The A-11 Offense (All 11 Potentially Eligible)

[reddogblitz]

You break the system, and/or you hit him enough times and Brady becomes the "JAG" he actually is, which is why he belongs nowhere near a discussion of Joe Montana, Steve Young, Marino, John Elway or Jim Kelly(the greats I've seen so far)-->the more you hit those guys the better, not worse, they played. Brady does belong in Warren Moon/Terry Bradshaw/Phil Simms land, however, because all of them were system QBs who had success.

 

Come on, Joe Montana was not a "system" guy. He played for "the Genius" who developed the legendary cutting edge "West Coast Offense". The first 20 plays of the game were scripted and practiced in order. Once he got out of that system he was a first round playoff loser who got hit one too many times.

 

Anyway, in this you have less pass rushers that my QBs have to think about. You don't have any LBs unless you are planning on leaving one of my guys uncovered, or splitting coverage outside/zone and hoping your guys get to my QB before my WRs can stretch the field. That's the thing = I see this largely coming down to how much ground(space) my 6 WRs can create and work in 3 seconds-->more space = harder to cover vs. giving your guys 3 seconds to get to my QB.

 

The other thing is: who has outside contain? Is there an outside contain? With only 3 pass rushers, there's a hell of a lot of extra room on the outside. If my right TE/T can get a good cut block on his DE, then there's nothing stopping my QB from running at least 5 yards to the outside. Is there? Your DE have to work extra hard to rush but also contain. Oh, and draw plays would be devastating if nobody is covering in the middle of the field.

 

The team in white is playing so far back, they're playing right into Piedmont's hands. On the few plays in there when they did put pressure on the QB he made some bad passes. Look at the last play, they put heat on the QB, he runs around and makes a bad pass.

 

Also, I'd have my DBs crowd the line of scrimmage and put a chuck on the receivers to throw off their timing. A little bump and run. I'd also put 2 guys on 1 on side and another on the other side. They could blitz in untouched. That QB would have zero time and would get happy feet and make bad throws. Then they'd have to go into a punt formation for real and PUNT.

[2020 Our Year For Sure]

It sure is interesting, I had thought of four on the line before because that would be legal and create a lot of space (didn't know you could do 3). What is funny that it looks like a defense, so for that reason alone I would guess it could work kinda well. I would want a option type QB to get most of the snaps though and the 2 TEs would have to be big ones. It might be interesting to have a running back in that backfield, as well.

No doubt this would be pretty hard to defense against with the right personal. it would work pretty well against teams not using a swarm type Tampa D (since it was invented to contain the spread) IMO. Definitely a good option on 3rd or 4th and long and it might be cool to use in a punting situation just to confuse and bewilder.

I wonder why great football minds in the NFL don't use more off the wall formations IMO, a T(with 3 backs) would work pretty well against the way the Giants play (they just might be hard pressed to stop 3 fast backs with options) for instance and a strong I formation like we used in the days of OJ) would work against most Tampas (just look at how successful the other teams ran up the middle against the Bills last year, bad example I know but....). I think that some strong run type stuff has to be put out there now as most Ds are fast and swarm zone based, I think bowling them over is a good idea. Think about the Eletric co. running a sweep against the Bills now.

The idea is that the quarterbacks ARE the running backs, so when they have the ball, you don't know what they're going to do with it.

[OCinBuffalo]

Come on, Joe Montana was not a "system" guy. He played for "the Genius" who developed the legendary cutting edge "West Coast Offense". The first 20 plays of the game were scripted and practiced in order. Once he got out of that system he was a first round playoff loser who got hit one too many times.

Apparently you are talking about the Montana that was on the Chiefs? Because that other guy on the 49ers had to play against LT, and the Bears, got hit....A LOT, and kept on coming. Oh, and if you think what the Giants did to Brady was impressive, apparently you didn't watch much football in the 80's. Again, I refer you to the Bears, Giants, Redskins, Cowboys, Eagles defenses of that decade. They broke everybody's system, every Sunday, all the time. The HOFers on those teams are endless, most of them are still the top 1-3 at their position all time. Montana had to face them all, and he still consistently beat them. What happened to Brady happened to Montana every Sunday, but unlike Brady he found a way to win, because while he could play the system, he could also flat out play.

The team in white is playing so far back, they're playing right into Piedmont's hands. On the few plays in there when they did put pressure on the QB he made some bad passes. Look at the last play, they put heat on the QB, he runs around and makes a bad pass.

Agreed. I think you'd have to have a real running QB threat to beat that, and it appears they don't.

Also, I'd have my DBs crowd the line of scrimmage and put a chuck on the receivers to throw off their timing. A little bump and run. I'd also put 2 guys on 1 on side and another on the other side. They could blitz in untouched. That QB would have zero time and would get happy feet and make bad throws. Then they'd have to go into a punt formation for real and PUNT.

Yeah, but this is like the west coast offense on steroids. Bump and run is fine, but I'm still throwing the ball over your blitzer's head right after the bump. All I need is 2 seconds in that case. And, like I said, the minute I read the Blitz is on, I send my other QB in motion towards the sideline. Snap throw it to him and the ball is now at least 15 yards away from most of your team. At the very least I get 8 yards on that.

[Steely Dan]

That's some crazy stuff. thanks for linking that. I'm sorta suprised it seems to be pretty effective as well. You would think a simple base stay home defense, while droping your lb's maybe have a spy on the field would neutralize this offense. A team who could play contain defense would probably serve well against this kind of O. Seems they let the d crash in and it exposes some easy matchups to pick apart. A little gimmicky for my tastes. It'll be interesting to see if this new offense catches on, or is caught up to.

