A few football questions

[MumboSauce]

Nice job fellers, good post and good replies/read. I also agree that it shouldn't take a injury for the coach to use or find out what Davis can do...you have weapons find a a way to use them, adjust, be innovative.

[darrelgreenie]

Except teams see that we're generally in a cover 3 look. With the single high safety. They'd be foolish to attack deep on that.

Alot of teams, including the Skins attack deep against a single high look.

Because of the off coverage its hard to get a read if we're playing Cover 1 or Cover 3

We don't need Landry to give us the freedom to use a SS in the box. We need a competent safety. The scheme allows us to bring our strong safety inside, not LaRon Landry.

We don't put the SS in the box some of the time, we keep the SS in the box most of the time.

In order to play as much single high safety as we do you need a safety that you trust with above average range.

For example you wouldn't play alot of single high if Peirson Prileau was your FS.

Landry would play much better with less area to cover. We're asking too much of him and he's not getting the job done. Let's play a cover 2 man under scheme and see how he plays. Chances are he'll be on top of most balls thrown his way.

We're asking alot of Landry and i think he's doing a good job.

But, i'm in the camp that believes the kid can take the next step.

I remember seeing some Cover 2 (zone) against the Giants, i'm a fan of Cover 2 (zone)

(Although i've seen it in some weird situations also like on 3rd and long??)

But, i also like the single high Cover 1 and Cover 3 also, but i would like us to be more aggresive up front.

[jtyler42]

There are differences to be sure and I would not want you to think I am saying they are the same schemes just that they have more in common than people might think.

You can run the 4-3 as a 2 gap scheme as well by the way.

Oh we agree that the under/over fronts out of the 4-3 and 3-4 are very similar, and I know that the 4-3 can be run as a 1 gap or 2 gap defense...I was just saying that when teams shift into the under/over fronts out of the 3-4 and 4-3 that they typically will play a 1 gap style b/c the alignment of the DL is already in the gaps and allows them to shoot them easier...

Not using personnel to the best of their ability isn't a fault of the scheme i.e. WCO its the fault of the coaching or implementaion of the scheme.

And i agree that they haven't maximized the possible contributions of the personnel.

This is I believe the benefit of adding Coach Lewis to the staff and making him OC...If it's one thing Coach Lewis can do it's implement the WCO and develop WR's and RB's in this scheme...IF you don't believe me take a look at his resume...In just his first week of running the offensive practice and calling plays the offense looked different to me against the Eagles...The end result wasn't different THAT GAME but the formations, motions, route combos/passing concepts, and how quick the plays got in were classic WCO and I was impressed that he was able to effect that much change that quickly...

Also Coach Lewis was utilizing the 2TE sets early on in the game before Cooley got hurt, he got Devin Thomas involved, Rock involved, and Davis involved...He did this in ONE WEEK...Coach Zorn hadn't been able to do this in 1.5yrs...

It also told me that Coach Zorn obviously either doesn't know this offense as well as we think or he just isn't a good teacher of this scheme...

I thought the same thing.

I figured that Devin and Malcolm would be natural fits as the X receiver, and would be groomed as such.

I remember reading Zorn's reasoning, to paraphrase he said that playing Moss at X put him one step closer to the DB in essence giving the defender less time to react, allowing Moss to be on top of them sooner.

Malcolm is a natural X...lol Malcolm X...Santana is a Z...Devin can play both but I would like him at Z as well...I think going forward we need to see Malcolm and Devin on the outside at X, and Z respectively and Moss in the slot when we go 3 wide...With Moss speed, shiftiness, and toughness in the slot he would be lethal...

Sellers still has a role because we use alot of I-Form.

And strangely enough Sellers often motions from the FB spot and stacks behind the OT or behind Cooley and goes out into pass routes.

This makes little sense to me because Cooley came into the league as an HB/FB under Gibbs.

They could've used Cooley at FB and Davis at TE if the intent were to pass, and even for a few of runs Cooley to keep from tipping their hand that a pass was coming.

And i think Cooley could handle some blocking duties; he isn't a horrible blocker just inconsistent getting more time at FB he would have likely tightened up his blocking.

I've been calling for this for a while now...I truly believe that Cooley would be a perfect WCO FB/H-back...Cooley was drafted to play H-back, he doesn't really run downfield routes anyways and by having him come out of the backfield would just open him up more...It also gives our offense versatility in that we can go 2TE, 2WR, 1RB or 2WR, 1TE, 2RB without changing personnel...

