The-Hogs.net - Washington Football Discussion, Redskins to Commanders Era

*double*

There is a reason you don't run lateral in the Nfl. The speed of the defense will take you for a loss.

patrickg68 refuses to concede anything, and he wrote:...Another point I want to make is that you guys are thinking of the option as a gimmick play. It isn't. It is a complete offensive system, that has been as productive as any ever created. The goal of the option isn't to fool the defense, it is to out execute the defense.

Pat, the goal of any offense is to "outexecute" the defense. That kinda went without saying, brother. If it were doable, Martz would've tried it. He had the personnel at one point to make it happen if he had thought it was worth a shot. Apparently, he did not. It's ludicrous to say that any coach who doesn't build his team around a circus act is "gutless". What's next ? Does the third man in the option jump through a loop of flame ?

patrickg68 also wrote:The reason that some of the great option qbs are not qbs in the nfl is because their talents don't fit a pro style offense.

Boy, it's good to know that you're aware that there's such a thing as a "Pro Style Offense". Who runs those ? The "gutless" coaches ?
Maybe if Vince McMahon becomes a head coach one day, you'll get your wish. Until then...

Talk to anyone who coaches the option and tell them that the option is a "circus act." I guarantee you that they will tell you that the offense will work in the NFL. It is a sound offense, and any offense that is sound will work on any level. Dismissing the option offense like this reveals your true ignorance on the subject of football. You guys think that because you watch football every Sunday that you know something about football, but in reality, you know very little. Have any of you actually played the game? Have you studied it? Do you have anything intelligent to offer in a conversation about football? All I'm hearing is insults and crap fed to you from an equally ignorant media.

patrickg68 wrote:Talk to anyone who coaches the option and tell them that the option is a "circus act." I guarantee you that they will tell you that the offense will work in the NFL. It is a sound offense, and any offense that is sound will work on any level. Dismissing the option offense like this reveals your true ignorance on the subject of football. You guys think that because you watch football every Sunday that you know something about football, but in reality, you know very little. Have any of you actually played the game? Have you studied it? Do you have anything intelligent to offer in a conversation about football? All I'm hearing is insults and crap fed to you from an equally ignorant media.

Why didn't Switzer bench Troy and go get a option QB if it is such a great offensive scheme?? I can't even believe this is being debated. You will never see this system ran in the NFL.

patrickg68 wrote:Talk to anyone who coaches the option and tell them that the option is a "circus act." I guarantee you that they will tell you that the offense will work in the NFL. It is a sound offense, and any offense that is sound will work on any level. Dismissing the option offense like this reveals your true ignorance on the subject of football. You guys think that because you watch football every Sunday that you know something about football, but in reality, you know very little. Have any of you actually played the game? Have you studied it? Do you have anything intelligent to offer in a conversation about football? All I'm hearing is insults and crap fed to you from an equally ignorant media.

Would it shock you to learn that I'm a lead coach on a high school team ? Would you also be shocked to know that our team went 10-2, and went state ?

Pat dude, you have no idea what our football background is, so insulting us is actually the defintion of "ignorance".

Don't tell me to go talk to option coaches. You give me ONE quote, a link, anything to ANYONE who says the option will be succesful in the NFL. Until you do that, all you are doing is spouting garbage.

TC, I'm very impressed (but not schocked) to learn you are a coach. I have a lot of respect for high school coaches, whether they went 10-2 or 2-10. Do you mind if ask which state you coach in, and whether or not you run the option?

NY. No option. Not looking to draw attention to myself. It has less to do with me as it does the kids playing here in the program.
"Option" plays are generally run in the OCS (here in Orange County) when you are either up by plenty, or your third string is in in an obvious defeat and you want to showcase a receiver who may going on to bigger and better things.
In my opinion, you can't do that on a protracted basis. It's gimmicky, and kind of getting away from fundamentals. There's too many other people on your offensive team that never get looked at, and that's what high school is for, for some guys who want to go on.
I'm out of coaching now. Mostly because there was a younger guy who played for a competing program that usually won against ours, and it was considered a coup by the AD of the school. That was six years ago.
I'll be damned if I take it in the butt from a Dallas fan who says the option plays aren't run because coaches are "gutless". That's not why coaches don't run those plays. (And they are "plays", not "offenses".) They don't run them because it gets old real fast. Soon, you get figured for a "gimmicky" program, and you're just done.

check out www.sportsonly.com/boards/option. I asked whether or not the option would be successful in the NFL.

Your link doesn't work. Not that I would care what anyone on those boards have to say anyway...

It's ok to have a contrarian view on a message board, but it's usually best to adopt one that has some basis in reality and can be backed up with facts.

