Re: The Future is Here: The NFL and the Pistol Offense
 

[quote=CRedskinsRule;980613]Lotus has pointed it out often, but there are two separate and distinct parts to this.

The first is the formation (Pistol). I think you will see it sweep in next year, and with a nod to Cowboys Week, I can honestly say, I don't want to see it run by them this week. Murray, Witten, Bryant and Austin on the edges, and Romo directing it in pistol would be very potent against our D, even with Fletcher reading the play. But I think Garrett/Jones is to prideful to bring it in to their building, which is fine by me.

The second is a particular play (zone read). I think this will die out quickly, if it hasn't already. I don't know the specific stats but I think we maybe did it 3 times in the last 3 games. Griffin is an excellent ball handler, and decision maker, so he is good at it. But defenses are quick, and once they know where the ball is going they converge quickly so that the zone read tends to get snuffed out for minimal gain.

Basically, the pistol gives you a half second to second edge against the defense, which a qb can exploit with[LIST][*]a quick pass out to the edge if the corners are creeping in[*]a slant in the middle of the field if the LB's are stacking the box[*]a handoff, if the lbs are dropping into coverage[/LIST]That is something most offensive coordinators will love. On the other hand, the zone-read from out of the pistol uses that half second edge as an opportunity for Griffin to make a play with his natural (and amazing) speed to the corner.

The zone read playcall can't last because Griffin will slow down, and he will get hurt, the pistol formation will last, because oc's and qb's will find ways to take advantage of the defensive hesitation.[/quote]

Agreed . . . this is how i look at it . . . what i don't understand is why everyone is saying the pistol formation puts a QB at further risk . . . i understand what the thinking is around the option plays and how that may add an extra risk, but the pistol formation itself would, IMO actually add a tiny bit of extra time, therefore a tiny bit of extra protection . . . isn't the pistol formation really just an i-formation or a pro-formation with the qb 3 - 4 yards deep instead of under center??

Re: The Future is Here: The NFL and the Pistol Offense
 

I dunno, I think they are using the right plays now, but it looks to be constantly changing also.

Re: The Future is Here: The NFL and the Pistol Offense
 

So if QB keeps aren't central to the pistol's effectiveness and it provides an insurmountable advantage for the offense, we should absolutely see P Manning and Brady run it next season, yes?

Re: The Future is Here: The NFL and the Pistol Offense
 

[quote=The Goat;980650]So if QB keeps aren't central to the pistol's effectiveness and it provides an insurmountable advantage for the offense, we should absolutely see P Manning and Brady run it next season, yes?[/quote]

:doh:

Re: The Future is Here: The NFL and the Pistol Offense
 

[quote=Chico23231;980654]:doh:[/quote]

That's mighty intelligent if I do say...

Re: The Future is Here: The NFL and the Pistol Offense
 

[quote=The Goat;980650]So if QB keeps aren't central to the pistol's effectiveness and it provides an insurmountable advantage for the offense, we should absolutely see P Manning and Brady run it next season, yes?[/quote]

Of course not. That would stupid. Teams are built differently and thus NFL teams will always run what works best for each individual team.
Who ever said the Pistol offense provides an "insurmountable advantage"?
Are you making shit up again?

Re: The Future is Here: The NFL and the Pistol Offense
 

[quote=The Goat;980650]So if QB keeps aren't central to the pistol's effectiveness and it provides an insurmountable advantage for the offense, we should absolutely see P Manning and Brady run it next season, yes?[/quote]

Big Ben operated out of the pistol almost all night a couple years ago against the Ravens when he had a busted up ankle.

The read option on the other hand is a different story.

Re: The Future is Here: The NFL and the Pistol Offense
 

[quote=Mattyk;980665][B]Big Ben operated out of the pistol almost all night a couple years ago against the Ravens when he had a busted up ankle. [/B]

The read option on the other hand is a different story.[/quote]

He still uses it too right?

Re: The Future is Here: The NFL and the Pistol Offense
 

[quote=The Goat;980667]He still uses it too right?[/quote]

I haven't noticed honestly

Re: The Future is Here: The NFL and the Pistol Offense
 

[quote=The Goat;980667]He still uses it too right?[/quote]

i believe so . . . yes . . . as do a few others, but not to the extent the redskins do . . . it's simply takes the advantages of the shotgun formation and other normal like the i or the pro formations and combines them into one . . .

