HTTR24-7; Film Sessions: Hitting The Quarterback To Stop The Read-Option Is Stupid

[RG3Hunna]

 

Hunna to KDawg: ...So you have a DE attack the QB and you "focus on the run from the back to even the playing field" I play action and destroy you down the middle...

 

 

No, you don't. The play action doesn't slow down the edge-rusher who has the QB in his sights. It only slows down the QB from getting the pass off in that situation. Play action makes the sack more likely.

Of course on playaction plays i'm not going to leave your DE unblocked to attack my QB....

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4oQI0PoSmPs

 

Please go to 2:28 and watch Mangini break down how deadly the zone read playaction is. 

 

Great article and I normally agree with you. But I dont in this case. There is one point to make about hitting the QB. The read option only works if your QB is a valid running threat. In other words. If you hit RG3 enough that he gets injured then that threat is gone. And lets not forget the Ravens did have a substantial effect on RG3's season with Ngata's hit. Granted that was not on a zone read play but they did injure him badly. I expect RG3 to be crushed with every zone read play. It makes sense to try to eliminate the threat. Can he make it through an entire season without injury? That remains to be seen. And every hit he takes increases the risk.

But how do you plan to hit RG3 if he's already handed off the ball? You can't tackle him but Surely you would be able to legally push him but i'm sure RG3 can withstand pushes to the ground for 60 minutes. 

 

RG3 was hurt trying to get down without sliding he fell down and put his right leg up and was hit on his leg. If that was Kaep or Wilson (who know how to slide properly, hopefully RG3 learns) that wouldn't have been an injury. The one weakness I see in RG3's game is he can not slide to save his life. Ravens were stopping RG3? The offense was TORCHING the ravens all game, we finished with 423 total yards, it was our defense who let us down Flacco went 16/21 182 yards 3 TD's and Rice had 20 carries 121 yards 1 TD. 

You absolutely CAN hit him on every zone read play legally. He is considered a running back until he drops back to pass. So yes. He will be hit on every zone read play. And I never said the Ravens stopped RG3. I said they effected his season by injuring him.

Please show me where a Zone Read QB was hit. Pushed or Pushed down? Yes, But Hit? No. 

[SkinsHokieFan]

Again, read. You play it defensively exactly like you would any play action. It's not a full commitment. And Morris will certainly get his yards. But it slows the process and prevents Griffin from hashing you backside.

Sure, Morris and the play action are very real threats, but the more plays you make the offense run, the increased probability of them making a mistake.

 

 

Huh? The more plays an offense runs, the weaker a defense gets (causing their own mistakes) and the less momentum an opposing offense can build. Right?

 

No defense wants to stay on the field.

 

There is a school of thought, the "bend but don't break" school of defense, where if you force an offense to run 12-15 plays every drive to score, they will have a play where they don't execute and will make a mistake, i.e a turnover, sack something or the other. 

 

I tend to disagree with it but I do see the logic. 

[clskinsfan]

 

 

Hunna to KDawg: ...So you have a DE attack the QB and you "focus on the run from the back to even the playing field" I play action and destroy you down the middle...

 

 

No, you don't. The play action doesn't slow down the edge-rusher who has the QB in his sights. It only slows down the QB from getting the pass off in that situation. Play action makes the sack more likely.

Of course on playaction plays i'm not going to leave your DE unblocked to attack my QB....

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4oQI0PoSmPs

 

Please go to 2:28 and watch Mangini break down how deadly the zone read playaction is. 

> 

 

Great article and I normally agree with you. But I dont in this case. There is one point to make about hitting the QB. The read option only works if your QB is a valid running threat. In other words. If you hit RG3 enough that he gets injured then that threat is gone. And lets not forget the Ravens did have a substantial effect on RG3's season with Ngata's hit. Granted that was not on a zone read play but they did injure him badly. I expect RG3 to be crushed with every zone read play. It makes sense to try to eliminate the threat. Can he make it through an entire season without injury? That remains to be seen. And every hit he takes increases the risk.

But how do you plan to hit RG3 if he's already handed off the ball? You can't tackle him but Surely you would be able to legally push him but i'm sure RG3 can withstand pushes to the ground for 60 minutes. 

