How Can the Pats Stop the Ravens?

[fightingirish595]

Of course I do.
The end (or whichever player they option) must make a decision.
He is the man they read and option off of. What he does makes the QBs decision because he is the read.
Every defense defending an option has to set those rules. He can’t just pick and choose.
What would you have him do?

If he knows the end will crash on him everytime hell just give it. Its the same effect as him waiting for him to hand it off.

It’s more dangerous than the end just standing their and containing. If you disagree with this than their is just no discussion. I guarantee you their are people that know more about Xs and Os than me that would agree

 

[Ring 6]

If he knows the end will crash on him everytime hell just give it. Its the same effect as him waiting for him to hand it off.

It’s more dangerous than the end just standing their and containing. If you disagree with this than their is just no discussion. I guarantee you their are people that know more about Xs and Os than me that would agree

Ok. The way to defend the option is to assign responsibilities.
The player being optioned MUST choose one or the other. That’s how the option works.
Ina traditional triple option he either takes the qb or the pitch man. He must choose one or the other.
In a read option/handoff situation it’s the same thing. The qb is keying off him. He can crash down the line take away the handoff or stay outside and take away the keep.
There really aren’t any other options.
I am saying against this team I have him take away the keep because I don’t want this win running. If I make that my rule I have the rest of my defense playing the handoff.
You should talk to those people that know more than you because you seem to be disagreeing just to disagree.
It is irrelevant what he “knows” will happen because he literally reads it as the play develops. How you played it last time is irrelevant to this time because he is simply reading a key. what you do have right is that he will hand off. That’s the goal of my scheme.
take the option away and force him to hand off. I’ve got 10 other players in this scheme defending that eventuality.

 

[fightingirish595]

Ok. The way to defend the option is to assign responsibilities.
The player being optioned MUST choose one or the other. That’s how the option works.
Ina traditional triple option he either takes the qb or the pitch man. He must choose one or the other.
In a read option/handoff situation it’s the same thing. The qb is keying off him. He can crash down the line take away the handoff or stay outside and take away the keep.
There really aren’t any other options.
I am saying against this team I have him take away the keep because I don’t want this win running. If I make that my rule I have the rest of my defense playing the handoff.
You should talk to those people that know more than you because you seem to be disagreeing just to disagree.
It is irrelevant what he “knows” will happen because he literally reads it as the play develops. How you played it last time is irrelevant to this time because he is simply reading a key. what you do have right is that he will hand off. That’s the goal of my scheme.
take the option away and force him to hand off. I’ve got 10 other players in this scheme defending that eventuality.

im not disagreeing to disagree. You’re the one who responded to me after I posted something a former nfl player said that I happened to agree with/ was thinking before he even said it.

 

[Ring 6]

im not disagreeing to disagree. You’re the one who responded to me after I posted something a former nfl player said that I happened to agree with/ was thinking before he even said it.

So how would you defend the option? wgat assignment would you give the unblocked man?

My comments addressed the issue the ex player raised.

 

[fightingirish595]

So how would you defend the option? wgat assignment would you give the unblocked man?

My comments addressed the issue the ex player raised.

bro your comments didn’t adress anything. If anything they raise more issues because you’re edge setter is crashing. If he waits to make his read he can still have an effect on a give. If he crashes, it completely takes him away from a play where they give it. And if he keeps crashing they can easily come up with something to bust a big gain.

It doesn’t matter if you say “I only mean on optionnplays” they can come up with an adjustment that is designed to look like an option play which is really just a misdirection, unless you think they have certain looks which they only run an option out of, which would just be bad coaching

 

[Ring 6]

bro your comments didn’t adress anything. If anything they raise more issues because you’re edge setter is crashing. If he waits to make his read he can still have an effect on a give. If he crashes, it completely takes him away from a play where they give it. And if he keeps crashing they can easily come up with something to bust a big gain.

