Completely legal substitution aka the "John Harbaugh is a whiny little brat" thread.

mulluysavage

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 19, 2005
714
Reads threads backwards
Could you have a C and RB at the ball, then 5 WR/TE/RB wide left, 3 ineligible, and 4 WR/TE/RB right, 2 ineligible?

Snap to the RB and run versus 2 or less D lined up at the ball.

More than 2 lined up at ball: bubble screen lateral to *anybody* on either side.

Mass confusion on D everywhere.
 

Kevin Youkulele

wishes Claude Makelele was a Red Sox
Gold Supporter
SoSH Member
Jul 12, 2006
8,935
San Diego
mulluysavage said:
Could you have a C and RB at the ball, then 5 WR/TE/RB wide left, 3 ineligible, and 4 WR/TE/RB right, 2 ineligible?

Snap to the RB and run versus 2 or less D lined up at the ball.

More than 2 lined up at ball: bubble screen lateral to *anybody* on either side.

Mass confusion on D everywhere.
You made a math error, I think.  There are only 5 ineligible total and one is the C.  So most likely only 2 of the 5 wide left are ineligible.  You can also only have one eligible on the line of scrimmage on each side, so one of the eligibles on the right and two of the eligibles on the left would need to stand a yard back from the line at the snap, the way a slot receiver typically does.
 

Super Nomario

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 5, 2000
14,024
Mansfield MA
mulluysavage said:
Could you have a C and RB at the ball, then 5 WR/TE/RB wide left, 3 ineligible, and 4 WR/TE/RB right, 2 ineligible?

Snap to the RB and run versus 2 or less D lined up at the ball.

More than 2 lined up at ball: bubble screen lateral to *anybody* on either side.

Mass confusion on D everywhere.
Chip Kelly didn't go quite this far, but he did line up his tackles super-wide on a couple plays earlier this year:
 

 
This would be best with a running QB - in your HB example, I think you send a couple rushers at him and bet that he's going to do something dumb with the football.
 

Kevin Youkulele

wishes Claude Makelele was a Red Sox
Gold Supporter
SoSH Member
Jul 12, 2006
8,935
San Diego
In a scenario like the PHI formation above, when can the ineligibles cross the line of scrimmage without incurring an ineligible downfield penalty, assuming a forward pass is thrown to one of the eligibles?  Is it when the pass is thrown or when it is caught?
 

speedracer

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 19, 2005
3,837
Kevin Youkulele said:
Does anyone know the story behind the rule that  player on the line of scrimmage is ineligible if covered up by another player on the line?  It seems kind of arbitrary.  I get having a requirement that five players be ineligible - presumably it was needed to provide balance so that the defense is not overly disadvantaged against the pass.  
 
I don't really get the requirements to have exactly seven players on the offensive line, and that only the ends can receive forward passes.  Why does the seven players on the line rule apply only to the offense?
 
(Not to say there aren't plenty of other arbitrary rules in football.  One of the strangest I think is how the timing rules go back and forth between early-game and late-game timing--is there any other sport where timing rules change three times in the course of the game (or more if there's OT)?  Who decided that going out of bounds at 5:01 in the fourth quarter should have a different consequence from going out of bounds at 4:59?)
 
Pretty sure the 7 men on the LOS rule is to outlaw flying wedges.
 

Kevin Youkulele

wishes Claude Makelele was a Red Sox
Gold Supporter
SoSH Member
Jul 12, 2006
8,935
San Diego
speedracer said:
 
Pretty sure the 7 men on the LOS rule is to outlaw flying wedges.
According to this paper, the outlawing of flying wedges was originally accomplished by the rule against multiple players being in motion at the snap:
 
http://library.la84.org/SportsLibrary/JSH/JSH1993/JSH2001/jsh2001f.pdf
 
This is not to say there wasn't some subsequent innovation where the wedge wasn't started until after the snap and a further rule change was needed, but if there was, I haven't found it.  Although this blog post is suggestive:
http://bluegraysky.blogspot.com/2005/01/breaking-up-flying-wedge.html
 

lexrageorge

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2007
18,244
Kevin Youkulele said:
In a scenario like the PHI formation above, when can the ineligibles cross the line of scrimmage without incurring an ineligible downfield penalty, assuming a forward pass is thrown to one of the eligibles?  Is it when the pass is thrown or when it is caught?
Once the ball is in the air, the ineligible receivers can move beyond 1 yard from the LOS.  
 

