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

[MartinC]

Like others have said the idea of sedning your edge defender hard at the mesh point is a sounds strategy and that is why you are seeing athletes like Dion Jordan, Barkevius Mingo and Jadeveon Clowney coming up.  Without a blocker to deal with those guys can get to that mesh point awful quick.  For example if I had Clowney, an explosive athlete running a 4.7, as my DE or OLB unblocked id bet on him getting to the mesh point and blowing it up before the QB had the ball out of the RBs belly.

 

This is not against the read option but man if unblocked Clowney gets there FAST!! If this was a read option and he was left unblocked the mesh point would have been destroyed and the result would have been the same. 

 

Having said that these athletes are not too abundant at the moment so like Oldfan said the RO will eventually die out, however not just yet.

 

  

Aside from anything related to this thread - what an awesome play and hit! I hope he gets drafted by an AFC team .....

[Jumbo]

This last page is great conversation. Every time I get a moment to think of adding something, someone's already said it ((better) or I just keep reading and thinking about the strategies and it's time to move on. I love threads like that! (and I see in the time it took me just to get this lightweight post done, several others have been posted that I haven't read as I hit "enter)

 

Good clarification on the rule, Mahons21, and my only general comment is a suggestion for some folks to avoid the too-common dynamic in many internet discussions of "sides" on a matter framing their points in too much absolute/black-white/all-or-nothing constructs.

 

I think the pistol may end up being the better long-term frequent-usage tool than the read-option, as OF suggests.

 

And I saw Zrag state one of my thoughts re: use of the term "stopping." In my own ponderings, I have certainly considered the idea of "stopping" an offense run like we do ours (believing that when healthy, there is only one RG3 at this time, even out of the other great QBs when it comes to running, including Vick and Newton). Regardless of how competent a backup QB likely may be, if you tailor your offense heavily around a fairly unique set/level of talent, and you get the QB knocked out of games, you obviously deal that team the classic major blow (usually) but with even greater effect---magnified in impact by how crucial that QB really is in specific required skills and abilities.

 

Cousins did great for a bit, and I have not one negative thing to say about that guy, but despite the warm-n-fuzzy we all have and hos good plays, the dropoff was big (nothing wrong with that; needs no defense or explanation per Cousins) and the negative affect to the team is more than normal (I'd contend).

 

So, simplistic as it may sound, let alone "dirty", or Gregg "Imma genius but Imma let you finnish" Williams-like, or maybe Jeff Fisherish, I can see some (maybe divisional/conference rivals in particular) DC's gambling more than normal in "punishing the QB" as the reward/risk ratio goes up commensurately (especially looking long-term) with the importance of the starting QB's skills to the preferred schemes/plays (which usually get some adjustments in a switch to help the backup, of course).

 

Do you get burned? Yes. But if you do get that guy out, it's really big.  No plan is without weaknesses, but "going after" RG3 is going to receive "extra" focus for many DCs, I believe. In some circumstances, I like the idea of simultaneously attacking an enemy (not limited to football) with a focus at both his strongest and weakest points. I think DC's focusing on adjusting to how our schemes helped an otherwise average O-line out and seriously going after Robert throughout the game is something we will see a lot of, risks and all.

 

Getting to the QB is always a big agenda for the defense. Legally hitting him hard is a bonus whether the play's busted or successful.  I have some fear that in our case in particular, opponents knowing there are now two serious knee injuries this player has had as he enters his second year as a pro, are going to be even more seriously tempted to make hitting him hard a major strategy, taking more risks and devoting "extra" effort to it in scheme and practice execution.

 

The obvious risk, as noted earlier, is that if he burns you big enough a couple times while suffering little or no consequences, then a DC is left with lowering that aggression, having already lost some important ground in gambling. Brings me back to "Dammit, can the season just start!" 

[KDawg]

People think of hear stud athlete DEs and OLBs as pass rushers only. And admittedly, some of them are. But some are unfairly classified as that due to their athleticism.

Michael Strahan was a great pass rusher, but he was actually better against the run than he was the pass.

Some of these athletic guys start as being a pass rusher only, but as they learn they transition.

Why is that important to the thread? Because that's who may be on the backside of the read option. Also keep in mind that tendency wise we left the backside of the read to Polumbus' side more often that the other way. That helps a defensive gameplan tremendously.

