A New Look Offense or the Same but Better?

[30gut]

Originally Posted by los panda

such as?

Wait, out of all the possible football discussion going on in this thread this is what you contribute?

If you want a list of all the teams that used the wishbone formation and don't use option your on your own with that one because the list would be ridiculously long.

There are countless football teams from pop warner to high school to college to NFL that use the wishbone formation and don't use option.

The reason?
The wishbone is a formation its not inherently used as an option offense as REDSKINSEVER suggested.

I can get you started with program where I used to coach the Arbutus Golden Knights and in the NFL the Green Bay Packers used wishbone and inverted wishbone.

-Cheers

[los panda]

Originally Posted by 30gut

Wait, out of all the possible football discussion going on in this thread this is what you contribute?

If you want a list of all the teams that used the wishbone formation and don't use option your on your own with that one because the list would be ridiculously long.

There are countless football teams from pop warner to high school to college to NFL that use the wishbone formation and don't use option.

The reason?
The wishbone is a formation its not inherently used as an option offense as REDSKINSEVER suggested.

I can get you started with program where I used to coach the Arbutus Golden Knights and in the NFL the Green Bay Packers used wishbone and inverted wishbone.

-Cheers

yes, this is what i'm bringing to the table, good honest football discussion.

so of the plenty/countless, the 2 teams referred used (not use?) the wishbone formation and don't use option. since they're countless, can you name plenty or even 1 that might be relevant? maybe plenty of teams run the single wing, but i'm not going to suggest that they are relevant and plentiful.

the wishbone was designed for the purpose of running the option, it sounds like you're saying otherwise.

[30gut]

Originally Posted by los panda

yes, this is what i'm bringing to the table, good honest football discussion.

so of the plenty/countless, the 2 teams referred used (not use?) the wishbone formation and don't use option. since they're countless, can you name plenty or even 1 that might be relevant? maybe plenty of teams run the single wing, but i'm not going to suggest that they are relevant and plentiful.

the wishbone was designed for the purpose of running the option, it sounds like you're saying otherwise.

Well, if that is all your bringing your answers are already found in my previous post:

Originally Posted by 30gut

Wait, out of all the possible football discussion going on in this thread this is what you contribute?

If you want a list of all the teams that used the wishbone formation and don't use option your on your own with that one because the list would be ridiculously long.

There are countless football teams from pop warner to high school to college to NFL that use the wishbone formation and don't use option.

The reason?
The wishbone is a formation its not inherently used as an option offense as REDSKINSEVER suggested.

I can get you started with program where I used to coach the Arbutus Golden Knights and in the NFL the Green Bay Packers(past 2 seasons) used wishbone and inverted wishbone.

-Cheers

Basically your list consists of every team that has used/uses a wishbone formation and not run the option from the formation.

Simple, logic tells you that the list is long.

[NC_Skins]

Is the off-season over yet? We are down to discussing the wishbone and option.



NEWSFLASH: Nobody runs the option in the NFL. It's pretty much all but disappeared in college as well.(navy being one of the few still using it)




ps. I'm still holding hope that the single wing offense makes a comeback!!

[los panda]

Originally Posted by los panda

since they're countless, can you name plenty or even 1 that might be relevant?

a simple "no" would have sufficed

[30gut]

Originally Posted by los panda

a simple "no" would have sufficed

A "no" wouldn't suffice because its not the truth and you know perfectly well that I've already mentioned 2 teams.

Its impossible to know or list every team from pop warner to highschool to college to the NFL that uses the wishbone formation and doesn't run the option.

It spurious reasoning to ask the for a list of teams when simple football logic tells the truth of my statement.
Teams use almost every formation over the course of a season, but you know what most teams don't do? Bingo, most teams don't run option.

Your question is a pointless and spurious as me asking you: to name some teams that use the wishbone formation to run the option?

-Obviously some teams do you use the wishbone formation to run option, I don't need a list of teams to know the football validity of that statement.

But to be clear ANY team that uses the wishbone formation and doesn't run the option from is relevant because that was the discussion myself andf REDSKINSEVER were having.
ANY team that uses the wishbone formation and doesn't run the option from the wishbone disproves REDSKINSEVER claim.

