Re: To Read Option, or Not
 

[quote=The Goat;998926]:doh:

I mean, the sheer ignorance of this statement is why I wonder/have wondered if you're a kid. Historical evidence, logic and basic common sense are completely at odds with this nonsense you continue to spout.

1. Running QBs by and large tend to break down faster than pocket passers, period. Again, how is it that you can be a football fan and not recognize this most simple of observations?

2. Statistically speaking (here's the logic angle) the more hits any player takes, but especially a QB much smaller than the defenders he faces, increases the risk of injury. Can really bad hits/injuries happen in the pocket? Of course, as everybody wants to bring Tom Brady into this debate. Guess what, it took Brady nearly 10 years to suffer a season ending injury, while RG suffered one in less than 10 months.

3. Common sense, son. Just plain common sense. You're opening up your franchise player to ferocious hits in the most brutal sport in the world.

The "perfect world" argument, of RG learning/knowing when to slide or drop to the turf or get out of bounce is as nonsensical as ignoring the above realities. Nobody's perfect to begin with. Add to it this is a sport where things happen in an instant, defenders appear from seemingly nowhere, and they're all gonna be head-hunting RG when he becomes a runner, it's hard for me to fathom why any Redskins/RG fan would prefer over exposing him. Wonders never cease...[/quote]

Running QB's tend to get hurt because they dont throw the ball away. Vick is considered a running QB, but honestly how many times was that a called run? Steve Young was a running QB, but how many times was that a called run. When RG3 has been injured, how many were called runs?

I say it has more to do with the O-line myself. Dont force them to scramble, and they wont. If you are afraid of a QB with legs, then a QB with legs shouldnt be drafted.

Brady and Peyton shouldnt even be in this conversation. They dont suffer a ton of injuries due to how quickly they read the defense and how quickly they get the ball out of their hands. In other words, they are great at avoiding hits. Had RG3 stepped out of bounds against the Ravens and Falcons, are we even having this discussion?

Re: To Read Option, or Not
 

Rg does have amazing fakes and that can still be utilized. Thing is the hit that did him in.. If you go back and look he was on his way down. Tough getting to the ground when you move like he does he looks like hes gonna twist his ankle the few times I saw him slide quickly because it's not like he didn't ever slide I saw him.

[QUOTE=Skins4L;999035]Rg does have amazing fakes and that can still be utilized. Thing is the hit that did him in.. If you go back and look he was on his way down. Tough getting to the ground when you move like he does he looks like hes gonna twist his ankle the few times I saw him slide quickly because it's not like he didn't ever slide I saw him.[/QUOTE]
he isn't Jason Campbell bad at sliding, his problem is more related to his competitive nature, on the Ngata play he could have cut outside and go out of bounds, but we would have had a longer 4th down. His competitive instinct took him inside to get a few more yards and Ngata got him at a bad angle. It has nothing to do with the zone read plays, or even pocket passing. Every bad hit came from Griffin not wanting to give up when he saw a sliver of opportunity, he will be successful if he can reset his internal gauge for success from college speed openings to pro speed openings, and only game experience will prove that one way or the other.

Re: To Read Option, or Not
 

[quote=The Goat;998926]:doh:

I mean, the sheer ignorance of this statement is why I wonder/have wondered if you're a kid. Historical evidence, logic and basic common sense are completely at odds with this nonsense you continue to spout.

1. Running QBs by and large tend to break down faster than pocket passers, period. Again, how is it that you can be a football fan and not recognize this most simple of observations?

2. Statistically speaking (here's the logic angle) the more hits any player takes, but especially a QB much smaller than the defenders he faces, increases the risk of injury. Can really bad hits/injuries happen in the pocket? Of course, as everybody wants to bring Tom Brady into this debate. Guess what, it took Brady nearly 10 years to suffer a season ending injury, while RG suffered one in less than 10 months.

3. Common sense, son. Just plain common sense. You're opening up your franchise player to ferocious hits in the most brutal sport in the world.