[Oldfan]

Martin: Normally the backside edge defender has contain on the QB boot - he does not normally crash on the ball carrier and if he does then you start to let the QB keep it and get to the edge with some kind of run/pass option. Point is that that backside DE or Linebacker never slams the QB carrying out the fake.

No, you're right. The edge defender would likely be penalized if he slammed the QB in that completely different situation.

What I am saying is that if you have your edge rusher focus on the QB in an attempt to hit him which is the premise of the article in the OP the end result is the offence gets what it wants - the QB handing the ball off to the running back and your edge defender out of the play.

KDawg's basic premise is that the edge defender has to dictate which option the offense will take. That makes sense. I don't think he can consistently tackle the RB from his position; but even if he could, the RB's momentum isn't going to allow him the outside run that is available to the QB. I want my NFL defense to know that the inside run is coming.

I should have been clearer - its a comparative numerical advantage versus a traditional NFL style running play.

That's the comparative advantage the read-option gave you to begin with. You haven't gained anything more by KDawg's tactic. What you have lost is an option which makes the play easier to defend since defenders can be sure of what's coming.

By show you read option I mean set up in the pistol with a back or backs aligned in a situation you have seen me run read option on film. I'm going to give you keys that tell your edge rusher its a read option - sometimes it may be but sometimes it might not. A lot of the time we showed read option looks last year we either had pre called play action or ran regular inside or outside zone runs with no read option element.

The edge defender is going after the QB unless he reads that the tackle wants to block him on the stretch. Thus, your play action only succeeds in slowing down the QB. As for the inside runs, the edge defender is not likely to stop those anyway unless he reads it early somehow.

Bubble screen to play side is one obvious example and one of the staples of most read option teams. You could also run a quick slant from a receiver with a close split into the area where the edge rusher is coming from. Your going to have to have a really fast rusher to get to the QB before he gets the ball out of his hands on something quick like that against a QB with quick release RGIII has.

You are giving me plays that would be tough to stop with Robert running them. You need to tell me why those plays would be more effective if I send the edge rusher at the QB (unless he reads the stretch coming his way).

[Warpath11]

From Dan Reeves in a Post article from today...

 

"The key for defenses going forward, Reeves said, will be to make such an offense one-dimensional, dictating either that the quarterback always keep the ball on option plays or always get rid of it to his running back. Defenses also must learn to play in a more disciplined, organized manner, according to Reeves, with defenders remaining in their assigned spots and lanes rather than trying to chase the ball too zealously.

You’ve got to have it coordinated, that’s how I’d put it, or it kills you,” Reeves said. “It’s like Coach [Tom] Landry years ago with his ‘flex’ defense. Everyone had a gap. You have to be coordinated like that and you can’t start following the football around.”

[MartinC]

 

What I am saying is that if you have your edge rusher focus on the QB in an attempt to hit him which is the premise of the article in the OP the end result is the offence gets what it wants - the QB handing the ball off to the running back and your edge defender out of the play.

KDawg's basic premise is that the edge defender has to dictate which option the offense will take. That makes sense. I don't think he can consistently tackle the RB from his position; but even if he could, the RB's momentum isn't going to allow him the outside run that is available to the QB. I want my NFL defense to know that the inside run is coming.

 

I accept that by effectively taking away the QB run you can dictate who gets the ball - but thats fine by me as I WANT my RB to get the ball and I like my chances of executing that inside zone. Its one thing knowing whats coming quite another stopping it.

 

On the comparative numerical advantage - if you have your play side edge guy sit and read thats another guy I have to scheme to block and I lose the comparative advantage. If he rushes and keys the QB he takes himself out of the play and I gain the comparative advantage, but to your point lose surprise.

 

Bubble screen to play side is one obvious example and one of the staples of most read option teams. You could also run a quick slant from a receiver with a close split into the area where the edge rusher is coming from. Your going to have to have a really fast rusher to get to the QB before he gets the ball out of his hands on something quick like that against a QB with quick release RGIII has.

You are giving me plays that would be tough to stop with Robert running them. You need to tell me why those plays would be more effective if I send the edge rusher at the QB (unless he reads the stretch coming his way).

