IS a power-rushing attack. Which is a strategy the some teams in the NFL still utilize. With success.

But I don't believe the passing-game is diverse enough.... to make the offense efficient overall. There are certainly passing options... good ones.

[Thirtyfive2seven]

Great idea! I was discussing it the other day with some friends

Take the QB off the field. Use a formation as follows:

EL at QB

Portis at RB

Cooley, Moss, Thrash, and Thomas/Kelly WRs

From that formation you would drive defenses batt ****. I'm not saying run often either, no no no, but you I don't have any problems with teams getting creative and screwing with the defense. This could get you some serious yardage, or be used in the red zone.

[Skin'Em84]

Bang, how often has Miami ran towards the side Pennington is on?

I've only seen highlights, and of those highlights I think they've only run to Pennington's side once, and the safety should've lit him up in that case, he just sorta ran around Pennington.

If Heyer got called on smashing a DE when the play wasn't anywhere nearby, then an LB will DEFINITELY get called on smashing a QB when the play is running the other way.

On that same train of thought, you can probably bet that the play will be running opposite direction of Pennington, and if runs towards Pennington, just lay him down. '

If I were to see it, and I'm not a coach so I could be wrong, but I would play strong opposite Pennington's side of the field. Instructions to the Weakside backer (or side with Pennington if it happens to be Strongside) would be to just smash the QB.

[G-Prime]

Not with ARE, but with Sellers, Betts and Portis? OMG!

[Doctorfro]

I've been calling for him to QB anyway, why not shift into him at the helm and JC split wide. That would be ridiculous. Cool, but ridiculous.

[Ili]

Leaving Pennington on the field gives Brown the option of throwing a lateral pass to him, and in turn Pennington could still throw the ball if he gets it. A defense has to be aware of that. Removing the QB from the formation altogether takes away deception and would make the Wildcat pointless.

They can use this formation with success because Brown although being a RB is a capable passer. I give them props. For a team that has totally sucked since the departure of Marino, it's nice to finally see them find a way to win (Although being it trickery) against some very good opponents. Whatever works, a win is a win!

Maybe someday they'll see the light and actually draft a potential marquee QB to replace Marino instead of going to the recycled bin year after year, perhaps they'll have even more success.

[NeueRedskinWelle]

I'd like to see ARE get the ball more on reverses like that. Give him the option to pass or run, one will ALWAYS be open. Teams will then look for it opening up Moss.

It's science.

[fire3fighter4]

why fix it if it aint' broke?

[KyleVA]

It'd be funny.

But I don't think we have the right coaching for it to be terribly effective and..

why fix it if it aint' broke?

[acuratl1984]

No thanks. Leave that poodle offense bull**** to the teams with garbage offenses.

who the hell cares if we are able to score with it?

[Peeping Wizard]

Another cool one to pull off is a direct snap to a guy in motion. That can be very tricky but every effective if done right.

I honestly think that ARE should be throwing the ball at least once every game. That adds an entirely different dimension to the offense and gives the D something else to worry about, especially in the red zone. If a D in the red zone has to worry about Portis up the middle, Cooley on a short route, Moss in the back of the end zone or even Campbell running, it becomes very difficult to cover us.

[skins4me58203]

Our offense is working just fine. No need to screw around. And ARE would get murdered trying to run the ball.

[DiscoBob]

To everyone who shot down the idea because we are doing well without it....?

You don't want to wait until some team is consistently stuffing our offense until you throw in some wrinkles....practice the off the wall stuff now, and go to it when the offense needs a jump start in an important game....

We could easily have a package of 10 or so plays with ARE at QB that we could use at the start of a 2nd half in a close game.....it doesn't have to be the single wing....tailor the plays to ARE's strengths....

[RandyHolt]

I want to see Zorn pass more near the line of scrimmage with ARE. The passer must now be fully over the line of scrimmage to be called for a penalty (maybe the Wycheck rule??). ARE did it masterfully last week, and he could have run at least another yard or two before passing it legally downfield; only his backfoot needs to be behind the LOS.

Defenses will have their hands tied trying to figure out when to peel off the coverage and step up to make the tackle. ARE can read the defense and make the smart play; continue running or pass.

[ballin86]

Well, he can't grab the QB, 'cause then he'll get a flag.

He can't smack him to the head, or he'll get a flag.

If he tries to do anything remotely resembling a cheap shot, he'll get a flag (see Heyer, Stephon).

The QB is probably lining up as flanker, so it's not like he's right on the line, so contact isn't necessarily a given.

QBs are often just as big, if not bigger, than LBs. It could be embarrassing for the LB .

The QB might be a mismatch for the LB and become a viable receiving option. How would you like to see Zach Thomas covering Campbell? Campbell has him by half-a-foot and is faster. Can you say play-action go route?

Any OC, seeing a defender isn't paying attention to a play, would take advantage of it in some way, shape, or form.

were talking about chad pennington, not daunte culpepper...

[bird_1972]

You'd have to utilize Betts as the other potential running threat.

Much like Pennington.... I think have a traditional QB on the field is a waste... so again you're playing with 10 men on the field.

If I'm coaching... I sub him out.

Problem with that is that you telegraph to the defense what you're going to do. In other words, any time we sub Campbell out, it's going to be Wildcat.

I think you lose some flexibility that way. Can you imagine having the team lineup with Campbell at wideout and then they motion before the snap to have campbell take the snap instead? Crazy.

[sniksdeR_RTTH]

we should start off the second half with el as the QB and JC as the WR, and then jus motion back to normal and c if it causes the defense to waste a time out