 

RG3 was hurt trying to get down without sliding he fell down and put his right leg up and was hit on his leg. If that was Kaep or Wilson (who know how to slide properly, hopefully RG3 learns) that wouldn't have been an injury. The one weakness I see in RG3's game is he can not slide to save his life. Ravens were stopping RG3? The offense was TORCHING the ravens all game, we finished with 423 total yards, it was our defense who let us down Flacco went 16/21 182 yards 3 TD's and Rice had 20 carries 121 yards 1 TD. 

You absolutely CAN hit him on every zone read play legally. He is considered a running back until he drops back to pass. So yes. He will be hit on every zone read play. And I never said the Ravens stopped RG3. I said they effected his season by injuring him.

Please show me where a Zone Read QB was hit. Pushed or Pushed down? Yes, But Hit? No. 

 

 

That is the change that defensive coordinators are planning for this year my friend. You will see plenty of it come september.

[Oldfan]

Darth: The thing about hitting the QB tactic.  Look at the mesh point, even though a defensive player may have a free run to that point, he still isn't often going to get there until after the QB can drop back and establish himself as a passer so, in that case, just blowing the QB up might be illegal at that point.

 

I don't see that at all. At the mesh point, the QB does not have his momentum underway dropping back while the edge rusher has his going toward the QB.

 

Second, if the defense is out to injure my QB, an offensive lineman or the back will have no issue with injuring a defensive player, the game would devolve into a hockey match.

 

You want to use your QB as a potential runner in the option, but you don't want the D to hit him hard legally? 

 

Third, the read option has many variants and counters to that tactic and what is being described is really what the OC wants.

 

 

Examples?

[RG3Hunna]

 

 

 

Hunna to KDawg: ...So you have a DE attack the QB and you "focus on the run from the back to even the playing field" I play action and destroy you down the middle...

 

 

No, you don't. The play action doesn't slow down the edge-rusher who has the QB in his sights. It only slows down the QB from getting the pass off in that situation. Play action makes the sack more likely.

Of course on playaction plays i'm not going to leave your DE unblocked to attack my QB....

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4oQI0PoSmPs

 

Please go to 2:28 and watch Mangini break down how deadly the zone read playaction is. 

>> 

 

Great article and I normally agree with you. But I dont in this case. There is one point to make about hitting the QB. The read option only works if your QB is a valid running threat. In other words. If you hit RG3 enough that he gets injured then that threat is gone. And lets not forget the Ravens did have a substantial effect on RG3's season with Ngata's hit. Granted that was not on a zone read play but they did injure him badly. I expect RG3 to be crushed with every zone read play. It makes sense to try to eliminate the threat. Can he make it through an entire season without injury? That remains to be seen. And every hit he takes increases the risk.

But how do you plan to hit RG3 if he's already handed off the ball? You can't tackle him but Surely you would be able to legally push him but i'm sure RG3 can withstand pushes to the ground for 60 minutes. 

 

RG3 was hurt trying to get down without sliding he fell down and put his right leg up and was hit on his leg. If that was Kaep or Wilson (who know how to slide properly, hopefully RG3 learns) that wouldn't have been an injury. The one weakness I see in RG3's game is he can not slide to save his life. Ravens were stopping RG3? The offense was TORCHING the ravens all game, we finished with 423 total yards, it was our defense who let us down Flacco went 16/21 182 yards 3 TD's and Rice had 20 carries 121 yards 1 TD. 

You absolutely CAN hit him on every zone read play legally. He is considered a running back until he drops back to pass. So yes. He will be hit on every zone read play. And I never said the Ravens stopped RG3. I said they effected his season by injuring him.

Please show me where a Zone Read QB was hit. Pushed or Pushed down? Yes, But Hit? No. 

 

 

That is the change that defensive coordinators are planning for this year my friend. You will see plenty of it come september.

 

And when they don't stop it what will you say next? They need another season to study the zone read? We put fear in Rob Ryan with the play-action that he played the pass week 17 and we ran it down his throat. But yea goodluck, we'll see who is right and who is wrong. 

[Darth Tater]

Again, read. You play it defensively exactly like you would any play action. It's not a full commitment. And Morris will certainly get his yards. But it slows the process and prevents Griffin from hashing you backside.

Sure, Morris and the play action are very real threats, but the more plays you make the offense run, the increased probability of them making a mistake.