8slim

has trust issues
SoSH Member
Nov 6, 2001
24,970
Unreal America
Need help... Been having tedious conversation with guy who is convinced that what the Pats did was illegal because Vereen and/or Hooman were switching their status between elligible and inelligible play to play without checking out/into the game.

1) did that happen? 2) if so, what is the rule that allows a player to stay in a game while changing eligibility?

He's quoted sections of the rule book that make it seem like a player does indeed need to check out to change his status.

I'd like to shut him the hell up.

Thanks in advance.
 

CaptainLaddie

dj paul pfieffer
SoSH Member
Sep 6, 2004
36,936
where the darn libs live
They didn't actually do that.  If you watch the tape, they only do it three times -- and each time, they both come off the field afterward (Bolden replaces Vereen, the RT replaces Hooman).
 
Yes, you have to check out to change your status back to your standard eligibility.  Fortunately, they did.  After each snap, both players come off the field and return at a later point.  The other thing to keep in mind is that if you're already on the field you can stay on the field if you change to eligible/ineligible so long as you're changing to the one you're not normally.  Meaning: Vereen is on the field as an eligible receiver on the LaFell first down, then changes to ineligible.  That's fine.  But to go back to eligible (what he's qualified for as a player with a number between 01-49 and 80-89) he has to sit a play out.  Hooman never stays on the field two plays in a row as an eligible receiver and never goes from eligible to ineligible and back or anything like that without taking a play or two off.
 
Basically your friend is stupid.  You can watch the game tape and see that the Patriots not only follow the rule properly, they actually give enough time for Baltimore to make substitutions.
 

Reverend

for king and country
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jan 20, 2007
64,604
8slim said:
Need help... Been having tedious conversation with guy who is convinced that what the Pats did was illegal because Vereen and/or Hooman were switching their status between elligible and inelligible play to play without checking out/into the game.

1) did that happen? 2) if so, what is the rule that allows a player to stay in a game while changing eligibility?

He's quoted sections of the rule book that make it seem like a player does indeed need to check out to change his status.

I'd like to shut him the hell up.

Thanks in advance.
You're friend is correct that the player does need to check out and such, or there needs to be a TO etc.

He does not, however, understand the sequence of plays. The declared ineligible plays were not consecutive and had appropriate changes between them and such to make them legal.

It's.all pretty clear if you look at each play in sequence. What sucks about this is wha: being lost in how they ran a whole sequence that had Vereen doing hardcore performance acting, acting the same when he was eligible AND ineligible during the sequence.

I'm basically dying from some unknown disease, but if this is not clear when I become coherent, remind me and I'll post video/
 

E5 Yaz

polka king
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Apr 25, 2002
90,688
Oregon
8slim said:
I'd like to shut him the hell up.

Thanks in advance.
 
Laddie and Rev answered the question, but I wanted to offer some advice to this part.
 
You're not going to shut him up. You could have Blandino meet your both for beers and have him explain the course of events to your friend, and your friend would say that the NFL is covering up for the Patriots.
 
If the statement from the NFL that the Pats did nothing wrong didn't convince him, nothing will.
 
He's one of those.
 

lexrageorge

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2007
18,244
8slim said:
Need help... Been having tedious conversation with guy who is convinced that what the Pats did was illegal because Vereen and/or Hooman were switching their status between elligible and inelligible play to play without checking out/into the game.

1) did that happen? 2) if so, what is the rule that allows a player to stay in a game while changing eligibility?

He's quoted sections of the rule book that make it seem like a player does indeed need to check out to change his status.

I'd like to shut him the hell up.

Thanks in advance.
Ben Volin spells it out in plain English in today's Globe:
 
http://www.bostonglobe.com/sports/2015/01/12/patriots-receiver-eligibility-tactic-could-catch/eTiRiTUbQaECsPGF4e8APJ/story.html
 
He mentions each of the 3 plays during which the Pats placed a normally eligible receiver in an ineligible role.  Summary: the first 2 times, the player in question went to the bench for a play before returning to the game.  The last time, there was no need to do that as Harbaugh threw his hissy fit and got called for a penalty.  
 
