Would you Let Casey Throw One This Week?

[BullNation4Life]

I despise gimmick plays. Waste of a down, has the potential to blow up in your face, and then your team loses heart and the opponent gets a surge of momentum.

The risk outweighs the reward, IMO.

The only way I think this play would work is if you had a bunched formation, almost a goal line look...you'd have to draw in the LBs and the DBs close to the line at pre-snap. Toss the ball to James Casey and hope your WRs and TEs can get separation enough, due to the defense being crowded up at the LOS, that your receivers can get into space and catch a pass.

To me, the play would be designed to hit either AJ with all other receivers running routes to open space for AJ to find a mismatch out there, or you find a way to get Foster to be ACROSS THE FIELD and out in space. Or even Yates, who can run pretty well for a QB.

Frankly though, I would rather us just use normal plays and forget the trick plays altogether. I hate the idea of us using a trick play and it backfiring on us badly. We've come to far to let a failed trick play be our demise in some form or fashion. Trick plays are fun when you're a kid on the playground.

Ha, tell that to the Carolina Panthers who made the Texans defense look like a bunch of kids on a playground as they were stomping a mud hole in them and walking it dry then made them look like idiots with the "Annexation of Puerto Rico"....

or Shaun Peyton going for an onside kick right after the half against the Colts in the Super Bowl...

or the Tennessee Titans in the "Music City Miracle" Wade Phillips could tell you all about that....







but then there is the "Chris Brown Debacle of 2009" to support your "risk vs reward" theory...

 

[pirbroke]

Didn't we try a trick play last year with fullback Leach throwing a perfect interception in the redzone. I can't remember the team and it might have been two years ago but the pass was just awful.

 

[Sigma]

Ok, I know it’s way out of Kubiak’s character, but that’s exactly why Baltimore would never see it coming. I kinda think we’re going to need some kind of out of the ordinary play to pull out this win. (Kick return, defensive TD, etc.)

Last week Kubiak ran a play that started with an empty backfield and Casey out in the slot. Casey motioned into the backfield and the play was a toss sweep to him. Now that the play is on film, what if we ran the same thing and let him take the pitch out to Andre’s side. Andre will momentarily run block, then release up field hopefully wide open for a TD. If it’s not there, then Casey simply gets what he can on the ground.

I do think we'll need to play "out of the ordinary" (Offence) to win this, but I think Kick returns will be difficult as everyone knows JJones is way better punt returner then WideR...

I think they will be prepared to put extra effort in those situations

 

[Trail.Blazr]

Didn't we try a trick play last year with fullback Leach throwing a perfect interception in the redzone. I can't remember the team and it might have been two years ago but the pass was just awful.

I think that was Chris Brown, not Leach, but yes... that was awful.

 

[RTP2110]

I despise gimmick plays. Waste of a down, has the potential to blow up in your face, and then your team loses heart and the opponent gets a surge of momentum.

The risk outweighs the reward, IMO.

The only way I think this play would work is if you had a bunched formation, almost a goal line look...you'd have to draw in the LBs and the DBs close to the line at pre-snap. Toss the ball to James Casey and hope your WRs and TEs can get separation enough, due to the defense being crowded up at the LOS, that your receivers can get into space and catch a pass.

To me, the play would be designed to hit either AJ with all other receivers running routes to open space for AJ to find a mismatch out there, or you find a way to get Foster to be ACROSS THE FIELD and out in space. Or even Yates, who can run pretty well for a QB.

Frankly though, I would rather us just use normal plays and forget the trick plays altogether. I hate the idea of us using a trick play and it backfiring on us badly. We've come to far to let a failed trick play be our demise in some form or fashion. Trick plays are fun when you're a kid on the playground.

I understand what you concerned about, but I don't think the potential for disaster is a great as your saying. Just to use the original post as an example, if you run Casey out on a toss sweep he has a run/pass option. If nothing is there he could just tuck his head and run. If it's really bad, and he's under duress, he just throws it our of bounds. So there are a few built in safeguards that can prevent disaster from happening.

I also don't think it's a waste of a down if you run a trick play in the right situation. If it's 14-10 in the 4th quarter, then no way should you even think about it. Just stick to the gameplan. But what if its 14-3, and your offense has done nothing all day? It could be worth a chance. Maybe you find yourself in a 2nd & 1 situation which would be a great opportunity. All that being said, and knowing Kubiak, it will probably never happen. Just fun to talk about nonetheless.