It doesn’t matter if you say “I only mean on optionnplays” they can come up with an adjustment that is designed to look like an option play which is really just a misdirection, unless you think they have certain looks which they only run an option out of, which would just be bad coaching

Setting the edge is stopping the keep. I have 10 players playing the handoff.

you are suggesting he stand still and take himself out of the play. That will fail miserably.

Setting the edge is taking away the qb keep. There is no “edge to set” on an inside handoff.

I spent 10 years playing football often facing options and the concepts age crystal clear.

I guess we just need to move in because of this is going to turn into defending the option by sitting back until they are already gone and “misdirection” we are speaking different languages and this will never get anywhere.

Appreciate the responses but we are just too far apart in understanding.

 

[fightingirish595]

If you played football for 10 years against the option and don’t understand teams can run misdirection off their option than I question your football IQ, respectfully

 

[Ring 6]

If you played football for 10 years against the option and don’t understand teams can run misdirection off their option than I question your football IQ, respectfully

Of course you do because you don’t understand the concepts.
It’s simple though, you could as I have asked numerous times, describe such a play and explain how the most basic concept of assigning a man to the keeper would make that an issue.

 

[fightingirish595]

Of course you do because you don’t understand the concepts.
It’s simple though, you could as I have asked numerous times, describe such a play and explain how the most basic concept of assigning a man to the keeper would make that an issue.

no I question how you think they can’t take advantage of misdirection in the strategy you propose. They can easily leave an end unblocked to crash on the qb while faking and flowing everything to the opposite. direction. This leaves the other side of the field completely vulnerable if the defense flows to the fake side while the end crashes on the qb

 

[Ring 6]

no I question how you think they can’t take advantage of misdirection in the strategy you propose. They can easily leave an end unblocked to crash on the qb while faking and flowing everything to the opposite. direction. This leaves the other side of the field completely vulnerable if the defense flows to the fake side while the end crashes on the qb

What? What in the world are you talking about?
If the end is unblocked and there is an option coming his way he plays option rules. If the end is unblocked and the play goes away from him he isn’t playing option rules.

I am talking about defending the option. when they run option they don’t block the player they are optioning off. (This is what makes it an OPTION. You make the player take himself out of the play by choosing one option and you read that and do the other)

When you scheme against an option that targeted player needs to either take keeper or handoff/pitch and the second man to show takes the other. It has nothing to do with the backside defensive end. Damn that’s what you caused all of this over?

what I am saying is against this team I have the unblocked player play the keeper and play it aggressively. If you eliminate the keep you have the dry of the defense defending the handoff/pitch and you essentially eliminate the option and turn it into a handoff.

backside discipline is part of the scheme and is not at all affected by what the playside end is doing with the option declaration.

 

[cmasspatsfan]

Really looking forward to the San Fran game and what they come up with, they've been touted as the best D in the league so should be interesting.

 

[fightingirish595]

You are literally assuming that if they leave the end unblocked it’s automatically an option @Ring 6

 

[fightingirish595]

Is there a delete option anymore

 

[Ring 6]

You are literally assuming that if they leave the end unblocked it’s automatically an option @Ring 6

No I am not and I said that numerous times.
I’d it is an option thru leave a player unblocked to option off of (typically an end).
If the player is unblocked and SEES OPTION COMING HIS WAY, He plays option rules.
If option isnt coming his way he plays backside scheme.
in what world does a football player not look at what is happening?
Your argument is now that if the backside de is unblocked and the play is going the other way he is somehow supposed to believe he is the player being optioned On by a qb running in the other direction?????

 

[Ring 6]

Really looking forward to the San Fran game and what they come up with, they've been touted as the best D in the league so should be interesting.

