HTTR24-7; The Difference Between The Wildcat and the Read-Option (Or, Why Perry Fewell is Wrong)

[KDawg]

Hahaha no, dg, I'm not disagreeing to disagree. I simply disagree with you. It's not personal. It's not against you. Sorry you feel that way.

And no, that's not what I'm saying. I'm sorry that's what you got out of this whole thing.

[darrelgreenie]

Where do you get the personal bit from? Nothing personal on my part.

 

Seeking to understand your point.

[KDawg]

As I've explained... I want you to see your QB getting hit repeatedly. Make you think about using the read option. If you continue to use it, there is for sure yards to be had. You will get them. No matter how I defend you. But with your quarterback taking repeated hits it increases the risk of running it.

If the OC/HC are prepared for that scenario, then they will continue to execute the play at the risk of the health of their quarterback. Or maybe he escapes well and doesn't take many hits, or he hands off and avoids hits and its a minimal concern.

I'd crash simply because there is no great strategy.

My strategy would be to commit minimal resources to your constraint play while still being prepared. I'd also utilize gap exchanges and stunts so its not just the defensive end taking that role, but I'd do that based on personnel.

I will not stop you unless you decide the risk isn't worth it. That's my hope.

[darrelgreenie]

As I've explained we are not going to allow your DE to hit our QB.

I don't understand where the disconnect is then; I don't understand what you're disagreeing with.

We are going to block the DE. (I've listed numerous ways read-option teams accomplish this)

Therefore our QB will not be getting hit by your DE.

 

EDIT:

 

Or a simpler way to make my point:

 

 

Although your intent may be to have your DE hit our QB that seems like an unlikely outcome because read-option teams can/and do scheme against your plan.

[TSO]

I think all the supposed strategies of stopping the read-option listed here are legitimate in one way or another, however, the one thing they all seem to miss is that we line up in the same exact formation (pistol) in which we run our traditional offense from that we do the read-option. Mike Shanahan has repeatedly stated that as long as the defense has to think about it, we already won because they have no idea whether or not we're going to even run the read option on any give play.

 

So, for instance, if they're practicing crashing the DE down the LOS during the entire week to slow down the read option, there is a ton of things we can do traditionally without ever running the read option to destroy their defense since, effectively, one guy on the strongside of the defense's formation will be out of the way. Heck, Robert can just drop back and pass, moving to the strongside of the defense instead of sitting in the pocket since there should be a lot of space there every time for him to just sit and read the coverage. One of our Olinemen will be free to block whomever decides to run at Robert (maybe even that DE who crashed coming back) and will have the better angle as well, since he can just use the guys momentum to push him away.

 

I can see us running plays where Robert immediately rolls out to the strong side at the snap out of the pistol formation and having like 5 minutes to pass the ball if the defense employs that strategy.

 

Of course, the DE can be told to pay attention if Robert simply drops back to pass and doesn't run any fake, which means it isn't a read option play... but, again, you're giving your players so much to think about they can't just play. And that will always give the offense the advantage.

 

The fact is, as long as your QB is a real running threat and can pass the ball well, it's going to be tough to stop him. Especially if that QB really excels at both, which is exactly what we have with Robert. I don't really believe there is a way to slow it down. I believe Robert is one of those players like a Manning or a Brady where you just hope they are a little off on that day or that you're able to guess right more than not to slow them down... but that everyone knows they're pretty much going to score on you more often than not.             

[KCClybun]

As I've explained... I want you to see your QB getting hit repeatedly. Make you think about using the read option. If you continue to use it, there is for sure yards to be had. You will get them. No matter how I defend you. But with your quarterback taking repeated hits it increases the risk of running it.

If the OC/HC are prepared for that scenario, then they will continue to execute the play at the risk of the health of their quarterback. Or maybe he escapes well and doesn't take many hits, or he hands off and avoids hits and its a minimal concern.

I'd crash simply because there is no great strategy.

