Hossage Posted July 21, 2010 Posted July 21, 2010 Football nomenclature varies, so please excuse my version. X is the split end who plays on the line. Tends to be the number one guy, also. Y is the deep threat who plays off the line Z is the slot who is quick and runs good routes. H is the halfback in a receiving position for my purposes. In a bigger package a fullback or tight end in a halfback position is often called an H-back. FL would be a wing back sort of guy in the classic sense of the position. A tight end, fullback, or utility back. A big receiver is the modern day fit. I submit that our z is Roscoe Parrish. Candidates for Y include Easley, Chad Simpson, Steve Johnson, and Felton Huggins. As FL or Z, Donald Jones fits the bill. He has explosive strength and power for a receiver. He is similar to Josh Reed.
boyst Posted July 21, 2010 Posted July 21, 2010 Who will be more succesful at FL, Freddy or Spiller? I have to think that they would be about the same. Freddy can do very good things and adapt to the play in actoin. Spiller should have a higher upside but I think that this year Freddy will be a better FL and pass catching due to his experience. I still would like to be able to put Evans in the Y even though he is our best WR. His strength is good enough he can battle through most physical coverages. Plus, he has a knack to get away with things or win the call. Our Z is Parrish and potentially having Johnson in that role with his big body. The problem is we have no one else to play on the line and take the X. I do not know enough about Easley to believe he could pull off our X position but why not through him in? Our QB situation will be a rotation every two or three weeks why not mix in some WR's?
Billy in 4C Posted July 21, 2010 Posted July 21, 2010 Football nomenclature varies, so please excuse my version. X is the split end who plays on the line. Tends to be the number one guy, also. Y is the deep threat who plays off the line Z is the slot who is quick and runs good routes. H is the halfback in a receiving position for my purposes. In a bigger package a fullback or tight end in a halfback position is often called an H-back. FL would be a wing back sort of guy in the classic sense of the position. A tight end, fullback, or utility back. A big receiver is the modern day fit. I submit that our z is Roscoe Parrish. Candidates for Y include Easley, Chad Simpson, Steve Johnson, and Felton Huggins. As FL or Z, Donald Jones fits the bill. He has explosive strength and power for a receiver. Chan says Spiller will be used like Reggie Bush/Percy Harvin = Z in 3 wide sets Backup Z/When Spiller isn't Z = Steve Johnson. Then Roscoe. Lee Evans should be used as a Y, but we don't have a true X, so Lee = X James Hardy, if healthy (always a big if) = Y. Steve Johnson is backup Y. Shawn Nelson = FL as he moves around in backfield, blocks, runs seams and outs HB is fairly interchangable between Feddy and Spiller. Marshawn can't catch.
Orton's Arm Posted July 21, 2010 Posted July 21, 2010 Football nomenclature varies, so please excuse my version. X is the split end who plays on the line. Tends to be the number one guy, also. Y is the deep threat who plays off the line Z is the slot who is quick and runs good routes. H is the halfback in a receiving position for my purposes. In a bigger package a fullback or tight end in a halfback position is often called an H-back. FL would be a wing back sort of guy in the classic sense of the position. A tight end, fullback, or utility back. A big receiver is the modern day fit. I submit that our z is Roscoe Parrish. Candidates for Y include Easley, Chad Simpson, Steve Johnson, and Felton Huggins. As FL or Z, Donald Jones fits the bill. He has explosive strength and power for a receiver. If I were coach, I'd strongly consider doing the following: X: either Steve Johnson or Easley or some other similar player. Y: Lee Evans. He was made for the Y position, and wouldn't be a great fit at X. I realize there's the temptation to plug him into X anyway due to the lack of alternatives. But that temptation should be firmly resisted. Z: As you noted, you want a guy who runs good routes. He should also have good hands. I'm not sure that Parrish lives up to either criterion. Instead I think you could go with a guy like Easley, Johnson, or even Hardy at this position; though Spiller could make the occasional appearance here as well. H: Spiller and Jackson are both good options here. I see Lynch as more of a power runner than a guy you'd want on the field in obvious passing situations. FL: Nelson
VABills Posted July 21, 2010 Posted July 21, 2010 X - don't have one Y -Evans Z - don't really have one. Reed was , but he's gone. H - Nelson FL - Spiller I disagree that a flanker is a big guy. TT ran the flanker spot to a tee. the question is who is going to step up and be our X and Z. Roscoe is more of our 4th Wr, weak side slot guy, who gets covered by a SS/LB who's off the line letting him run free without contact.
Cson76 Posted July 21, 2010 Posted July 21, 2010 X guy who lines up on the opposite side of the TE Y lines up off of the line on the same side as the TE Z slot receiver
K Gun Special Posted July 21, 2010 Posted July 21, 2010 Y is the tight end almost 100% time in offensive playbooks. Y is alwasy the tight end from a defensive perspective.
VABills Posted July 21, 2010 Posted July 21, 2010 Y is the tight end almost 100% time in offensive playbooks. Y is alwasy the tight end from a defensive perspective. No. X has the most responsibility and has the most diversity in routes. long, short, mid, and crossing. Y is typically working outside the hashmarks and off the line looking for speration. Z at times is the TE when he splits out, but no the Y is not a TE unless you're in a jumbo set.
K Gun Special Posted July 21, 2010 Posted July 21, 2010 No. X has the most responsibility and has the most diversity in routes. long, short, mid, and crossing. Y is typically working outside the hashmarks and off the line looking for speration. Z at times is the TE when he splits out, but no the Y is not a TE unless you're in a jumbo set. Nope. Y is almost always the TE. I played in west coast offense in college, and i was a TE, the Y. Many of my friends did too, the TE is the Y. I know some types of spread offenses that dont use the TE will assign Y to a WR. For reference http://www.mbbc.edu/download/Athletics/Phi...sing%20Game.pdf http://sports.espn.go.com/boston/nfl/colum...&id=5154116 http://www.chicagobears.com/news/NewsStory.asp?story_id=3357 http://wapedia.mobi/en/Tight_end http://www.nationalfootballpost.com/Tight-...ight-night.html Like i said, the Y is almost always the TE.
Hossage Posted July 21, 2010 Author Posted July 21, 2010 Y is the tight end almost 100% time in offensive playbooks. Y is always the tight end from a defensive perspective. I don't have a tight end listed. For what its worth, traditionally the tight end has been Y, but in the absence of a tight end, in a four receiver set, y would be as described. I purposely did not include tight end in this discussion. We know who our tight ends are.
Recommended Posts