 

If you have your edge man play side rush he vacates the area play side into which I can run my bubble screen or the quick slant. If he sits and reads he is in better position to defend those plays.

[ZRagone]

ZRagone,

 

The read-option is unlike the offenses run by the Patriots, Packers, Saints or Broncos in two ways. First, those schemes don't put a QB at risk by having him run much. And, they are not dependent on one concept. They are sort of a modular collection of elements most of which have a good track record in the NFL. . Some elements go back to Sid Gillman, Bill Walsh and Mouse Davis. The Shotgun traces back to Pop Warner. Parts that stop working well can be replaced

 

Defenses can work on punishing the read-option QB and on defensive adjustments at the same time. That's what our own devious coach KDawg was up to earlier in this thread. 

 

I think the Pistol will have a long life, but I'd bet against the read-option having a long and prosperous  NFL life.

 

Let me try to address each part...

 

With regards to your first paragraph...

 

One it's built off a premise that the QB running a lot inherently increases his "risk". That isn't necessarily true, because that risk is not happening just in a vacuum. Your assertion would be correct if this was simply function in a way similar to a traditional option out of a single wing, where the default action most of the time is always going to be run.

 

The fact that that the READ element is there in the "read-option" and that there's three legitimate "options" that can all occur in the same general time period produce either hesitation or a safe "out" for the QB. This helps to mitigate some risk.

 

So while there is more risk outside of the pocket as a runner, it's questionable as to whether it is an overall significant increase to risk. Even if it's an increase of risk it doesn't mean you "stop" the offense. Risk is just that, the possability of bad things happening. The coaching staff and the QB may very well find that the reward outweighs the risk.

 

Two, the Read Option is simply an evolution of a moular and proven portion of the NFL game as well...the Play Action pass.

 

In a Play Action pass the QB fakes a standard hand off to the Running Back, pulls the ball back in, and attempts to pass as the immediete assumed primary, with scrambling as a final option.

 

The Read Option is simply a dynamic version of the static play action. In the Read Option, rather than the hand off being predetermined, the QB makes the decision to hand off or keep based on relevant CURRENT intelligence of the situation. Additionally, instead of having an assumed upon static primary option you again have a DYNAMIC option based on current information in terms of whether the QB passes or Runs.

 

The Read Option is nothing more than an evolved Play Action; the style of offense that Mike Shanahan has been running effectively for quite some time within the NFL. A style of offense that is also rather "Modular" as well.

 

To your second paragraph...

 

Yes, Defenses can try to "punish" the Read-Option QB. However are any of us seriously sitting here and thinking that teams don't attempt to "punish" the QB CURRENTLY? In terms of "attacking the mesh point", how many times do you see defenders in the back field at the time of a NORMAL hand off occuring? Not often...so why are we assuming they're going to get there on the read option situations? As has already been documented, RG3 has a means to indicate when he legitimately handed the ball off and is no longer a target. Sure, teams may take cheap shots...but again, that's no different than what they could do OUTSIDE of the Read Option as well.

 

Yes, defensive coordinators can scheme against it and make adjustments. Yes, some of those adjustments may be to focus on the QB. That doesn't mean it's a "solution" to it in some kind of general sense. Personnel is going to matter for one. Execution for two. And that's execution both by the defense AND the offense.

 

The notion of "stopping" the Shotgun spread is to get pressure with just your front four and to play with siginificant secondary help, hoping to harass the QB and take away his options despite the plethora of them. That works great on paper...but against a GOOD offense, it's difficult to do effectively without excellent personnel to pull it off. Similarly, there's definitely ways you can attempt to "stop" the Read Option...but there's no reason to think they'll be any more effective then means to stop other styles of offense.

 

The Read Option is FAR more a TYPE of offensive strategy, like Play Action, then it is a gimmick package, like the Wild Cat.

 

To your third comment, I also agree the Pistol is going to have a very long life in the NFL, but I disagree with you about the read option. I don't believe we'll see teams rely SPECIFICALLY on it. However, I would be shocked if we see it "go the way of the Wild Cat", where about two years it went from huge fad to occasional gadget at best.

[ZRagone]

From Dan Reeves in a Post article from today...