My strategy would be to commit minimal resources to your constraint play while still being prepared. I'd also utilize gap exchanges and stunts so its not just the defensive end taking that role, but I'd do that based on personnel.

I will not stop you unless you decide the risk isn't worth it. That's my hope.

 

Seems like a bad battle strategy, coach.

 

Especially when you have a stubborn OC and a quarterback that occasionally has more guts than brains.

Is what you're saying, KDawg, is "okay, we know we can't really stop it, so all we can do is hit the quarterback and hope we land a scary enough shot without getting a penalty that we scare the offensive coordinator into stop running it, and we'll just take the yards given up on the ground and hope we can stop them from scoring"?

 

 

Because CHRIST is that a scary way of playing defense.

[darrelgreenie]

And just because a defense wants to hit your QB with their DE doesn't at all mean they will be successful.

Kdawg is counting on sending the optioned or 'unblocked' DE at the QB.

But, a read-option offense can easily choose to block this player (and option another player) on plays where they plan to use their QB thus removing the DE as a threat to even hit the QB.

[KDawg]

To each their own, I suppose. If you wham block my end, I tell him to take it on depending on the way you attempt to block. If you widen first, I want to protect the inside and let my help get to the outside. If you come tight to the formation I want to take you on with my nose on my outer breast plate keeping my outside arm free.

If I run into a stubborn OC, then bless them. If they succeed without getting their QB injured they deserve all the credit and acclaim they can possibly get. But if he gets hurt... Now that stubborn OC is really not looking so hot.

I'm crashing the DE not to stop the read option, but to commit minimal resources to the QB and prevent the RB from gaining too many yards. And it doesn't need to be the DE. It could simply be the end man on the line of scrimmage post snap via blitzing and stunts. I am going to keep you guessing as best as I can, just as you are.

The read option is a wonderful series of plays that is extremely tough to stop when they are being executed by excellent personnel. Which is why game planning to stop the play is a poor decision. The play is going to get going unless the offense screws itself. The best way to do that is to contact the QB as often as possible.

Sending a wham my way adds a read key for the rest of the defense and will allow support players to come much sooner.

And yes, there would be times that I wouldn't crash the DE. I'd create a guessing game for your QB. Add confusion. Let him hand it off and play defense against the regular rushing attack.

I've yet to see a strategy work against an elite NFL QB. So while you all can look at my plan and say it won't work, I haven't seen one that has. Professionals are struggling to stop it, there is no blueprint.

It's all a chess match.

That makes it fun as hell.

I don't have the time or the energy to explain my entire gameplan. It entails more than what's covered but what I've talked about is certainly the building blocks.

[KCClybun]

If I run into a stubborn OC, then bless them. If they succeed without getting their QB injured they deserve all the credit and acclaim they can possibly get. But if he gets hurt... Now that stubborn OC is really not looking so hot.

 

So the goal is to injure the quarterback then?

[KDawg]

If I run into a stubborn OC, then bless them. If they succeed without getting their QB injured they deserve all the credit and acclaim they can possibly get. But if he gets hurt... Now that stubborn OC is really not looking so hot.

So the goal is to injure the quarterback then?

Uhhh. No.

It's to hit him.

Don't put words in my mouth.

[KCClybun]

 

If I run into a stubborn OC, then bless them. If they succeed without getting their QB injured they deserve all the credit and acclaim they can possibly get. But if he gets hurt... Now that stubborn OC is really not looking so hot.

So the goal is to injure the quarterback then?

Uhhh. No.

It's to hit him.

Don't put words in my mouth.

 

I'm not putting words in your mouth, it's a legitimate question.

 

I keep bringing up examples showing that hitting the quarterback doesn't work and the response continues to be "hit the quarterback". That's part of my annoyance in general with the NFL.