It's all spelled out very clearly in the NFL rulebook; but I realize that none of that matters to the haters. 
 

Smiling Joe Hesketh

Throw Momma From the Train
Moderator
SoSH Member
May 20, 2003
35,912
Deep inside Muppet Labs
There is no Rev said:
You're friend is correct that the player does need to check out and such, or there needs to be a TO etc.

He does not, however, understand the sequence of plays. The declared ineligible plays were not consecutive and had appropriate changes between them and such to make them legal.

It's.all pretty clear if you look at each play in sequence. What sucks about this is wha: being lost in how they ran a whole sequence that had Vereen doing hardcore performance acting, acting the same when he was eligible AND ineligible during the sequence.

I'm basically dying from some unknown disease, but if this is not clear when I become coherent, remind me and I'll post video/
 
As mentioned, the plays were not run consecutively.
 
Play order:

1st ineligible: Brady to Hooman for 16 yards
THEN: Brady to Gronk for 9 yards
THEN: Brady sneak, Ravens had too many men on field
2nd ineligible: Brady to Edelman for 11 yards
THEN: Brady to Edelman for 4 yards
3rd ineligible: Brady to Hooman for 14 yards
Harbaugh penalty
 
In short: get smarter friends.
 

BigJimEd

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 4, 2002
4,457
Yates reported Lions did something similar against the Vikings but they had an O lineman split out instead.
Apparently the Vikings covered him still and left the end man on the other side of the LOS uncovered. Of course, Stafford was sacked on the play.

I don't see why Harbaugh got all upset. Why Ravens didn't just go safe is beyond me and it's not like the Pats had Solder declare eligible and threw to him.
 

soxfan121

JAG
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 22, 2002
23,043
The most interesting thing to me is that apparently John Harbaugh doesn't watch much film. Or, watches only his opponents' film. 

Because the numerous examples offered - some from his own players - in this thread make his "never saw it before" a laughably egregious lie.
 

bakahump

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jan 8, 2001
7,568
Maine
Could the pats use this in conjunction with thier "patented" WR Screens? (ok maybe it was patented back in 04....)
 
Announce Vereen as ineligble..... put him on the right.
 
Have the 4 man line + Hooman in tight (for the Confusion aspect....do we cover him? is he a tackle?)
 
Then Line up WRs and Josh Kline out wide to the left.  Throw a screen to the WR out to the left
Let Kline Clean out DBs like a snow plow.
 
If they leave Vereen uncovered.....through him a long Lateral (backwards pass like the Edelman catch on the Double pass play) and let him get the ball in space.
 
If they put a guy with Size (DT,DE or LB) out on the "Screen Team" of Kline and the WRs....then you run some pick play hoping to get a mismatch of a WR on a LBer or DE.
 

Devizier

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 3, 2000
19,606
Somewhere
bakahump said:
Could the pats use this in conjunction with thier "patented" WR Screens? (ok maybe it was patented back in 04....)
 
Announce Vereen as ineligble..... put him on the right.
 
Have the 4 man line + Hooman in tight (for the Confusion aspect....do we cover him? is he a tackle?)
 
Then Line up WRs and Josh Kline out wide to the left.  Throw a screen to the WR out to the left
Let Kline Clean out DBs like a snow plow.
 
If they leave Vereen uncovered.....through him a long Lateral (backwards pass like the Edelman catch on the Double pass play) and let him get the ball in space.
 
If they put a guy with Size (DT,DE or LB) out on the "Screen Team" of Kline and the WRs....then you run some pick play hoping to get a mismatch of a WR on a LBer or DE.
 
I suppose they could, but that makes the screen hugely risky with the lateral component.
 

8slim

has trust issues
SoSH Member
Nov 6, 2001
24,970
Unreal America
Bless you guys.
 
This dude isn't even really a friend, and I know so much better than to let dopes get under my skin.  I normally let it go because there's no reasoning with someone who thinks the game is fixed in favor of the Pats because Kraft and Goodell are buddies.  But I just had to get this part right so I could sleep at night!
 