 

"The key for defenses going forward, Reeves said, will be to make such an offense one-dimensional, dictating either that the quarterback always keep the ball on option plays or always get rid of it to his running back. Defenses also must learn to play in a more disciplined, organized manner, according to Reeves, with defenders remaining in their assigned spots and lanes rather than trying to chase the ball too zealously.

You’ve got to have it coordinated, that’s how I’d put it, or it kills you,” Reeves said. “It’s like Coach [Tom] Landry years ago with his ‘flex’ defense. Everyone had a gap. You have to be coordinated like that and you can’t start following the football around.”

 

That's pretty much my thoughts on it to a point. Pick the aspect you want to stop, and if you're smart you make the aspect you're NOT stopping go up against the strength of your defense.

 

At that point you hope your personnel and your execution is better than the offenses.

 

I'm not saying the Read Option is "unstoppable" or that it can't be hindered or that there's no defenses that can manage it. I'm saying the theory of "Just hit the quarterback" as the primary methodology for "stopping" the read option is a failed out save for the notion of trying to knock a QB out of the game...and THAT strategy is the best one for stopping ANY NFL offense so it's kind of a worthless addition to the conversation.

[Oldfan]

Dan Reeves: "The key for defenses going forward, Reeves said, will be to make such an offense one-dimensional, dictating either that the quarterback always keep the ball on option plays or always get rid of it to his running back.

 

Thanks for chiming in here, Coach.

 

I don't see letting the QB always keep it as a realistic option since the key edge defender is the one who would inherit the responsibility. The QB would just keep and run through the hole vacated by the defender who bites on the fake or drop a couple of steps and pass with no pressure off the edge.

 

Anyone else see a realistic way to force the QB to keep it?

 

 

[Oldfan]

ZRagone: One it's[my point] built off a premise that the QB running a lot inherently increases his "risk". That isn't necessarily true, because that risk is not happening just in a vacuum.

 

It's a simple matter of probability. The same QB running the football 150 times a year is three times as likely to be injured as he would be running it 50 times a season as he would in those other offenses you mentioned. 

 

So while there is more risk outside of the pocket as a runner, it's questionable as to whether it is an overall significant increase to risk. Even if it's an increase of risk it doesn't mean you "stop" the offense. Risk is just that, the possability of bad things happening. The coaching staff and the QB may very well find that the reward outweighs the risk.

 

If the added risk is significant, the reward would have to be huge when an NFL QB's career is considered.

 

Two, the Read Option is simply an evolution of a moular and proven portion of the NFL game as well...the Play Action pass.

 

They both have a fake involved, but otherwise there's nothing to connect the concepts.

 

 

In terms of "attacking the mesh point", how many times do you see defenders in the back field at the time of a NORMAL hand off occuring?

 

Not often. That's probably because defenders within striking range are usually blocked. 

 

The Read Option is FAR more a TYPE of offensive strategy, like Play Action, then it is a gimmick package, like the Wild Cat.

 

It's neither a gimmick nor a full-blown offense like those you wanted to use as comparables.

 

I'm saying the theory of "Just hit the quarterback" as the primary methodology for "stopping" the read option is a failed out save for the notion of trying to knock a QB out of the game...and THAT strategy is the best one for stopping ANY NFL offense so it's kind of a worthless addition to the conversation.

 

Since no one has argued that position, why argue against it?

[KDawg]

Martin, the play side edge guy isn't crashing anything. The backside guy, or the guy the QB is reading would be crashing him.

Numerically, not blocking the backside end does give you a slight advantage offensively. But defensively, that guy isn't likely to make the play anyways. Having him sit and read is a mistake. Not only will he not make a play on the running back, but by planting his feet he likely wouldn't make a play on the quarterback, either.

The bubble is defended by the edge guy rushing the mesh point. Any pass thrown would literally have to go through the defensive ends hands. He's in great position if he attacks the midline of the QB in order to erase the mesh.

ZR,

The read option isn't a "normal" run play. On most normal plays, the backside end isn't typically left unblocked. That's why there's a greater chance of him getting to the mesh point. You all keep saying you'd rather see the running back get the ball from an offensive perspective, and I agree. But from a defensive perspective if prefer the same thing. We attack the mesh point, not necessarily to blow it up, though that would be nice. Moreso to force the play where WE dictate. If the QB keeps he's probably going to get crushed.

Make the play one dimensional.