I hear you on this, i'm one of the rubes that bought into the preseason talk of getting Davis involved in the offense this year.

We have split Cooley out wide a couple of times, like in the Giants and Rams games Cooley split wide.

Why we don't do it more often or use Davis in this role is a great question for the offensive staff.

I was with you in believing that and I was actually excited to see it...I think with Coach Lewis now running the offense I believe that you will begin to see this again with Davis as the season goes on...

[Going Commando]

We don't put the SS in the box some of the time, we keep the SS in the box most of the time.

In order to play as much single high safety as we do you need a safety that you trust with above average range.

For example you wouldn't play alot of single high if Peirson Prileau was your FS.

Do you think LaRon would be an upgrade over Horton and Doughty at SS or do you think he would be worse?

Personally, I think he would be a massive upgrade and could star at that position with less responsibility. We can't get trapped into thinking we've got to play Landry as the deep safety because it allows us to use the best personnel group we've got right now. Go out and get the right guy for your scheme then! Maybe this arrangement can be acceptable this year, but I'm telling you, cheaper, coverage safeties are there to be had in the middle of the draft. Acquiring one would let us upgrade two positions at once. This is where Macho Harris would have been nice to draft last year. He went in the 5th.

I've been active in the draft thread and one guy I've started talking about for this specific role is Myron Lewis from Vanderbilt. He's fallen off the map a little since D.J. Moore left and he's been exposed as a CB this season. But he's a physical DB who's a hitter and he's got great ball skills. He's a natural in zone coverage and I think he could step in and take over the deep safety spot fairly quickly. NFL Draft Scout has him listed as a faller right now and has him as a 3rd-4th round prospect. I think his talent level is higher than that and if he were already playing safety he'd be taken earlier. He's a guy to watch but I'm sure he's not the only one.

[kramdizzle]

play madden and you'll get it

[Oldfan]

.... I also agree that it shouldn't take a injury for the coach to use or find out what Davis can do...you have weapons find a a way to use them, adjust, be innovative.

It's interesting that Bill Walsh was only moved to create the WCO when his number one QB went down with a career-ending injury and he was forced to adapt to the lesser talents of Virgil Carter.

It seems to me that, given equal talent, the head coach who "sticks with what he knows" will lose to the innovative coach, whose game strategies are continually evolving, most of the time.

[Elessar78]

Ooh-ooh, can someone go over the differences between Cover-2 and Inverted Cover-2? Why make the corners play deep instead of the safeties? Doesn't that expose the deep-middle of your defense?

[KDawg]

Ooh-ooh, can someone go over the differences between Cover-2 and Inverted Cover-2? Why make the corners play deep instead of the safeties? Doesn't that expose the deep-middle of your defense?

No. They'd take the same responsibilities as the safeties would. Deep halves. They wouldn't just be a sideline to hash player, they'd be sideline to middle of the field.

It's a disguised coverage, it's not the most practical coverage. Your safeties would probably then take the curl zones and your outside backers would buzz the flats. The MIKE would either take the hook zone or drop to the hole.

[KDawg]

It's interesting that Bill Walsh was only moved to create the WCO when his number one QB went down with a career-ending injury and he was forced to adapt to the lesser talents of Virgil Carter.

It seems to me that, given equal talent, the head coach who "sticks with what he knows" will lose to the innovative coach, whose game strategies are continually evolving, most of the time.

A good coach will adapt his scheme 100% of the time. Agreed.

[darrelgreenie]

Do you think LaRon would be an upgrade over Horton and Doughty at SS or do you think he would be worse?

Short answers? Yes.

But, I think in our scheme you put the better of your safeties at FS.

I think LaRon is our best safety.

LaRon would be an upgrade over Doughty/Horton in terms of coverage and maybe blitzing.

But, he would have to snap out of his tackling funk though and I don't think he has the same physicality of Horton for taking on/shedding blocks and Horton just seems have a nose for the ball i.e. TOs.

I remember coach Jackson in training camp interview addressed this same topic and more, one of the better coaches interview's i've read:

http://blog.redskins.com/2009/05/26/tuesday-may-26-steve-jackson-talks-safeties/#continued

All right. Let's talk a little about the specific guys you've got in your position group. You've got LaRon Landry starting at free safety, and people email me all the time asking why he's not up at strong safety. What's the thinking behind that?

