Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

Steve Smith knocks the read option...


  • Please log in to reply
158 replies to this topic

#151 Razeyfingers

Razeyfingers

    Senior Member

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,648 posts

Posted 05 February 2013 - 10:25 AM

The RB shouldn't be standing with his feet nailed down. When the exchange takes place the RB should be 85% of top speed and then exploding through the hole. He isn't reading linebackers, he already knows where he needs to go. The RB is responsible for the exchange, the QB is in charge of the read. The RB is supposed to go straight to where his gap should be, but he also has the option to cutback to a better gap if it opens up and looks to be the better option. Something that RBs do in any zone blocking run scheme, whether it be under center or out of the shotgun or in the pistol.


The back is most certainly not going 85% of his speed, maybe that is the problem you're finding. Watch the tape and tell me Stew or D'Lo are ever going 85% at the point of hand off.

Also, again, the back's field is narrower because he has to stay closer to the middle of the field in case the QB takes it. So he cant adjust, he cant go faster. . . basically he's wearing lead weights until the QB removes them.


edit: the back doesnt know if he's blocking or running yet at the point of hand off. So, yes, he is reading the play and no he doesnt have a set gap to just run through then. That takes time for a brain to work out and it's about a billion times easier to plant a heel in the dirt and explode when the play is a definite hand off. See a guy breaking through a gap early? cut earlier and bounce to the outside. There's much less time to do that in an option and he has less speed AND is closer to the center of the field.

#152 teeray

teeray

    THE SWAGNIFICENT

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,998 posts

Posted 05 February 2013 - 11:18 AM

The back is most certainly not going 85% of his speed, maybe that is the problem you're finding. Watch the tape and tell me Stew or D'Lo are ever going 85% at the point of hand off.

Also, again, the back's field is narrower because he has to stay closer to the middle of the field in case the QB takes it. So he cant adjust, he cant go faster. . . basically he's wearing lead weights until the QB removes them.


edit: the back doesnt know if he's blocking or running yet at the point of hand off. So, yes, he is reading the play and no he doesnt have a set gap to just run through then. That takes time for a brain to work out and it's about a billion times easier to plant a heel in the dirt and explode when the play is a definite hand off. See a guy breaking through a gap early? cut earlier and bounce to the outside. There's much less time to do that in an option and he has less speed AND is closer to the center of the field.


The 85% is what the coaches who actually run this offense say. You using the Panthers version is like watching William Hung to learn about singing. I have said all along the problem wasn't the read option, but how we tried to run it and how we executed it.

The RB is never blocking. He runs straight to his gap no matter whether he gets the ball or doesn't for deception purposes.

They are told that they are going to jam it into the A gap unless they see something better. So they are coached to run right at the butt of the frontside guard.

Here is the clever way the running backs coach for Oregon explains it to his players.

He tells them pretend like you are out on a Saturday night and you see a good looking girl. That girl is in the A gap and you are going for her. However, before you commit, scan the room and have a look at the girl over there to she if she looks even better.

The RB knows where he is going. He runs straight for the A gap but has to read to see if there is a better gap before he gets there. If there is he will cutback through that gap.

Even if the QB keeps it the RB has to sell the fact that he has the ball so the DE can crash down on him. So he is never a blocker.

And lastly, the RB is in charge of the exchange in the zone read. The QB is in charge of the read. So the RB shouldn't be looking at the defense at that point, he is focusing on the exchange. The QB is reading the defense, and it is up to him where the running play goes. Or more accurately, it is up to the defense which way the run goes.

And in case you didn't get the William Hung reference



#153 Mr. Scot

Mr. Scot

    Football Historian

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 39,809 posts
  • LocationSC

Posted 05 February 2013 - 11:28 AM

I'm a troll because I don't think an old hag should be complaining about our offensive system? OK, guy!


If I were you I'd take the troll label.

It's a better option than being dumb enough to talk about Steve Smith like that.

#154 Razeyfingers

Razeyfingers

    Senior Member

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,648 posts

Posted 05 February 2013 - 05:18 PM

The 85% is what the coaches who actually run this offense say. . . .

And in case you didn't get the William Hung reference



#1 what people say isnt truth or fact. Watch tape then take an average. If you dont like how we run it check someone else's like you have, but be fair. Dont take the five fastest times its been perfectly executed as your data set.