[jcolan1]

OldFan: It's a simple matter of probability. The same QB running the football 150 times a year is three times as likely to be injured as he would be running it 50 times a season as he would in those other offenses you mentioned.

 

I don't think its quite this simple, as this doesn't take into account when a QB runs and either slides or gets out of bounds, or when he stands in the pocket and takes a hit. 

[Oldfan]

OldFan: It's a simple matter of probability. The same QB running the football 150 times a year is three times as likely to be injured as he would be running it 50 times a season as he would in those other offenses you mentioned.

 

I don't think its quite this simple, as this doesn't take into account when a QB runs and either slides or gets out of bounds, or when he stands in the pocket and takes a hit. 

 

It's the SAME QB so his propensity for sliding or getting out of bounds is the same. And, if it wasn't completely clear, my statement was about the probability of him getting hurt while running. Getting hurt by standing in the pocket is not relevant.

[PeterMP]

The idea of hitting the QB isn't about stopping any given play.  It is about stopping the play (player) over the course of the game and even season.  Yes, in individual plays the defense loses, but over the course of games/seasons the defense is going to win because the QB will get hurt.

 

If your an AFC team playing the Skins in a one off game, it might not make sense, but for teams in the NFC and especially, the NFC East it is a comletely reasonable strategy, and I expect you'll see quite a bit of it.

[KDawg]

Not only that, Peter, but it makes all teams who run the read option understand that you're going to be in position to hit the QB. Offenses have to understand that and do what they can to prevent it. Put it on film that you will attack it. A daring OC may play Russian Roulette and not have the bullet in the chamber and escape. But at some point, that bullet is going to fire and will result in the demise of an OC.

We're spoiled here with the Shanahans and Cousins. They have everything set up just in case something happens (on any play an injury can occur, not just read option). Kyle has something in place. A lot of these other teams are in trouble if something happens. They may have to think about their decisions a bit more, AFC or NFC it makes a ton of sense.

[MartinC]

Martin, the play side edge guy isn't crashing anything. The backside guy, or the guy the QB is reading would be crashing him.

Numerically, not blocking the backside end does give you a slight advantage offensively. But defensively, that guy isn't likely to make the play anyways. Having him sit and read is a mistake. Not only will he not make a play on the running back, but by planting his feet he likely wouldn't make a play on the quarterback, either.

The bubble is defended by the edge guy rushing the mesh point. Any pass thrown would literally have to go through the defensive ends hands. He's in great position if he attacks the midline of the QB in order to erase the mesh..

I always understood the QB reads the edge defender to the side he is going to run which can be playside or backside. I think here for example of the second Dallas game were we ran RGIII a few times around Ware who was coming inside on Morris running to his side with RGIII reading him as the play side edge defender and running outside him even on one leg.

On the bubble it's the QBs responsibility to create the angle for the throw and you see that done every week in College and we saw t done by RGIII quite a few times last year as well. There is a risk of a batted ball on the screen - but there is a risk on any pass play that's badly executed.

[Oldfan]

In Mike Shanahan's shoes, I'd dump the read-option right now. I'd use Robert pretty much the way Jay Cutler was used by Mike in 2008.

 

Jay was in the Shotgun a lot. I'd substitute the Pistol.

 

Jay's mobility allowed him to be moved a lot in pass protection which made the job much easier for his lighter weight ZBS O-line. The Broncos led the NFL that year with just 11 sacks allowed..

 

I would encourage Robert to scramble especially when the DBs are in man coverage with their backs turned. Big gains are more likely and usually there is plenty of time to bail out without taking on contact.

 

I would not encourage him to slide. He's likely to hurt himself sliding. When he can't get out of bounds, I'd prefer to see him take a dive like Wes Welker does.

[Mahons21]

OF,

 

If Qb dives head first, he isn't down until someone touches (or hits) him.

 

If he slides, he's declared himself down.

 

Hence the preference towards sliding.

[Hitman21ST]

I would not encourage him to slide. He's likely to hurt himself sliding. I'd prefer to see him take a dive like Wes Welker does.

 

I'm curious, why do you think he's more likely to hurt himself sliding than diving?

 

As soon as the QB starts their slide motion, the refs consider them as "giving up" and thus untouchable. Especially the superstar QBs - remember London Fletcher getting flagged for hitting Tom Brady who had just started his slide?

