- Joined
- Jul 11, 2005
- Messages
- 15,519
- Reaction score
- 27,509
... here a few of the questions I'd be sure to ask him.
1. Bill, I'd think we'd all agree that eliminating the possibility of TO's is a huge part of game preparation. In that vein, isn't time to consider that the multiple option read passing game that has swept through the league might be part of the problem. Even though it looks great on the board when you draw it up, the fact is that you put your team where you are always in danger where only ONE of the 4 or 5 guys who are running patterns or throwing the ball makes a miss read, and a play can blow up on you really badly.
Wouldn't you get better execution and a much less risky play if the receivers ran patterns called in the huddle. That way you eliminate any hesitation by the receivers. The QB would know EXACTLY where every receiver is going to be at any time. So wouldn't the improved EXECUTION would make up for any loss you'd have in creating separation by running option/read patterns?
Also wouldn't going back to that kind of system perhaps saved a guy like Chad Jackson, and allowed him to thrive, as opposed to crash and burn like he did. Back in the day Everyone knew that Unitas was going to throw that 12 yd out to Ray Berry, but the execution was SOOOO precise that it was completed anyway.
2. In the same vein that everything is cyclical in football (the shot gun that is the rage now is merely a version of the single wing that was run in the 30's and the spread formation has been used since the late 40's. So here is my next queston. I still can't get over how offensive line blocking has evolved into the zone blocking techniques we see today. Back in the day, (when the rules were a lot different and a lot HARDER for OLmen) the OLman AGGRESSIVELY ATTACKED his assigned man. He put his helmet into the man's chest and drove him back or at an angle. Today's technque we USE TO deride as "titty blocking". Standing straight up and litterally hand fighting the defensive lineman.
Once again this is a trade off between crisp execution and the read/option knd of thing that looks great when you draw it up, but requires the RB and blockers all to read the same thing. When it works it looks great, when it doesn't it nets negative yardage. AGAIN I ask, Bill, wouldn't you be better off in a system where everyone knows his assignment at the snap of the ball, and the runner knows WHERE the hole is going to be and is limited to PERHAPS a single option (ie 0ne hole over, depending on what he sees)
3. The first couple of questions I'd be asking him kind of coach to coach. But I would finally have to ask him the question WTF was he thinking when he sent that guy to film the Jets defensive signal AFTER getting the league memo NOT to do that anymore. Was he surprised at how strong the response was? What was the real purpose of the filming anyway, they certainly didn't get any advantage on the day they filmed?
In other words I'd ask him the same questions everyone else would...and more, but I have to run so I'll stop with these 3
1. Bill, I'd think we'd all agree that eliminating the possibility of TO's is a huge part of game preparation. In that vein, isn't time to consider that the multiple option read passing game that has swept through the league might be part of the problem. Even though it looks great on the board when you draw it up, the fact is that you put your team where you are always in danger where only ONE of the 4 or 5 guys who are running patterns or throwing the ball makes a miss read, and a play can blow up on you really badly.
Wouldn't you get better execution and a much less risky play if the receivers ran patterns called in the huddle. That way you eliminate any hesitation by the receivers. The QB would know EXACTLY where every receiver is going to be at any time. So wouldn't the improved EXECUTION would make up for any loss you'd have in creating separation by running option/read patterns?
Also wouldn't going back to that kind of system perhaps saved a guy like Chad Jackson, and allowed him to thrive, as opposed to crash and burn like he did. Back in the day Everyone knew that Unitas was going to throw that 12 yd out to Ray Berry, but the execution was SOOOO precise that it was completed anyway.
2. In the same vein that everything is cyclical in football (the shot gun that is the rage now is merely a version of the single wing that was run in the 30's and the spread formation has been used since the late 40's. So here is my next queston. I still can't get over how offensive line blocking has evolved into the zone blocking techniques we see today. Back in the day, (when the rules were a lot different and a lot HARDER for OLmen) the OLman AGGRESSIVELY ATTACKED his assigned man. He put his helmet into the man's chest and drove him back or at an angle. Today's technque we USE TO deride as "titty blocking". Standing straight up and litterally hand fighting the defensive lineman.
Once again this is a trade off between crisp execution and the read/option knd of thing that looks great when you draw it up, but requires the RB and blockers all to read the same thing. When it works it looks great, when it doesn't it nets negative yardage. AGAIN I ask, Bill, wouldn't you be better off in a system where everyone knows his assignment at the snap of the ball, and the runner knows WHERE the hole is going to be and is limited to PERHAPS a single option (ie 0ne hole over, depending on what he sees)
3. The first couple of questions I'd be asking him kind of coach to coach. But I would finally have to ask him the question WTF was he thinking when he sent that guy to film the Jets defensive signal AFTER getting the league memo NOT to do that anymore. Was he surprised at how strong the response was? What was the real purpose of the filming anyway, they certainly didn't get any advantage on the day they filmed?
In other words I'd ask him the same questions everyone else would...and more, but I have to run so I'll stop with these 3
