Crazy Offense Idea

[Ash Ketchum]

players who are bad in the sense of "traditional" football positions. Thats the point you don't understand because you can only think of traditional terms. Most of these guys were highly successful football players in college. Look at the 3 QBs from Ohio St. your telling me that athletes can'tplay football? Are you the same type of person who said 5 years ago that Adam Thielen had no business playing NFL football.

You know who also doesn't fit the norm of traditional football? Kalil Mack. Not really a LB and not really a DE just a god dam good football player. Teams knew players like this existed so they invented a 3-4 Defense. To get these guys on the field. He can rush the passer without having to play a traditional DE position with his hand on the ground.. getting killed by tackles.

And if you think basketball isn't positionless then you are crazy. It has evolved from the.. Short guy runs point.. slightly taller guy plays the 2 guard.. medium guy plays small forward.. big guy plays PF and really tall dude plays Center. The Center position is really no more. The SG/SF are now mostly interchangeable. The point guard has gone from the short guy who passes to a guy who scores.

Lets look at baseball.. teams now move players into different spot on the field. I never saw a 2nd baseman play shallow right field and a SS play between 2nd/ and 1st with one guy between 2nd/3rd before a few years ago.. but baseball has evolved. Football could to in a sense. If you are a team without a great QB and skilled players.. why not invent a new way to play offense? The idea is to get the ball in the hands of an athlete and let him makes some plays and gets some yards. Get out in the open field and see what happens. Its not rocket science that this WR has to take 10.5 steps and turns left and the ball is there. Its about opening up and let the SLASH make a play. Imagine Lamar Jackson getting the ball on a WR screen and just a CB to elude. 10 yards boom. Can't roll coverage over to him to stop that if the guy on the other side (say Kyle Murray) can do the same. Or is Tayson Hill in the slot.. wait now he is motioning in and takes the snap. What do you defend? Do you take slow Nose tackle off the field and replace with a LB? Now you mash up the middle running a player. You can't put sub defensive packages in becuse you don't know how they will line up based on personnel on offense.

Serious question:

If you were the OC of this offense you are proposing, what would your first fifteen plays of the game look like?

Oh yeah.. I got a whole offensive play book written out. There is not a single person in here who really understands an offense. People like to think they know something but they have no clue. There is way more to it. These people here cute terms like RPO and they think they know what they are talking about. They don't understand the likes of if this CB is off the ball and shading inside you run 7 yard cut to the left. But if he is shading to the outside and the LB is here you run 8 yard hitch. (and I have no idea if thats a thing either.) I actually know a D2 College OC from MSU (our kids are friends).. I wouldn't even begin to know the details of what his offense looks like.. much less a NFL one. Maybe next time I see him I will bring the idea up to him. Probably not.

No, I was legitimately asking what your plan would be for discussion purposes.

[hategreenticemase]

3 pages in a thread where people are actually debating "hey we should try 6 qb's on the field". You fuckers are hilarious sometimes, and I am talking to the good posters who joined in this moronic nonsensicle babble. You must also be the type who argues with the falldown drunk at bar close who is saying he could have kicked Mike Tyson's ass in his prime!

[Ash Ketchum]

Let’s use the Ravens as the example since they already have two of the players with skill sets you are talking about.

1. Lamar Jackson, Robert Griffin already on the roster.
2. Trade a first round pick and extras for Cam Newton (RB).
3. Sign Joe Webb, who has experience playing WR.
4. Draft Tyree Jackson out of Buffalo in the later rounds.

So then you’d play all of those guys out there at once. How would that look?

[Ash Ketchum]

3 pages in a thread where people are actually debating "hey we should try 6 qb's on the field". You fuckers are hilarious sometimes, and I am talking to the good posters who joined in this moronic nonsensicle babble. You must also be the type who argues with the falldown drunk at bar close who is saying he could have kicked Mike Tyson's ass in his prime!

Calm down.

It would absolutely not work, but it’s kind of fun to discuss.

[mankatobjr]

Less Diggs and Thielen and more JT Barrett and Cardale Jones.


I don’t think that’s a good plan.

I only used the Vikings as an example because I know how their roster is set up. I could have used Baltimore but I really don't know their roster.

Yes Ideally when you have two top 10 Wrs you don't need to run this offense. But What teams have this? Few. What teams have a franchise QB? A real franchise QB? 6? their isn't one team in the NFL that this wouldn't be a better option?

Again I only used the Vikings offense as an example to show how you could start it first year.. since I knew their roster.