Jackson: "That's a good question, and I hear it all the time too. With the style of defense that we play, the strong safety is more a box type player. He's gonna cover tight ends, and he has to be able to attack fullbacks and take the physical rigors of being down there. He's like a small linebacker.

"LaRon's biggest assets are his speed and his range. With the way we play our free safety, he has to be a guy that can run from sideline to sideline to protect the corners. If anybody breaks free, the free safety has to be the one to run that guy down. And that's what he does better than anybody we have on this team.

"As far as taking on fullbacks and just being the guy to get in there and get dirty and grimy and do all the dirty work, that's not LaRon. It's a waste of his particular talents to put him down in there. Nothing against the position, but he's better for our defense with his physical skills back there being the traffic cop and being the savior, the angel for anyone who gets into trouble."

And backing him up is Kareem Moore. What do you see from him heading into his second year?

Jackson: "He has the same attributes as LaRon. They're guys who can go sideline to sideline, and he's probably got the best ball skills of everybody in the defensive backfield besides DeAngelo [Hall].

Really?

Jackson: "Aw, yeah. You throw a ball, he'll just pluck it out of the air. And the thing about him is, he was hurt when we got him. He didn't have any OTAs, didn't even practice til the middle of training camp. So I think people'll be surprised with what they see out of Kareem this year now that he's had a full offseason AND got some experience in games last year. He looks a million times better than he did last year -- we've got a pretty good group."

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

And even IF LaRon is an upgrade a SS then what happens to the FS position.

I like Doughty and Horton but it would make me nervous if they were playing alot of single high FS.

And although Kareem might be good imo he hasn't played enough to take on the S position with the greatest amount of responsibility. (He might be able to handle it, he might not but it would be a big risk)

Personally, I think he would be a massive upgrade and could star at that position with less responsibility.

Do you think Horton/Doughty are playing poorly?

I don't think Horton/Doughty need to be upgraded, i'm happy with their performances and while i could see Landry as an improvement its not by alot.

If any of the safeties needs to step up their play right now i would say its LaRon, he's missing tackles and not playing up to his ability.

We can't get trapped into thinking we've got to play Landry as the deep safety because it allows us to use the best personnel group we've got right now. Go out and get the right guy for your scheme then! Maybe this arrangement can be acceptable this year, but I'm telling you, cheaper, coverage safeties are there to be had in the middle of the draft.

I like the way they are using LaRon i don't think they're trapped by personnel at al;. If anything safety is one of the position where we have good depth. Horton and Doughty both play alot; Kareem even gets some playing time. I think they have all the personnel at the safety spot to run any scheme they want.

Personally i think you would get what you're looking for from the SS if we played Kareem Moore at SS.

I see where you're coming from though,

HTTR

[Oldfan]

A good coach will adapt his scheme 100% of the time. Agreed.

Since my only coaching experience has been at the youth level, I'd be interested in your thoughts on this.

Keeping the scheme simple is conventional wisdom at the youth level, but I suspect that simplicity is a good idea at all levels of the game. Obviously, simplicity is a relative term. At the NFL level, Tom Moore's passing game, with Peyton throwing from the gun, and with relatively few pass patterns, is a simple system that might be more predictable, but it's still hard to stop because the simplicity permits better execution.

What are your thoughts on this?

[KDawg]

Since my only coaching experience has been at the youth level, I'd be interested in your thoughts on this.

Keeping the scheme simple is conventional wisdom at the youth level, but I suspect that simplicity is a good idea at all levels of the game. Obviously, simplicity is a relative term. At the NFL level, Tom Moore's passing game, with Peyton throwing from the gun, and with relatively few pass patterns, is a simple system that might be more predictable, but it's still hard to stop because the simplicity permits better execution.

What are your thoughts on this?

Simplicity allows your players that have a harder time memorizing an offense to get a chance to succeed. I think there's a fine line between being too simple and being simple. You have to have complexities in your schemes in order to make them work... But then you're walking the other fine line of "too complex".

Now, granted, a scheme can never be too complex if you get the personnel that is smart enough to learn, understand and apply the concepts. But that's a tough task to come across an entire unit that is completely understanding of a complex system.