If my word isn't good enough here's a blurb:
Packers rocking the wishbone - NFC North Blog - ESPN
Packers rocking the wishbone @ 1:05 mark

You Tube

Originally Posted by Kevin Seifret

When they are clicking, the Green Bay Packers have one of the most explosive downfield passing games in the NFL. So you might not believe what their most effective personnel formation was in Sunday's 21-16 victory over the Philadelphia Eagles.

*8.7 yds per attempt up the middle Source: ESPN Stats & Information

The long-forgotten (at least in the NFL) three-back set.

That's right. According to ESPN Stats & Information, Packers rookie tailback James Starks averaged 7.6 yards on eight carries in either the wishbone or inverted wishbone formation, accounting for 61 of his 123 yards. He had 62 yards on his other 15 carries.

During the regular season, NFL teams ran the ball out of a three-back set 34 times. The Packers accounted for 20 of them, utilizing a preseason roster decision to carry three fullbacks on their 53-man roster.

Just in case you don't remember Aaron Rodgers wasn't running the option that day.

Once again, cheers-

[30gut]

Originally Posted by NC_Skins

We are down to discussing the wishbone and option.

NEWSFLASH: Nobody runs the option in the NFL. It's pretty much all but disappeared in college as well.(navy being one of the few still using it)

Heck, I wish we were discussing option football.
That was one of the aims of this thread to discuss and chronichle the Redskins exploration and possible implementation of Baylor's option concepts.
I've been updating this thread with zone-read (option) concepts for my own benefit, I wish there were more people willing to discuss it though...

Also, I wish we would all make an effort be more clear in our definitions. Although it might seem like semantics there are distinctions in the terms used that would avoid some of the conflict that is going on in this thread.

For example I'm guessing you're think 'QB pitch option' when you say 'Nobody runs the option in the NFL'.

But 'the option' is a blanket statement that covers numerous types of plays and concepts.

For example the Panthers and Bronco's do actually run the option.
They run the 'read option' the most popular play being the 'zone read'. (Which I've posted about several times in this thread)
And actually the Panthers and Broncos also use the 'traditional' QB pitch option too.
Heck, Mike Shanahan used to run the option with Jay Cutler @ 1:10 mark

You Tube

So, I gotta disagree with you when you say 'Nobody runs the option in the NFL' especially since all signs seem to point to the Redskins being one of the teams that will run some option this year.

[los panda]

i'm not sure that packers formation was even wishbone. i don't know of any teams that use the wishbone and run the option. i don't know of any teams that run the wishbone. i'm not going to post a clip of theisman getting retired and say that the redskins run the flea flicker offense. i'm not going to reference a team that did it decades ago or a team that doesn't even turn up in a google search (arbutus golden eagles for an arbutus golden knights search).

what was redskins4ever's claim?

[Lotus]

Originally Posted by 30gut

A "no" wouldn't suffice because its not the truth and you know perfectly well that I've already mentioned 2 teams.

Its impossible to know or list every team from pop warner to highschool to college to the NFL that uses the wishbone formation and doesn't run the option.

It spurious reasoning to ask the for a list of teams when simple football logic tells the truth of my statement.
Teams use almost every formation over the course of a season, but you know what most teams don't do? Bingo, most teams don't run option.

Your question is a pointless and spurious as me asking you: to name some teams that use the wishbone formation to run the option?

-Obviously some teams do you use the wishbone formation to run option, I don't need a list of teams to know the football validity of that statement.

But to be clear ANY team that uses the wishbone formation and doesn't run the option from is relevant because that was the discussion myself andf REDSKINSEVER were having.
ANY team that uses the wishbone formation and doesn't run the option from the wishbone disproves REDSKINSEVER claim.

If my word isn't good enough here's a blurb:
Packers rocking the wishbone - NFC North Blog - ESPN
Packers rocking the wishbone @ 1:05 mark

James Starks 2010 Highlights - YouTube

Just in case you don't remember Aaron Rodgers wasn't running the option that day.

Once again, cheers-

Excellent catch with the Pack's reverse wishbone.

You are correct - most people in this thread are using "option" to mean only a wishbone-style pitch option on the defensive end/linebacker and are missing things like zone-read and bootleg run/pass options. You have correctly stated that option plays are a bigger part of NFL offenses than people think. Heck, if we included option routes by receivers then many, if not most, NFL plays would be options. But I suppose in this thread we are talking about QB options only.