Re: The Future is Here: The NFL and the Pistol Offense
 

[quote=Defensewins;980657]Of course not. That would stupid. Teams are built differently and thus NFL teams will always run what works best for each individual team.
Who ever said the Pistol offense provides an "insurmountable advantage"?
Are you making shit up again?[/quote]

I'm simply asking for some substantive explanation. There's nothing you've said I hadn't already heard/read at least a dozen times.

If the pistol doesn't give the offense a tangible, reliable advantage (what I would call insurmountable), why would we use it as our base as Lotus said?

On the flip side, if it does provide that advantage why wouldn't the other super smart QBs, namely Manning and Brady, begin using it next year?

Re: The Future is Here: The NFL and the Pistol Offense
 

[quote=The Goat;980650]So if QB keeps aren't central to the pistol's effectiveness and it provides an insurmountable advantage for the offense, we should absolutely see P Manning and Brady run it next season, yes?[/quote]

I don't think successful QB's necessary will change their style that has been successful for them over the past 13 years, but I especially wouldn't be surprised to see PManning use it. With his ability to read and sway defenses even from behind center, I imagine he would be like an grand symphony conductor moving TE's and FB's in and out of a diamond or pistol formation.

Again, the shotgun was an evolution that many coaches didn't like, simply because it created a less sure passing of the ball from the center to the qb, but now I don't think there is a team in the league that doesn't use it to some extent.

I would be surprised if the pistol doesn't become at least an option in every team's playbook over the next few years

Re: The Future is Here: The NFL and the Pistol Offense
 

[quote=The Goat;980673]I'm simply asking for some substantive explanation. There's nothing you've said I hadn't already heard/read at least a dozen times.

If the pistol doesn't give the offense a tangible, reliable advantage (what I would call insurmountable), why would we use it as our base as Lotus said?

On the flip side, if it does provide that advantage why wouldn't the other super smart QBs, namely Manning and Brady, begin using it next year?[/quote]

Your whole post is really a pure BS argument. Nothing in the NFL gives an "insurmountable" offensive advantage, as they say Defense gets paid too.

As for the substantive explanation, I know the article expressed several rational points for the pistol being a sustainable effective formation for any NFL team. I know Defensewins and I put forward several as well, the fact that you don't acknowledge them makes them neither less substantive, nor less effective. The proof this year is in the stats that have our team leading the NFL in yards per attempt, and the fact that more teams are starting to use it, copycatting is a form of flattery in the NFL.

As to Lotus' point, we may use it as our base formation, specifically because our exceptionally talented qb is able to run it to a T. If he ran the shotgun perfectly, my guess is that would be our base. It's kind of a fitting the scheme to your personnel type thing.

Re: The Future is Here: The NFL and the Pistol Offense
 

[quote=The Goat;980673]I'm simply asking for some substantive explanation. There's nothing you've said I hadn't already heard/read at least a dozen times.

If the pistol doesn't give the offense a tangible, reliable advantage (what I would call insurmountable), why would we use it as our base as Lotus said?

On the flip side, if it does provide that advantage why wouldn't the other super smart QBs, namely Manning and Brady, begin using it next year?[/quote]


In 1982 the Redskins (Bugel and Gibbs) took a college play the "counter-trey" and introduced it into the NFL. They ran it until defenses learned how to defeat it and it did not work anymore. It took almost ten years and we won three super bowls with it. Many teams copied it but not all teams copied used it.
I am not by any means saying the Pistol will have that kind success but you keep using something it if it works.

There is nothing in football, scheme or formation that is insurmountable or gives you an insurmountable advantage. Everything can at some point be defeated or at least neutralized by the clever NFL defenses that are prepared with the knowledge, scheme and tools to defeat it.
We are using the pistol because we are winning and playing well in it, not because it affords us an insurmountable advantage Why change (fix) something it it ain't broke.

Re: The Future is Here: The NFL and the Pistol Offense
 

[quote=CRedskinsRule;980681]Your whole post is really a pure BS argument. Nothing in the NFL gives an "insurmountable" offensive advantage, as they say Defense gets paid too.

As for the substantive explanation, I know the article expressed several rational points for the pistol being a sustainable effective formation for any NFL team. I know Defensewins and I put forward several as well, the fact that you don't acknowledge them makes them neither less substantive, nor less effective. The proof this year is in the stats that have our team leading the NFL in yards per attempt, and the fact that more teams are starting to use it, copycatting is a form of flattery in the NFL.

