BeastMode54 Posted September 23, 2008 Posted September 23, 2008 The Pats looked stupid against the Fins with this package, as Ronnie Brown had 5 TD's. Oakland used it against us a few times and had big gains with McFadden on 2. I think this is something we should be looking out for. http://www.nfl.com/news/story;jsessionid=C...mp;confirm=true
BuffaloWings Posted September 23, 2008 Posted September 23, 2008 I think it's safe to say that the rest of the league will be ready for it within the next few weeks. It helps Miami, Oakland & whoever else has the personnel to run it in that it gives their opponents something else to think about, but the word is out now.
stevewin Posted September 23, 2008 Posted September 23, 2008 I think every one of the Pats* opponents for the rest of the year should run at least one play from this formation in their games - if for no other reason than to just mock them
GG Posted September 23, 2008 Posted September 23, 2008 What's funnier is the list of "unsung heroes" at the bottom. Personally, I don't see the Arkansas package having lasting power in the NFL, as it exposes the QBs to open hits in the playing field. Not a sound strategy for a 16-game season.
RJ (not THAT RJ) Posted September 23, 2008 Posted September 23, 2008 What's funnier is the list of "unsung heroes" at the bottom. Personally, I don't see the Arkansas package having lasting power in the NFL, as it exposes the QBs to open hits in the playing field. Not a sound strategy for a 16-game season. I agree. It is one thing to let your QB trot out wide a few times... and maybe when you are playing Arkansas-Little Rock he can even throw a block or two. In the NFL, not so much.... The Pats* were exposed for having old and slow linebackers by that formation. Other teams on the Miami schedule do not have that weakness. Once teams have film on this formation it will also be exposed, though it might work from time to time.
PIZ Posted September 23, 2008 Posted September 23, 2008 I hope the fins try it against the Bills. I would put Poz and Whitner on him and at the snap of the ball, slam him into the turf.
Albany,n.y. Posted September 23, 2008 Posted September 23, 2008 We used it in the Raiders game too. Fred Jackson was the QB.
Big Turk Posted September 25, 2008 Posted September 25, 2008 We used it in the Raiders game too. Fred Jackson was the QB. Yeah I noticed it too...I have never seen more RB's taking snaps lined up as the QB in one week in the NFL as I had that day...perhaps more times in 1 day than in my whole life watching the NFL...its as if all the offensive coordinators sat down together and drew some formations and then they all were excited to try them out their first game... It does create some interesting matchups, but for the most part you are looking at a 90% probability of a run, so it should be stopped pretty soon...
The Dean Posted September 25, 2008 Posted September 25, 2008 Yeah I noticed it too...I have never seen more RB's taking snaps lined up as the QB in one week in the NFL as I had that day...perhaps more times in 1 day than in my whole life watching the NFL...its as if all the offensive coordinators sat down together and drew some formations and then they all were excited to try them out their first game... It does create some interesting matchups, but for the most part you are looking at a 90% probability of a run, so it should be stopped pretty soon... It's a running play, with one fewer blocker (the QB) to help...right? Which leads me to a question (or several). The NFL protects the QB. In that situation, who is the QB? Is it the guy who wears the QB number, of the guy who takes the snap from center? Is the team's QB now open to any contact that is legal on other players? Is the RB taking the snap afforded the same protection as the QB usually is given? Are BOTH of them now covered by the invisible shield? Just curious.
Captain Hindsight Posted September 25, 2008 Posted September 25, 2008 I think every one of the Pats* opponents for the rest of the year should run at least one play from this formation in their games - if for no other reason than to just mock them
lets_go_bills Posted September 25, 2008 Posted September 25, 2008 That formation is an anomally. It won't happen often I don't think. I don't see how suddenly because the RB is taking the snap he suddenly becomes more of a threat. What was it called again? The Wild Hog, I think. Had the word hog in there I'm pretty sure.
Dan Posted September 25, 2008 Posted September 25, 2008 It's a running play, with one fewer blocker (the QB) to help...right? Which leads me to a question (or several). The NFL protects the QB. In that situation, who is the QB? Is it the guy who wears the QB number, of the guy who takes the snap from center? Is the team's QB now open to any contact that is legal on other players? Is the RB taking the snap afforded the same protection as the QB usually is given? Are BOTH of them now covered by the invisible shield? Just curious. If the RB took the snap and stood back there trying to make a pass, then I would assume he's afforded the same invisible shield as a QB. However, once he takes off running, which is what they did, then he's fair game to be tackled like any player. Now it would be interesting if he took off running and just before being tackled he took a slide. Technically, that's be a penalty if he got hit, right? But as for the QB out there, I'd say he's fair game. And I'd line some up against him and knock the ever lovin crap out of him. I heard one of the talking heads this weekend say they called that formation the "kill the QB" formation. Because if you ever saw it, you ran a LB over and took out the team's QB.
dib Posted September 25, 2008 Posted September 25, 2008 Texas A and M tried it against the Hurricanes. Miami owned them If colleges can figure it out, pro defensive coordinators shouldnt have a problem
The Dean Posted September 25, 2008 Posted September 25, 2008 If the RB took the snap and stood back there trying to make a pass, then I would assume he's afforded the same invisible shield as a QB. However, once he takes off running, which is what they did, then he's fair game to be tackled like any player. Now it would be interesting if he took off running and just before being tackled he took a slide. Technically, that's be a penalty if he got hit, right? But as for the QB out there, I'd say he's fair game. And I'd line some up against him and knock the ever lovin crap out of him. I heard one of the talking heads this weekend say they called that formation the "kill the QB" formation. Because if you ever saw it, you ran a LB over and took out the team's QB. I agree with all of that, in theory. I, too would love to see a team put the QB out there to take a lickin'. But, I'm not convinced that the QB wouldn't still be afforded extra protection, by the refs, and I'm not entirely sure if that would be wrong. The QB has the communicator in his helmet, right. That doesn't change when he doesn't line up under center. If the QB pitches out to an RB, who passes the ball, is the QB then fair game, and the RB protected by the QB rules (sliding and such)? I'd like to see some controversial incidents out of that formation next week against San Diego, to let the NFL sort it out.
Recommended Posts