Really, it's about knowing your personnel and making it simple for them. Some groups that's going to be a very complex system, some groups is going to be a semi simplistic system.

Bottom line is, everyone needs to understand what you're doing. If you can do that, and see any kind of positive results, your scheme works.

It's a vague answer, but it's the answer I believe in when I'm coaching. "dumb it down" or "amp it up". Of course, I don't tell my student athletes I'm doing either, I just do it.

[darrelgreenie]

Ooh-ooh, can someone go over the differences between Cover-2 and Inverted Cover-2? Why make the corners play deep instead of the safeties? Doesn't that expose the deep-middle of your defense?

Basically what KDawg said.

The CBs start back prior to the snap and 'bail' to take deep 1/2 coverage.

The SS/FS come down the hashes, they could take the flats or hook zones, or one could take the flat and the other take a slot receiver man-to-man their are many variations.

Sometimes they invert to one side of the field only when there are twins on one side an no WR on the opposite side.

I don't think it would expose the middle of defense anymore then a typical cover 2 would because the mike backer is still in the middle of the field or dropping into the hole.

The purpose is to give the defense a different look then what the expected and get the QB to make a bad read or cause hesitation.

[terryb101]

okay answer this,, when a rcvr is 25 yds down field and the d back is all over him, and the ball is overthrown,but the offical throws a flag for pass interference, then they say no penatly because the ball was uncatchable, so how come they dont call illegal contact? your not supposed to touch a rcvr after 5 yds.

[wwSEANd]

i have a question about press coverage:

do teams ever have their two starting corners do different things? (that is, one presses and the other gives a cushion) because our top two have RADICALLY different skillsets and neither plays very well outside their comfort zone. basically, Carlos NEEDS to press and DeAngelo can't press.

i've heard that Barnes is a solid press corner, so maybe we could have a formation with Carlos and Barnes at CB, and three safeties (cobra?) with DeAngelo deep, Landry shallower and shaded to Barnes' side, and Horton/Doughty just behind the LBs to the other side. it's just that i'd like to see everyone get the chance to play the style that fits them best, and i don't see that happening.

i also subscribe to the philosophy that you should try to put your best 11 guys out there, rather than fill a scheme. unfortunately, Andre and Orakpo bring just about the same thing to the table, so getting them on the field with the above 5-DB package would only make sense in obvious passing situations. perhaps it would look like:

                   23

          30

                         48
                  59
          52
25         98 - 93 - 92 - 99          22

• Hall gets to watch the play develop in front of him, spy the QB, and be the best ballhawk he can be.
  
• Landry gets to do what he's doing now, only with half the territory. i feel like he'll make more impact plays this way.
  
• Horton (or Doughty) get to play a hybrid LB/S role.
  
• London is London.
  
• Rocky is Rocky.
  
• Carlos and Barnes play press man coverage. (hallelujah!)
  
• Orakpo and Andre get to pin their ears back and rush the passer.
  
• Daniels is a DT/DE anyway, so he kinda gets to rush the passer, too. (note: this could just as easily be either Lorenzo or Golston)
  
• Haynesworth eats the OL alive.
  

i guess all i really want is for the coaches to adapt their scheme to the talents of their players, like everyone else here is saying. this is just one possible defensive configuration that would suit our players, imho.

[Darth Tater]

A good coach will adapt his scheme 100% of the time. Agreed.

Yep. Reminds me of Gibbs in 1981. Original concept was to use Joe Washington as his primary and set up a passing game like SD had. Injuries and the horses he had (including a bunch of young linemen who knew how to run block but hadn't really learned how to be good NFL level pass blockers) and a QB who wasn't a Fouts-clone made him change up a bit.

[KDawg]

i have a question about press coverage:

do teams ever have their two starting corners do different things? (that is, one presses and the other gives a cushion) because our top two have RADICALLY different skillsets and neither plays very well outside their comfort zone. basically, Carlos NEEDS to press and DeAngelo can't press.

Yes. Often. Some teams have specific checks when they see a certain formation to do one thing to the strong side and one to the weak, etc.

Let's say we're dealing with a trips formation with the 3 receivers to the left and a lone receiver to the backside.

Often times you'll see teams check to a zone to the trips side (to avoid running into each other in man coverage) and man on the backside.

