The Jumbo Offense - I Need Input

[mgteich]

As I understand it, the jumbo set involves playing a 6th OL, often a blocking TE.

If that is so, why wouldn't team with very weak OL's run this set almost all the time?

If we called Thomas a TE, we'd have the 5 OL's, 2 TE's (Henry and Thomas), 2 WR's and 1 RB.
====================================
On passing downs, we might have say Thornton and Pop as WR's, with Henry and Gibson as additional targets.
==========
Yes, Brissett's target would be more limited, but he might be able to stand in the pocket longer.

Would we really have a less effective passing game than now? It would seem that Henry would continue to get lots of targets, and Pop may be more effective.

 

[Ring 6]

As I understand it, the jumbo set involves playing a 6th OL, often a blocking TE.

If that is so, why wouldn't team with very weak OL's run this set almost all the time?

If we called Thomas a TE, we'd have the 5 OL's, 2 TE's (Henry and Thomas), 2 WR's and 1 RB.
====================================
On passing downs, we might have say Thornton and Pop as WR's, with Henry and Gibson as additional targets.
==========
Yes, Brissett's target would be more limited, but he might be able to stand in the pocket longer.

Would we really have a less effective passing game than now? It would seem that Henry would continue to get lots of targets, and Pop may be more effective.

When you defend regular base personnel you must account for 5 potential receivers. If one of those is not a viable receiver then your defensive calls can adjust to that.
All you have accomplished is that you theoretically replaced a TE with a better blocker but it’s at the expense of another defender in the box. Now you have more players to block

 

[mgteich]

When you defend regular base personnel you must account for 5 potential receivers. If one of those is not a viable receiver then your defensive calls can adjust to that.
All you have accomplished is that you theoretically replaced a TE with a better blocker but it’s at the expense of another defender in the box. Now you have more players to block

Is there a difference between running 2-2 (WR-TE) using a blocking TE and replacing that TE with a lineman.

Why isn't the Defense the same?

 

[Ring 6]

Is there a difference between running 2-2 (WR-TE) using a blocking TE and replacing that TE with a lineman.

Why isn't the Defense the same?

Because the defense knows that one of your receiving options isn’t a receiving option.
If you are a DC do you defend an offense with gronk at TE differently than one with Marcus Cannon?

 

[One-If-By-Sea]

Is there a difference between running 2-2 (WR-TE) using a blocking TE and replacing that TE with a lineman.

Why isn't the Defense the same?

You are trading blocking for receiving. The jumbo has an extra lineman ( usually OT) who is a better blocker. You would never play a TE as a offensive tackle because their blocking is poor by comparison. Also an extra offensive tackle is unlikely to run a receiving route and catch a pass.

OL are 100% blockers and 0% receivers. TEs are 50% blockers and 50% receivers. Not really but %s help some people visualize.

 

[Pape]

run it all the time? oof... we run it a lot already... either with a 6th lineman or a blocking tight end

for us, we have problems pass blocking... 4 rushers can usually put pressure on the line, 5 usually will collapse the pocket... the extra blocker hasn't helped all that much based on our pressure rate... the defense can just attack on the weak side... and the advantage is now mitigated... the defense now has an extra edge, lb or DB they can use to their advantage in the numbers game... we saw it a few times with different blitz packages that were used... iirc the jete sent a guy right up the middle a few times... no real advantage there...

its simply a numbers game... the defense can use the extra guy to their advantage if we are stuck in a jumbo package a majority of the time

 

[KCSVEN]

As I understand it, the jumbo set involves playing a 6th OL, often a blocking TE.

If that is so, why wouldn't team with very weak OL's run this set almost all the time?

If we called Thomas a TE, we'd have the 5 OL's, 2 TE's (Henry and Thomas), 2 WR's and 1 RB.
====================================
On passing downs, we might have say Thornton and Pop as WR's, with Henry and Gibson as additional targets.
==========
Yes, Brissett's target would be more limited, but he might be able to stand in the pocket longer.

Would we really have a less effective passing game than now? It would seem that Henry would continue to get lots of targets, and Pop may be more effective.