 

 

One would think that when one has proof that doing something doesn't work, one doesn't keep doing it on the off chance that an offensive coordinator will stop doing it or that you won't get flagged. RG3 take some hard shots when teams ignored the hand off and tee'd off on the quarterback, but Kyle wouldn't stop calling it. That whole Bengals game was an excercise in insanity, as they kept creaming RG3 but Kyle kept running the triple option because it was the only thing at that point that was moving the football.

 

And the first game after the real refs came back, Robert handed it off and Mark Barron plastered him and it was a roughing the passer penalty, even though it probably shouldn't have been. Refs err on the side of protecting the quarterbacks.

 

I get that what you're saying is you would hit the quarterback regardless of the yards it gives up, to discourage it from being called. I think the point I have is that you can hit the QB all you want; 1.) it's not likely to stop an offensive coordinator from calling it if it's working, 2.) you put yourself at the risk of taking penalties, particularly if the hits become more and more obvious, and 3.) you're leaving a lot of yards on the field that a talented running back and a smart quarterback will take advantage of in the run, play pass and screen game.

 

 

I don't want my DE/OLB to screw his feet in and slow play it. I want my DE to be smart and pay attention, and I want my defenders to focus on making solid tackles and reading their keys, more than I want to just put hits on the quarterback and watch as their back gets 5-6 yards a clip and getting play actions to death. Chances are you're not likely to hurt anyone but yourself if your only mission is to hit the quarterback. You stop him from being a run threat, but you don't stop the rest of the offense from cooking.

[KDawg]

Nothing has worked.  You're throwing away a viable game plan because it hasn't worked so far. I don't buy the argument it can't work. You believe that argument. It's merely a fundamental difference in approach and belief. And neither one of us have any clue if either of us are correct.

 

And again, re-read what I said. My only mission is not ONLY to hit the quarterback. It's to hit him. There is a major difference in that wording. 

 

I'm not telling my DE to crash no matter what. I'm telling him to make a read and if you see a possible zone read, and it fits with our scouting profile, go give him a clean, legal hit. Do NOT let him just play cat and mouse with the entire defense without taking a few hits. Make them think. 

 

As I said earlier, I never fully commit to one thing. There's a methodical approach to the way I'd do things.

 

But hitting the quarterback is certainly a strategy I would employ.

[darrelgreenie]

To each their own, I suppose. If you wham block my end, I tell him to take it on depending on the way you attempt to block. If you widen first, I want to protect the inside and let my help get to the outside. If you come tight to the formation I want to take you on with my nose on my outer breast plate keeping my outside arm free.

Exactly, but in everything you've stated above the end result is the same. The DE (or attack player) is being blocked. Therefore NOT hitting the QB and as you stated your goal would be to hit the QB your plan fails in that regard.

 

Sending a wham my way adds a read key for the rest of the defense and will allow support players to come much sooner.

And yes, there would be times that I wouldn't crash the DE. I'd create a guessing game for your QB. Add confusion. Let him hand it off and play defense against the regular rushing attack.

I've stated several times it doesn't have to be a wham, there are numerous ways to deal with the optioned/unblocked player. Like I've said before the offense could simply block the edge and option off another player. E.g. Like the midline read of a DT.

 

So while you all can look at my plan and say it won't work, I haven't seen one that has. Professionals are struggling to stop it, there is no blueprint.

I've seen defenses 'stop' the read option running options by picking their poison. They even up the numbers by sacrificing coverage and bringing one or both S into the box and assigning a player to the QB, RB and someone to fill the alley. It leaves them man-to-man though.

[darrelgreenie]

You know KD we're just going in circles.

 

You can disregard my last post and just answer this question:

 

How will you hit the QB if a read-option offense blocks the unblocks defender or options another player, the DT, and blocks the DE at the POA?

[KDawg]

To each their own, I suppose. If you wham block my end, I tell him to take it on depending on the way you attempt to block. If you widen first, I want to protect the inside and let my help get to the outside. If you come tight to the formation I want to take you on with my nose on my outer breast plate keeping my outside arm free.