Plus though with this offense you aren't paying a 15 mil WR another 10 Mil Wr and a 28 Mil QB. You are paying 11 guys 3-5 mil a peice and you still have 120 mil to spend on D and Oline.

I kinda get what you're trying to do. Any maybe a team set up this way would have more offensive success that a team with poor talent trying to run a traditional offense. But I can't imagine an offense like this being able to win a division, make noise in the playoffs, and win a championship. A talented defense with a creative scheme would shut this offense down like an outdoor water park in the winter.

It reminds me of the "wildcat" offense flirtation the NFL went through about a decade ago. Some teams (Miami, with Ronnie Brown) used it extensively. But it never went anywhere and no teams that really made noise employed it. Now, you see it as a gadget wrinkle from time-to-time.


But, by all means. Try to prove everyone wrong. Sell this idea to football guys and if it takes hold and takes over the NFL by storm, I'll buy you a ticket to watch your brainchild in the Super Bowl.

Until then, we can just agree to disagree that this would ever work.

The difference with this vs the Wildcat was the wildcat bascially took the passing game completely out of the equation. This wouldn't because you'd have guys who can throw and you'd run designed passing plays. Wouldn't be a gadet.

Plus this team would need to have a good D.. and you could spend the money on a D.

And Maybe it wouldn't work.. would need to start at the college level and would need to be a program that can get those athletes. The difference at the pro level is you are taking guys who played QB with some success at college. Doing it at the college level you don't have the QB exerpeince you need with 5 or 6 guys to make it work.

Like I said.. crazy idea.. but I think right situation, with the right coach and the right players it could work with some success. And if you have a good D, maybe ride it to the play-offs.

Each year there are only 6 teams that could be Superbowl caliber. Before the season started I'd say 3 of the 4 teams left now were pre season potential.. (Pre season Cheifs had no chance) throw in the Vikings and Eagles. And maybe Packers and Steelers. Those 7 teams are the only ones who had a chance to win it.

If you have no shot to win it, why not try something different. The Bills went what 17 years without making the play-offs doing the same thing year after year?

[Beef Supreme]

It might fly in college at some level. Maybe. I don't know the college game well enough to say.

I know not every team has a legit Super Bowl chance, but this offense, in my mind, guarantees that. If you're not at a true SB hopeful level yet, you have to build to get there. In my opinion, installing an offense like this guarantees that you will not get there. There is no value in taking a bad team and "gimmicking" them to 8-8, if that were even possible with this idea. Better off bottoming out and getting that franchise QB in the draft, because that's the only place you find them 99% of the time (Saints got lucky).

The Bills went forever without making the playoffs because they made bad decisions. The Patriots have won an unprecedented amount of games doing the same thing year after year too. Everyone else is in-between. You just have to do it well and not do it poorly.

[D_B_U]

I've always thought take a 7 footer and use for goal line WR or short yardage situation. If you can have a guy who just kicks off why not a basketball 6'10" or above basketball player.

You could use him to block FG too I'd assume.

Also help coaches reach things on high shelves.

[Ash Ketchum]

I only used the Vikings as an example because I know how their roster is set up. I could have used Baltimore but I really don't know their roster.

Yes Ideally when you have two top 10 Wrs you don't need to run this offense. But What teams have this? Few. What teams have a franchise QB? A real franchise QB? 6? their isn't one team in the NFL that this wouldn't be a better option?

Again I only used the Vikings offense as an example to show how you could start it first year.. since I knew their roster.

Plus though with this offense you aren't paying a 15 mil WR another 10 Mil Wr and a 28 Mil QB. You are paying 11 guys 3-5 mil a peice and you still have 120 mil to spend on D and Oline.

I kinda get what you're trying to do. Any maybe a team set up this way would have more offensive success that a team with poor talent trying to run a traditional offense. But I can't imagine an offense like this being able to win a division, make noise in the playoffs, and win a championship. A talented defense with a creative scheme would shut this offense down like an outdoor water park in the winter.

It reminds me of the "wildcat" offense flirtation the NFL went through about a decade ago. Some teams (Miami, with Ronnie Brown) used it extensively. But it never went anywhere and no teams that really made noise employed it. Now, you see it as a gadget wrinkle from time-to-time.


But, by all means. Try to prove everyone wrong. Sell this idea to football guys and if it takes hold and takes over the NFL by storm, I'll buy you a ticket to watch your brainchild in the Super Bowl.

Until then, we can just agree to disagree that this would ever work.

The difference with this vs the Wildcat was the wildcat bascially took the passing game completely out of the equation. This wouldn't because you'd have guys who can throw and you'd run designed passing plays. Wouldn't be a gadet.