The "perfect world" argument, of RG learning/knowing when to slide or drop to the turf or get out of bounce is as nonsensical as ignoring the above realities. Nobody's perfect to begin with. Add to it this is a sport where things happen in an instant, defenders appear from seemingly nowhere, and they're all gonna be head-hunting RG when he becomes a runner, it's hard for me to fathom why any Redskins/RG fan would prefer over exposing him. Wonders never cease...[/quote]RG is a very good passer, but he will also be a running QB whether we run the read-option of not. Again as others have said many times, RG took the worst hits scrambling, not on the read-option.

So the question is, does the read-option increase the chance of RG taking vicious shots? Last season says that the confusion and hesitation inflicted on opposing defenses actually reduced the risk.

If you want to reduce RG's vulnerabilities as a running QB, you have to make him stop scrambling, extending plays, and running upfield on broken plays. That's why running QBs don't last, before and since the read-option was introduced to the NFL.

Re: To Read Option, or Not
 

[quote=SouperMeister;987413]Let's go for the breach of etiquette, and straight to the triple dog dare :silly:[/quote]

The dreaded triple dog dare.

Re: To Read Option, or Not
 

Honestly if we keep mixing it up, the defenses will continue to have no idea what's going on. We started to shred Seattle's defense early when RG3 had 1.5 legs, and only when he was hopping on one leg did they slow us down. Seattle had a full season of tape on us. If Kyle keeps dialing up new innovative schemes, not fully relying on one predictable set, I think we're fine. I'm fine with the read option.

As has been said the problem is RG3 himself, not our scheme. RG3's a smart guy, but I'm not sure he can ever completely dial down that competitive instinct. In the biggest of stages with high stakes => I'd wager he scrambles inside vs. stepping out 9 times out of 10. Hope he can change this.

Still excited about the years to come.

Re: To Read Option, or Not
 

I agree with the previous post(s) in regards to the read/option being a tool into bag, not the entire bag. My concern is that the healing period extends well into training camp and reduces the time spent on developing the other tools in the bag.

Re: To Read Option, or Not
 

[quote=SouperMeister;987152]I may be in the minority on this, but I do not believe Shanny should abandon the read option. By the middle of the season, Griffin was so good at reading defensive ends, that when he opted to keep the ball, he always seemed to get 10+ yards untouched before either sliding or scampering out of bounds. Fact of the matter, his concussion against Atlanta and his initial LCL injury against Baltimore came when a passing play broke down, and he tried to get too much out of his legs instead of throwing the ball away or sliding earlier. It's on Griffin to get better at protecting himself in those situations.

What became clear to me is that a healthy Griffin running read option out of the pistol paralyzes even the most dominant defensive ends, forcing them to read [I]then[/I] react. I strongly believe that if we run a normal pocket passing attack, Griffin will take more hits from the likes of JPP, Umenyiora, Trent Cole, and Demarcus Ware.[/quote]

It's still a huge risk to his overall health. The reason Griffin was injured last year was because he dove sideways with his legs in the air which enabled Haloti Ngata to slam into his leg and cause the initial stages of that knee injury. All RG3 has to do is either slide, get out of bounds, or dive forward. He can't be diving sideways.

Re: To Read Option, or Not
 

What is the ironic of this, Griffin's injuries tend to happen when he is scrambling to avoid sack. And when Griffin runs out from option plays, he never got hurt. Sure he did got hit hard sometimes but not the ones that cause injury.

Re: To Read Option, or Not
 

So basically, it's really not about the read option. It's about RG trying to protect himself better against getting hit when he runs. Against world-class athletes, trying to make a decision in a split second, easier said than done. Griffin made plenty of would-be rushers in the backfield, especially the Giants, look like they were stuck in mud. He ran right by other defenders when getting huge chunks of yardage downfield, like the big run on Minnesota. But sometimes he's going to get hit hard, even blindsided. It's the promise and curse of having a running QB instead of a statue. Not that QBs don't get mauled in the pocket too, if they hold on to the ball too long. (Jason Campbell, Ben Rothlisberger, etc.)