 

 

Huh? The more plays an offense runs, the weaker a defense gets (causing their own mistakes) and the less momentum an opposing offense can build. Right?

 

No defense wants to stay on the field.

Not exactly.  Option teams want chunk plays and thus are highly likely to either force it or make other mistakes.  If you play solid and don't give them the chunks, they'll either try to force it or make a mistake.  Thing is, an option team wants the dive, not the QB sweep, because the dive part of a RO is where you usually get your big plays.  An example of defending a read-option team well is probably the second Giants game.   They gave up lots of yards but only 17 points, you WILL give up lots of yards to a RO team but you have to focus on the points allowed (if you got the right Joes, things change).  Had their offense done its job, they'd have put 21 or so points more than they got.

[Darth Tater]

 

 

Darth: The thing about hitting the QB tactic.  Look at the mesh point, even though a defensive player may have a free run to that point, he still isn't often going to get there until after the QB can drop back and establish himself as a passer so, in that case, just blowing the QB up might be illegal at that point.

 

I don't see that at all. At the mesh point, the QB does not have his momentum underway dropping back while the edge rusher has his going toward the QB.

The mesh point is 3-4 yards BEHIND the LOS.  Yes, sometimes a focus guy is going to get there but that is not going to happen every time (and even when it does, about half the time its not a solid hit anyway).

 

> 

Second, if the defense is out to injure my QB, an offensive lineman or the back will have no issue with injuring a defensive player, the game would devolve into a hockey match.

 

You want to use your QB as a potential runner in the option, but you don't want the D to hit him hard legally? 

 

Are you really that stupid or are you just pretending? 

 

Third, the read option has many variants and counters to that tactic and what is being described is really what the OC wants.

 

 

Examples?

Many of Almos long runs.  Did you watch any Baylor games during RG3's tenure there? 

 

[RG3Hunna]

 

Ravens Defending Redskins Zone Read

 

Play one: Torched Ravens Defense. 

Play two: 3rd and 1 Missed opportunity by RG3, horrible pitch, imagine Chris Thompson on this play.

Play Three: Great Play by the Ravens, not sure if Niles missed a block or they just stuffed it.

Play four: 3 yard gain by RG3 can't complain. 

[Warpath11]

Nice article but TBH it is hard to determine from the still photos how hard those ends/olbs went at the QB.  In some instances, again from the photos, they do look like they pause for a second with their footwork to determine who has the ball (Kruger, Upshaw examples).  The only play that I recall the ravens going straight at RG3 was the Ngata play you showed in the article.  Ngata just went all out to RG3 without a pause and got a good hit on him its those types of plays that may cause concern to o-coordinators.

 

I do agree with Oldfan and KDawg commit to stopping the RB or the QB all out.  If you play like the QB is keeping the ball at least the rest of the defense knows, that more than likely a run from the RB is coming.  Having said that if the offense executes their blocks well there is nothing a defense can do to prevent a nice gain by the RB.

[Oldfan]

Darth: Are you really that stupid or are you just pretending?

 

We're done here.

[MartinC]

 

KDawg: I love the read option and stopping it is a difficult task, but slowing it by making it one dimensional and focusing on the run from the back can certainly even the playing field.

 

Agreed. When executed properly, the read-option works regardless of what the edge-rusher does. So, the worst thing he can do is to stand there and squeeze his jock. So, have him take away the QB option which allows his defensive teammates to know what's coming.

 

If a blocker is sent at the edge-rusher, the tactic has caused the offense to use another player.

 

Even if the QB isn't hit that much, I don't see the downside here.

The downside is that you have taken a defensive player out of the equation since you have a player accounting for the QB every play - which is partly what the read option is designed to do. Now I have one less defender to block and if I have a good running back I can make hay on the inside zone and dive. If I want to negate that rusher coming for the TE I can always bring a TE or FB across to take him on but that just evens things up again so I would let him come and have my QB hand off inside - unless that edge rusher gets a real jump on the snap and is super fast he should not be able to hit my QB before the handoff or be close enough for a legal hit after the handoff.

 

I think the NFL will penalise and fine players for illegal hits after the handoff too much to make that a long term strategy - as you point out QBs are too valuable, especially high profile ones like RGIII. 