Plus this team would need to have a good D.. and you could spend the money on a D.

And Maybe it wouldn't work.. would need to start at the college level and would need to be a program that can get those athletes. The difference at the pro level is you are taking guys who played QB with some success at college. Doing it at the college level you don't have the QB exerpeince you need with 5 or 6 guys to make it work.

Like I said.. crazy idea.. but I think right situation, with the right coach and the right players it could work with some success. And if you have a good D, maybe ride it to the play-offs.

Each year there are only 6 teams that could be Superbowl caliber. Before the season started I'd say 3 of the 4 teams left now were pre season potential.. (Pre season Cheifs had no chance) throw in the Vikings and Eagles. And maybe Packers and Steelers. Those 7 teams are the only ones who had a chance to win it.

If you have no shot to win it, why not try something different. The Bills went what 17 years without making the play-offs doing the same thing year after year?

If you have no shot to win it, it’s better to try to build your roster so that hopefully you can win it.

Playing a bunch of QBs at WR doesn’t actually help you as an offense because you’re now playing with one or two less-than-NFL-caliber WRs on the field, and the benefit of the gadget factor of those players potentially being able to throw the ball are more than cancelled out.

Let’s say, hypothetically, the you line up with Lamar Jackson in the shotgun as the “QB”, Cam Newton (RB) is the single back next to the QB, RG3 is on the outside and Kyler Murray is in the slot (WRs).

I think what you’re envisioning is that the defense will be shitting themselves trying to figure out which one out of Jackson, Newton, RG3 or Murray will eventually be the one making the play. On the snap, Jackson can throw or tuck it and run. Maybe he’ll hand it off to Newton who could run or throw. The threat of the bubble screen to RG3 is there, and after he catches it, he can run or throw. Or maybe Murray motions to the backfield and can then either run or throw.

If that’s correct, then, sure, maybe that works once in a while. The potential confusion that the defense feels is worth something, but it’s not going to work consistently over the course of a game, and certainly not over the course of a season.

When any of those players drop back to pass, they aren’t of the level of (sans Newton on a good day) of a typical NFL-caliber pocket passer. So you’re weakening yourself at the most important position. A large majority of the potential routes or plays that could beat a defenses’ coverage are now completely off the table, making coverage much easier and gives them the ability to somewhat cheat towards stopping those gadget players and plays.

Any of those players lined up outside as a “WR” are no where close to the level of even middling NFL-caliber WRs. CBs who normally have to worry about a WR beating them deep or with crafty route running can now all of a sudden just shadow their guy and prevent them from catching the short pass.

It’s really just the inverse of defending an offense that just runs vanilla, predictable plays all the time or a team that tries to run play action fakes without the threat of the run being there.

If there’s no threat that the passing game can beat you in the traditional way down the field, finding soft spots in coverage, manipulating DBs with route running, etc., then how is the trickery going to work consistently?

Also, any play where the ball is going to ultimately be thrown by the second player touching the ball involves a ton of risk, and there’s only a couple of ways to get the ball to this player legally.

Once Jackson takes the snap, a second player can only become the “QB” off a lateral or handoff. You could hand the ball to Newton who pretends he’s going to run up the middle before stopping and throwing once the LBers commit to stopping the run, but how many times will this work?

You could throw the ball out wide on a lateral to RG3 out wide, who could then throw it deep once the defense thinks it’s just a simple WR screen, but you’re risking a fumble every time you do this. Without the threat of RG3 beating any NFL-caliber CB deep, DBs are going to try to jam him at the LOS, flooding that area with players. The chances for the ball hitting the ground are too high to get away with this consistently.

I don’t hate the outside the box thinking, I just don’t think it would work consistently enough to be a viable option to win games, and for the discussion’s sake, you’re not really coming up with anything besides “No, I’m sure it’ll work.”

I think if you ran a traditional offense, but had one or two “slash” type players that you could throw on the field a few times per game to run some of this stuff... it could work. Just not as regularly as you’re arguing.

[RubeTube]

Come on. This is ridiculous

[mankatobjr]

I kinda get what you're trying to do. Any maybe a team set up this way would have more offensive success that a team with poor talent trying to run a traditional offense. But I can't imagine an offense like this being able to win a division, make noise in the playoffs, and win a championship. A talented defense with a creative scheme would shut this offense down like an outdoor water park in the winter.

It reminds me of the "wildcat" offense flirtation the NFL went through about a decade ago. Some teams (Miami, with Ronnie Brown) used it extensively. But it never went anywhere and no teams that really made noise employed it. Now, you see it as a gadget wrinkle from time-to-time.