On to Indianapolis.
 

bakahump

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jan 8, 2001
7,568
Maine
Devizier said:
 
I suppose they could, but that makes the screen hugely risky with the lateral component.
Dev the "lateral" is only if you decide that the Screen Side (Left in my example) is covered too well
and
That the Vereen Side (right side) is uncovered by  a defender.
 
ONLY then would you "lateral" (Reverse Pass acutually as it will be 10-12 yards out to Vereen) and let Vereen run.
 
IF the Screen is there.....Vereen is only Decoy (occupying a defender at the other side of the formation) and it would be just like every other screen the pats run.
 

BigJimEd

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 4, 2002
4,457
bakahump said:
Could the pats use this in conjunction with thier "patented" WR Screens? (ok maybe it was patented back in 04....)
 
Announce Vereen as ineligble..... put him on the right.
 
Have the 4 man line + Hooman in tight (for the Confusion aspect....do we cover him? is he a tackle?)
 
Then Line up WRs and Josh Kline out wide to the left.  Throw a screen to the WR out to the left
Let Kline Clean out DBs like a snow plow.
 
If they leave Vereen uncovered.....through him a long Lateral (backwards pass like the Edelman catch on the Double pass play) and let him get the ball in space.
 
If they put a guy with Size (DT,DE or LB) out on the "Screen Team" of Kline and the WRs....then you run some pick play hoping to get a mismatch of a WR on a LBer or DE.
who's outside of Vereen on the right? If he's out there by himself then he's eligible.

Which side is Hooman on? Is he on the line because then he's ineligible since either Kline or Vereen is covering him.
Is Kline eligible or is someone covering him?
 

DJnVa

Dorito Dawg
SoSH Member
Dec 16, 2010
54,235
Dev the "lateral" is only if you decide that the Screen Side (Left in my example) is covered too well
and
That the Vereen Side (right side) is uncovered by  a defender.
 
ONLY then would you "lateral" (Reverse Pass acutually as it will be 10-12 yards out to Vereen) and let Vereen run.
 
IF the Screen is there.....Vereen is only Decoy (occupying a defender at the other side of the formation) and it would be just like every other screen the pats run.
 
 
 
The idea though is simplicity and not a hell of a lot of moving parts because there's so many ways that can go wrong.
 

bakahump

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jan 8, 2001
7,568
Maine
BigJimEd said:
who's outside of Vereen on the right? If he's out there by himself then he's eligible.

Which side is Hooman on? Is he on the line because then he's ineligible since either Kline or Vereen is covering him.
Is Kline eligible or is someone covering him?
Harbaughs right......this shit is hard!  :p
 
Good point....I didnt account for the players needing to cover both of them.  (in my example I envisioned Kline reporting as Eligable and hooman elgible and covered by Vereen.  That still leaves No one covering Kline.....unless I guess one of the WRs out in the Screen Bunch cover him.....or he himself get up on the line (and is the outside guy).  Essentially he is only there to block anyway.
 
I think that would work.  
 
Anyway its amazing that BB and the staff can get us thinking about so many different possibilities in something many (including other head coaches) took for granted.
 

Leather

given himself a skunk spot
SoSH Member
Jul 18, 2005
28,451
This shit is so exhausting, and it all stems back to the Patriots violating a technical rule, not one that gave them a material, or unfair, advantage.
 

Super Nomario

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 5, 2000
14,024
Mansfield MA
I don't really agree that Vereen has to be respected because he can catch a lateral. He has to line up on the LOS, so he has to run backwards at the snap in order to catch a lateral. Meanwhile, Brady is almost certainly going to be in the shotgun, because you don't want him to have to take even a three-step drop with only four OL. So the geometry is all wrong - if Vereen catches a lateral he's probably getting it five yards behind the LOS with his momentum going in the wrong direction. Even if he's uncovered at the snap it's hard to see things going well if he gets the ball.
 

Eddie Jurak

canderson-lite
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 12, 2002
44,831
Melrose, MA
drleather2001 said:
This shit is so exhausting, and it all stems back to the Patriots violating a technical rule, not one that gave them a material, or unfair, advantage.
What rule did they violate?
 