Since you claim to be a Cowboys fan, please oh option guru explain to me the blocking assignments against the Cowboys defense.

I would love to hear how your plan to have an o-lineman seal against a quick mlb like Nguyen or prevent your rb from being decapitated from an unblocked Williams or Woodsen.

I'll await with baited breath.

I know the link doesn't work, but I think that if you type it in it will.

I have already said how you would block a quick mlb. Establish the fullback, use misdirection, and use different blocking schemes. Against the option, he will be responsible for the fullback anyways, so if you can establish the fullback as a threat to pick up 4 or 5 yards a carry, then getting out to him shouldn't be much of a problem. By the way, how do you suppose linemen seal quick middle linebackers like Nguyen on conventional running plays like isos, powers, and tosses? The option isn't really any different, except the linemen have the advantage of the linebackers having to worry about the fullback as well as the option to the outside.

Many times when you run the option, the FS will be unblocked. But the option really puts him in a bind. He has to fill on the option, but also has to stay deep to prevent a deep pass.

The beauty of the option is in its simplicity. You run a handful of plays well rather than many plays not so well. Every play serves a purpose. You anticipate certain adjustments by the defense, and then attack them. You spend more time working on the fundamentals of the game. Football is still a game that comes down to who blocks and tackles the best, not who has the fanciest schemes.

gambit187 wrote:You guys will be in for a suprise this year, Cause Quincy has had a full offseason to work with Payton and learn the playbook. and two words

DREW HENSON

He is getting ready to take over. You just watch and wait

That my friend it the funniest thing I ever heard, two words HENSON, you do realize this is football not baseball ??
Parcells is building a great minor league pitching squad, Quincy is horrible, Henson is even worse if that could be possible.

The option is not used in the NFL due to one fact - speed.

In the college ranks it is easier to move to the outside and establish blocking because most college linebackers don't run a 4.4 to 4.6 40. Most linemen aren't as strong, maybe a team has one guy on it that can make it on the pro level, but most likely not.

You have to keep in mind - out of all of the 200+ colleges in America... there is only a very small percentage that get to the pros. 32 teams times 7 picks... plus the compensatories.
224 plus what ever.

Figuring most college teams have 80-100 players... 16000 players?

Most people can't run a sweep in the pros on a constant basis cause the defense is so fast and can string it out for a no gain or a loss.

I just don't think the option is viable once you hit the pros - heck it isn't really that viable against large college teams with several good defensive players.

If an NFL team were built to be a true option team, they would run into significant problems, much like the ones Nebraska ran into the past couple of years.

If a team were running the option, presumably you would have option quarterbacks on your roster, such as an Eric Crouch. The team would have a handful of good running backs, some good run-blocking lineman and tight ends, but really no good wide receivers, because in the option, you only really pass on play-action when the defense gets too anxious.

Even if this team ran the option well against NFL defenses (which I doubt, but let's say they did), they can only do just that, run the option. If they get down in the fourth quarter, or have to run a two-minute drill, they are not going to be able to throw the ball. If you have an option team, pro-style quarterbacks are not going to come play for you, and neither are good wide receivers. Even if Eric Crouch could run the option against the NFL, he certainly can't pass the ball against it.

While I still maintain that NFL defenses are too fast, smart, disciplined and well-coached to ever be dominated by the option, maybe this will tell you why no team will run the option. It limits them from doing the things that are essential to be successful. Teams like Nebraska are moving away from the option because the top players don't want to come play for them, and teams like Navy (who use the offense because of their inferior talent) that have relative success running the option, can never be really successful because they can't throw the ball when they need to.

By the way, I got your link to work. The problem was you put an extra period on the end. I will post the response here:

"1. yes, i do believe the option would work in the NFL, especially the double slot offense that Paul Johnson runs at Navy...especially for the fact that the ball would always be in the middle of the field becuase of the hash marks....they would be able to run to both sides of the field instead of wide or back into the boundary, so yes, i feel that you could run the option
2. You run the option to equalize the playing field with teams who have BETTER talent than what you've got. If your better talented and run the option, you will KILL the other team. Trust me on this one buddy..."

I don't know who this guy is, but I will assume he is a high school or college coach (fair?). First of all, I'm not saying the option is a "gimmicky" offense for high school or college. It's been proven to work in those venues; I just don't think it will in the NFL.

Secondly, this post did not address our big point, which is that the NFL defenses are too fast for the option to thrive. So this guy didn't really bring anything new to the table.

Obviously you aren't going to be convinced that the option won't work, and I know I'm not going to be convinced that it will, so I really hope one day some nutcase brings it into the NFL, and then we will finally know the answer to this burning question...

