Play Action ...

[AzPatsFan]

EXACTLY...PLAY ACTION = DEEP POST TO JACKSON = TOUCHDOWN...(if he doesnt drop it. )

No tickee, no laundry.
No try it, never know if it works.

Since when do Defensive Ends cover deep WRs patterns??

 

[AzPatsFan]

Have to say I disagree with you here, yes, it takes time for the play action to develop, but the WRs are running routes while its developing, not just standing there, so the overall time doesn't change. Also, there is no reason a WR can't sight adjust on a play action pass, since that is pre-snap, and both WR and QB should know that adjustment will be made against a blitz. Good explanation of the O-line play. As a former guard I appreciate any love for the unseen complexities of line play. One other thing to note is that the opposite (from a blocking standpoint) can also be true of a draw play, using a pass protection kind of look to get the D-line running upfield and hopefully right past the play.

But the QB is not looking at his receivers; he has turned and is retreating to pass but slower as he is looking at the RB to make a fake handoff, and not collide with him, or have the exposed ball hit and fumbled. Then when he get back to pass he can finally turn his attention to the passing situation, look downfield and try to find his receivers, or more likely, the receiver he intended to throw to in the first place...

Thanks for the agreement with the complexities of the play action from a Guards standpoint. The O-linemen sell "play action" much more than any other fakes or fakers.

I intended to post a "draw play" discussion after this thread ran down, as it is indeed the exact opposite of "play action". The Pats use it a heck of a lot more too, as it fits their personnel and situations better.

 

[AzPatsFan]

Personally i dont think we run it enough. What i do think we need to see more of, is the Pats offense running the screen. I think the Pats execute the screen just as good as any team in the NFL. We ran one screen to the TE, against the Jets and that was it. I would like to see the Pats run more screen plays to the running back. The screen play to Faulk this week, has big play written all over it.

The screen pass is a different finesse (fool 'em) play that you can't predict consistent success for as its eady ot defend if they are not fooled. But you overlooked the Reche screen pass that almost certainly sealed the victory. It went for 15-18 yards and took the Pats from the Jets 40 to the Jets 20-25 and in position for the FG or TD which would make it more than a two score lead.

I agree our Guards are mobile and not big fat oafs. They can pull or get out in front of the screen and then actually block a little guy. Neal is quick and the little guys can't juke him and make a tackle. But you still need the Defense to get fooled or it just falls apart.

 

[maverick4]

EXACTLY ! Thats what I said. But if you think Freeney ever gave a damn about a running play, to slow down his pass rush than you must have some powerful rope that you are smoking. Play action is meant to confuse the LBs, Safeties to open passes of the short and intemediate variety. Thanks for your confirmation.

Az, you're using unique players like Freeney to discount the general theory behind play-action. It's like me using Deion Sanders as an example of why a passing game is a poor way to play offense.

Also Az, your thinking of play-action doesn't make any sense at all at the NFL level. The linebackers and safeties bite on the fake run, which allows players to get BEHIND them, not in front of them. Play action is for intermediate to long passes, not for short passes. Explain to me why you think play-action is for short passes, if the point of play action is to make LB/S freeze or move forward?

 

[maverick4]

arrellbee, you make a good point that play action is maybe not as useful in man coverage or if the LB/S is playing in an obvious passing down.

I never said play action applied in all cases, but in zone coverage and in 'running' downs, it can be a very effective way for receivers to get BEHIND linebackers.

 

[maverick4]

I have seen many critics say the Pats don't play enough "play action". Its obvious that they have an incomplete idea of what a "play action" entails.

Some think its only a Fake hand off by the QB to a RB in the backfield. Its not.

The "play action" first of all, is sold by fakes by the offensive linemen, the RB and only finally, the QB. For a pass rusher the most important is the fake by the O -lineman in front of him, faking a run. To do that the Blocker must fire out and try to drive him back as if to to open a hole. If he misses even a little, the pass rusher can dodge him and get around him to rush the passer with little to interfere. They don't do this in pass blocking as its so easy to get a pass rusher completely free. In Pass blocking, the linemen retreat and punch, retreat and punch, to delay but not stop a pass rusher, while simply buying time. So for a real pass with "play action"... Strike One.

The fake by the RB forces him to run up to, or through the line without actually getting the ball. Translation: he is removed from being able to pick up the blitz or the pass rusher going for the QB. He is not in a position to help block for the passing QB... Strike Two.

The faking takes time, and removes the attention of the QB from looking down field to see the WRs and the progressions. Finally, the time is compressed, since the pass rushers will be on the QB faster than normal.

When I hear fans say "run play" action and "throw it deep" they are contradicting themselves. They show how much they don't understand.

"Play action" lends itself to quick and short intermediate passes. Why? There is simply not enough time to wait for a deep receiver to get free on his route before the QB is sacked. Its also a play that commits to a specific receiver running a route. Why? The QB will have little time to survey the field and can probably only find and check his first ie. primary receiver.

The opposite of what the Patriots dictum is; "throw to the open receiver". If you had a great receiver like Wayne or Holt, you can rely on them to get open. The Pats don't have those receivers who can always separate, and always get open.