Personally I hope that we have Griffin pursue zone-read pass options. Such could simultaneously open up the running game and the passing game when used prudently. A small package of such plays would be all that is required to either keep defenses honest or, thinking bigger, bust some huge plays. Grif could threaten the corner with the run or whip it downfield if the safety/corner are crashing the run. And, if Grif hands off, Helu could be deadly if backside pursuit is paralyzed by the threat of Grif on the other side.

This would demand that Griffin do more reading of defenses than he did in college but he is the #2 overall pick dammit. When Shanny talked about an option game, I hope that this is what he means.

[30gut]

Originally Posted by Lotus

Personally I hope that we have Griffin pursue zone-read pass options. Such could simultaneously open up the running game and the passing game when used prudently. A small package of such plays would be all that is required to either keep defenses honest or, thinking bigger, bust some huge plays. Grif could threaten the corner with the run or whip it downfield if the safety/corner are crashing the run. And, if Grif hands off, Helu could be deadly if backside pursuit is paralyzed by the threat of Grif on the other side.

This would demand that Griffin do more reading of defenses than he did in college but he is the #2 overall pick dammit. When Shanny talked about an option game, I hope that this is what he means.

I agree.
At first I was hesitant to believe that Kyle would even add read option/zone read plays at all.
But, I've kinda been keeping my ear out for anything mention of zone read or option concepts.
The rhetoric from Mike Shanahan (that admittedly could be coachspeak) and the mentions of zone-read and option plays in practice from the local beat writers and the actual video of the zone-read and option in practice lead me to believe that at the very least their will be a package of read option plays in the offense.

These words from Mike Shanahan resonate with me:

Originally Posted by 30gut/Mike Shanahan

if it’s running the option, running the counter option, doing things that are not going to be the staple of your offense – that really dictate what defenses can do and can’t do

keeps defenses honest because they’ve just got to prepare, and it makes it a little bit easier to do other things. The more a quarterback can do, the better chance you have to be successful.”

Mike makes the same point Gruden made when talking to Tannehill about the benefits of the zone-read:

Originally Posted by Gruden

This read option combined with the WCO offense is just down right scary...no huddle offense..hey...it regulates the coverage and fronts a defense can play

To your last point, having a zone-read based series of plays could actual help Griffin read the defensive coverages because those plays could dictate/force defenses to play certain known coverages.

Originally Posted by 30gut

Gruden talks about the zone read + WCO concepts that could be possibilities for our offense with Griffin:
7:50-8:30

At a minimum what do you think a zone-read series of plays would consist of?
I'm think a base zone-read, a counter option/veer, then play action passes.
This article from smart football posted earlier talks about zone-read play action.

“A very wise coach once told me, ‘If you really want play-action, you better pull a guard’” — Andrew Luck and Robert Griffin III agree | Smart Football

I'm gonna follow up with an article about a base zone read and a counter/veer from that site.

[30gut]

Great article by Bucky Brooks that breaks down the QB keeper and the zone-read in the NFL by the Broncos:

Zone-read option leads to big results for Tebow, Broncos - NFL.com

In a league driven by the performance of the quarterback, the most successful coaches are adaptable and willing to cater their offensive systems to fit the skill set of the signal caller.

In Denver, John Fox and his coaching staff are undergoing a radical offensive makeover to maximize the talents of Tim Tebow. Part of the transformation includes featuring the zone-read option play that Tebow made famous at the University of Florida while winning two national championships and a Heisman Trophy.

Other teams (like the Panthers with Cam Newton and the Bills with Brad Smith) have certainly sprinkled some elements of the formation into their playbooks. However, no team has featured the play as prominently as the Broncos did in their 38-24 win over the Raiders.

To the surprise of traditionalists who have often dismissed the prospects of the zone-read succeeding in the league, the concept not only worked but also generated the kind of production that will lead others to explore the possibility of adding it to their respective playbooks.

Let's take a closer look at three ways the Broncos' zone-read produced big results against the Raiders:

Quarterback keeper

Tim Tebow 32 Yard Run (11/6/11) - YouTube
The most dangerous element of the zone-read is the quarterback keeper. A quarterback with explosive running skills can wreak havoc on the edges, and the play often puts him in isolated situations with defenders in space. If he is able to elude the first defender, he often has a lot of running room on the outside and it typically leads to huge gains.

