Faulking an RB

[Fencer]

Suppose one tries to take an RB out of the game, by assigning him a dedicated personal annoyance, ala' McGinest on Faulk. What can go wrong?

1. If he tries to rush, you probably have a decent defensive set against that. You're not guaranteed to have a good defensive play, since he will of course have blockers -- but you're starting out at least even and hopefully a bit ahead.

2. If he goes out for a pass, things depend on how good a receiver he is. Can Hightower reliably cover Lynch? Can Collins? I'm not aware of Lynch being anything special as a receiver -- just a good running back who does his job when going out for pass.

3. If he stays in to pass block, and picks up a rusher other than his personal spy, that's a problem -- he's effectively taking two guys out of the play. That's the eventuality the scheme would need to avoid. That's not easy, and is probably why game plans of this kind aren't tried more often.

 

[SalemPats]

I don't think we will or can assign a spy against Lynch. We need a spy on Wilson to contain him on the read option.

 

[BradyFTW!]

That worked with Faulk partly because he was such a versatile player who was a major factor on every play, passing or rushing. While Lynch is a capable receiver, he's just not that kind of guy. If they're going to spy someone and hit him everytime it's legal to do so (whenever he declares as a runner), I expect Wilson to be that guy.

 

[Ring 6]

We didn't really spy Faulk in that game, we just had the player with contain also hit him if he came their way.

 

[IcyPatriot]

You can spy both Wilson and Faulk with Collins ...
they both cannot run with the ball in that read option they run.

Also as to the read option ... the Jets and Bills use it so it's not like we're noobs against it.
Seattle may run it better but Belichick is more than used to designing to foil it.

 

[Fencer]

The numbers for having two spies sort of work.

• Suppose Hightower spies Lynch, mirroring him wherever he lines up.
• Suppose Collins spies Wilson, in shallow center field.
• Suppose the other four eligible receivers have men on them, none of whom is McCourty ...
• ... who plays deep center field (Cover 1).

That leaves four guys on the DL.

It's tough to do that all game, because there's not enough variability in it to allow for much disguise unless you're willing to risk letting a receiver go free. But it could work as part of a defensive look rotation.

 

[Ring 6]

The numbers for having two spies sort of work.

• Suppose Hightower spies Lynch, mirroring him wherever he lines up.
• Suppose Collins spies Wilson, in shallow center field.
• Suppose the other four eligible receivers have men on them, none of whom is McCourty ...
• ... who plays deep center field (Cover 1).

That leaves four guys on the DL.

It's tough to do that all game, because there's not enough variability in it to allow for much disguise unless you're willing to risk letting a receiver go free. But it could work as part of a defensive look rotation.

I'm not sure how you spy a RB. If there is run action, you play your assignment. If you mean take a defender and line him up and have him run to the ball, thats was Mike LB almost by definition.
As far as a pass, you either play man or zone.

As far as Spying Wilson, what you are doing is essentially assigning a player as a pass rusher, who instead of rushing hangs back at the los to mirror Wilson in case he runs. I'm sure that will be some part of the game plan, but you can't do it every down, because then you are playing with 10 men.

 

[Sicilian]

I'm not sure how you spy a RB. If there is run action, you play your assignment. If you mean take a defender and line him up and have him run to the ball, thats was Mike LB almost by definition.
As far as a pass, you either play man or zone.

As far as Spying Wilson, what you are doing is essentially assigning a player as a pass rusher, who instead of rushing hangs back at the los to mirror Wilson in case he runs. I'm sure that will be some part of the game plan, but you can't do it every down, because then you are playing with 10 men.

Agreed. As a general rule it's not good to do anything every down, because even the most basic offensive teams will catch up and adjust. What I'm guessing is Belichick and Patricia have a sense of what down, distance, and game situation that Wilson most often does damage with his legs, and they'll utilize the spy (or whatever gameplan they've devised) on those downs.

 

[Fencer]

You're right that there isn't much difference between an RB spy and a Mike. More precisely, an RB spy would be a Mike who is obsessed with the RB. As I indicated in my OP, it's easy for that obsession to do more harm than good.

 

[Ring 6]

Agreed. As a general rule it's not good to do anything every down, because even the most basic offensive teams will catch up and adjust. What I'm guessing is Belichick and Patricia have a sense of what down, distance, and game situation that Wilson most often does damage with his legs, and they'll utilize the spy (or whatever gameplan they've devised) on those downs.

Agree. And I think it will be different players. JC91, Hightower, Ayers, Chung, McCourty are all viable options.

 

[Ring 6]

You're right that there isn't much difference between an RB spy and a Mike. More precisely, an RB spy would be a Mike who is obsessed with the RB. As I indicated in my OP, it's easy for that obsession to do more harm than good.

Mike's are always obsessed with the RB.
I think the question is whether they give special attention on pass plays to Lynch, and I doubt it.

 

[Sicilian]

I haven't spent a ton of time watching Seattle, but the few times I've seen them it seems like Lynch gets most of his receiving yards on dump offs. He strikes me as more of an escape valve on pass plays than a Vereen or Sproles type of route runner. I don't think that requires any special assignment, just the whole defense has to be ready to swarm when they see those dumps. Don't let him get a head of steam.

 

[hwc]

I don't recall Belichick ever using a lot of "spy" type approaches. He's usally takes more of a "stay in your lane, do your job" approach from what I can tell.

I have a sneaking suspicion that Belichick is not seeing Lynch as the #1 threat in the game. I'm wondering if his #1 defensive priority isn't going to be keeping Wilson in the pocket. Lynch can gain a lot of yards and not beat the Patriots if they take away Wilson's big plays out of the pocket, running and passing.

 

[Fencer]

I don't recall Belichick ever using a lot of "spy" type approaches. He's usally takes more of a "stay in your lane, do your job" approach from what I can tell.

I have a sneaking suspicion that Belichick is not seeing Lynch as the #1 threat in the game. I'm wondering if his #1 defensive priority isn't going to be keeping Wilson in the pocket. Lynch can gain a lot of yards and not beat the Patriots if they take away Wilson's big plays out of the pocket, running and passing.

That's fair, especially if there isn't much extra to do to stop Lynch anyway.

 

[woolster22]

I haven't spent a ton of time watching Seattle, but the few times I've seen them it seems like Lynch gets most of his receiving yards on dump offs. He strikes me as more of an escape valve on pass plays than a Vereen or Sproles type of route runner. I don't think that requires any special assignment, just the whole defense has to be ready to swarm when they see those dumps. Don't let him get a head of steam.

Agree completely. To take it a step further, many of those are when he initially stays in for pass pro, Wilson extends the play outside the pocket and plays a 2 on 1 with the short zone/lynch "spy." Many of these seem to have cone late in games after lynch picks up the blitz and Wilson evades.

Contain is going to be huge, as much as we hate the time it allows the mobile quarter backs we use it against.