Well, I asked a follow up question on Pat's message board, and here is the response:

"Remember you are talking about the NFL= No Fun League...also unfortunately, it is a BUSINESS, they have to put people in the stands, and throwing the ball 40 times a game (chiefs, rams, 49er's, etc, etc,) puts people in the stands....as for the defenses being too fast, and disciplined, i think on the contrary, i don't think the majority of the defenses in the NFL ARE disciplined..hell, half the guys don't even wear thigh pads or knee pads...most teams play the majority of the game with 5 sometimes 6 DB'S now...if you rant the option at them the would be FORCED to change their defensive structure..i remember sitting about 4 years ago at the Univeristy of SOuth Carolina coaches clinic and asking then defensive co-ordinator Charlie Strong (an advocate of the 3-5-3 defense) how they would defense the option, and drew up some different option schemes...i'm telling you, an option game would dissect that defense..and he finally said " well, its not designed to stop the option"...so there ya go, by going to the option you would be forcing teams to something that they aren't really prepared to be doing.....and if you remember, when Barry Switzer took over at Dallas, a smartass reporter once asked him if he was going to run the wishbone at Dallas and even Barry thought that the option game would be hard to stop on the Pro level because of the hashmarks....just look at what you would eliminate from the defense:
1. the zone blitz - on what down could you run it?
2. Man to Man coverage- man vs. a option team is NOT good
3. Wide line splits to stretch the 3 and 4 man fronts - this would create vertical seams and force teams out of their 5 and 6 man secondary alignments.
4. You wouldnn't need linemen 350 lbs. because your not running a Zone Scheme.....
5. You would eliminate Double coverage on your best WR because of option responsibilities.

These are just my thoughts, but i've listened to enough pro coaches in my career to know that THEY believe it could be run very effectively but don't do it because of the Business side of it..."

He makes some good points, but I still don't think it would work, for all the reasons I've already said. If it had a chance, someone would have tried it by now. Nonetheless, it is all very interesintg...

I think that speed is relative. Yes the defensive players are faster on the NFL level, but so are the offensive players. Teams don't run sweeps much anymore, but the option has one very important advantage over the sweep. It involves the fullback dive. The defense can't just fly to the outside as soon as the qb opens up. They need to worry about the dive.

Also, Steve Spurrier III, you mentioned Nebraska. I think that they are moving away from the option due to recruiting problems, not because the scheme doesn't work. I do think that they did have some deficiencies in their offense. They haven't had a threat at fullback for several years. They also didn't have much of a misdirection game. Their entire option package was really based on the speed option. They didn't really do much to try and slow the linebackers from flying to the outside.

The two minute drill is just about the only weakness in an option offense. You just don't have much time to spend on the dropback passing game. This means that the option offense will struggle when they are in predictable passing situations. However, this does not mean that the option is not a great passing offense. It limits coverages and assures that the majority of the time you will be facing single coverage, thus resulting in many big play opportunities.

patrickg68 wrote:Also, Steve Spurrier III, you mentioned Nebraska. I think that they are moving away from the option due to recruiting problems, not because the scheme doesn't work.

That's absolutley right. My point is that in the NFL, teams might have problems attracting top free agents for the same reasons Nebraska is struggling at attracting top high school atheletes...

But in the NFL, you don't have to rely solely on recruiting free agents. I think that the only position you would have trouble with would be wide receiver. But even then, you would only be missing out on the top flight receivers and an option offense doesn't need them.

If an option team will only miss out on top wide recievers, why is Nebraska moving away from the offense? Shouldn't they too only be missing out on wide recievers, who aren't even essential to the option offense?

Obviously NFL teams can build through the draft, but a top football school like Nebraska should have a better chance of recruiting a top player than an NFL team would have drafting an equal player (relative, of course). If that is true, then why is Nebraska's situation worse than an NFL franchise's?

One point that you have to take into account is that Nebraska has pretty much gone downhill since Tom Osborne retired. If he was still there, they probably would still be one of the most talented teams in the country, and they would still be destroying people running the option. The difference between college and the NFL is choices. College athletes have countless choices. At the very best NFL players have only 32 choices, but in reality, its probably at most a quarter of the teams. And the bottom line is that money takes precedence over systems. Whoever puts up the most money will sign the player.

It was just a few short years ago that Nebraska was in the Championship game with their Heisman winning option quarterback Eric Crouch. Sure, Nebraska has gone downhill since Osbourne left, but they haven't exactly fallen off the map.

