Championship Subdivision Football | FCS Football | Stadiums | Blogs | Forums

...or so all my so-called football-knowledgeable friends assure me.

Yet the Steelers got two points off of the option in the freaking Super Bowl.

If it'll never work, then how come it worked for them?

SuperHornet wrote:...or so all my so-called football-knowledgeable friends assure me.

Yet the Steelers got two points off of the option in the freaking Super Bowl.

If it'll never work, then how come it worked for them?

Can't remember if I've brought this up before, but is that a dick dimple poking out of the throat of your dike's avatar there?

No offense really, just askin'.

Screw you, Wedgie. Once MIGHT be funny, but this is getting unfunny REAL fast....

I've said it for a long time. If there's ever an NFL owner with the guts to run an Oregon or Auburn-esque offense in the NFL, they'd run shop. Of course, most of them believe the orthodox thought for offense in the NFL religiously and probably won't be swayed.

SuperHornet wrote:...or so all my so-called football-knowledgeable friends assure me.

Yet the Steelers got two points off of the option in the freaking Super Bowl.

If it'll never work, then how come it worked for them?

Because it was one play.

89Hen wrote:

SuperHornet wrote:...or so all my so-called football-knowledgeable friends assure me.

Yet the Steelers got two points off of the option in the freaking Super Bowl.

If it'll never work, then how come it worked for them?

Because it was one play.

It's not that the option won't work, it will to some extent, just like anything else. It's just that the QB won't last running it very often. The NFL is a QB league - if you don't have a great one, you generally don't win (yes, Dilfer is an anamoly, but if you have him you just need maybe the greatest defense ever to compensate). No one's going to consistently expose their QB to the hits he'd take in an option offense. Running it once a year is fine, but several times a game would be a disaster.

GannonFan wrote:It's not that the option won't work, it will to some extent, just like anything else. It's just that the QB won't last running it very often. The NFL is a QB league - if you don't have a great one, you generally don't win (yes, Dilfer is an anamoly, but if you have him you just need maybe the greatest defense ever to compensate). No one's going to consistently expose their QB to the hits he'd take in an option offense. Running it once a year is fine, but several times a game would be a disaster.

This is the closest I've ever seen to an anti-option offense that MIGHT work.

But the thing is, I really don't want to have a true wishbone-triple option attack. All I'm asking for is for a team to OCCASIONALLY (perhaps a couple of times a game or every few games) use speed option out of an ace package or PRE-DETERMINE the FB give or fake in short yardage or two-point situations. And there are plenty of other tools to use in similar situations so defenses can't completely key on the option. I say pre-determine the fake or give (ensuring, of course, that on a straight FB dive, the QB actually runs an option fake instead of just standing there asking to be hit) because that eliminates part of the decision making process. Unless a team is willing to devote 2/3 of their practice time to the full triple option, it's not going to work. But a team CAN have the illusion of it by keying off the outside backer (particularly on the strong side) if the CB and SS are run off by the wideouts. So you run the option THIS time, and then run play action off of it the next time and stretch or a short pass (especially a roll-out pass) the next few times. That way, the option can be a truly effective play in these limited-expectation situations and not be stuffed.

As others have said, you don't risk your multi-million dollar QB to this.

It was a trick play. Designed to be used in EXACTLY a situation like this. If it worked, they are within a FG of tying. If it didn't, they would need a TD, just like if they kicked the XTRA point.

Very high reward to risk ratio.

Wedgebuster wrote:

SuperHornet wrote:...or so all my so-called football-knowledgeable friends assure me.

Yet the Steelers got two points off of the option in the freaking Super Bowl.

If it'll never work, then how come it worked for them?

Can't remember if I've brought this up before, but is that a dick dimple poking out of the throat of your dike's avatar there?

No offense really, just askin'.

but seriously... is it?

SuperHornet wrote:

GannonFan wrote:It's not that the option won't work, it will to some extent, just like anything else. It's just that the QB won't last running it very often. The NFL is a QB league - if you don't have a great one, you generally don't win (yes, Dilfer is an anamoly, but if you have him you just need maybe the greatest defense ever to compensate). No one's going to consistently expose their QB to the hits he'd take in an option offense. Running it once a year is fine, but several times a game would be a disaster.

This is the closest I've ever seen to an anti-option offense that MIGHT work.