As to Lotus' point, we may use it as our base formation, specifically because our exceptionally talented qb is able to run it to a T. If he ran the shotgun perfectly, my guess is that would be our base. It's kind of a fitting the scheme to your personnel type thing.[/quote]

...and what's my argument again? Notice, apart from giving my opinion the pistol is a gimmick in my view unless it's central to a SB winning offense, I haven't made any other assessment. I've simply asked you to put the pistol in the context of pro football as opposed to the Washington Redskins. Honestly, I think you've already overreached.

Re: The Future is Here: The NFL and the Pistol Offense
 

[quote=Defensewins;980683]In 1982 the Redskins (Bugel and Gibbs) took a college play the "counter-trey" and introduced it into the NFL. They ran it until defenses learned how to defeat it and it did not work anymore. It took almost ten years and we won three super bowls with it. Many teams copied it but not all teams copied used it.
I am not by any means saying the Pistol will have that kind success but you keep using something it if it works.

There is nothing in football, scheme or formation that is insurmountable or gives you an insurmountable advantage. Everything can at some point be defeated or at least neutralized by the clever NFL defenses that are prepared with the knowledge, scheme and tools to defeat it.
We are using the pistol because we are winning and playing well in it, not because it affords us an insurmountable advantage Why change (fix) something it it ain't broke.[/quote]

Best post I've read from you.

Re: The Future is Here: The NFL and the Pistol Offense
 

Not that he'd join the Redskins, but maybe the Eagles, Bills, Jets or Panthers as an OC, since his offense is working right now in the NFL.


[url=http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2012/12/29/offensive-innovator-chris-ault-leaves-nevada-could-head-to-nfl/]Offensive innovator Chris Ault leaves Nevada, could head to NFL | ProFootballTalk[/url]

Re: The Future is Here: The NFL and the Pistol Offense
 

Not sure why you guys are debating with a guy who doesn't understand the difference between a formation and a play.

Re: The Future is Here: The NFL and the Pistol Offense
 

Wildcat is not an offensive philosophy where you line up with it every play -- it's where you have a RB at the normal QB spot to have an extra blocker. It's more a change of personnel.

Re: The Future is Here: The NFL and the Pistol Offense
 

Throwing and Running are now considered gimmicks in the NFL, not even trolling.

Re: The Future is Here: The NFL and the Pistol Offense
 

[quote=Evilgrin;980835]Throwing and Running are now considered gimmicks in the NFL, not even trolling.[/quote]Well, I remember when a Steeler fan I know was calling Peyton and Brady's offenses a "dink and dunk" play that anybody could do. Like it was a gimmick. Now that Rothlisberger is doing the some of the same thing under Haley...

If other teams start copying what we do, it won't be considered a "gimmick" for long.

Re: The Future is Here: The NFL and the Pistol Offense
 

[quote=HailGreen28;980838]Well, I remember when a Steeler fan I know was calling Peyton and Brady's offenses a "dink and dunk" play that anybody could do. Like it was a gimmick. Now that Rothlisberger is doing the some of the same thing under Haley...

If other teams start copying what we do, it won't be considered a "gimmick" for long.[/quote]

As someone pointed out, formations and plays are different things. The run and shoot has come and gone a lot also, works great for Brady.

Re: The Future is Here: The NFL and the Pistol Offense
 

[quote=The Goat;980695]Best post I've read from you.[/quote]

Yet, the best one I've read from you.

Re: The Future is Here: The NFL and the Pistol Offense
 

[quote=SkinsGuru;980633]Agreed . . . this is how i look at it . . . what i don't understand is why everyone is saying the pistol formation puts a QB at further risk . . . i understand what the thinking is around the option plays and how that may add an extra risk, but the pistol formation itself would, IMO actually add a tiny bit of extra time, therefore a tiny bit of extra protection . . .[B] isn't the pistol formation really just an i-formation or a pro-formation with the qb 3 - 4 yards deep instead of under center??[/B][/quote]

That's certainly one good way to look at it.

I prefer to consider the pistol as a marriage between the old single wing and the modern passing game.