2nd best

 

[Ring 6]

You are literally assuming that if they leave the end unblocked it’s automatically an option @Ring 6

Let’s back up.

when a team runs an option the leave a defender unblocked and “option off of him”. This means they make him declare whether he will defend the qb or the pitch/handoff man then the ball goes to whoever he leaves.

every concept of defending the option says that player must be assigned which player he takes and take the aggressively.

against Baltimore’s option I would have that player take the qb. This will result in the ball being handed off inside (mostly) or pitched to the rb. I would rather negate the qb on the option and defend 10 on 10 vs the rb than have Jackson running in space.

 

[fightingirish595]

Let’s back up.

when a team runs an option the leave a defender unblocked and “option off of him”. This means they make him declare whether he will defend the qb or the pitch/handoff man then the ball goes to whoever he leaves.

every concept of defending the option says that player must be assigned which player he takes and take the aggressively.

against Baltimore’s option I would have that player take the qb. This will result in the ball being handed off inside (mostly) or pitched to the rb. I would rather negate the qb on the option and defend 10 on 10 vs the rb than have Jackson running in space.

you’re literally assuming the the unblocked d end will know if it’s an option or an automatic give. You are also assuming that if it is an option, hell know what kind of option it is.

think about it. You want him to crash on the QB everytime there’s an option. You really can’t see how he could make a mistake?

Baltimore could leave the end unblocked on a play which isn’t an option

 

[cmasspatsfan]

2nd best

In some corners, yes, I've heard them described as the best by some pundits.

 

[luuked]

If he knows the end will crash on him everytime hell just give it. Its the same effect as him waiting for him to hand it off.

It’s more dangerous than the end just standing their and containing. If you disagree with this than their is just no discussion. I guarantee you their are people that know more about Xs and Os than me
that would agree

I think the point he is trying to make is that by having a player always go for the QB you take the guess work on option plays out of the equation. Meaning you sacrifice a player but at the same time also know that the ball will go to the RB and you can scheme accordingly without the need for a plan B.

Now whether that ultimately helps or not I am not sure. But keeping in mind that the player they are option-ing off of usually ends up doing nothing anyway I'd be interested to see what you could do if you take the guess work out of the option play.

Of course this would work for a series or two and then they'd adjust to that taking advantage of the predictability of your crashing player. Hell, maybe they already have that adjustment build in and it only works for 3-4 plays.


Ultimately, while scheme will play a role in this I think people are overthinking it here. Most importantly what you need is absolute discipline and players not taking even one wrong step on the edge.

There was a play in the first meeting where we had LJ dead in the backfield but KVN took one single step to far up hoping to sack him for a bigger loss and LJ juked him and broke contain for a big play.

I think the biggest thing is to not get greedy and try to get those extra 2-3 yards on stops but rather go for the conservative but sure angle on tackles. And so on.

It might not be fancy or sexy but fundamentally sound football absolutely necessary. The reason they look like a buzzsaw on offense is because players are just undisciplined, greedy and way to aggressive.

Like Bruschi said..

 

[fightingirish595]

I think the point he is trying to make is that by having a player always go for the QB you take the guess work on option plays out of the equation. Meaning you sacrifice a player but at the same time also know that the ball will go to the RB and you can scheme accordingly without the need for a plan B.

Now whether that ultimately helps or not I am not sure. But keeping in mind that the player they are option-ing off of usually ends up doing nothing anyway I'd be interested to see what you could do if you take the guess work out of the option play.

Of course this would work for a series or two and then they'd adjust to that taking advantage of the predictability of your crashing player. Hell, maybe they already have that adjustment build in and it only works for 3-4 plays.

I see what you’re saying but it’s not like the back is the only one who can receive the ball. You can set up formations to run counters/sweeps. There could be an H back who is either blocking for the tail back on a counter or receiving the ball on a sweep.

Like you said this could work for a few plays. You can easily adjust to this.

The main point to this is, which I’ve said and you already basically stated is that whether the end stays home, or cashes the QB... there is no difference. The ravens still have that advantage that he isn’t coming down that I originally mentioned which ignited this discussion