 

Don't forget as well many times last year we lined up in pistol and gave a zone read 'look" on what was not a zone read play at all - much of this is just window dressing for the offense Mike has been running for years. We only need to run read option a handful of times and have defenses looking for it and committed to attacking us for us to be able to take advantage of that in other ways.

 

I do though accept the value of the QB in an NFL offense and the risk/reward of using him in a way that exposes him to potentially more hits than he might otherwise get. I don't think we will see RGIII have anything like as many carries as last year and I think we will see read option less as well. But it will be part of our play book and we will show it enough to have defense spend time preparing to defend it and defenders look for it during games.

[RG3Hunna]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XXjZcQR4M5I

 

49ers were DESTROYING the Ravens on the read option. 

[NoCalMike]

The read option and pistol formation are precisely designed to take advantage of the attack-first defenses. 

 

There are never enough defenders to attack every option in these formations.

 

What the offense is doing is getting the defense to over-pursue and then quickly find the option that is best matchup for the offense.

 

If I was a D-coordinator, I wouldn't be attacking, instead I would instead maybe spy the QB the way teams had to against McNabb in the early days.  I would concede giving up a couple yards on a QB rush or running play in order to prevent giving up homeruns and huge gains by over-pursuing and leaving parts oft he field totally vacant.  I'm not saying this strategy doesn't have it's downfalls either, but I think the more D-coordinators think they will beat this offense by being super aggressive with their blitzing, the more they will be looking like a cursing, pacing Rob Ryan by halftime.

[KCClybun]

If I could find a way to make GIFs from the All-22, I would, but I haven't figured out how to yet.

 

 

I understand that the idea of focusing on the quarterback is to force the dive, force the offensive coordinator to make a decision on keeping their quarterback happy, and trying to force offenses to make mistakes, to force them to take minimal yardage and minimize the quarterback's impact on the game.

 

I think my overall point is that's not what happened when teams hit the quarterbacks. I go back through these games, and generally speaking, I find the same thing; when teams like us, the 49ers and the Seahawks got away from the read-option when teams attacked the quarterback, the offense slowed down. The Falcons game and the Steelers game comes to mind for us, and I think you saw that with the Seahawks vs. 49ers in their big rally, and then the next week the Falcons utilized the same tactic versus the 49ers and initially it worked, and then the 49ers started to feed the ball to Gore, and then the same thing happened in the Super Bowl.

 

When those offenses stuck with the read-option despite the defenses attacking the quarterback, 1.) the running backs generally had big games, and 2.) the running game and the pistol looks set up play-action opportunities down the field that led to big play. I also found that general speaking, IF the pass rusher even got to the quarterback before the ball was handed off, the licks put on the quarterbacks weren't substantial. 

 

 

It's an unsound strategy. I get the idea behind it, but that idea in practice has not worked, particularly as offenses adjusted to the way defenses were playing it. And I think that's an underplayed part of this whole discussion. "Defenses have spent the whole offseason figuring out how to stop the read-option."

 

Great. You spent the whole offseason trying to figure out a set of plays you may only see 5-10 times a game, sent your entire defensive staffs to colleges to study stopping this thing you may only see 5-10 times a game (as if the read-option has been stopped in college), and then just assumed that while you were studying this small part of a few teams offenses, that offensive staff were just kicking the feet up on their desk and resting on their laurels and not thinking of ways to stop or prevent this.

 

And that the idea of hitting the quarterback no matter what the back does keeps getting parroted through the media in the same "defenses will adjust, offenses will still the same" way.

 

It's just a dumb approach to the game.

[Oldfan]

Martin: The downside is that you have taken a defensive player out of the equation since you have a player accounting for the QB every play - which is partly what the read option is designed to do. Now I have one less defender to block and if I have a good running back I can make hay on the inside zone and dive.

 

You are missing something. The well-executed read-option will take the edge-rusher out of the equation.  Yes; that's a given. I'm agreeing with KDawg that, since that is the case, we are going to use him to take the option out of the option. Our D can now game plan on the RB option. That's better than allowing the O to render the edge-rusher useless.

 

I think the NFL will penalise and fine players for illegal hits after the handoff too much to make that a long term strategy - as you point out QBS are to valuable, especially high profile ones like RGIII.