Re: To Read Option, or Not
 

NFL head coaches are already speaking to college defensive coordinators on how to stop the read option. I don't know how much longer the Shanahans plan to use it, but I think they should use it but not as much as last year and begin having RG3 operate out of a more traditional west coast offense more.

Re: To Read Option, or Not
 

Not only keep the read option, but expand it and tweak it.
More spread read-option from 3-4 WR sets.
Mix in a lil no-huddle.

Re: To Read Option, or Not
 

[quote=30gut;999159]Not only keep the read option, but expand it and tweak it.
More spread read-option from 3-4 WR sets.
Mix in a lil no-huddle.[/quote]

Agreed. And more read option play action passes.

To stop the read option defenses will send one guy take the QB and have another defender shadow the RB for the pitch option. We saw several teams (eg. Dallas, Baltimore) try this last year. This will leave defenders out of position for pass coverage. So when defenders set themselves to defend the read option run, it will not be difficult to go over their heads.

Re: To Read Option, or Not
 

The ravens showed in the super bowl, you knock the crap out of out him when they do the option play, whether he has the ball or not. It starts to get the QB rattled, more snaps to the RB, and as we saw when the QB is rattled or hit a lot, he doesn't play up to par with some bad throws, just like Kaepernick did.

Re: To Read Option, or Not
 

[quote=CultBrennan59;999182]The ravens showed in the super bowl, you knock the crap out of out him when they do the option play, whether he has the ball or not. It starts to get the QB rattled, more snaps to the RB, and as we saw when the QB is rattled or hit a lot, he doesn't play up to par with some bad throws, just like Kaepernick did.[/quote]

Until the 49ers OC realized that if a defense commits to stopping the read option, that other plays are completely open without putting your QB in harms way. Once the 49ers OC pulled his head out of his ass, the 49ers came charging back.

We run the quick pitch. Let the defense commit outside guys to the inside. A good OC will burn that, just like the 49ers OC burned the Ravens the entire second half.

Most of you against the read option think that we run it 85% of the time. It doesnt need to be done more than a couple of times a game to get the desired result.

Re: To Read Option, or Not
 

[quote=30gut;999159]Not only keep the read option, but expand it and tweak it.
More spread read-option from 3-4 WR sets.
Mix in a lil no-huddle.[/quote]

I like this idea. Turn it into a passing offense or use passing formations and then hit the defense with the option run.

Re: To Read Option, or Not
 

[quote=REDSKINS4ever;988353]Rg3 has to have learned. When a 350 pound NT crashes into your leg and kills your knee, then you begin to think of what can be done differently. Diving, sliding, and running out of bounds should be his focus when he's running out there with the [B][SIZE="4"]pigskin[/SIZE][/B].[/quote]


For a brief second, I saw the Team name!

Re: To Read Option, or Not
 

[quote=CRedskinsRule;999036]Every bad hit came from Griffin not wanting to give up when he saw a sliver of opportunity, he will be successful if he can reset his internal gauge for success from college speed openings to pro speed openings, and only game experience will prove that one way or the other.[/quote]

for sure.

Re: To Read Option, or Not
 

[quote=HailGreen28;999038]RG is a very good passer, but he will also be a running QB whether we run the read-option of not. Again as others have said many times, RG took the worst hits scrambling, not on the read-option.

So the question is, does the read-option increase the chance of RG taking vicious shots? Last season says that the confusion and hesitation inflicted on opposing defenses actually reduced the risk.

If you want to reduce RG's vulnerabilities as a running QB, you have to make him stop scrambling, extending plays, and running upfield on broken plays. [B]That's why running QBs don't last, before and since the read-option was introduced to the NFL.[/B][/quote]

So...what's your expectation for our boy?