 

If he dives he opens himself up to someone diving at him - remember how Vick got sandwiched between Hall and Kareem Moore and broke some ribs?

[Oldfan]

OF,

 

If Qb dives head first, he isn't down until someone touches (or hits) him.

 

If he slides, he's declared himself down.

 

Hence the preference towards sliding.

 

I know the rule, but the slide itself is risky for someone who doesn't do it well especially on turf. And defenders aren't going to be willing to pay the roughness penalty that would result from an over-aggressive hit when all they have to do is touch him.

[KDawg]

Martin,

 

If both the back and the QB are both going in the same direction, I consider that option, I realize it's merely nomenclature, but that's how I defend it.

[Binton]

Article doesn't focus enough on the aftermath of handing it to the running back. If RG3 is constantly taking these hits, it's going to start accumulating thus making him unable to continue to take these kind of hits

[Califan007 The Constipated]

Article doesn't focus enough on the aftermath of handing it to the running back. If RG3 is constantly taking these hits, it's going to start accumulating thus making him unable to continue to take these kind of hits

 

Probably because that's not gonna happen. Ever.

[SpacePenguin]

 

I would not encourage him to slide. He's likely to hurt himself sliding. When he can't get out of bounds, I'd prefer to see him take a dive like Wes Welker does.

 

This sounds a little crazy, but I think OF may be onto something. Considering the injury toll on his knees, throwing them forward into the turf or oncoming players kinda scares me. He may get a concussion diving headfirst, but....as cold as it sounds, I'd prefer that to another knee injury.

[Lavarleap56]

 

Martin: But its always been that way - when have you ever seen a QB carrying out a fake bootleg after handing off to a RB on a stretch play or sweep to the opposite side get blown up? 

 

It isn't the rules that prevent the QB from being hit on a stretch play. There are no defenders rendered otherwise useless on a stretch play as there are on a well-executed read-option. So, defenders  will go for the ball carrier.

 

> 

 ...I would direct you to para 3 on page 146 - "we want the ball in the running backs hands. We want the QB to give the ball unless he cannot".

 

I understand why Kelly wants that. I don't understand what point you are making. If the NFL edge-rusher was in a position to consistently stop the RB, that would be a good option, but he's not. He has a better shot at the QB who has no momentum going for him at the mesh point.

 

If you crash your edge defender on my QB every time I show you read option I am going to be happy. I play the numbers and inside zone you to death with a numerical advantage on my blockers versus your defenders.

 

I'm not sure what you mean by "show me the read-option." If you run the read-option, your QB can't block and my edge-rusher sent after the QB can't tackle the RB. How do you get a numerical advantage? What you have is 10 on 10.

 

This is without even thinking about the pass options you could build in based on how the defense plays the look

 

Your QB has taken the time to fake the option. My edge-rusher has his ears pinned back rushing the QB. How does this work to your advantage for the passing options?

 

If you crash on my QB he hands off and you cant hit him legally.

 

I don't believe that. Robert was quoted telling us that the ref reminded him to put his hands up to show defenders that he didn't have the ball. Why would the ref do that if the defender was going to be penalized regardless of the timing on the fake? 

 

 

1.It isn't the rules that prevent the QB from being hit on a stretch play. There are no defenders rendered otherwise useless on a stretch play as there are on a well-executed read-option. So, defenders  will go for the ball carrier.

 

This is wrong...It is the rules that prevent the QB being hit on the stretch play. NFL counts the QB as out of the play once the ball is handed off and hes carrying out the fake, the QB is off limits until he becomes a blocker,wr, or runner after a lateral etc..

 

Unnecessary Roughness- (e) unnecessarily running, diving into, cutting, or throwing the body against or on a player who (i) is out of 

 the play or (ii) should not have reasonably anticipated such contact by an opponent, before or after 

 the ball is dead; or throwing the runner to the ground after the ball is dead; 

 

2.Your QB has taken the time to fake the option. My edge-rusher has his ears pinned back rushing the QB. How does this work to your advantage for the passing options?

 

Easy, your defense is exposed to quick routes to the flat that will put Davis,Reed, Paulsen, Paul, Thompson, Garcon, and Morgan in 1 on 1 situations for yac..