 

 

Yes, but what can they responsibly make illegal? They can't protect him as they do when he's in the pocket if he offers himself up as an option on a running play.

 

I do though accept the value of the QB in an NFL offense and the risk/reward of using him in a way that exposes him to potentially more hits than he might otherwise get. I don't think we will see RGIII have anything like as many carries as last year and I think we will see read option less as well. But it will be part of our play book and we will show it enough to have defense spend time preparing to defend it and defenders look for it during games.

 

 

If the defense did as KDawg suggests, it simplifies the defensive game plan. DCs would not have to spend much practice time on it. 

[RG3Hunna]

 

Martin: The downside is that you have taken a defensive player out of the equation since you have a player accounting for the QB every play - which is partly what the read option is designed to do. Now I have one less defender to block and if I have a good running back I can make hay on the inside zone and dive.

 

You are missing something. The well-executed read-option will take the edge-rusher out of the equation.  Yes; that's a given. I'm agreeing with KDawg that, since that is the case, we are going to use him to take the option out of the option. Our D can now game plan on the RB option. That's better than allowing the O to render the edge-rusher useless.

 

> 

I think the NFL will penalise and fine players for illegal hits after the handoff too much to make that a long term strategy - as you point out QBS are to valuable, especially high profile ones like RGIII.

 

 

Yes, but what can they responsibly make illegal? They can't protect him as they do when he's in the pocket if he offers himself up as an option on a running play.

 

I do though accept the value of the QB in an NFL offense and the risk/reward of using him in a way that exposes him to potentially more hits than he might otherwise get. I don't think we will see RGIII have anything like as many carries as last year and I think we will see read option less as well. But it will be part of our play book and we will show it enough to have defense spend time preparing to defend it and defenders look for it during games.

 

 

If the defense did as KDawg suggests, it simplifies the defensive game plan. DCs would not have to spend much practice time on it. 

 

I agree that it simplifies the defensive game plan. However the read option has shown to still be effective even when you use that defensive approach. As long as your blockers are executing the correct blocks and the QB continues to make the right decisions in regards to keep the ball or hand off, it's almost impossible to defend when you are choosing to aggressively attack. 

 

But we'll see what these defensive coordinators have planned for this year, however if they don't stop it i'm intrigued to hear what the excuses will be on ESPN. 

[Oldfan]

Hunna: I agree that it simplifies the defensive game plan. However the read option has shown to still be effective even when you use that defensive approach. As long as your blockers are executing the correct blocks and the QB continues to make the right decisions in regards to keep the ball or hand off, it's almost impossible to defend when you are choosing to aggressively attack.

 

If the issue was as simple as whether or not the scheme can be effective, then you could count me in as a supporter. If it was that simple, we should be considering the read-option as a base offense.

 

However, I really doubt that the running QBs have much of a future in the NFL. I don't think the reward will ever make it a risk worth taking. RG3's real value is as a very accurate passer. I would not design running plays for him.

[RG3Hunna]

 

Hunna: I agree that it simplifies the defensive game plan. However the read option has shown to still be effective even when you use that defensive approach. As long as your blockers are executing the correct blocks and the QB continues to make the right decisions in regards to keep the ball or hand off, it's almost impossible to defend when you are choosing to aggressively attack.

 

If the issue was as simple as whether or not the scheme can be effective, then you could count me in as a supporter. If it was that simple, we should be considering the read-option as a base offense.

 

However, I really doubt that the running QBs have much of a future in the NFL. I don't think the reward will ever make it a risk worth taking. RG3's real value is as a very accurate passer. I would not design running plays for him.

Definitely see where you're coming from, however Russell Wilson and Kaep have remained very healthy with the zone read, simply because they know how to slide. I doubt Russell Wilson or Kaep suffer an injury from running simply because they slide very well. 

 

I understand what you mean and I agree pocket passing should always have precedence over running however I just think football is slowly evolving and the running QB is here to stay for good, Tahj Boyd will be the next "Running QB" you see have monster numbers his rookie year. 

[Always A Commander Never A Captain]

Taking away the backside of the play makes the play one dimensional. Hitting the quarterback, legally, will force OCs to make a decision on whether to keep with it or not. Sure there are ways to counter the unblocked end, such as the fullback arc release block. You could change the read man too, but that puts your quarterback between the tackles running the football.