Against Oakland, the Broncos were able to establish the threat of Tebow on the corner early in the game. On a play in the first quarter (right), the Broncos aligned in "Trips" -- three receivers on the right and the tight end on the backside of the shotgun formation. Tebow took the snap and read Jarvis Moss' (No. 94) while sticking the ball in McGahee's belly. When Moss took a flat angle to pursue the runner, Tebow pulled the ball out and raced around the corner for a 32-yard gain.

This was a pivotal play for the Broncos' offense because it forced the Raiders to pay close attention to the quarterback, which prevented defenders from aggressively pursuing runners on the zone run.

Inside zone

The inside zone is the complementary run to the quarterback keeper. The running back will cross the face of the quarterback while taking a direct path to the inside foot of the opposite offensive guard. His approach to the line of scrimmage is important because it forces linebackers to flow aggressively to the frontside, which creates better blocking angles for the offensive line. The front five is simply asked to latch onto a defender in their assigned area and push down the line of scrimmage. The runner reads the initial flow of the defense and bursts through the first available hole once he hits his landmark. This eliminates the chances of a negative run and also leads to the possibility of a big gain if one or two defenders fail to stay in their assigned gaps.

In looking at McGahee's 60-yard run at the end of the third quarter (right), the lack of gap discipline led to the big play. The Broncos aligned in an unbalanced "Trips" formation. McGahee was set to the right of the shotgun formation beside Tebow. At the snap, McGahee took a path to the inside foot of the left guard with Tebow riding the handoff while reading Kamerion Wimbley (No. 96) on the right. Wimbley stayed home, which prompted the quarteback to hand the ball off before carrying out his fake. The extended action of Tebow caused Darryl Blackstock (No. 56) to hesitate, leaving a huge hole for McGahee to sprint through on the way to a score.

Zone-read cutback

When both elements of the zone-read are working effectively, offensive coordinators will routinely call a designed cut back to take advantage of aggressive linebackers. The play design and execution are the same, but the path of the running back is changed to give him the opportunity to get to the backside quicker. Rather than aim for the inside foot of the opposite guard, he will take a downhill angle in the direction of the center to allow him to cut back immediately at the line of scrimmage.

In looking at McGahee's game-clinching 24-yard touchdown run (right), it was the cutback element that led to the big run. The Broncos aligned in a "Trey" formation with McGahee set to the left. He stepped in the direction of the center while Tebow continued to read Aaron Curry (No. 51) on the left. When Curry flew up the field to chase the quarterback, Tebow slipped the ball to McGahee, who immediately bends it back to the left to take advantage of an overaggressive Blackstock flying to the frontside to stop the inside zone. With the linebacker out of position, McGahee skated into the end zone untouched for his second score of the day.

Follow Bucky Brooks on Twitter @BuckyBrooks

[Lotus]

^ That Brooks article made me salivate. Replace Tebow/McGahee with Griffin/Helu and things look potentially devastating.

Originally Posted by 30gut

To your last point, having a zone-read based series of plays could actual help Griffin read the defensive coverages because those plays could dictate/force defenses to play certain known coverages.

That is an intelligent insight.

I like your idea of the counter/veer. I also like the idea of a zone-read triple option: (1) running back, (2) keeper, or (3) pass to wideout on QB's side or crossing route. We could run such a zone-read play three times and it could be different each time. Or we could low-high the QB's side with a TE short and a wideout deep, putting intense confusing pressure on the LB and CB, as part of the triple option.

If it were me, I would also be liberal in adding pure play action plays that looked like run option plays but were passes from the get-go. This would take advantage of Griffin's arm while also protecting him from injury (the specter of an injury makes me like the threat of a run by #10 perhaps more than an actual run, as long as the threat is established).

[30gut]

Playbook: Panthers 'counter' option
By Matt Bowen | National Football Post – Wed, 27 Jun, 2012 5:30 AM EDT

Playbook: Panthers 'counter' option | National Football Post

Option football does exist in the NFL when you have the personnel at the QB position to run the Read Option, Speed Option and the “Counter” Option. Today, I want to take a look back at the Saints-Panthers matchup from the 2011 season and breakdown Carolina’s option scheme with Cam Newton at QB...

[Lotus]

^ Good stuff 30 Gut.

[skinsfaninok]

Originally Posted by 30gut

Playbook: Panthers 'counter' option
By Matt Bowen | National Football Post – Wed, 27 Jun, 2012 5:30 AM EDT

Playbook: Panthers 'counter' option | National Football Post

With their QB I'm sure they can run any offense. Cam is about to take over the NFL