Exactly, but in everything you've stated above the end result is the same. The DE (or attack player) is being blocked. Therefore NOT hitting the QB and as you stated your goal would be to hit the QB your plan fails in that regard.

Okay this seems to be a disconnect. My goal is to hit the QB, but if my DE is blocked, obviously that's not going to happen. The over arching goal, that's more important than hitting the QB is to stop the play. My DE can't hit the QB, the next most important job is to take on the block to allow his teammates to come up and play football. I didn't say that in exact words before. I assumed it would be understood, which is retrospect, I can understand why it wasn't. My strategy isn't solely reliant on hitting the quarterback. That's my goal when I get the chance. If there are circumstances that prevent that, I simply have the DE play football.

 

Sending a wham my way adds a read key for the rest of the defense and will allow support players to come much sooner.

And yes, there would be times that I wouldn't crash the DE. I'd create a guessing game for your QB. Add confusion. Let him hand it off and play defense against the regular rushing attack.

I've stated several times it doesn't have to be a wham, there are numerous ways to deal with the optioned/unblocked player. Like I've said before the offense could simply block the edge and option off another player. E.g. Like the midline read of a DT.

I want the play hitting inside as a defense. Ideally, that's going to be an area that's fairly clogged and more difficult to squirt through. Of course the negative is that if the player DOES manage to get through, it's a straight beeline for the end zone. Oh well. Can't have it all.

 

So while you all can look at my plan and say it won't work, I haven't seen one that has. Professionals are struggling to stop it, there is no blueprint.

I've seen defenses 'stop' the read option running options by picking their poison. They even up the numbers by sacrificing coverage and bringing one or both S into the box and assigning a player to the QB, RB and someone to fill the alley. It leaves them man-to-man though.

That scares me a heck of a lot more than the way I'd play it. Especially with the new read option plays that involve a built in pass read. If a single receiver is good enough to take the cap off a coverage, it could be major problems for the defense. But I understand why someone would do that. 

 

I state what my game plan would be in a perfect world with perfect personnel. But in reality, if I didn't have the guys to do it the way I want to, I couldn't.

[darrelgreenie]

 

So while you all can look at my plan and say it won't work, I haven't seen one that has. Professionals are struggling to stop it, there is no blueprint.

I've seen defenses 'stop' the read option running options by picking their poison. They even up the numbers by sacrificing coverage and bringing one or both S into the box and assigning a player to the QB, RB and someone to fill the alley. It leaves them man-to-man though.

That scares me a heck of a lot more than the way I'd play it. Especially with the new read option plays that involve a built in pass read. If a single receiver is good enough to take the cap off a coverage, it could be major problems for the defense. But I understand why someone would do that. 

 

I state what my game plan would be in a perfect world with perfect personnel. But in reality, if I didn't have the guys to do it the way I want to, I couldn't.

 Right, I wouldn't want my DC gameplanning to 'stop' the zone read either it takes far too many resources to 'stop' the read-option.

And I wouldn't do that to my secondary. In certain circumstances depending on the down and distances* I might take that risk a few times per game but it wouldn't be my over arching defensive game-plan against a read option team.

*in the redzone with a short field behind my acting as a defacto extra safety. Or in 'must' stop situations 3rd/4th less then 1-2 yards.

 

I would sit back in my base zone defense, and contain on the edges. Like you, if the QB runs I want the gains coming inside.. My wager is that even though there will be yards are there for the QB; most OCs won't stick with running the QB (except for the Tebow/Broncos) regardless of whether or not their QB can gain yards without getting hit.

 

Therefore I'm not going to try and stop a contingency that only happens about a handful of times per game. I'm gonna play sound defense, not get destroyed by play-action, not give up the big play. The opposing QB might gain 30-50 yards but it will hopefully be in a loss.