#2 I dont give a fug what Chip Supergenius has to say about it or any other college coach even though I understand you're siting it because college is where its ran most and this guy is a proponent of that. The reason is because. . he doesnt coach the pros, Tee. I get the guy is badass, there's been plenty that have come n gone, he's got to prove it in the pros first.

Im not hear to convince you one way or another what should or should not be done as a solution. Im telling you, by fact, that a human being cannot be going as fast at a handoff in an option as he can taking three steps and meeting the QB downhill whos ready to slap it in the basket. Im also telling you that he is starting closer to the center of the field because the play has to have the ability to go both ways and if you lean too much to one way someone's gonna get killed when you run the back door route.


no pie for Hung, of course I got the reference, Kook. Here's the Wu Tang clan because I cant get that opening scene to "The Man with Iron Fists" out of my head. That should be just about as ambiguously appropriate.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wf3jzDb4H7o

#155 TheRumGone

TheRumGone

    mountain man

  • ALL-PRO
  • 9,413 posts
  • LocationAsheville, NC

Posted 05 February 2013 - 05:36 PM

#1 what people say isnt truth or fact. Watch tape then take an average. If you dont like how we run it check someone else's like you have, but be fair. Dont take the five fastest times its been perfectly executed as your data set.

#2 I dont give a fug what Chip Supergenius has to say about it or any other college coach even though I understand you're siting it because college is where its ran most and this guy is a proponent of that. The reason is because. . he doesnt coach the pros, Tee. I get the guy is badass, there's been plenty that have come n gone, he's got to prove it in the pros first.

Im not hear to convince you one way or another what should or should not be done as a solution. Im telling you, by fact, that a human being cannot be going as fast at a handoff in an option as he can taking three steps and meeting the QB downhill whos ready to slap it in the basket. Im also telling you that he is starting closer to the center of the field because the play has to have the ability to go both ways and if you lean too much to one way someone's gonna get killed when you run the back door route.


no pie for Hung, of course I got the reference, Kook. Here's the Wu Tang clan because I cant get that opening scene to "The Man with Iron Fists" out of my head. That should be just about as ambiguously appropriate.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wf3jzDb4H7o



Agree with everything. And i miss ODB.

#156 teeray

teeray

    THE SWAGNIFICENT

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,998 posts

Posted 06 February 2013 - 04:26 PM

#1 what people say isnt truth or fact. Watch tape then take an average. If you dont like how we run it check someone else's like you have, but be fair. Dont take the five fastest times its been perfectly executed as your data set.

#2 I dont give a fug what Chip Supergenius has to say about it or any other college coach even though I understand you're siting it because college is where its ran most and this guy is a proponent of that. The reason is because. . he doesnt coach the pros, Tee. I get the guy is badass, there's been plenty that have come n gone, he's got to prove it in the pros first.

Im not hear to convince you one way or another what should or should not be done as a solution. Im telling you, by fact, that a human being cannot be going as fast at a handoff in an option as he can taking three steps and meeting the QB downhill whos ready to slap it in the basket. Im also telling you that he is starting closer to the center of the field because the play has to have the ability to go both ways and if you lean too much to one way someone's gonna get killed when you run the back door route.


no pie for Hung, of course I got the reference, Kook. Here's the Wu Tang clan because I cant get that opening scene to "The Man with Iron Fists" out of my head. That should be just about as ambiguously appropriate.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wf3jzDb4H7o


I just charted three of our games with a stopwatch. Surprisingly even for me, the RB was actually quicker to the line of scrimmage and through the hole on read option plays than he was with runs from under center.

When we ran the read option the RB got to the hole faster both in zone blocking plays and dive plays that when we ran similar blocking plays from under center.

Zone blocking read option plays averaged about 2.33 seconds to get through the hole.

Zone blocking run plays from under center averaged 2.51 seconds through the hole.

DIve read option plays took on average 1.40 seconds through the hole

Dive runs from under center on average 2.04 seconds through the hole

My methodology was to time each run play at a minimum three times to try and eliminate human error as much as possible. If there was a large discrepancy between times I would time it for a fourth time and possibly a fifth if the times until it seemed consistent. I also discarded unusual plays. For instance if Deangelo cut all the way to the backside, all of those instances happened on under center plays and all of them, obviously, had very large times and were not useful for what i was trying to determine. I took all of the times and averaged them and then compared like kind running plays from under center and in the read option.

