Formation on Offense vs. Indy

[kcwilson]

Ok, I noticed during the whole first half that any motion we had on offense was either of the following:

(1) Cook line dup at WR, and then would go in motion to the traditional FB location in front of RB in the I. Not once did we try and run a play where Cook was line dup outside. There didn't seem to be a mystery to the movements and no "surprise! we are actually going to runa play out of the different formation".

(2) Daniels or the TE lined up outside and then would shift in motion to the more traditional TE role. If we are going to run the ball, why not try and spread that line pressure out a little more. Runa few plays with the TE lined up wide.

Although the scheme is different, it seemed to be a pretty predictable run vs. pass game plan that we ran. Even when we tried a few draw plays, we did so with max protection instead of trying to spread the pressure out from the middle of the field.

Was it just me or did the formation shifting really not create any confusion for the defense?

[dtran04]

I think the whole point of it was to see what type of defense the opponent was running.

[Grid]

either that, or its possible that they just werent biting on some stuff, and it would have been pointless to try and capitalize on it when there was nothing to capitalize on.

[MYDAUGHTER'STEXANS]

Steve Mckinney on soprts 610 radio right now, he thinks the O line had a good game this week agains INDY, is he for real, someone turn this on and listen to him......when David is still running for his life, and the running game not opening up for the backs, I find that hard to believe the O line had a good week........Steve might need a drug test......

[thunderkyss]

Originally Posted by MYDAUGHTER'STEXANS

Steve Mckinney on soprts 610 radio right now, he thinks the O line had a good game this week agains INDY, is he for real, someone turn this on and listen to him......when David is still running for his life, and the running game not opening up for the backs, I find that hard to believe the O line had a good week........Steve might need a drug test......

I don't know..... the first sack of the game came on what looked like a bootleg...... the line moved left, the backs faked left....... we forgot to tell Mathis he was supposed to go left.

We also ran for 98 yards........ throw in David's 10 yard scamper, and that's a 100 yard game. not bad, considering we started in the whole.... early in the game.

Our running game actually looked pretty good till Lundy Fumbled.... if it weren't for that, and the points that followed, we might have actually been in the game to win it...

overall, we have a young offensive line, going against a seasoned, mean defense. I think we did pretty well, considering..........

[TEXANS84]

Interesting fact is that I don't think I've seen David out of the shotgun the entire season.

[MYDAUGHTER'STEXANS]

Hopefully the O linewill be able to control the line of scrimmage this week against the skins.......and the defense put some pressure on Brunnell this week.....

[Honoring Earl 34]

You ever get the feeling this is why they don't help Carr up after he's creamed . That its understood that until they can get the ball out and burn the Colts who rush first ... why should they stop . Kubiak said they discussed this Saturday night , that the Colts are coming , you want have much time , throw the damn ball .

[bigTEXan8]

Originally Posted by Honoring Earl 34

You ever get the feeling this is why they don't help Carr up after he's creamed . That its understood that until they can get the ball out and burn the Colts who rush first ... why should they stop . Kubiak said they discussed this Saturday night , that the Colts are coming , you want have much time , throw the damn ball .

yeah...but kubiak is calling the plays that take the time to develop that are allowing the speedy colts defense to already be in the backfield by the time carr is getting ready to throw. by the time carr is done coming around from the bootleg, either mathis or freeney is already going to be in the backfield. if you ask me...i don't trust the o-line to block long enough for a bootleg. just need a quick stab pa movement, give carr another second to make the read.

[thunderkyss]

Originally Posted by bigTEXan8

yeah...but kubiak is calling the plays that take the time to develop that are allowing the speedy colts defense to already be in the backfield by the time carr is getting ready to throw. by the time carr is done coming around from the bootleg, either mathis or freeney is already going to be in the backfield. if you ask me...i don't trust the o-line to block long enough for a bootleg. just need a quick stab pa movement, give carr another second to make the read.

I can think of at least 5 plays off the top of my head, where David had more than 3 seconds to throw the ball. and another half dozen, where he threw the ball too fast, when protection looked Solid.....

[El Tejano]

Sack wise yes but hurries....our team stunk.

[infantrycak]

Originally Posted by thunderkyss

I can think of at least 5 plays off the top of my head, where David had more than 3 seconds to throw the ball. and another half dozen, where he threw the ball too fast, when protection looked Solid.....

You are blatantly skewing your description of the times involved. So now it is common for Carr to have over 3 seconds and McNabb always had 2.5 or less before scrambling? That is obviously wrong even as a guestimate and verifiably wrong according to the game clock just like your description of Carr having 5 seconds on a 3 second play in the Philly game.

[thunderkyss]

Originally Posted by infantrycak

You are blatantly skewing your description of the times involved. So now it is common for Carr to have over 3 seconds and McNabb always had 2.5 or less before scrambling? That is obviously wrong even as a guestimate and verifiably wrong according to the game clock just like your description of Carr having 5 seconds on a 3 second play in the Philly game.

If 5 plays equals common, then I guess so.

[thunderkyss]

I didn't start recording the time between the snap & the release until 13:47 in the second Qtr.
13:47 1-10 P31....... play action pass 13:45 McNabb throws the screen to Westbrook

13:08 2-2 P39....... hand off

12:27 1-10 P47...... Draw play

11:47 2-6 H49........ I didn't time it..... I believe Orr came in untouched, and McNabb threw a hurried incomplete pass.

11:42 3-6 H49...... McNabb releases the ball @ 11:39

11:22 1-10 H42.... Mcnabb releases the ball @ 11:17.... this was the long touchdown to Stallworth.... the only play I think DM had too much time.

LATER
5:58 1-10 P24,,,,,, the ball is gone @ 5:57...... incomplete

5:50 2-10 P24......... 5:49.. McNabb delivers the screen to WB for 2 yards.

5:09 3-8 P22......... 5:07 both feet are off the ground, as Earl hits McNabb... amazing catch by LJ smith.... for the 1st

4:38 1-10 P46..... handoff

4:13 2-2 H46...... 4:03 McNabb throws incomplete, as the pocket collapses.

4:04 3-2 H46........ 4:01 McNabb throws the ball as Babin folds him in half

LATER

0:57 1-10 P20....... @ 0:55 McNabb throws a 23 yard pass to Stallworth.

0:44 1-10 P43...... Mcnabb runs for 10 yards, as Mario chases him.

0:35 1-10 H47....... I didn't record the time, as it was a screen the whole way

0:28 2-5 H42......... I didn't record this one either... 37 yard pass to stallworth

0:17 1-Goal....... 0:15....... 5 yard pass to R.Brown.

LATER
14:55...... 14:53 incomplete

14:50...... 14:47 screen to WB...... Mario is in McNabbs face

Then there are a bunch of run plays, and that pitch to WB that screwed Mario pretty good.

11:41....... playaction....... fake reverse..... screen to WB @ 11:38 31 yard TD

I stopped taking notes......

But I stand by what I said... if McNabb had more than 2.5 seconds in the pocket, he was being hurried, or scrambling out of the pocket.....

all except for that one big strike.

I've been asking how much time is too much time, but I can't imagine 2.5 seconds being too little, because we've constantly provided Carr with 2.5 seconds......

[texaslifter]

I'll agree that with our motion in our new formations, we are not using them as effectively as they could be used.

Hell, I run a harder game to defensively playcall against in Madden/NCAA.

[thunderkyss]

Originally Posted by texaslifter

I'll agree that with our motion in our new formations, we are not using them as effectively as they could be used.

Hell, I run a harder game to defensively playcall against in Madden/NCAA.

I think the main reason is to help David read the defense.......