[KDawg]

I think you and I are more on the same page with this than either of us figured a few pages ago

[MartinC]

Here is Steve Saban (who has seen a read option play or two in his time) on stopping the read option.

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2013/04/10/nick-saban-nfl-coaches-are-asking-for-read-option-advice/

“Several NFL coaches have come to visit this year to say, ‘How do you stop these guys?’ Because they’re not accustomed to seeing that,” Saban said.

Saban says NFL defenses are built around the idea of rushing the quarterback, but a lot of those pass rushers find that mobile quarterbacks who are good at running the read-option can blow right past them.

“That’s a pass-rush oriented league,” Saban said. “People getting up the field to pass rush is what it’s all about because of the type of quarterbacks — the Tom Bradys of the world, Drew Brees, that’s what you’ve got to stop. You’ve got to put pressure on the quarterback. Well, that’s just what you don’t want to do against [read-option quarterbacks]. You have to play on the line of scrimmage just like old option football.”

According to Saban, it’s particularly difficult for NFL defenses to stop teams like the 49ers, who will run read-option plays out of multiple formations.

“I think the teams that do a really good job like the 49ers, they do it from multiple formation looks, so they make more defensive players have to understand how to do it, and I think that’s the biggest challenge that they have right now,” Saban said.

[KDawg]

I can't disagree with Saban. I don't know my strategy would work anyways. But, screwing your feet in at the LOS seems like a recipe the get completely run passed by an athletic QB.

This really is quite the conundrum.

[MartinC]

I can't disagree with Saban. I don't know my strategy would work anyways. But, screwing your feet in at the LOS seems like a recipe the get completely run passed by an athletic QB.

This really is quite the conundrum.

Stopping the read option is not that difficult if the QB is a runner first and a passer second. You play man, walk your SS up to make an 8 man box, preach sound assignment and gap control football and don't let the QB get outside your contain. You will still give up some yardage but you can control things.

However when you have a QB like RGIII who is as good a passer as he is a runner then you just can't walk that safety up or you will get gashed in the passing game, so of drop back and cover and you get gashed by the run, so then you blitz and RGIIi sprints right past it for a 70 yard TD or beats it with his arm against single man so the you ......well no one seems to have worked that out yet!

[KDawg]

I was under the impression we were talking about an athletic QB with an arm to go with it for the duration of this thread. Defending a runner quarterback is much less demanding.

[MartinC]

I was under the impression we were talking about an athletic QB with an arm to go with it for the duration of this thread. Defending a runner quarterback is much less demanding.

Absolutely. My last post was just a lighter attempt to summarize the problems a QB like RGIII causes defenses.

[bedlamVR]

One thing I am confused about is the unblocked DE or defensive player ... I know the read option only works when the D is in specific looks and my understanding - and I could be very wrong here - is the read is based upon what the unblocked player does ...

 

So KDawg - If the DE comes free as a rusher and is soley going for the QB then he has to take an inside lane (not inside a takle but just off the OT shoulder) to avoid the outswinging running back as a blocker - Thus committing to the pass - Unless the DE essentially is going to jump the snap the RB is 9.9 times out of 10 going to get to the QB at the mesh point than the rusher is going to get to the QB once he realizes this is going to be a read option play .. so if the QB see the free rusher coming and the RB has a step to the outside of him then the ball is going to the RB and going for a 7-8 yard gain - and I think most OC will take that ALL day - indeed it is kind of what happened against the Cowboys - they ignored Morris and he ran for a country mile and if the OC can control the clock pounding out the D in an effective running game early there are few OC who would not be happy with that - especially because it opens up the play action so much more .

 

When the DE gets to the QB and the ball is gone  - all he need do is throw his hands up - and if the DE does hit the QB when it is clear he no longer has the ball - thats 15 yards for free - thanks alot ..