But, by all means. Try to prove everyone wrong. Sell this idea to football guys and if it takes hold and takes over the NFL by storm, I'll buy you a ticket to watch your brainchild in the Super Bowl.

Until then, we can just agree to disagree that this would ever work.

The difference with this vs the Wildcat was the wildcat bascially took the passing game completely out of the equation. This wouldn't because you'd have guys who can throw and you'd run designed passing plays. Wouldn't be a gadet.

Plus this team would need to have a good D.. and you could spend the money on a D.

And Maybe it wouldn't work.. would need to start at the college level and would need to be a program that can get those athletes. The difference at the pro level is you are taking guys who played QB with some success at college. Doing it at the college level you don't have the QB exerpeince you need with 5 or 6 guys to make it work.

Like I said.. crazy idea.. but I think right situation, with the right coach and the right players it could work with some success. And if you have a good D, maybe ride it to the play-offs.

Each year there are only 6 teams that could be Superbowl caliber. Before the season started I'd say 3 of the 4 teams left now were pre season potential.. (Pre season Cheifs had no chance) throw in the Vikings and Eagles. And maybe Packers and Steelers. Those 7 teams are the only ones who had a chance to win it.

If you have no shot to win it, why not try something different. The Bills went what 17 years without making the play-offs doing the same thing year after year?

If you have no shot to win it, it’s better to try to build your roster so that hopefully you can win it.

Playing a bunch of QBs at WR doesn’t actually help you as an offense because you’re now playing with one or two less-than-NFL-caliber WRs on the field, and the benefit of the gadget factor of those players potentially being able to throw the ball are more than cancelled out.

Let’s say, hypothetically, the you line up with Lamar Jackson in the shotgun as the “QB”, Cam Newton (RB) is the single back next to the QB, RG3 is on the outside and Kyler Murray is in the slot (WRs).

I think what you’re envisioning is that the defense will be shitting themselves trying to figure out which one out of Jackson, Newton, RG3 or Murray will eventually be the one making the play. On the snap, Jackson can throw or tuck it and run. Maybe he’ll hand it off to Newton who could run or throw. The threat of the bubble screen to RG3 is there, and after he catches it, he can run or throw. Or maybe Murray motions to the backfield and can then either run or throw.

If that’s correct, then, sure, maybe that works once in a while. The potential confusion that the defense feels is worth something, but it’s not going to work consistently over the course of a game, and certainly not over the course of a season.

When any of those players drop back to pass, they aren’t of the level of (sans Newton on a good day) of a typical NFL-caliber pocket passer. So you’re weakening yourself at the most important position. A large majority of the potential routes or plays that could beat a defenses’ coverage are now completely off the table, making coverage much easier and gives them the ability to somewhat cheat towards stopping those gadget players and plays.

Any of those players lined up outside as a “WR” are no where close to the level of even middling NFL-caliber WRs. CBs who normally have to worry about a WR beating them deep or with crafty route running can now all of a sudden just shadow their guy and prevent them from catching the short pass.

It’s really just the inverse of defending an offense that just runs vanilla, predictable plays all the time or a team that tries to run play action fakes without the threat of the run being there.

If there’s no threat that the passing game can beat you in the traditional way down the field, finding soft spots in coverage, manipulating DBs with route running, etc., then how is the trickery going to work consistently?

Your situation is using all first round draft picks picked to play QB... and not the athletic guys teams want on the team and convert to WR.

My scenario is using people already ebing converted to WR and using their abilities as a QB.. there is a difference.

There are plenty of WRs who played QB in college. Julian Edleman. is One. He made himself into a probowl WR. There atheltic guys can be adequate WRs. Its not like they are going out there and have zero ability.

Probably wouldn't work... but then again if you can be the one team to do it.. get the top guys first, it "could".. would it work for other teams as well? No because only so many of these athletes out there.

I wouldn't advocate a team with already a tradional QB to do it.

What if Houston Looked into it more. Its Got Watson at QB, he'd fit the mold, Joe Webb is there, it had Braxton Miller who wasn't terrible at WR. After Hopkins.. what did it have at WR? What did it have really at RB? Lamar Miller? Oh boy.

The right situation I think it could work. Jackson won a Division for his team with a worse offense.

[Ash Ketchum]

The difference with this vs the Wildcat was the wildcat bascially took the passing game completely out of the equation. This wouldn't because you'd have guys who can throw and you'd run designed passing plays. Wouldn't be a gadet.

Plus this team would need to have a good D.. and you could spend the money on a D.