But the thing is, I really don't want to have a true wishbone-triple option attack. All I'm asking for is for a team to OCCASIONALLY (perhaps a couple of times a game or every few games) use speed option out of an ace package or PRE-DETERMINE the FB give or fake in short yardage or two-point situations. And there are plenty of other tools to use in similar situations so defenses can't completely key on the option. I say pre-determine the fake or give (ensuring, of course, that on a straight FB dive, the QB actually runs an option fake instead of just standing there asking to be hit) because that eliminates part of the decision making process. Unless a team is willing to devote 2/3 of their practice time to the full triple option, it's not going to work. But a team CAN have the illusion of it by keying off the outside backer (particularly on the strong side) if the CB and SS are run off by the wideouts. So you run the option THIS time, and then run play action off of it the next time and stretch or a short pass (especially a roll-out pass) the next few times. That way, the option can be a truly effective play in these limited-expectation situations and not be stuffed.

SH, is that you?? You learned all this from watching that Sac City Sirens team???

SuperHornet wrote:

GannonFan wrote:It's not that the option won't work, it will to some extent, just like anything else. It's just that the QB won't last running it very often. The NFL is a QB league - if you don't have a great one, you generally don't win (yes, Dilfer is an anamoly, but if you have him you just need maybe the greatest defense ever to compensate). No one's going to consistently expose their QB to the hits he'd take in an option offense. Running it once a year is fine, but several times a game would be a disaster.

This is the closest I've ever seen to an anti-option offense that MIGHT work.

But the thing is, I really don't want to have a true wishbone-triple option attack. All I'm asking for is for a team to OCCASIONALLY (perhaps a couple of times a game or every few games) use speed option out of an ace package or PRE-DETERMINE the FB give or fake in short yardage or two-point situations. And there are plenty of other tools to use in similar situations so defenses can't completely key on the option. I say pre-determine the fake or give (ensuring, of course, that on a straight FB dive, the QB actually runs an option fake instead of just standing there asking to be hit) because that eliminates part of the decision making process. Unless a team is willing to devote 2/3 of their practice time to the full triple option, it's not going to work. But a team CAN have the illusion of it by keying off the outside backer (particularly on the strong side) if the CB and SS are run off by the wideouts. So you run the option THIS time, and then run play action off of it the next time and stretch or a short pass (especially a roll-out pass) the next few times. That way, the option can be a truly effective play in these limited-expectation situations and not be stuffed.

The wildcat offense that got a little en vogue with the Dolphins running it is option based, and no one is really clammoring the copy it. And the Dolphins only ran it because they didn't have a QB anyway. If they had a QB who could really throw the ball they would dump that offense in a heartbeat. People run a lot of misdirection stuff anymore (like when they bring the receiver in motion pre-snap and then have him as an option on a speed sweep) but the NFL is a passing league - if you can't throw the ball, you don't win. Running the ball is passe, option or not.

Lemme know how it worked out for the Pittsburgh.

It does seem though, like wildcat teams in the NFL don't give the pass, pitch, or end around options much of a chance. How many times does a fella have to see Brad Smith line up at QB only to run a dive play for little to no gain?

It works in college because the defenses are young guys who aren't as disciplined with their assignments. The defenses in the NFL are not only disciplined, they're SO MUCH bigger and faster. Add that to the fact that these professionals prepare for offenses like it's no tomorrow and are conditioned to play for 16 weeks + playoffs, and you've got an answer for suppressing the option. Seriously, all the defense would have to do is line up everyone and bring pressure with the biggest and fastest dudes (aka. everyone in the NFL), and there'd be more people on defense going at the guy with the ball than blockers available. And again, this isn't college where it's young guys blowing their assignments because the option just confused them. These are professionals who know EXACTLY what to do and where to go, and would be well prepared for this type of offense.

Willie wrote:Lemme know how it worked out for the Pittsburgh.

Willie: That's a non-sequitur. The play worked great. It got them to within a FG. That they failed to capitalize later has NOTHING to do with the choice of 2-pt play.

Cubed: You're assuming every NFL defesive player stays home on every play. Just ask Green Bay about that.

SuperHornet wrote:

Willie wrote:Lemme know how it worked out for the Pittsburgh.

Willie: That's a non-sequitur. The play worked great. It got them to within a FG. That they failed to capitalize later has NOTHING to do with the choice of 2-pt play.

Cubed: You're assuming every NFL defesive player stays home on every play. Just ask Green Bay about that.

It worked because they weren't expecting it. IT WOULD NOT WORK as an offensive system in the NFL. You seem like a fairly sharp bloke, are working on a Master's, etc, yet you either fail to, or maybe just refuse to grasp some of the most simple concepts.

GATW: Who said anything about making it a freaking SYSTEM? It's not like I'm asking for teams to run the Wishbone, for crying out loud. All I'm asking for using some form of option every once in a while. The fact that it's not every time the situation comes up mitigates the possibility of the defense stuffing it. You OCCASIONALLY run speed option out of an ace formation and a two-back option out of I, split backs, off-set I, etc. Then run a play-action off of it. And in the same situations, sprinkle in some stretch, toss sweep, the short passing game, and even some fly patterns. That way, defenses can't key off of ANY of it.