I wonder how and if they will incorporate zone read plays in Madden

Re: The Future is Here: The NFL and the Pistol Offense
 

[quote=hooskins;982777]I wonder how and if they will incorporate zone read plays in Madden[/quote]

They'll have to actually let you decide to hand it off or not, like how they do it in NCAA. Not sure why they don't already let you do that. There are read option plays in there, but it's not a true "option" as you have to just run the play as is.

It will be cool to see the pistol in there too.

Re: The Future is Here: The NFL and the Pistol Offense
 

The best line in the whole article is that [U]Griffin almost always makes the correct read[/U]. He is effectively neutering the best defensive ends in the league, whom are left unblocked, letting them pick their poison. It's a beautiful thing when DeMarcus Ware bites on the handoff to Morris, only to helplessly watch Griffin pull the ball back and streak around the corner. With this QB, the Pistol isn't a gimmick, it's a paradigm shift that has the entire league on notice.

Re: The Future is Here: The NFL and the Pistol Offense
 

[quote=SouperMeister;983071]The best line in the whole article is that [U]Griffin almost always makes the correct read[/U]. He is effectively neutering the best defensive ends in the league, whom are left unblocked, letting them pick their poison. It's a beautiful thing when DeMarcus Ware bites on the handoff to Morris, only to helplessly watch Griffin pull the ball back and streak around the corner. With this QB, the Pistol isn't a gimmick, it's a paradigm shift that has the entire league on notice.[/quote]

I started wondering a couple weeks ago, when talk about a playoff game vs Seattle started, if their big corners can minimize the pistol's effectiveness. A few analysts have talked about it too, but I have no idea what to expect. I guess if they're expecting the keep and RG is still hobbled they could close fast enough to stop a first down.

Or maybe the pistol can be effective without RG being a threat to run necessarily. Maybe we'll find out this game?

Re: The Future is Here: The NFL and the Pistol Offense
 

[quote=The Goat;983126]I started wondering a couple weeks ago, when talk about a playoff game vs Seattle started, if their big corners can minimize the pistol's effectiveness. A few analysts have talked about it too, but I have no idea what to expect. I guess if they're expecting the keep and RG is still hobbled they could close fast enough to stop a first down.

Or maybe the pistol can be effective without RG being a threat to run necessarily. Maybe we'll find out this game?[/quote]

I still dont get why people talk about the Pistol as if its an offense and/or offensive concept in and of itself. There is way too much reading into it. The Pistol is nothing more than a formation. It can run the same concepts as the standard I-Formation as SkinsGuru said earlier. It was asked earlier why others dont run it. Because it depends on what you want to do on offense as to whether the Pistol formation is usable or not.

The reason why it helps RG3 and the Redskins. Because of the concepts they want to use. First, they run the ZBS which is based heavily on stretch running plays. Second, RG3 is way to good at play action to not want to use it and even feature it in the passing game. Third, They want to use the read option to keep defenses reading before reacting, ultimately slowing them down making the rest of the offense work better.

Starting with the first point, the ZBS. The stretch run from the Pistol allows RG3 to get the ball quicker to Morris than he could under center, allowing Morris to get on the stretch runs quicker. Morris can press the outside hard because he doesnt have to wait as long for the hand-off.

The second point, play action. RG3 does not read defenses as good as experienced QB's, and play action can be detrimental to young QB's because that keeps their head in the backfield and not on reading the defense. The Pistol allows RG3 to execute the play action and get his head around quicker because he is already 3 or 4 yards deep.

The third point, the read option. Going back to it being asked why everyone doesnt run the Pistol if its so special. Tebow and Cam can both run the read option very well. Then shouldnt they use the Pistol? No way, that would be a huge mistake. The reason why is due to the axis of the run itself. Tebow and Cam are tanks. They have the option to hand off to the RB who is going to stretch the outside. They specifically read the DE that is reacting to the RB. If the DE crashes inside, they hand off to the RB who goes outside. If the DE maintains the outside to force it inside, Tebow (Tank 1) and Cam (Tank 2) take it right up the middle. Now they can choose basically tackle to tackle if they see a hole, but they are a FB at that point.

That is a mistake with RG3, hence the pistol. In the shotgun, the QB is facing forward, the RB runs across his face to the sideline. In the Pistol, the QB is facing the sideline, and the RB goes straight ahead. This changes the axis of the play from RB outside/QB inside to the exact opposite. The Pistol read option is RB inside/QB outside. Which is what we need to do based on RG3 not being a tank, but a cheetah (who can also throw the ball). RG3 does not read the DE who is assigned to the RB, he reads the DE to his side. If the DE crashes, RG3 keeps and goes outside. If the DE maintains the edge, Morris takes it between the tackles. I would much rather have RG3 going outside since he has that speed, plus it has him headed towards the sidelines.