My hypothesis was that there would be no discernible difference between the two. In fact what I discovered was that almost universally the read option plays were faster to the hole and the line of scrimmage than their like kind running plays from under center (i.e. zone blocking, power blocking, etc.)

I thought what you said was interesting so I tried to put it to the test to see if you were right. Honestly, I was surprised that the read option plays were actually faster than under center running plays. There was no evidence of it being slower to develop, or that it was effecting the RB speed to the hole.

Just food for thought.

#157 chris999

chris999

    Senior Member

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,023 posts
  • LocationFlorida

Posted 06 February 2013 - 06:23 PM

Anyone else notice out version of it was so much slower than WAS or SF


True, but Cam is stronger than those guys, and breaks more tackles. Plus he is much better in short yardage situations.

#158 Razeyfingers

Razeyfingers

    Senior Member

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,648 posts

Posted 06 February 2013 - 07:27 PM

I just charted three of our games with a stopwatch. Surprisingly even for me, the RB was actually quicker to the line of scrimmage and through the hole on read option plays than he was with runs from under center.

When we ran the read option the RB got to the hole faster both in zone blocking plays and dive plays that when we ran similar blocking plays from under center.

Zone blocking read option plays averaged about 2.33 seconds to get through the hole.

Zone blocking run plays from under center averaged 2.51 seconds through the hole.

DIve read option plays took on average 1.40 seconds through the hole

Dive runs from under center on average 2.04 seconds through the hole

My methodology was to time each run play at a minimum three times to try and eliminate human error as much as possible. If there was a large discrepancy between times I would time it for a fourth time and possibly a fifth if the times until it seemed consistent. I also discarded unusual plays. For instance if Deangelo cut all the way to the backside, all of those instances happened on under center plays and all of them, obviously, had very large times and were not useful for what i was trying to determine. I took all of the times and averaged them and then compared like kind running plays from under center and in the read option.

My hypothesis was that there would be no discernible difference between the two. In fact what I discovered was that almost universally the read option plays were faster to the hole and the line of scrimmage than their like kind running plays from under center (i.e. zone blocking, power blocking, etc.)

I thought what you said was interesting so I tried to put it to the test to see if you were right. Honestly, I was surprised that the read option plays were actually faster than under center running plays. There was no evidence of it being slower to develop, or that it was effecting the RB speed to the hole.

Just food for thought.


Wow, Im stunned to hear thats what you found. The only variable left is positioning then, space, I think. Im brain dead after work today. Got lots to think about, thanks.

#159 teeray

teeray

    THE SWAGNIFICENT

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,998 posts

Posted 06 February 2013 - 09:28 PM

Wow, Im stunned to hear thats what you found. The only variable left is positioning then, space, I think. Im brain dead after work today. Got lots to think about, thanks.


Not sure exactly what you mean by positioning, however, when I was looking through the times I was wondering why the dive plays were so much faster in the read option than with the QB under center. I thought the times would be pretty close

I can't say for certain, but I believe it is because when we were running the dive plays on the option, the RB is already on that side. He is beside the QB and about 1-1.5 yards on the frontside. So it is a shorter distance to the gap than if he were directly behind the QB like he would be if the QB was under center.

But then that doesn't explain why the zone read option was also a little bit faster than a zone blocking run from under center. On a zone read (from the formation we run it from) the RB runs across the front of the QB, so he is actually farther away from his primary gap than he would be if he were directly behind the QB.

I can't quantify this, but here is why I think the read option was faster for the RB. As I have said a couple of times, when the QB is reading the defense, the RB is actually responsible for the exchange. So the RB actually has to locate the ball, get it, and after all of that look at the defense and look for daylight.

However, in a regular run play from under center. The QB is responsible for the exchange. So the RB is looking and reading the defense as soon as the play starts and the QB is responsible for putting the ball in the RB's gut.

So for the RB, there is actually a lot more for him to process mentally before he gets the ball in a regular run play from under center, than in a read option, where the QB is reading the defense for him and the RB is focused on the exchange and then running straight for his gap.

That is just my theory. I don't have the patience or time to study every team, and how this compares to other NFL teams who run the read option and college teams who use it frequently.

I also should note that the 3 games I charted were our last 3 games where we ran the read option considerably more effectively than we did at the beginning of the year.


0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

Shop at Amazon Contact Us: info@carolinahuddle.com