Re: To Read Option, or Not
 

[quote=REDSKINS4ever;999101]NFL head coaches are already speaking to college defensive coordinators on how to stop the read option. I don't know how much longer the Shanahans plan to use it, but I think they should use it but not as much as last year and begin having RG3 operate out of a more traditional west coast offense more.[/quote]

This is my bottom line per hope/expectation. Trouble is: hard to get too "traditional" when your pass-protection looks like Swiss cheese, which ours did far too often last season. After the reg season I saw a stat RG took the highest percent of hits in the pocket among all QBs. And it's not all from the right side. Missed blocking assignments on the left, particularly involving our TEs and especially with curious presence of one Niles Paul on offense, led to several massive hits on RG. I remember commentators mention concussion on at least a few occasions.

Re: To Read Option, or Not
 

[quote=CultBrennan59;999182]The ravens showed in the super bowl, you knock the crap out of out him when they do the option play, whether he has the ball or not. It starts to get the QB rattled, more snaps to the RB, and as we saw when the QB is rattled or hit a lot, he doesn't play up to par with some bad throws, just like Kaepernick did.[/quote]I don't think this is an accurate account of the SB. Kaep passed for 302 and the team rushed for 182 yards.

Re: To Read Option, or Not
 

[quote=Lotus;999168]Agreed. And more read option play action passes.

To stop the read option defenses will send one guy take the QB and have another defender shadow the RB for the pitch option. We saw several teams (eg. Dallas, Baltimore) try this last year. This will leave defenders out of position for pass coverage. So when defenders set themselves to defend the read option run, it will not be difficult to go over their heads.[/quote]And the defender assigned to the QB is therefore (a) not playing coverage and (b) out of position to play the backside/cut-back play and (c) prone to bite on read action

The only way to truely even up the numbers against a zone read play is to replace the defender assigned to the QB, in college team usually do this by moving a S into the box and play only 1 deep FS which means (a) the team is playing man-to-man against the WRs which is a win for the offense or (b) the defense is playing some type of single post FS zone coverage, which makes it easier for the QB to read the coverages because the variety is narrowed down; especially when an offense is running up-tempo or no huddle

Re: To Read Option, or Not
 

[quote=30gut;999230]And the defender assigned to the QB is therefore (a) not playing coverage and (b) out of position to play the backside/cut-back play and (c) prone to bite on read action

The only way to truely even up the numbers against a zone read play is to replace the defender assigned to the QB, in college team usually do this by moving a S into the box and play only 1 deep FS which means (a) the team is playing man-to-man against the WRs which is a win for the offense or (b) the defense is playing some type of single post FS zone coverage, which makes it easier for the QB to read the coverages because the variety is narrowed down; especially when an offense is running up-tempo or no huddle[/quote]

Precisely.

Once again you and I are on the same page when it comes to offensive strategy.

[QUOTE=Lotus;999236]Precisely.

Once again you and I are on the same page when it comes to offensive strategy.[/QUOTE]

Count me in on the strategy party as well.

Re: To Read Option, or Not
 

[quote=SouperMeister;987152]I may be in the minority on this, but I do not believe Shanny should abandon the read option. By the middle of the season, Griffin was so good at reading defensive ends, that when he opted to keep the ball, he always seemed to get 10+ yards untouched before either sliding or scampering out of bounds. Fact of the matter, his concussion against Atlanta and his initial LCL injury against Baltimore came when a passing play broke down, and he tried to get too much out of his legs instead of throwing the ball away or sliding earlier. It's on Griffin to get better at protecting himself in those situations.

What became clear to me is that a healthy Griffin running read option out of the pistol paralyzes even the most dominant defensive ends, forcing them to read [I]then[/I] react. I strongly believe that if we run a normal pocket passing attack, Griffin will take more hits from the likes of JPP, Umenyiora, Trent Cole, and Demarcus Ware.[/quote]

It's the safest Offense for him to run. It was clear that pass protection was a weakness, so he's more vulnerable dropping back in a traditional set than he is running zone read or running their conventional plays out of the pistol. No brainier.