Look at goal line situations and jumbo packages, teams can match what you have, and you only have so many plays you can run before they start recognizing the play.

However, I do think randomly sending out a goal line package offense, say 2nd and 5 would confuse the defense so much they might not get the personnel out there and in synch, might waste a TO, you can also sneak TT in there and then have him run a go off the line. I'd even push it to make the change with 15 seconds on the clock, ref has to give them time to get their substitutions, but you can probably still hike it with 5 second left and they would never expect the TT go route, They'd just be wondering what the heck you were doing.

Pretty exaggerated example but I love real creative crap like that, I wanted to start a thread on creative play ideas, either seen in a game or one you made up but doubt there are many people interested in that. I'd have 1 really creative play designed for every game. Remember when Tush Push did not exist? Still opportunities for creative plays.

Not going to see anything like it from AVP, not very creative.

 

[IcyPatriot]

I believe we did some of that vs the Bengals.

 

[Pape]

I believe we did some of that vs the Bengals.

on at least 28% of the snaps we had an extra blocker (6th OL), 16% vs Seattle (6th OL) based on snap counts... that does not include TE's that were used for blocking... too much to parse there to figure that out...

 

[Wozzy]

We've probably run jumbo or 6 man offensive line more than any team in the league. I don't have that data available, but they've certainly run it a lot.

It doesn't matter when your linemen suck. If your rookie guard is being tossed aside on a pass play, having six linemen doesn't slow the rush down at all.

 

[signbabybrady]

I'm open to giving Jumbo Elliot a chance

 

[TomPatriot]

Or a blocking back.

 

[mgteich]

We've probably run jumbo or 6 man offensive line more than any team in the league. I don't have that data available, but they've certainly run it a lot.

It doesn't matter when your linemen suck. If your rookie guard is being tossed aside on a pass play, having six linemen doesn't slow the rush down at all.

Agreed.

IMO, the solution isn't to run the jumbo set less. The solution is to have the rookie inactive.

 

[Pape]

Agreed.

IMO, the solution isn't to run the jumbo set less. The solution is to have the rookie inactive.

With the current "man down situation" that currently not feasible

 

[mgteich]

With the current "man down situation" that currently not feasible

I agree. Thomas might be ready soon. He might not be as much of a liability as Robinson. Leverett could start, but then we would have no backup center. And, of course, Leverett belongs on the Practice Squad.

 

[PancakeBlockPaul]

As others have said, jumbos just an additional fatty/lineman. Extra meat/push on the line. What’s the point of another linemen if they’re a turnstile or getting blown back though…they really need to draft 4 next year at least. To account for injuries and ones that don’t make it or need time. At LEAST 4….then target one vet or more in FA. Don’t know about next years OL class though…could be in for another year if this….

 

[Wozzy]

Agreed.

IMO, the solution isn't to run the jumbo set less. The solution is to have the rookie inactive.

The problem is there may be no answers on their bench. The young tackles may surprise and play well, they might be terrible also.

Somebody started a thread earlier in the season entitled “this team held hostage by its OLine” and that may be paraphrasing but unfortunately it’s really accurate.

The only hope for improvement is Sow returning from injury, possibly Strange returning from what might be a career ending injury and the three young tackles (Wallace, Jacobs, Thomas) contributing. This is a lot of wishful thinking…

 

[Wozzy]

As others have said, jumbos just an additional fatty/lineman. Extra meat/push on the line. What’s the point of another linemen if they’re a turnstile or getting blown back though…they really need to draft 4 next year at least. To account for injuries and ones that don’t make it or need time. At LEAST 4….then target one vet or more in FA. Don’t know about next years OL class though…could be in for another year if this….

Sounds good in theory, does anyone trust Wolf and co to draft the right guys?

He couldn’t identify good free agent linemen this offseason, he hires stiffs with long arms. Color me skeptical…

 

[Thelonious]

If this Jumbo Offense is so damned terrific, why are we choosing to run the Microscopic Offense?

 

[PancakeBlockPaul]

If this Jumbo Offense is so damned terrific, why are we choosing to run the Microscopic Offense?

Jumbos awesome when competent.