Even with Nebraska's "fall" shouldn't their chances of recruiting a targeted player be about equal of an NFL team recruiting a targeting player? If that is true, I ask you again, why is Nebraska's situation worse than an NFL franchise's? As far as I can tell, Nebraska is actually in a superior postion...

Lets drop the option issue ok. It's all about money..and winning. If it worked owners would be bringing those college coaches to the pro's.
Second issue: Dallas sucks! The only good thing about Dallas is the "Tuna." He is a good coach! He finds ways to win.
Third issue: Spurier sucked! He never devised run blocking schemes and never thougt to add blitz package blocking. He hoped the Qb would get rid of the ball within 3 sec. Ramsey was great the first yr because he tried to get rid of the ball. Last yr he tried to find the right receiver for yardage which took time.
Fourth issue: Ramsey is a great Qb. He has a great arm for distance and an accurate arm. He can thread the needle. Quincy is not bad but I see him as another Vick. Someone who is not great but if you let him run around the field long enough he will find someone or make the yardage himself.
Fith issue: No one really knows how bad the Redskins coaching staff really was except the Redskin players and fans. All this will be cleared up this yr because of Gibbs. Just like the Tuna, Gibbs is great and knows how to get the best from what he has. The OL will be better because of blocking schemes. Our defense was not bad...it was simply a player run defense. Now with a real D-coach like Lewis we will thrive. Our running back situation has changed drastically because previously ours were to small and relied on speed. Trotter was not the whole team. Trotter was a good player but there were other members on the team also. Trotter was more often then not out of position and could not make the play. Didn't he come from the Eagles? why did they get rid of him?
Sixth issue: Why is everyone downplaying our receivers? Coles has more speed then most Db's and made the most catches on the team. Rod if used properly can be another Art Monk. MCants is awsome! If we achieved anything with Spurier it was fast receivers.
Seventh issue: Our D-line is an issue...Hopefully our D-coach will work this out.
Eigth issue: Yea we suck a T.E. hopefully Raspy will be good. The mini camp did not show much.
Ultimatly though our team has talent and now that we have Gibbs and Co. back and Zampese assisting the Redskins will be dominate again. Look what Zampese did for Dallas when they went to the Superbowl, and what he did for the Rams. Look out NFC East here we come!!!

curveball wrote:

kkryan wrote:Offensive ranking of NFC East offenses:
QB
Redskins-just for depth
Eagles
Giants
Cows--Skins season looking good with another year of QC

Oline
Eagles--good thing they dont run alot cuz they are dominate
Skins
Cows
Giants--Needs a ton of work

TE
Giants
Cows--Whitten and Campbell are a good combo
Eagles
Skins

WR
Giants
Skins
Cows--Lot of depth at WR
Eagles--TO is the only threat

RB
Skins--205 LBS of DYNOMITE
Eagles
Giants-Tiki fumble Barber
Cows-draft will affect this ranking

offensive game plan
Parcells
Gibbs--Just till Gibbs familarises himself with NFL
Krusty Kreme
Mr. Yells-a-Lot
What do you guys think??

Lets try a realistic look at this.

QB Eagles, Giants, Redskins, Cowboys is probably the correct order.
You'd be hard pressed to find anyone who'd trade McNabb or Collins for Brunell. The Dallas situation is the question mark.

OL Eagles Cowboys, Redskins Giants.
Blame coaching all you'd like, but Thomas was the only decent Skins o-lineman last season. The Giants O line may surprise some if they stay healthy.

TE, I agree with you.

WR Eagles, Giants, Skins, Cowboys. Owens and a nobody is better than Toomer and nobody or Coles and Nobody. It's hard to judge the Cowboys WRs until someone actually throws them "the damn ball".

RB Too many question marks such as Buckhalter's final destination and who the Cowboys end up with to even take a guess at ranking them.

Those are five times worse than the original pre rankings. I disagree that the Eagles are the NFC's elite when it comes to QB's because behing McNabb Detmer is mediocre at best and their savior A.J. Feely is gone. SAYING THAT THE GIANTS ARE IN BETTER SHAPE THAN THE REDSKINS IS THE STUPIDEST THING I'VE HEARD THIS OFFSEASON. Kerry Collins is a good QB, nothing more, and his knee got torn apart late last season by Bruce Smith. Their backup is ABC'S new bachellor Jessie Palmer, who has fumbled away every opportunity he has gotten. We have two players whom would start for at least 10-15 teams right now, and aside from McNabb every other team in our divison would trade anyone they have for Pat Ramsey, maybe even Brunell. I stopped looking at it after that, so I won't comment on the other positions.

Funny you mention trading for Brunell, since nobody else seemed that interested in trading for him when he was on the market.