Re: To Read Option, or Not
 

When we played Seattle, they ran it on us and we couldn't stop it. The best teams in the NFC, Seattle and SF will both be running parts of this in their offense. We need to keep it in as well.

Re: To Read Option, or Not
 

[url=http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/9075120/mike-shanahan-wants-robert-griffin-iii-protect-better]Mike Shanahan wants Robert Griffin III to protect himself better - ESPN[/url]


[quote]PHOENIX -- The Washington Redskins don't know when Robert Griffin III will be ready to play again following offseason knee surgery, but whenever the quarterback does return to the field, coach Mike Shanahan would like to see him do a better job of protecting himself.

Mike Shanahan wants Robert Griffin III to take fewer big hits, such as this one by the Buccaneers' Mark Barron, next season.

"You can't take shots consistently," Shanahan said at the NFC coaches breakfast Wednesday morning at the NFL owners meetings.

Shanahan said he thinks more experience as a pocket passer and more practice throwing the ball away or sliding in situations that call for it will help Griffin improve in areas of his game he didn't have to worry about as a Heisman Trophy-winning superstar in college.[/quote]

Re: To Read Option, or Not
 

[quote=budw38;987191]I wouldn't scrap it , but wouldn't use it as often . upgrade the OL and we can line up and run downhill , not to mention better pass protection .[/quote]

IAWTP. The read option is a valulable tool, chucking it altogether would be foolhardy. Same time if its relied upon to much defenses will figure it out sooner rather than later and RG3's chances of injury will increase.

Re: To Read Option, or Not
 

[quote=30gut;999230]And the defender assigned to the QB is therefore (a) not playing coverage and (b) out of position to play the backside/cut-back play and (c) prone to bite on read action

The only way to truely even up the numbers against a zone read play is to replace the defender assigned to the QB, in college team usually do this by moving a S into the box and play only 1 deep FS which means (a) the team is playing man-to-man against the WRs which is a win for the offense or (b) the defense is playing some type of single post FS zone coverage, which makes it easier for the QB to read the coverages because the variety is narrowed down; especially when an offense is running up-tempo or no huddle[/quote]

Teams tried to at I safety back against us in the second half of the season and III burned them. Both Robinson long balls against the Eagles and Cowboys consecutively were the result. Teams did not try it again and actually moved to two deep safety play.

We are dangerous and our offense is different than those who tried to replicate it. By that I mean better.

Re: To Read Option, or Not
 

I agree, the knockoffs of our offense were.... well just that, knockoffs... and i seem to remember stopping seattle for almost a full half and they were lucky in the bits of success they had against us.. imo

Re: To Read Option, or Not
 

[quote=Meks;1004979]I agree, the knockoffs of our offense were.... well just that, knockoffs... and i seem to remember stopping seattle for almost a full half and they were lucky in the bits of success they had against us.. imo[/quote]

If III was healthy for the entire game I still believe we would have won and after that who knows.

Re: To Read Option, or Not
 

[quote=artmonkforhallofamein07;1004980]If III was healthy for the entire game I still believe we would have won and after that who knows.[/quote]

This. We completely dominated on offense side, even with Griffin's bum knee. Until the knee got worst after the fall in red zone.

Re: To Read Option, or Not
 

[quote=Bishop Hammer;1004919]IAWTP. The read option is a valulable tool, chucking it altogether would be foolhardy. Same time if its relied upon to much defenses will figure it out sooner rather than later and RG3's chances of injury will increase.[/quote]

The read option is a gimmick offense at this level. The right personnel and defensive scheme would stop it flat! A defense with a hybrid SS/LB on the outside(s) behind a 4 man line w/ends wide and 2 inside linebackers that fill is the answer (correct=single safety see-Texas in the 80's), personnel is the answer.
Griffin is best in a spread type of offense where he can scramble if needed, with up-tempo and plays called at the line of scrimmage. I forgot that would require the Shannys to relinquish all of the play calling and game mis-management. NEVERMIND

[QUOTE=whistler;1004987][b]The read option is a gimmick offense at this level.[/B] The right personnel and defensive scheme would stop it flat! A defense with a hybrid SS/LB on the outside(s) behind a 4 man line w/ends wide and 2 inside linebackers that fill is the answer (correct=single safety see-Texas in the 80's), personnel is the answer.
Griffin is best in a spread type of offense where he can scramble if needed, with up-tempo and plays called at the line of scrimmage. I forgot that would require the Shannys to relinquish all of the play calling and game mis-management. NEVERMIND[/QUOTE]

An NFC East Championship says you're wrong.