 

[Rey]

I don't mind "trick" plays...

No one was complaining when LT was throwing TD's with the chargers...

A lot of football is about catching your opponent off guard...Yeah, there are times when you say "everyone knows what we are going to do, now stop it"....

But in order to be successful, as a play caller, you have to find a good balance and know when to gamble and when to just play it straight...

There is a lot that goes into play calling and I don't get mad unless something is just obviously stupid. I didn't get mad when Chris Brown threw that INT against Jacksonville because the idea was good, but the execution was poor...

But doing something "tricky" every now and then keeps your opponents on their toes and it doesn't let them key in on exactly what you're doing. That is the point. They have to play everything honestly and can't cheat up, or cheat back, or cheat over...Hell, our offense is basically set up that way with the bootlegs...It's just another way of keeping the defense honest...

 

[Rey]

I despise gimmick plays. Waste of a down, has the potential to blow up in your face, and then your team loses heart and the opponent gets a surge of momentum.

The risk outweighs the reward, IMO.

You could say the same thing about going for it on 4th and short in certain situations where you don't have to...

Yes there is some risk involved, but that's where play callers/HC's make their money....

I'm not saying that we MUST do it, but I think that the occasional wrinkle is ok.

 

[thunderkyss]

well in that case why dont we have Dre throw it to foster or cushing throw it to JJ


:kubepalm:

I was thinking we could have Foster running towards the tackle, then pitch it out to Casey like the option.

 

[GP]

In reply to those who have replied to me...

The old "If there's nothing there he could just throw it away" theory sounds good, but I don't trust a guy under pressure to think very clearly...I expect him to think he can make a play out of it, which will get a bad result. When you're under fire, and you've practiced the play over and over in only a few days leading up to the game...you begin to think it's up to YOU to make it happen, even in the heat of the moment when logic says to you, "Don't do it," your heart and passion for the play to succeed says, "You CAN do it. Trust that it's there. Throw it."

The comment from rey, IIRC, about how going for it on 4th and 1 and how that's similar to the risk of using a trick play...I don't agree. On a 4th and 1, you're doing what you've done since middle school football: Trying to pound away and get that 1 yard. You've practiced and performed lots of 3rd and 1, 2nd and 1, and even 4th and 1. You've likely never practiced AND performed trick plays as much as you have a 1-yard situation. The two scenarios are wildly different.

Lastly, the comments about The Music City Miracle and the Saints going for onside kick vs. Colts in Super Bowl. Those were two plays born out of sheer necessity (Ok, the Saints onside kick is arguable...but they were needing to get that score, not pulling an onside kick to get a 21-point lead on the Colts). The topic at hand, here, is about using a trick play in mid-stream of a game. Why do it? I don't get it. Just run your normal playbook and toss the trickery away for a more prudent time.

All in all, the replies are weak sauce. Trick plays out of nowhere, in the middle of a game to try and surprise your opponent, just boggle my mind.

 

[ObsiWan]

If we have to do something like that, then the game is already out of hand..

TJ

Not necessarily. The Steelers did it in SB XL to break open a tight game. (see below)

Why stop here, lets pick Chris Brown back up from wherever he is and let him run the play for us.

Okay, now you're just being silly.

Id rather TJ throw a handful of 40+ yard attempts into double/triple coverage to AJ vs this idea

So you'd rather throw into the strength of the defense several times than take one chance like this per game. Help me find the logic in that...

Misdirection and fakes, sure. Gimmick plays? No way. Let your players do what they do best at their positions.

Agreed. If the play works I'll call it genius, if it doesn't then I'll be angry and calling for Kubiak's head. So goes the life of a sports fan

At least you're up front about it. I can respect that.

 

[ObsiWan]

...doing something "tricky" every now and then keeps your opponents on their toes and it doesn't let them key in on exactly what you're doing. That is the point. They have to play everything honestly and can't cheat up, or cheat back, or cheat over...Hell, our offense is basically set up that way with the bootlegs...It's just another way of keeping the defense honest...

I'm with you here. I don't have an issue with doing something unconventional and uncharacteristic to throw the defense off balance.