 

And okay you might say well if the hit connects and the hit rattles or removes the QB then those 15 yards are payment worth making.. But then I ask the question .. what is the difference between a read option QB handing the ball off to his running back on an outside stretch play 5 yards behind the LOS - and a reknown pocket passer (Tom Brady for example) handing off the ball  on a stretch play 5 yards behind the LOS ... what I am saying is if the league turns a blind eye to the just hit the QB on the read option type plays then it turns a blind eye to late hits ... and it is never going to do this ..... plus if you get caught on tape saying these kinds of things - can you say bounty gate II ?

 

Plus hitting the QB when he is no longer a thrower or a runner - hit at all costs - sounds outside the sketchly lines of what is legal in the game of football . If your defensive play to counter the read option is really to go on the outside of the rules - then to hell with it - line up 13 against it or just give the DE a 9mm and tell him to shoot the QB on the read option - that will stop it ... or just throw down your clipboard and pick up the ball and go home - its not really a viable option - just hit the QB ..

 

I think what you have to remember is to make this work the QB is looking to read the free man and chose what to do at the mesh based on that - so to counter it either do nothing ... and react to the play at the LOS or do something unexpected running different stunts delays etc to move that read man post snap 

 

- What these QBs are looking to do is make a massive game changing play - if you frustrate and confuse  him by taking away the obvious - the read man - then there is more chance they will force the ball and start making stupid mistakes because they are into a point where they are confused and improvising more and thats how the play becomes inneffective  - and that when the OC has to look else where ..

 

lets face it - Football is a violent sport - every play the QB has a chance of being hit and hurt regardless of the play - the OC cannot call the game scarred and at the NFL level they wont - or they wont be NFL level OC very long .

[Darth Tater]

I can't disagree with Saban. I don't know my strategy would work anyways. But, screwing your feet in at the LOS seems like a recipe the get completely run passed by an athletic QB.

This really is quite the conundrum.

Screwing your feet into the ground does work to neutralize the read option (you are not going to stop the RO).  Read option teams are looking for the huge chunk.  If you can stop them from getting the huge chunk, they WILL get impatient and try to force it which almost always leads to a mistake or throws off the schedule.   Either that or I've seen it neutralized with a freakishly good NT and Safety or LB.

[KDawg]

One thing I am confused about is the unblocked DE or defensive player ... I know the read option only works when the D is in specific looks and my understanding - and I could be very wrong here - is the read is based upon what the unblocked player does ...

So KDawg - If the DE comes free as a rusher and is soley going for the QB then he has to take an inside lane (not inside a takle but just off the OT shoulder) to avoid the outswinging running back as a blocker - Thus committing to the pass - Unless the DE essentially is going to jump the snap the RB is 9.9 times out of 10 going to get to the QB at the mesh point than the rusher is going to get to the QB once he realizes this is going to be a read option play .. so if the QB see the free rusher coming and the RB has a step to the outside of him then the ball is going to the RB and going for a 7-8 yard gain - and I think most OC will take that ALL day - indeed it is kind of what happened against the Cowboys - they ignored Morris and he ran for a country mile and if the OC can control the clock pounding out the D in an effective running game early there are few OC who would not be happy with that - especially because it opens up the play action so much more .

This is when there is a wham or an arc coming I assume based on your description. If that happens, I advocate the DE blowing up the blocker. If the blocker takes an aiming point of the end's inside shoulder, the DE wants to try to attack the outer V of the blocker and keep his outside arm free. If the blocker tries to take an outside "banana" block on the DE, the DE wants to try to keep inside leverage the best he can and allow his teammates to come over the top. (This is obviously in my plan, so when I say things that sound like absolutes, it's strictly within this plan).

You can't assume the QB is going to get a 7-8 yard gain due to a free rusher on the back side of the play. For the record, when I say back side, I mean the QB read side. "Play side" is what I consider to be the running back's attack angle.

When the DE gets to the QB and the ball is gone - all he need do is throw his hands up - and if the DE does hit the QB when it is clear he no longer has the ball - thats 15 yards for free - thanks alot ..