And Maybe it wouldn't work.. would need to start at the college level and would need to be a program that can get those athletes. The difference at the pro level is you are taking guys who played QB with some success at college. Doing it at the college level you don't have the QB exerpeince you need with 5 or 6 guys to make it work.

Like I said.. crazy idea.. but I think right situation, with the right coach and the right players it could work with some success. And if you have a good D, maybe ride it to the play-offs.

Each year there are only 6 teams that could be Superbowl caliber. Before the season started I'd say 3 of the 4 teams left now were pre season potential.. (Pre season Cheifs had no chance) throw in the Vikings and Eagles. And maybe Packers and Steelers. Those 7 teams are the only ones who had a chance to win it.

If you have no shot to win it, why not try something different. The Bills went what 17 years without making the play-offs doing the same thing year after year?

If you have no shot to win it, it’s better to try to build your roster so that hopefully you can win it.

Playing a bunch of QBs at WR doesn’t actually help you as an offense because you’re now playing with one or two less-than-NFL-caliber WRs on the field, and the benefit of the gadget factor of those players potentially being able to throw the ball are more than cancelled out.

Let’s say, hypothetically, the you line up with Lamar Jackson in the shotgun as the “QB”, Cam Newton (RB) is the single back next to the QB, RG3 is on the outside and Kyler Murray is in the slot (WRs).

I think what you’re envisioning is that the defense will be shitting themselves trying to figure out which one out of Jackson, Newton, RG3 or Murray will eventually be the one making the play. On the snap, Jackson can throw or tuck it and run. Maybe he’ll hand it off to Newton who could run or throw. The threat of the bubble screen to RG3 is there, and after he catches it, he can run or throw. Or maybe Murray motions to the backfield and can then either run or throw.

If that’s correct, then, sure, maybe that works once in a while. The potential confusion that the defense feels is worth something, but it’s not going to work consistently over the course of a game, and certainly not over the course of a season.

When any of those players drop back to pass, they aren’t of the level of (sans Newton on a good day) of a typical NFL-caliber pocket passer. So you’re weakening yourself at the most important position. A large majority of the potential routes or plays that could beat a defenses’ coverage are now completely off the table, making coverage much easier and gives them the ability to somewhat cheat towards stopping those gadget players and plays.

Any of those players lined up outside as a “WR” are no where close to the level of even middling NFL-caliber WRs. CBs who normally have to worry about a WR beating them deep or with crafty route running can now all of a sudden just shadow their guy and prevent them from catching the short pass.

It’s really just the inverse of defending an offense that just runs vanilla, predictable plays all the time or a team that tries to run play action fakes without the threat of the run being there.

If there’s no threat that the passing game can beat you in the traditional way down the field, finding soft spots in coverage, manipulating DBs with route running, etc., then how is the trickery going to work consistently?

Your situation is using all first round draft picks picked to play QB... and not the athletic guys teams want on the team and convert to WR.

My scenario is using people already ebing converted to WR and using their abilities as a QB.. there is a difference.

There are plenty of WRs who played QB in college. Julian Edleman. is One. He made himself into a probowl WR. There atheltic guys can be adequate WRs. Its not like they are going out there and have zero ability.

Probably wouldn't work... but then again if you can be the one team to do it.. get the top guys first, it "could".. would it work for other teams as well? No because only so many of these athletes out there.

I wouldn't advocate a team with already a tradional QB to do it.

What if Houston Looked into it more. Its Got Watson at QB, he'd fit the mold, Joe Webb is there, it had Braxton Miller who wasn't terrible at WR. After Hopkins.. what did it have at WR? What did it have really at RB? Lamar Miller? Oh boy.

The right situation I think it could work. Jackson won a Division for his team with a worse offense.

Your examples of player who could theoretically pull it off isn’t my issue with it.

My issue with it would be relying on such an offense over the course of an entire game and an entire season.

I love Lamar Jackson, and yes, the Ravens have won with him. But, that’s in large part to dumbing down the offense and relying on his sandlot style to take over. And even still, there were serious limitations to their passing game as a result. They were ill-equipped to score points when they fell behind and needed to throw the ball traditionally, which you will ALWAYS have to do in today’s NFL.

Now imagine an offense like you are suggesting where instead of giving a QB like Jackson far less to digest, he now has to be responsible for this very complicated and high risk style.

Again, I actually love the idea in theory. I just don’t think it would work over the course of any extended period of time.

Like I said, it’s just the inverse of trying to defend a one-dimensional team who struggles because they are too vanilla and predictable (Teddy or Ponder era Vikings).