[darrelgreenie]

okay answer this,, when a rcvr is 25 yds down field and the d back is all over him, and the ball is overthrown,but the offical throws a flag for pass interference, then they say no penatly because the ball was uncatchable, so how come they dont call illegal contact? your not supposed to touch a rcvr after 5 yds.

Good question, i have no idea

i have a question about press coverage:

do teams ever have their two starting corners do different things? (that is, one presses and the other gives a cushion) because our top two have RADICALLY different skillsets and neither plays very well outside their comfort zone. basically, Carlos NEEDS to press and DeAngelo can't press.

I've seen the Skins have one CB up and one off before, i recall reading that in certain defenses it up to the CB wether the play press/off.

i've heard that Barnes is a solid press corner, so maybe we could have a formation with Carlos and Barnes at CB, and three safeties (cobra?) with DeAngelo deep, Landry shallower and shaded to Barnes' side, and Horton/Doughty just behind the LBs to the other side. it's just that i'd like to see everyone get the chance to play the style that fits them best, and i don't see that happening.

i also subscribe to the philosophy that you should try to put your best 11 guys out there, rather than fill a scheme. unfortunately, Andre and Orakpo bring just about the same thing to the table, so getting them on the field with the above 5-DB package would only make sense in obvious passing situations. perhaps it would look like:

                   23

          30

                         48
                  59
          52
25         98 - 93 - 92 - 99          22

I would be more comfortable seeing Tryon then Barnes in a starting position.

I think we have a similiar nickel package to the one you describe.

Except they put Smoot as the deep safety (which scares the bejesus out of me).

Interesting thought though.

Although i don't think its practical i think the concept of playing D.Hall as deep safety is intriguing.

[wwSEANd]

I would be more comfortable seeing Tryon then Barnes in a starting position.

I think we have a similiar nickel package to the one you describe.

Except they put Smoot as the deep safety (which scares the bejesus out of me).

Interesting thought though.

Although i don't think its practical i think the concept of playing D.Hall as deep safety is intriguing.

yeah to be clear, i think DeAngelo is a very good corner, and that Landry is a great FS, but...

-DeAngelo plays WAAAAAAAY better when he can see the QB. if he's playing man and his receiver get him turned around, i just say "oh ****" because he's practically nonfunctional at that point. he has the skills and talent to play CB or FS at the highest level, but i think his natural tendencies and temperament lend themselves better to playing safety. he reminds me more of Ed Reed than Nnamdi Asomugha, and i really think he could be a difference-maker back there.

-Landry might be the most talented FS in the league, and we are using him to the very limits of his range. the problem is that, at the very limits of his range, his ballhawking skills and tackling ability are somewhat compromised. he *can* play sideline to sideline, but he's best with less territory. even if we had him cover sideline-to-far-hash with a corner covering the other 1/3 of the field, i think we'd see a dramatic change in his presence/impact on the field.

and Tryon over Barnes? hmm, i was more impressed with Barnes in the pre-season. that might just be me, though. can Tryon press? he's kind of small.

[gortiz]

what's the difference between offsides and encroachment?

what's a flanker? the outside WR?

why do they call middle linebackers Mikes? and the other Sams?

is there a "strong side" of the line if you have a two tight ends on either side of the line?

are basically only two predominant forms of offense in the nfl ... the "west coast" and its hybrids and the "Coryell" type offense that norv, martz and at one time gibbs ran? Are there others??

are tailsbacks and half backs the same thing?

[Oldfan]

...It's a vague answer, but it's the answer I believe in when I'm coaching. "dumb it down" or "amp it up". Of course, I don't tell my student athletes I'm doing either, I just do it.

My question is just as tough to nail down as your answer. It certainly makes sense that the amount of complexity is relative to the experience and the intelligence of the team.

Let me just throw out a few opinions on some statements I've heard.

Todd Collins estimated that it would take two years to learn the Saunders scheme. Brunell laughed. He said he'd be gone in two years.

Jim Zorn estimated it would take three years for his QB to be proficient in the WCO.

Mario Manningham, who reportedly scored a six on his first try at the Wunderlic, is producing in his rookie year -- while none of our receivers have shown that they have mastered their WCO assignments.

Peyton Manning is running a simpler passing scheme, usually from the gun with fewer patterns, than Jason Campbell.