Re: To Read Option, or Not
 

[quote=whistler;1004987]The read option is a gimmick offense at this level. The right personnel and defensive scheme would stop it flat! [B]A defense with a hybrid SS/LB on the outside(s) behind a 4 man line w/ends wide and 2 inside linebackers that fill is the answer [/B](correct=single safety see-Texas in the 80's), personnel is the answer.
Griffin is best in a spread type of offense where he can scramble if needed, with up-tempo and plays called at the line of scrimmage. I forgot that would require the Shannys to relinquish all of the play calling and game mis-management. NEVERMIND[/quote]
Do you......surmise that the teams (and their combined staffs) we plagued with the read option all year somehow, were eluded by this revelation?

Re: To Read Option, or Not
 

RG3 and Cousins allow us to do both.. read option is something that will work but just have to fine tune the mentality they running this style means it has to wear your QB down..

Re: To Read Option, or Not
 

[quote=whistler;1004987]The read option is a gimmick offense at this level. The right personnel and defensive scheme would stop it flat! A defense with a hybrid SS/LB on the outside(s) behind a 4 man line w/ends wide and 2 inside linebackers that fill is the answer (correct=single safety see-Texas in the 80's), personnel is the answer.
Griffin is best in a spread type of offense where he can scramble if needed, with up-tempo and plays called at the line of scrimmage. I forgot that would require the Shannys to relinquish all of the play calling and game mis-management. NEVERMIND[/quote]


Yes, because a gimmick gives you the #1 rushing offense in the NFL AND one of the highest-rated passers in the league, in his rookie year.

Get used to it, we're a powerhouse on offense and will be for years. This isn't a gimmick that defenses can figure out...RGIII's incredible ball skills on fake hand-offs and the option plays isn't something you figure out, it's something you just have to hope you guess the right way on as a defender. There's nothing complex to decipher, this offense just forces the defense to react and take a blind guess about where the ball is and is going.

[YT]_zujLGT5DQc[/YT]

Re: To Read Option, or Not
 

[quote=whistler;1004987]The read option is a gimmick offense at this level. The right personnel and defensive scheme would stop it flat! A defense with a hybrid SS/LB on the outside(s) behind a 4 man line w/ends wide and 2 inside linebackers that fill is the answer (correct=single safety see-Texas in the 80's), personnel is the answer.
Griffin is best in a spread type of offense where he can scramble if needed, with up-tempo and plays called at the line of scrimmage. I forgot that would require the Shannys to relinquish all of the play calling and game mis-management. NEVERMIND[/quote]

You counter-action can be counter-acted with a good outside passing game and quality interior line play allowing for serious between the tackles yardage. The fact still remains that with the right personnel (smart qb who's fast, decisive one-cut RB and speed at WR) the read option is damn hard to defend. It eliminates one defender on the field straight away. The backside DE has to make a decision on what to do...there isn't a DE in the league who can scrape down the line AND provide containment. If you're QB reads it correct then the defense is playing catching right off the bat.

Re: To Read Option, or Not
 

And the biggest counter-argument is this...the read option has been around for years. The best coaches with the best players had the opportunity to figure this out and by the end of last year not many had any success in stopping the three teams featuring it.

Re: To Read Option, or Not
 

At one time the west coast offence was " a gimmick " . The two TE/One Back , a gimmick as was the " spread " . Talent , coaching and getting the breaks ( turnovers ) is what determines success . As long as we have RG3 , A. Morris and a solid OL , we will move the ball and score .