So "play action" doesn't fit the scheme or personnel; Hence you don't see the Pats run it very often, if at all.

Are you surprised???

The more I read this the more it doesn't make sense.

1. If the offensive linemen drive into the d-lineman, it drives them backwards, right? And if they miss, the defensive end will chase the fake ballcarrier first, so their momentum will be all screwed up, not towards the QB.

2. The running back doesn't always lose his ability as a blocker. In fact, plenty of play actions involve the running back picking up any rushers from a certain side after the fake is initiated.

3. Yes, the faking takes time, which is why play action is for passes of 10+ yards, NOT for short passes. It is idiotic to think play action, which takes a few seconds, is designed to throw a short pass into LB's who are right in that area.

Your entire conclusion that play-action is for short passes is you don't think the QB has time to throw because somehow the DE's are all undisciplined and rush the QB no matter what. This is naive, because if you watch properly executed play action plays, the DE's are either driven back by the offensive tackles, or the DE's take a momentum-line towards the RB who doesn't have the ball. Proper play action actually gives the QB TONS of time to make a throw.

Your initial post sounded intelligent, but the more I think about it, it doesn't make any sense, and is the opposite of what I think is actually going on. On the other hand, you should only use play-action if the defense is keying on the run, and is also not playing their corners man-to-man.

 

[maverick4]

Proper situations for play action are:
- anywhere on the field when the defense is keying in on a run (usually 1st and 2nd down, or 3rd and short).
- at the goal line.
- in the red zone when it is not a for-sure passing down.
- prefereably against zone coverage, but not necessary as long as the WR can fool the CB by fake blocking or running a good, tricky route.

 

[Box_O_Rocks]

You nail it, despite being lectured on why looking at half of an issue makes others smarter than professional coaches. Oh well, at least the team and coaches you and I watch and enjoy are 13-4 failures.

I will also add your other post which added another important aspect of the play action pass.



The advocate(s) (ranter(s)) of more play action have been challenged to discuss the negative aspects of the play action pass along with the possible benefits. Needless to say, they have ignored this challenge, preferring to repeat OVER AND OVER AGAIN AD NAUSEUM the same tired rants about how play action is a miracle cure. They wish to totally ignore the very pertinent points you make which makes their viewpoint simplistic to the point of stupidity.

There are a few more points that I might add as a small addition to your excellent writeup.

There are many particular defensive schemes that make the shortcomings of the play action pass much more severe as well as the problems you point out.

If the defensive call is for the run/pass rush to be done by the front four and the LBs are responsible for dropping into short coverage, the play action pass is worthless in terms of positive effect and has only the negatives you mention.

When advocates talk about the play action pass 'enhancing' the long pass, there are the problems you mention PLUS if the defensive call is for DB man coverage, the play action is worthless. Even if only one DB is playing man coverage, that still leaves the second safety free to double cover the long route of the other receiver even if one safety moves up to cover the 'run'. Not only that, but if one safety moves up from a 'normal' set position, chances are very good that he actually becomes another defender in the short passing lanes which is where play action passes are usually schemed for the receivers.

Also, as you so aptly point out, part of the 'fake' is for the OL to push forward rather than collapsing to form a pocket. I'll add that this also has the effect of creating wide open space in front of the QB so if even one rusher slips thru his block, he has a wide open unabated path to the QB.

If the particular defensive call has the DL pass rushing period without any read to adjust to a run, then the play action pass is a disaster. If the general defensive scheme is for DEs to pass rush and ignore the run on every play, the play action pass is pretty much worthless. Example in point are the Colts where Freeney ALWAYS pass rushes and Mathis pass rushes the majority of the time - EVEN on obvious running downs. (Wonder why the Colts are the worst run defense all time ?)

If a team is heavily oriented to the blitz (ie Steelers) then running the play action pass is suicide. Blitzers are ignoring the RBs unless they happen to be in their path. The play action pass is especially vulnerable to an outside blitz (LB or DB) for the reasons you and I mention.

If the defensive scheme is concerted run blocking with LBs charging the line of scrimmage without making reads, there is no point to the play action pass (leaving only the significant negatives) because the short passing zone is already being left open.

The other thing that is impossible to understand is the arrogance where some fan(s) posting on this board think they know better than Belichick what kind of play calls would be more effective. They have to be assuming that Belichick is not a very effective coach (how RIDICULOUS is that) or that he has some sort of a blind spot or unfounded bias against the play action pass (how RIDICULOUS is that when we see countless examples of Belichick using particular plays and schemes that that amaze us and produce wins).

 

[MrBigglesWorth]

One of the pet peeves I have is when we are inside the 5 yard line and they send Brady into the shotgun without a back staying in.

We might as well draw the play on the ground for the defense, ...its pass, pass, or pass.

I, for one, prefer Brady under center in that situation, especially on first down, and then you make the defense guess...is it, straight run, or pass, or maybe play action.... but inthe shotgun, you take the guesswork out of the defenses heads.