In today's NFL, with the roster turnover considered, I read these comments about Al's scheme, with his belief in volume, and Jim's scheme, with its reliance on detail and precision, and it seems obvious that they must be too complex.

Agree or not?

[Darth Tater]

what's a flanker? the outside WR?

why do they call middle linebackers Mikes? and the other Sams?

The flanker is the WR flanked off the rear of the TE in more basic forms of the T, I and Ace. The outside receiver is an end, sometimes called the split end. In the days before Lombardi, both ends were often about the same size.

Mike, Sam and Will came about because they're just easier.

[Darth Tater]

My question is just as tough to nail down as your answer. It certainly makes sense that the amount of complexity is relative to the experience and the intelligence of the team.

Let me just throw out a few opinions on some statements I've heard.

Todd Collins estimated that it would take two years to learn the Saunders scheme. Brunell laughed. He said he'd be gone in two years.

Jim Zorn estimated it would take three years for his QB to be proficient in the WCO.

Mario Manningham, who reportedly scored a six on his first try at the Wunderlic, is producing in his rookie year -- while none of our receivers have shown that they have mastered their WCO assignments.

Peyton Manning is running a simpler passing scheme, usually from the gun with fewer patterns, than Jason Campbell.

In today's NFL, with the roster turnover considered, I read these comments about Al's scheme, with his belief in volume, and Jim's scheme, with its reliance on detail and precision, and it seems obvious that they must be too complex.

Agree or not?

Thing about WR, if you run disciplined routes which has nothing to do with intelligence, you may do well knowing just a couple of routes and having good hands depending on how much the staff and the QB trust you and how much time the QB has. Also, you are only partially right when you say Peyton Manning is running a simpler passing scheme.

[Going Commando]

what's the difference between offsides and encroachment?

I could be wrong but I think offsides can only be called after the snap whereas I believe encroachment is called before the snap. I think the defensive player has to touch an offensive player. It's different than a neutral zone infraction, where I think that is a more general penalty where no one has to touch anyone else but is typically called before the snap.

what's a flanker? the outside WR?

A flanker is the receiver who lines up behind the LoS and not on it. And they are technically supposed to be outside of the slot. I've forgotten what the rules were about where the slot guy has to be in relation to the flanker. Because of the rules that stipulate 7 should be on the LoS, one of your receivers always has to be on the line and that's the split end.

why do they call middle linebackers Mikes? and the other Sams?

I'm not sure but this is what I was told when I was young and I've always believed it. Obviously the M and the S are supposed to represent your positioning on the field but I was told the first names were picked after Mike Singletary and Sam Huff. I have no idea what the other names mean like Will.

is there a "strong side" of the line if you have a two tight ends on either side of the line?

There is a strong side but not necessarily in the sense that one side of your formation is overloaded. My guess is that the side you lined your flanker or your starting TE up on in an otherwise perfectly symmetrical formation would be referred to as the strong side in that instance.

are basically only two predominant forms of offense in the nfl ... the "west coast" and its hybrids and the "Coryell" type offense that norv, martz and at one time gibbs ran? Are there others??

It seems to me that the umbrella of Coryell/Walsh offenses is so enormous and inclusive in the way they are discussed today that they can include every offense you see in the NFL. But there is such a cluster**** of schemes and influences going on that every offense borrows things from others as well as runs their own unique things. It would take many labels to get them all uniquely defined and classified.

are tailsbacks and half backs the same thing?

Not historically but they seemed to be used interchangeably these days. I could be wrong but I think the term tailback goes back to those option offenses where a fullback actually was the one who lined up behind the quarterback and you had wingbacks on the sides. A half back used to be way different in his alignment and responsibilities--he was the one who lined up directly behind the QB when he was actually used. Then at some point the wing back fell out of fashion and moved into the role of the tailback behind the fullback who has usually been your most powerful back. In the early days of football the backs were far less specialized and used more in the sense of how the 6, 7, and 8 forwards and backs are used today in Rugby. In Rugby the fullback is essentially your safety in the way he lines up and that represents the alignment and responsibilities of the original fullbacks in football.

[MartinC]

the Mac Will and Sam thing it's much simpler than any link to ex players. Mac is shorthand for middle as it starts with an M, Will is weak and Sam strong for the W and S.

Offsides is an offensive penalty and encroachment is called on the defense.