We can run the stretch run plays with the ZBS (which can be run from under center). We can run a pro style play action passing game (which can be run from under center). Or we can run the read option. All very easily out of the Pistol Formation. Throw in that the defense has to respect three offensive concepts without changing a single look (Remember, under Rex/Beck/McNabb even the good plays seemed telegraphed) and the Pistol suits what we do better than other formations.

Re: The Future is Here: The NFL and the Pistol Offense
 

[quote=The Goat;983126]I started wondering a couple weeks ago, when talk about a playoff game vs Seattle started, if their big corners can minimize the pistol's effectiveness. A few analysts have talked about it too, but I have no idea what to expect. I guess if they're expecting the keep and RG is still hobbled they could close fast enough to stop a first down.

[B]Or maybe the pistol can be effective without RG being a threat to run necessarily. [/B] Maybe we'll find out this game?[/quote]

To repeat: the pistol is a formation, not a play. You can run the pistol without the QB's EVER keeping the ball.

When people talking about RGIII making good reads, as described above, they are talking about a play, the read option, not a formation. The read option can be run from formations other than the pistol. The read option and the pistol are not the same thing.

I cannot understand why this concept is so difficult to understand.

[QUOTE=Mattyk;983059]They'll have to actually let you decide to hand it off or not, like how they do it in NCAA. Not sure why they don't already let you do that. There are read option plays in there, but it's not a true "option" as you have to just run the play as is.

It will be cool to see the pistol in there too.[/QUOTE]

But thats all presnap, right? It not like you hold onto A throughout the handoff for run and let go of it before handing if off for pass/keeper. That'd be cool. Like if you hold A just right, then the D bites or something.

And agreed about the pistol.

[QUOTE=Lotus;983134]To repeat: the pistol is a formation, not a play. You can run the pistol without the QB's EVER keeping the ball.

When people talking about RGIII making good reads, as described above, they are talking about a play, the read option, not a formation. The read option can be run from formations other than the pistol. The read option and the pistol are not the same thing.

I cannot understand why this concept is so difficult to understand.[/QUOTE]

Ah I get it! So you're saying the read option and pistol are the same thing?

Re: The Future is Here: The NFL and the Pistol Offense
 

[quote=hooskins;983140]But thats all presnap, right? It not like you hold onto A throughout the handoff for run and let go of it before handing if off for pass/keeper. That'd be cool. Like if you hold A just right, then the D bites or something.

And agreed about the pistol.[/quote]

That's kinda how it works. I've never really run the option offense but it does give you some control over handing it off vs not.

Re: The Future is Here: The NFL and the Pistol Offense
 

[quote=hooskins;983141]Ah I get it! So you're saying the read option and pistol are the same thing?[/quote]

Lol.

Re: The Future is Here: The NFL and the Pistol Offense
 

[quote=NC_Skins;980828]Not sure why you guys are debating with a guy who doesn't understand the difference between a formation and a play.[/quote]


I think this quote needs to be bumped for it's relevancy. Lot's of herp derp in this thread.

Re: The Future is Here: The NFL and the Pistol Offense
 

[quote=hooskins;983141]Ah I get it! So you're saying the read option and pistol are the same thing?[/quote]

Well, and both are simply synonyms for the wildcat - which is why MS is in hot pursuit of Tebow.

herp derp

Re: The Future is Here: The NFL and the Pistol Offense
 

it's better known as the crab claw offense in those parts

Re: The Future is Here: The NFL and the Pistol Offense
 

[quote=Lotus;983134]To repeat: the pistol is a formation, not a play. You can run the pistol without the QB's EVER keeping the ball.

When people talking about RGIII making good reads, as described above, they are talking about a play, the read option, not a formation. The read option can be run from formations other than the pistol. The read option and the pistol are not the same thing.