And besides, on a straight option with a pre-determined fake, you only have to worry about TWO guys (in NFL terms): the outside backer, and the secondary run forcer (the SS or CB to the strong side or F/S or CB if you run it weak, which I really don't like). Theoretically, the LBer has the QB, while the CB or safety has the pitch man. The problem for the defense is that your flanker on the strong side or split end on the weak side runs off that DB, which forces the LBer to make a decision, which by definition is the wrong one: if he goes after the QB, the pitch goes around the end for at least five. If he goes after the pitch man, the QB is in the secondary. And if the DB ignores the receiver, you run play-action because your receiver is wide on the fade. But, again, it's merely a tool among many, NOT a whole freaking system.

It would absolutely work. The idiots that say the defenses are too fast are just recycling what idiot mediots say. NFL offenses are faster than NFL defenses at the skill positions.

Well, I heard that the Broncos are all over this incredible thread, and with the power of Tim Teabag, they will be going full "bone" next fall.

the option (which I fervently love by the way) is not tenable as a full-time offense in the NFL... each NFL squad is, in essence a college all star team... and as a result - you get defenders who are 1) very fast 2) very good at gap assignments and 3) hit too damn hard to allow your quarterback (a $50-100 million investment) to take the kinds of hits you have to take to run the option successfully long term.

added to that is this - the NFL rewards passing and punishes running... look at the rulebook changes since the late 90's (when the Vikings and Rams became teams the most casual fans would watch) - you now basically can't touch the quarterbacks, or the receivers... combine that with spot-foul PI penalties... there is huge incentive to play through the air.

added to that is also this... show me the agent who will let his star clients play in a system like that... If I were an NFLer, I'd take a lot less money to play in an offense that wasn't so brutal on the body. These guys have careers to think about... most college kids still playing the option are playing the much safer spread... and even then, only have to do so for a few years before graduating - playing in today's conditions for 10 years in the old-school option would cripple most guys, and I suspect no qb or hb would last that long...

TwinTownBisonFan wrote:the option (which I fervently love by the way) is not tenable as a full-time offense in the NFL... each NFL squad is, in essence a college all star team... and as a result - you get defenders who are 1) very fast 2) very good at gap assignments and 3) hit too damn hard to allow your quarterback (a $50-100 million investment) to take the kinds of hits you have to take to run the option successfully long term.

added to that is this - the NFL rewards passing and punishes running... look at the rulebook changes since the late 90's (when the Vikings and Rams became teams the most casual fans would watch) - you now basically can't touch the quarterbacks, or the receivers... combine that with spot-foul PI penalties... there is huge incentive to play through the air.

added to that is also this... show me the agent who will let his star clients play in a system like that... If I were an NFLer, I'd take a lot less money to play in an offense that wasn't so brutal on the body. These guys have careers to think about... most college kids still playing the option are playing the much safer spread... and even then, only have to do so for a few years before graduating - playing in today's conditions for 10 years in the old-school option would cripple most guys, and I suspect no qb or hb would last that long...

The Broncos will call it "The Tea-Bone"

Wedgebuster wrote:

TwinTownBisonFan wrote:the option (which I fervently love by the way) is not tenable as a full-time offense in the NFL... each NFL squad is, in essence a college all star team... and as a result - you get defenders who are 1) very fast 2) very good at gap assignments and 3) hit too damn hard to allow your quarterback (a $50-100 million investment) to take the kinds of hits you have to take to run the option successfully long term.

added to that is this - the NFL rewards passing and punishes running... look at the rulebook changes since the late 90's (when the Vikings and Rams became teams the most casual fans would watch) - you now basically can't touch the quarterbacks, or the receivers... combine that with spot-foul PI penalties... there is huge incentive to play through the air.

added to that is also this... show me the agent who will let his star clients play in a system like that... If I were an NFLer, I'd take a lot less money to play in an offense that wasn't so brutal on the body. These guys have careers to think about... most college kids still playing the option are playing the much safer spread... and even then, only have to do so for a few years before graduating - playing in today's conditions for 10 years in the old-school option would cripple most guys, and I suspect no qb or hb would last that long...

The Broncos will call it "The Tea-Bone"

not "the dimple" ???

eagleskins wrote:It would absolutely work. The idiots that say the defenses are too fast are just recycling what idiot mediots say. NFL offenses are faster than NFL defenses at the skill positions.

And yet here we are. 32 NFL head coaches and 32 NFL Offensive Coordinators would disagree with you.