 

It's effective because it's new. I think it will be figured out pretty quickly.

[reddogblitz]

Apparently you are talking about the Montana that was on the Chiefs? Because that other guy on the 49ers had to play against LT, and the Bears, got hit....A LOT, and kept on coming. Oh, and if you think what the Giants did to Brady was impressive, apparently you didn't watch much football in the 80's. Again, I refer you to the Bears, Giants, Redskins, Cowboys, Eagles defenses of that decade. They broke everybody's system, every Sunday, all the time. The HOFers on those teams are endless, most of them are still the top 1-3 at their position all time. Montana had to face them all, and he still consistently beat them. What happened to Brady happened to Montana every Sunday, but unlike Brady he found a way to win, because while he could play the system, he could also flat out play.

 

I watched tons of football in the 60s, 70s, 80s, 90s, and 00s. I'm very familiar with the Cowboys "Doomsday Defense" and Doomsday Junior. And, the "Purple People Eaters". And, the "Fearsome Foursome". And who could ever forget the 85 Bears defense. Joe was good and he was tough I'll grant you that. But, he was on a great team. He had Jerry Rice, Dwight Clarke, Roger Craig, a HOF coach, etc. Once Joe left, the team didn't miss a beat and even went on to win another SB without him. Once he was no longer on such a great team, the results were less spectacular, that's all I'm saying.

 

Yeah, but this is like the west coast offense on steroids. Bump and run is fine, but I'm still throwing the ball over your blitzer's head right after the bump. All I need is 2 seconds in that case. And, like I said, the minute I read the Blitz is on, I send my other QB in motion towards the sideline. Snap throw it to him and the ball is now at least 15 yards away from most of your team. At the very least I get 8 yards on that.

 

Yeah but with only 3 guys up front blocking, your QB wouldn't even have 2 seconds. Plus, my guys blitzing on the edges would have instructions to go after and tackle the QB on their side wether he has the ball or not. Sort of like how Notre Dame figured out how to stop the Wishbone.

[bowery4]

The idea is that the quarterbacks ARE the running backs, so when they have the ball, you don't know what they're going to do with it.

 

yes I realize that but a real running QB like a Vick or Flutie was what I meant by rb (or a Lynch and dare I say it JP) and I understand the philosophy that you don't know what they are going to do, why do you think I don't? that is the reason 90% of offensive scheems work. The reason the Bills O looked like sh*t last year. The weakness is of course having a consistant running QB/RB type.

 

Also ND did stop the wishbone that way but it wouldn't in fact be legal to do it that way in todays NFL. IMO Some team with the right personal could use it against a zone type D with success today because of the over commitment that each player has to his place on the field. The reason it was successful in the first place was it opened up the field by forcing a consentration of defenders in one place and then flipping or throwing or running in another place (direction). In other words they don't know what you are going to do and they are overcommited to where they are. A wishbone could force a break up of the zone. If the players stay where the are commited to be they will get beat by not reacting to the offensive concentration.

 

I also think that a D has no option but to play this offence deep as they would get burned everytime they get beat. I agree that there is the weakness of 3 linemen but you can't expect every bump to work and dumping it off to a wide open guy is going to burn maybe 1 out of 3 times (which is really all you need). Also, it would be great to draw, off a blitz scheem with this. You need about 5 safety types to defend this well and consistanly. You would have to be in a prevent to insure you don't lose big yardage every 3-5 plays IMO. It looks like a prevent D so that is what you would have to use against it. Defense really has to mirror the offense to be effective. Not many Ds really have the personal to fight this without using the Punt or Kick off teamers. Coy Wire would be good at it. I wouldn't mind seeing a Bills team run this a bit if they got it down right (not so sure Trent would be the guy to do it though). Look what we did with the no-huddle 20 years ago. This would work in a no huddle, no time for the D to react. Total unexpected plays, cool. I really like it as a two minute formation, or a just throw it in to create unbalance sometimes thing. It creates space to play in.

 

I also think the running game should make a bit of a come back in the next year or two because of the force out rule. I really think it is a big change that not many people realize is going to change the pass game a bit back to the defenses favor. I really like that the Bills decieded to go back to the fullback for this reason and a few others (we are a cold weather team, our OL is not all great etc.....) IMO power running is the future, but I also think unperdictabilty is a great asset as well. I would love to see the I formation sweep (Jackson has the running style for it more than Marshawn though) or play action dump to the RB. I really hope Turk is an imaginative guy. I really don't think Ds are too fast to run against, I think they need to be run over more and misdirected. they are fast and they are light now a days you have to play against their strengths to make it a weakness.

[Pyrite Gal]

This is relevant for Bills football...

 

Trent and JP together on the field for every snap...everybody happy!

Given the presence of the WGR contingent having Trent and JP on the field every snap simply means everybody is pissed.

[Stenbar]

Given the presence of the WGR contingent having Trent and JP on the field every snap simply means everybody is pissed.

Havent even listened to one minute of the madness..I want to be surprised..LOL

[Pyrite Gal]

Havent even listened to one minute of the madness..I want to be surprised..LOL

Thetalk radio clowns and many of the professional arguers out there are not as much interested in proving they are right but the seem to desperately want to prove the other side wrong.

 

I think the thing that defines a true Bills fan is that even though they may be incredibly committed to rooting for and supporting (Edwards/Losman) this does not mean that they are rooting for (Edwards/Losman) to do badly or get killed because that would help their guy.

 

Football is interesting to me in part because it is the ultimate team sport. A key is that your starting 22 produces a result greater than the sum of 22 individual parts. When one is so invested in an individual one is willing to see the team do badly as long as it happens because his competitor for a position has screwed up, then the team concept is lost.