I cannot understand why this concept is so difficult to understand.[/quote]

Wow, just wow. Do you have invented arguments with your walls at home too lol? Nobody, including me, ever implied the pistol is a play rather than a formation. The forest through the trees issue here is whether it can be an effective formation (run, pass, pitch, toss) without the threat of the QB keeping the ball X percent of plays per game. I'm far from the only person asking this question. The analyst discussions have gone something like this:

The pistol's effectiveness is based on 1) keeping the defense back on its heels trying to diagnose the play and 2) quicker development. If Seattle's corners can effectively crash from the outside to stop major gains on the keeps, then we're limited to pass, hand-off, or pitch in a loaded backfield. The defense already has the luxury of stacking the box, and now we're seeing defenses come with heavy blitzes too. You've seen this on a few occasions where RG looks to pass out of the pistol. Unless he finds a target immediately open the pocket collapses around him. When he was in top form he could often escape and even turn it into a positive gain. Last week was a different story. He took a sack out of the pistol while trying to pass, and on another play like it near the goal line he got hurried and threw into coverage, luckily avoiding an INT. Passing out of pistol hasn't looked terribly effective to you, has it?

So again, there's absolutely no confusion what the pistol is. There's a debate whether it can be an effective formation if the defense finds a way to shut down RG on X number of designed keeps. It should be obvious that you give up a lot with the pistol. It forces you by its nature to load up the backfield, and therefor keeps you from putting more than two receivers out wide. Some d coordinators, to be sure, will see this as an opportunity. To highlight this, offenses who've had success with the pistol (Washington, Seattle, and SanFran to a lesser extent) have very mobile QBs who, once again, keep the ball X number of times. The Steelers on the other hand didn't find much success with it, though they tried using it to cover Ben's immobility when he played with injury.

It is why, IMO, we don't see, and won't see, elite pocket passers like Manning and Brady use it beyond a gimmick set, if at all.

Re: The Future is Here: The NFL and the Pistol Offense
 

Like I said. Lots of HERP DERP up in here.



[IMG]http://thefunnyway.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/11/Herp-a-Derp-Dance.jpg[/IMG]

Re: The Future is Here: The NFL and the Pistol Offense
 

[quote=The Goat;983328]Wow, just wow. Do you have invented arguments with your walls at home too lol? [B]Nobody, including me, ever implied the pistol is a play rather than a formation.[/B] The forest through the trees issue here is [B]whether it can be an effective formation (run, pass, pitch, toss) without the threat of the QB keeping the ball X percent of plays per game. [/B] I'm far from the only person asking this question. The analyst discussions have gone something like this:

The pistol's effectiveness is based on 1) keeping the defense back on its heels trying to diagnose the play and 2) quicker development. If Seattle's corners can effectively crash from the outside to stop major gains on the keeps, then we're limited to pass, hand-off, or pitch in a loaded backfield. The defense already has the luxury of stacking the box, and now we're seeing defenses come with heavy blitzes too. You've seen this on a few occasions where RG looks to pass out of the pistol. Unless he finds a target immediately open the pocket collapses around him. When he was in top form he could often escape and even turn it into a positive gain. Last week was a different story. He took a sack out of the pistol while trying to pass, and on another play like it near the goal line he got hurried and threw into coverage, luckily avoiding an INT. Passing out of pistol hasn't looked terribly effective to you, has it?

So again, there's absolutely no confusion what the pistol is. There's a debate whether it can be an effective formation if the defense finds a way to shut down RG on X number of designed keeps. It should be obvious that you give up a lot with the pistol. It forces you by its nature to load up the backfield, and therefor keeps you from putting more than two receivers out wide. Some d coordinators, to be sure, will see this as an opportunity. To highlight this, offenses who've had success with the pistol (Washington, Seattle, and SanFran to a lesser extent) have very mobile QBs who, once again, keep the ball X number of times. The Steelers on the other hand didn't find much success with it, though they tried using it to cover Ben's immobility when he played with injury.

It is why, IMO, we don't see, and won't see, elite pocket passers like Manning and Brady use it beyond a gimmick set, if at all.[/quote]

You have more than implied that the pistol is a play. You have presumed it in repeated posts, including the very post here.

For the last time, the pistol can be run without the QB EVER keeping the ball (I repeat, EVER). The pistol in no way prima facie presumes that the QB will keep the ball at any % above zero. Thus the concerns you expressed in your post are completely moot.

You can only make the argument that you make above if the pistol is a play - which it is not.

Goat, I have responded to your posts when others have ignored you in the hope that you will come around to seeing things clearly. Now I'm done.