Like you say though, its best on 1st and/or 2nd down.....

yesterday they did this and had faulk split wide, then motionned him into the back field. i thought it was a nice reversal

 

[maverick4]

In what way have I criticized Belichick? You guys talk as if Belichick is making the play calls during the game, which is highly unlikely.

Your thought process comes across as something like "we're, 13-4 so any criticism is blasphemy".

From this one belief, in order to make it work in your mind, somehow you have constructed a rationale for play-action which doesn't even make sense, in order to explain why we haven't used it more.

I ask again: how did you come up with the idea that play-action is for short passes, and also the fact that it gives the QB less time? It doesn't make any sense.

 

[maverick4]

arrellbee, you give tons of reasons which amount to only two ideas: what if the DE pass rushes no matter what, and what if the defense is playing pass?

well, only the Colts do that; most DE's are disciplined and react to what they see (the fake ballcarrier). play action is ******ed on an obvious passing down, but other than that, it is not the disaster you make it out to be.

you guys are trying to talk about this backwards. you think the OC is doing a great job, so you are coming up with a reason to explain why there hasn't been more play action.

 

[maverick4]

I will talk about screen passes the same way you guys talk about play-action to show you how you sound like:

"Screen passes are a horrible play, and only ignorant, idiotic fans think it should be used more. We're 13-4, so people should just shut up because things are working fine the way they are. There are multiple reasons why screen passes can be worthless, such as if the defensive linemen fail to rush the QB, if the LB is keying on the RB, if there is an extra safety who happens to be in the area, etc etc etc."

-------

The point is, all kinds of plays have positives and negatives, which is why they are useful in different situations. I'm not even an advocate of using lots of play-action, but I have to chime in so often in this thread because your arguments against play action don't make any sense. Also, I have no clue again why you think play action, if used correctly, is for short passes and also gives the QB less time.

 

[borg]

I disagree somewhat.. Play action can fool safeties into run support which can free up WRs from double coverage.

 

[wdkantro2]

To the original poster: You are correct on a few fronts. However, one important use of the play fake is to capitalize off defensive backs who try to read the quarterback. You don't need the line to fake a run block for that to work. Lots of DBs read the QB instead of the line, and all it takes is a simple glance to the running back from Brady to make it seem like a run. As soon as they freeze for that split second, it should open up whatever routes they are trying to run.

 

[maverick4]

And I DO think we should run more play-action, despite our success. So far we average what, one per game? I think we should run it whenever we are in 2nd and short, anywhere on the field.

 

[maverick4]

That's part of the intent of play action, to make LB's and DB's think run.

Right, but it should be used if they are already thinking 'run play' before the play starts. All the fake stuff is only to get them to bite on their own expectation.

 

[Stokes]

But the QB is not looking at his receivers; he has turned and is retreating to pass but slower as he is looking at the RB to make a fake handoff, and not collide with him, or have the exposed ball hit and fumbled. Then when he get back to pass he can finally turn his attention to the passing situation, look downfield and try to find his receivers, or more likely, the receiver he intended to throw to in the first place...

:

Sorry, I probably didn't explain myself well enough in my 1st post. All I meant was it won't take the WR more time on a play action to get downfield on a deep route since he's going from the snap. Yes I agree the QB will often not have as much time to go through a typical progression of reads, but hopefully, if you have as nice a play action fake as Brady or Peyton Manning, the safety will have bit, and the guy on the deep route will be wide open. Sorry haven't checked if others mentioned this play, but a great example of using a safety's aggressiveness against him like this was in 2004 playoffs against the Steelers, they caught Polomalu bad on the long TD to Branch was it?

 

[AzPatsFan]

That's part of the intent of play action, to make LB's and DB's think run. Sometimes it works, other times it doesntl but in either case, the Pats have the players that are very capable of pulling it off, but arent being given much oportunity.

No one is saying that the use of more play action wqill, suddenly, turn the team into unbeatable monsters, but moreso that it shoud give them another solid weapon that might make games with a little less 4th quarter stress...and we had a lot of them this season, including the game vs. the Jets this past Sunday which was still a 7 point game with 5 minutes left in the 4th quarter.

Some play action in the red zone, on those three trips, might have made a significant difference. And, I believe, that is all the we, those that woud like to see more of it, are saying.

THey DID ! They used it on the Graham TD and it failed on another occasion.

 

[AzPatsFan]

If you want to see a play action pass described by Belichick himself.

Finesse or "fool 'em " plays work sometimes and look terrible when no one is fooled. How can you count on them to work. You can't unless you use them sparingly and set them up for the right situation.


http://youtube.com/watch?v=VBLx8GPzBpQ

Thansk for the find by another post and poster.

 

[nukin]

If you want to see a play action pass described by Belichick himself.

Finesse or "fool 'em " plays work sometimes and look terrible when no one is fooled. How can you count on them to work. You can't unless you use them sparingly and set them up for the right situation.


http://youtube.com/watch?v=VBLx8GPzBpQ

Thansk for the find by another post and poster.

How about that Detroit play where they pull their guards and the QB runs behind the center. That seem's like a very well thought out play - although I don't understand how it ever worked at all.