Remember when Cowher's Steelers used Randall El to break the Seahawks' back in SB XL.

Probably the biggest play of the night, though, was Randle El's touchdown pass to Ward on a double-reverse play. The score essentially put the game out of reach and, typically, was set up perfectly by Whisenhunt on a previous call. Two plays before the gimmickry, the Steelers had run a quick screen to Randle El for a 7-yard gain. So on the long pass play, Pittsburgh aligned in the same formation, brought the tight end in motion, and tried to bait the Seahawks into thinking the screen was coming again.

Instead, Parker took a pitch, then handed it off to Randle El, who found Ward behind the Seahawks' defense for the score. Key to the play, Whisenhunt and Steelers players said, was the realization that the Seahawks were playing minus two starters in the secondary, and that the backup Pruitt was likely to bite on the reverse, and come up into the no-man's land in which no defensive back wants to be caught.

Last week, in offering his views on the game to ESPN.com, New England head coach Bill Belichick was adamant that Randle El would make a big play in Super Bowl XL. A play, he said, for which "an opponent can't plan." The "Fake-39 Toss X-Reverse Pass" was that play.

Randle El has three options on the play: throw deep to Ward, throw to Parker, who after pitching the ball proceeds up the left sideline, or keep the ball and run. Ward was so far behind Pruitt and cornerback Marcus Trufant, though, there was really no option at all.

"I was so open," recalled Ward, who finished with five catches for 123 yards, "that I just kept thinking, 'Please, ball get here, huh!' It just seemed like it happened in such slow motion, you know? But it was a great play call, at just the right time, something that we had run before and had some success with, and it worked again.

I particularly like the Steelers' version because it gives the passer three options, two of which are quick & easy reads.

1. Is the deep guy wide open?
   1. If "yes" hurry up and throw it for six.
   2. If "no" check the short guy.
2. Is the short guy wide open?
   1. If "yes" hurry up and throw it for a nice gain (Hey, and if it's Foster, maybe he breaks it).
   2. If "no" keep it and run.
3. Run the reverse. If they've maintained deep coverage AND have the RB (that should be 10-15 yds downfield) also covered, that means pulling it down and running it (especially with Casey being the ball carrier) should be able to pick up some nice yardage. Not to mention giving the defense something else to worry about.

Another thing I liked about this play was when they decided to run it. They ran it on first & 10. ...at mid-field. If it blows up - meaning all of the three options above are covered, worse case it's 2nd & 10.

And worse/worse case let's assume that GP's scenario, where Casey suddenly goes into "Hero Mode" (or panic mode), is credible. I don't think it is but let's play along. Casey tries to go deep but underthrows or floats one allowing Ed Reed to come back and make a play on the ball. IMO, that's no different than if T.J. tries to go deep to Andre and Reed makes a play on the ball. If we do this from midfield, it's as good as a punt.

all that to say, I like the idea but we need to be judicious in when it's done (consider down, field position, ebb & flow of the game, etc.; i.e., don't do it in desparation) and how we set it up (like the Steelers, make it look like something that burned the defense previously).

 

[infantrycak]

But doing something "tricky" every now and then keeps your opponents on their toes and it doesn't let them key in on exactly what you're doing. That is the point. They have to play everything honestly and can't cheat up, or cheat back, or cheat over...Hell, our offense is basically set up that way with the bootlegs...It's just another way of keeping the defense honest...

Agreed, not as a 1-2 times per game thing but 2-3 times a season. Personnel really matters. LT was 8 of 12 for 7 TD's as a passer. Why would you remove that from the playbook just to avoid trick plays.

Best trick play threat I can remember - Danny White as punter. Better legs than most punters and a heck of a threat to pass.

The old "If there's nothing there he could just throw it away" theory sounds good, but I don't trust a guy under pressure to think very clearly...I expect him to think he can make a play out of it, which will get a bad result. When you're under fire, and you've practiced the play over and over in only a few days leading up to the game...you begin to think it's up to YOU to make it happen, even in the heat of the moment when logic says to you, "Don't do it," your heart and passion for the play to succeed says, "You CAN do it. Trust that it's there. Throw it."

This isn't trying to teach Vonte Leach to throw a ball and make good decisions. We are talking about a guy who was a starting QB in HS and then in college was repeatedly called upon to make throws as well.