Darbsk Posted March 27 Share Posted March 27 15 hours ago, RaidersAreOne said: The only Welshman in the NFL and he’s going to sign with the Chiefs isn’t he?? It’s like fate is mocking me 😂😂 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hunter2_1 Posted March 27 Share Posted March 27 55 minutes ago, Darbsk said: I was thinking the same, maybe not some super complicated play, but a sweep kinda play where you have two RBs and the first draws the DE/LBs and passes to a second RB looping around into the outside channel. I don’t think the defence would be ready for that and it would be really easy to install and execute. Probably not a game breaker type play but may turn a 5 yard gain into 15 or 20. How often do you see a CB running down a WR on the slide lines ? A quick little pop pass to an inside runner and he’s away. TD Its easier said than done of course, and it would take time to become institutional like it is in rugby 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
adamq Posted March 27 Share Posted March 27 A rugby field is much wider than a football field, no? As someone else mentioned it seems like you'd just be running a triple option type of offense and that isn't going to work outside of a trick play here and there 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ryan_W Posted March 27 Share Posted March 27 feel bad for the defensive fines trying to catch a speedster Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OkeyDoke21 Posted March 27 Share Posted March 27 (edited) Are you guys just describing running the option in the NFL, with an RB/WR instead of the QB, or is it something else entirely? Edited March 27 by OkeyDoke21 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darbsk Posted March 27 Share Posted March 27 19 minutes ago, OkeyDoke21 said: Are you guys just describing running the option in the NFL, with an RB/WR instead of the QB, or is it something else entirely? Yeh, kind of, but with more separation and rather than a hand off essentially you’re passing laterally 5 or 10 yards into space. Also, I’m thinking both players start behind each other, maybe in an I formation and the deeper player runs a much wider arc so the defence steps in and the ball goes out away from the convergence. The difference really is that in an option play with the QB the defence knows the QB has an option and the DE crashes in or holds the edge whereas once a RB has the ball the D is not thinking option and usually simply making a beeline for the ball and ball carrier. I suppose you could run it with a running QB and RB too. Hopefully that makes sense! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hunter2_1 Posted March 27 Share Posted March 27 52 minutes ago, OkeyDoke21 said: Are you guys just describing running the option in the NFL, with an RB/WR instead of the QB, or is it something else entirely? Could foresee something like follow-routes, where they're just behind waiting for an inside lateral as the last defender commits. Just as an example 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RaidersAreOne Posted March 27 Share Posted March 27 15 hours ago, Darbsk said: The only Welshman in the NFL and he’s going to sign with the Chiefs isn’t he?? It’s like fate is mocking me 😂😂 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
11sanchez11 Posted March 27 Share Posted March 27 He's signing with KC Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
49erurtaza Posted March 27 Share Posted March 27 Going to be a kick return GOAT 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nabbs4u Posted March 28 Share Posted March 28 Damnit Andy! 🖕😎 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chiefer Posted March 28 Share Posted March 28 (edited) 45 minutes ago, 49erurtaza said: Going to be a kick return GOAT Yeah I think we found our primary kick returner Edited March 28 by Chiefer Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chiefs_5627 Posted March 28 Share Posted March 28 I figured he was 5'10" 175lbs or something but he's 6'3" 194lbs and runs a 4.44 👀 But man oh man, if he's brand new to the game I'm not expecting much at all. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nabbs4u Posted March 28 Share Posted March 28 1 hour ago, Chiefs_5627 said: I figured he was 5'10" 175lbs or something but he's 6'3" 194lbs and runs a 4.44 👀 But man oh man, if he's brand new to the game I'm not expecting much at all. If a KR, catch ball , Run Forrest Run! Anything else Andy can get out of him Gimmick Wise, is gravy. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tugboat Posted March 28 Share Posted March 28 20 hours ago, Chiefer said: Dude I’m so confused by the new rule, does it seem like a rugby style play? I think it's more like a Rugby-style play than the previous rules at least. It's going to be interesting, where i think some ST coordinators are really going to earn their bacon...being the earliest to figure out how to take advantage of some of the blocking options that will arise from having all these bodies right there moving together just out in front of the returner. 18 hours ago, Darbsk said: I was thinking the same, maybe not some super complicated play, but a sweep kinda play where you have two RBs and the first draws the DE/LBs and passes to a second RB looping around into the outside channel. I don’t think the defence would be ready for that and it would be really easy to install and execute. Probably not a game breaker type play but may turn a 5 yard gain into 15 or 20. I mean, it'd be easy to install because it basically just sounds like a modified lesser version of very HS level triple option concept. 😆 Maybe i'm misunderstanding your description, but are you not suggesting something basically like this? But less evolved, without the Dive option to help temporarily freeze some of the defensive front? Like these concepts are super common at lower levels. But they don't work against more disciplined and athletic defenses at higher levels. The biggest thing is like...you can accomplish more or less the same thing you're describing, by just having the QB toss the ball out there to the RB swinging out into the flat, where if they do it right, it's got the bonus of being a forward pass so if it glitches it's not a fumble and live ball for a loss or turnover. While also not luring the entire defense to come crashing down in that direction. 17 hours ago, Hunter2_1 said: How often do you see a CB running down a WR on the slide lines ? A quick little pop pass to an inside runner and he’s away. TD Its easier said than done of course, and it would take time to become institutional like it is in rugby So ya'll are suggesting a "quick little pop pass" back inside against the grain...over/through the pursuing defensive back? There's nothing to that which screams potential "catastrophically stupid looking turnover" to you? lol. 13 hours ago, adamq said: A rugby field is much wider than a football field, no? As someone else mentioned it seems like you'd just be running a triple option type of offense and that isn't going to work outside of a trick play here and there Yeah. Rugy pitch is more like a Canadian Football field in width, but even more. And honestly, you see a lot more formations and concepts that are at least closer to this idea there...but all of the forward motion rules are kind of more advantageous in the end and dominate play more anyway. Because the Foward Pass when legal, is far superior to the lateral. 5 hours ago, Hunter2_1 said: Could foresee something like follow-routes, where they're just behind waiting for an inside lateral as the last defender commits. Just as an example A couple things here... 1)A lot of these look like plays that would already be a solid 1st down in the NFL. Which...any smart coach will take that all day and live to fight another entire set of downs. As well as just the benefits of controlling the ball and the clock in doing so. Especially over the potential for a disastrous turnover. 2)It's really hard to set up this kind of "follow-route" concept without just drawing a bunch of extra defenders to them/their general area of the field. Formation rules and the "stop -> line up -> start" procedure of Football make it really hard to outnumber defenders that way. You move guys that way and you're dragging just as many defenders there. Which is why in Football where blocking is allowed and dominant, it makes more sense to simple have the lead guy "blocking" and just give the ball to the "follower" in the first place. Which is the concept that obviously dominates the league. By the time you've got a bunch of big bodies chasing plays down from the back side...tossing it back inside becomes incredibly risky, because you're doing it in heavy traffic. Where even if you make that toss and don't fumble, you're actually just giving up yards gained and moving the ball closer to more of the backpressure. 2 hours ago, RaidersAreOne said: I mean...if anyone can figure out what to do with him, it's probably Andy and the Chiefs. Smart choice for him to take that the second it was offered probably. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.