 

Isn't this partially why we drafted Chris Thompson and hope Helu is healthy?  Those two pass-catching threats out of the backfield would stretch the defense horizontally.  We tried to do this with Banks, but he sucked.  Thompson/Helu would force the backside defenders to play much more conservatively.

 

If the backside defenders don't play conservatively and instead still key in on RG3.  Then won't that open a dump/quick toss to Thompson/Helu?  Guys with enough speed/burst to get some good yardage.

[Lavarleap56]

 

Great article and I normally agree with you. But I dont in this case. There is one point to make about hitting the QB. The read option only works if your QB is a valid running threat. In other words. If you hit RG3 enough that he gets injured then that threat is gone. And lets not forget the Ravens did have a substantial effect on RG3's season with Ngata's hit. Granted that was not on a zone read play but they did injure him badly. I expect RG3 to be crushed with every zone read play. It makes sense to try to eliminate the threat. Can he make it through an entire season without injury? That remains to be seen. And every hit he takes increases the risk.

But how do you plan to hit RG3 if he's already handed off the ball? You can't tackle him but Surely you would be able to legally push him but i'm sure RG3 can withstand pushes to the ground for 60 minutes. 

 

RG3 was hurt trying to get down without sliding he fell down and put his right leg up and was hit on his leg. If that was Kaep or Wilson (who know how to slide properly, hopefully RG3 learns) that wouldn't have been an injury. The one weakness I see in RG3's game is he can not slide to save his life. Ravens were stopping RG3? The offense was TORCHING the ravens all game, we finished with 423 total yards, it was our defense who let us down Flacco went 16/21 182 yards 3 TD's and Rice had 20 carries 121 yards 1 TD. 

You absolutely CAN hit him on every zone read play legally. He is considered a running back until he drops back to pass. So yes. He will be hit on every zone read play. And I never said the Ravens stopped RG3. I said they effected his season by injuring him.

 

You cannot legally T off on the QB in the zone read.. The rules are basically the same as if he were a passer. Defender needs to get there while the QB has the ball at the mesh point. Easy to say but hard to do vs the Redskins.

 

Teams can continue to try and hit RG3 in the Read Option & they will keep getting beat. It's not a sound way to slow down this offense. 

[KDawg]

I still can't disagree with you more, LL, and NLC.

 

What are you supposed to do with the backside DE? No matter what he does, he's out of the play. May as well have him crash and try to get to the mesh point. The problem is, you guys seem to think it's a end all be all, even throwing around words like "dumb" and "stupid". You're entitled to your opinion, and I respect you both.

 

But the strategy is one that could help to slow the offense. Stop it? No. Do I sell out on the QB? No. Do I sell out on Morris? No. I try to play sound defense.

 

The more that an offense is on the field, the greater the probability of them making a mistake. Yes, the defense will get tired. But when you are doing your job and limiting the gashing, the confidence doesn't get taken out of the sails like it does when an offense is running the ball down your throat for fun. It may result in the same basic yardage, but it's how it happens that is disheartening to a defense. When you are limiting an explosive offense to small chunks, confidence stays high and they start looking for mistakes.

 

You can send a blocker to the backside DE, but that's committing another one of the offenses resources to blocking the defense. And, quite honestly, that can benefit either side.

 

Ideally, I'd like a defense full of smart, elite talent where I could sit still and defend the read option without thinking about it. But it's an unrealistic stance to take.

 

Stopping the read option comes down to either trying to consistently hit the QB (legally) or confusing the QBs reads. Stunts, blitzes and the backside DE crashing  the QB are all ways to help to slow the offense. You could even have the DE come down the LOS to attack the RB and have another overhang defender take the DEs place. These are all ways to help SLOW the read option. Not stop it.

 

The playside of the read option is a major threat, always will be. Only thing you can do is play fundamentally sound football and try to force a mistake, or shut down running lanes which is about 100% easier said than done.

 

Discipline is a major part of slowing the read option. But there has to be a strategy, and sitting back COMPLETELY, to me, is a mistake. Don't let them get clear reads and time to think about the read. Force them to make choices quickly.

[Oldfan]

LL: You cannot legally T off on the QB in the zone read.. The rules are basically the same as if he were a passer. Defender needs to get there while the QB has the ball at the mesh point. Easy to say but hard to do vs the Redskins.