Not necessarily. If the End crashes hard and there is no threat to block him (no wham, no arc, etc) then he could have a free shot on the QB because he got down hill now. The goal would be to get there as soon as possible. If he's slow in his read, then yes, he could get flagged... But hitting the QB that late would be downright stupid and unsportsmanlike, so I would hope they didn't continue on at that point. Personally, I think the hands up stuff is non sense. QBs should be held accountable for the fake, but, I digress. (Obviously, if it's egregious with intent to injure, that's a different story. But on a basic play, if he haphazardly throws his hands in the air right before contact and draws a flag, that's horse crap )

And okay you might say well if the hit connects and the hit rattles or removes the QB then those 15 yards are payment worth making.. But then I ask the question .. what is the difference between a read option QB handing the ball off to his running back on an outside stretch play 5 yards behind the LOS - and a reknown pocket passer (Tom Brady for example) handing off the ball on a stretch play 5 yards behind the LOS ... what I am saying is if the league turns a blind eye to the just hit the QB on the read option type plays then it turns a blind eye to late hits ... and it is never going to do this ..... plus if you get caught on tape saying these kinds of things - can you say bounty gate II ?

The difference is simple. The read makes the QB a threat. If he eyeballs the backside end, he's declaring himself as a possible runner. Brady handing the ball off on a simple stretch play is quite a bit different. He's not reading anyone.

And I'm not sure what "things" you're referring to being said. No one said they were trying to hurt anyone.

Plus hitting the QB when he is no longer a thrower or a runner - hit at all costs - sounds outside the sketchly lines of what is legal in the game of football . If your defensive play to counter the read option is really to go on the outside of the rules - then to hell with it - line up 13 against it or just give the DE a 9mm and tell him to shoot the QB on the read option - that will stop it ... or just throw down your clipboard and pick up the ball and go home - its not really a viable option - just hit the QB ..

Okay, I have no idea where you're getting this from. No one, most specifically myself, advocates late hits or "hits no matter what". I'm not sure where ANYONE got that from. Mingia.

I would NEVER advocate to set out to injure a player. EVER. In a MILLION years.

He needs to be hit in the field of play during the legal course of the play. Not seconds late. Not real late. Legal hits.

Please show me where I said that once in the thread. It's annoying that people keep saying that when it was never once mentioned.

I think what you have to remember is to make this work the QB is looking to read the free man and chose what to do at the mesh based on that - so to counter it either do nothing ... and react to the play at the LOS or do something unexpected running different stunts delays etc to move that read man post snap

I said all of that in my posts. You sure you read them all?

- What these QBs are looking to do is make a massive game changing play - if you frustrate and confuse him by taking away the obvious - the read man - then there is more chance they will force the ball and start making stupid mistakes because they are into a point where they are confused and improvising more and thats how the play becomes inneffective - and that when the OC has to look else where ..

lets face it - Football is a violent sport - every play the QB has a chance of being hit and hurt regardless of the play - the OC cannot call the game scarred and at the NFL level they wont - or they wont be NFL level OC very long .

This isn't entirely true either. They have a job to do. No owner wants to see their QB take repeated hits. There are some organizations that would pull the plug. Some that wouldn't.

I can't disagree with Saban. I don't know my strategy would work anyways. But, screwing your feet in at the LOS seems like a recipe the get completely run passed by an athletic QB.

This really is quite the conundrum.

Screwing your feet into the ground does work to neutralize the read option (you are not going to stop the RO). Read option teams are looking for the huge chunk. If you can stop them from getting the huge chunk, they WILL get impatient and try to force it which almost always leads to a mistake or throws off the schedule. Either that or I've seen it neutralized with a freakishly good NT and Safety or LB.

I'm not sure it does against athletic QBs. Screwing your feet into the ground only makes you stationary, and with someone like RG3 running the ball that leaves you very liable to getting run by. We saw Griffin do it several times.