 

If those are the rules, the rules are unfair to the defense. The purpose of the fake is to fool defenders. But those rules would penalize a defender who is fooled into thinking that the QB kept the ball.

[ZRagone]

Part of this depends on how you're defining "Stop the Read Option".

 

If you mean "stop" it from being used, then the "Hit the QB" may be a reasonable option. You focus on hiting the QB and you accept that you may get gashed during that time, but the hope is that you bang up the QB enough that the coaches stop calling read option plays because they fear the health of their QB.

 

In that type of scenario for "STOPPING" it, pointing out that it gashes the defense doesn't really counter it. However, a legitimate argument can be made how intelligent that theory is.

 

Now if you mean "Stop" as in "Keep it from being a viable offensive play", then "hitting the quarterback" is NOT the answer. The great reality is that the "read option" is simply "Playaction +". Many of the same principles of play action are in play here, but with the added dimension that whether it's a run or not isn't known until that mesh point instead of prior to the snap. That's far different than the Wild Cat, for example, which was a somewhat single dimensional "gadget" that has limitations based on personel.

 

There's no better way to "STOP" the Read Option, where "stop" means "keep it from being a viable offensivep lay", then there is to "STOP" play action.

 

NOW, finally, if you by stop you mean "weaken or neutralize it's offensive potency"....THEN you've found your correct path.

 

The question isn't about stopping it, it's about limiting it...just as you would do with any other type of offense. To do that you have to look at it's strengths, and address them.

 

The Read Option offers up three (primary) possabilities:

 

1. QB passes

2. QB runs

3. RB runs

 

Similar to play action, there are a few ways you can neutralize this.

 

One such way is good old traditional football basics of understanding your strengths.

 

If you have a solid secondary then you attempt to trust your backfield to do it's job without extra "help" and you play assignment football focused on stopping the run. Perhaps 4 in the backfield, one spying, and 5 run stopping.

 

If you have a solid run defense, then you provide help on the backside and you trust your front four or to clog up lanes and deal with the inevitable rush. Perhaps 4 upfront, one spying, and 5 playing the pass.

 

You provide a situation where the best "option" out of the Read Option is to attack what you feel is your teams strength.

 

Does this STOP the read option. No, no it doens't. You're not GOING to "STOP" it. But it at least allows a defense to attempt to constrain it and chip away a bit at it's benefits.

 

I think the Read Option feasts the most when a Defense doesn't know what it wants to do. Where at one moment it's trying to take away the pass and another moment they want to take away RG3 running but then they want to take away Alfred Morris running. This lack of focus and direction leads to further confusion, further thinking on the field, and thus further freezing as the Redskins role up big yards.

 

Teams need to pick their poison. Try to hinder one or two of the three options, and try to make that "unhindred" option match up against the strength of your defense.

 

Will teams still fail at times and wil lthe Redskins still put up huge points? ABSOLUTELY. That's what GOOD OFFENSES do. And that's what we have when it comes down to it. Our offense is GOOD, and it's not good simply because of a gimmick.

 

Do we believe teams don't go into every game against New England going "Okay, we're going to stop Brady from killing us today from the shotgun"? OF COURSE THEY DO! And guess what...more often then not, Brady still has a pretty damn good game from out of the shotgun.

 

The problem isn't even the notion of "hitting the quaterback" being stupid. The problem is the QUESTION is stupid.

 

It shouldn't be "How do you stop the read option"

 

It should be "How do we handle and limit the read option"

 

There's ways to do it, but you'll never accurately figure them out if you're going at the problem all wrong.

[RG3Hunna]

 

LL: You cannot legally T off on the QB in the zone read.. The rules are basically the same as if he were a passer. Defender needs to get there while the QB has the ball at the mesh point. Easy to say but hard to do vs the Redskins.

 

If those are the rules, the rules are unfair to the defense. The purpose of the fake is to fool defenders. But those rules would penalize a defender who is fooled into thinking that the QB kept the ball.

When have rules ever been fair to the defense? The rules are ALWAYS going to be in favor of the offense especially a "Franchise QB" who the league profits off of and thankfully that plays in to our favor. 

[KDawg]

ZR,

That's pretty close to my "philosophy" in a nut shell. Good post.