Stitch01

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
18,155
Boston
I don't think they are going to be running this much or at all without the element of surprise, it worked because the Ravens played a very predictable scheme on early downs and didn't know how to react to the formation and left the "tackle" uncovered.  Im not sure we really want to be running that play with the Colts prepping for it and responding by overloading three rushers on Vereen's side or showing double a gap pressure or any other pass rush look that normally forces the O Line to communicate correctly in order to avoid a free shot at Brady.
 

Eddie Jurak

canderson-lite
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 12, 2002
44,831
Melrose, MA
Stitch01 said:
I don't think they are going to be running this much or at all without the element of surprise, it worked because the Ravens played a very predictable scheme on early downs and didn't know how to react to the formation and left the "tackle" uncovered.  Im not sure we really want to be running that play with the Colts prepping for it and responding by overloading three rushers on Vereen's side or showing double a gap pressure or any other pass rush look that normally forces the O Line to communicate correctly in order to avoid a free shot at Brady.
I agree. I could see them "showing" it, to try to get the Colts to burn a time out, maybe. But I doubt they go back to that well to actually run a play.
 

Reverend

for king and country
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jan 20, 2007
64,604
Stitch01 said:
I don't think they are going to be running this much or at all without the element of surprise, it worked because the Ravens played a very predictable scheme on early downs and didn't know how to react to the formation and left the "tackle" uncovered.  Im not sure we really want to be running that play with the Colts prepping for it and responding by overloading three rushers on Vereen's side or showing double a gap pressure or any other pass rush look that normally forces the O Line to communicate correctly in order to avoid a free shot at Brady.
 
They had also decided to quit on the run altogether and were super focused on Brady getting the ball out super quick on basically every down already, so they were in a mindset well suited for a minimal protection scheme.
 

( . ) ( . ) and (_!_)

T&A
SoSH Member
Feb 9, 2010
5,302
Providence, RI
After all this talking back and forth, I'm dying to see them line up in a similar type formation with Vereen on the line in the slot, but as an eligible receiver and then call the ref over or stop to talk to the ref on the way to his spot.
 
 Not to announce himself as ineligible but just to tell the ref that he thought the guy's shoe was about to come untied or something.  The righteous indignation from all non-patriots fans would be awesome.  
 

Leather

given himself a skunk spot
SoSH Member
Jul 18, 2005
28,451
dynomite said:
He's saying that ever since Spygate was blown out of proportion everything the Patriots do is viewed with similarly hysterical frothing by many outside of New England.
 
Exactly.  
 
Can't ever enjoy a close win in peace, there's always some absolute bullshit that gets heaped on top.   
 

wade boggs chicken dinner

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 26, 2005
30,824
Super Nomario said:
I don't really agree that Vereen has to be respected because he can catch a lateral. He has to line up on the LOS, so he has to run backwards at the snap in order to catch a lateral. Meanwhile, Brady is almost certainly going to be in the shotgun, because you don't want him to have to take even a three-step drop with only four OL. So the geometry is all wrong - if Vereen catches a lateral he's probably getting it five yards behind the LOS with his momentum going in the wrong direction. Even if he's uncovered at the snap it's hard to see things going well if he gets the ball.
 
Vereen could run a jet sweep and take a hand-off, couldn't he?
 

Stitch01

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
18,155
Boston
There is no Rev said:
 
They had also decided to quit on the run altogether and were super focused on Brady getting the ball out super quick on basically every down already, so they were in a mindset well suited for a minimal protection scheme.
Plus they were playing fast, so if the Ravens weren't going to burn a TO it was going to be hard for the Ravens to adjust to it on the fly.  Colts shouldnt have that problem.
 

Kevin Youkulele

wishes Claude Makelele was a Red Sox
Gold Supporter
SoSH Member
Jul 12, 2006
8,935
San Diego
tims4wins said:
 
I don't think ineligibles can be in motion at the snap?
Right. Ineligibles must be on the line and players on the line cannot be in motion at the snap.
 

Harry Hooper

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jan 4, 2002
34,628
In the event Brady were lined up under center, there would be the possibility of an uncovered Vereen taking about 3 steps backward at the snap and getting a quick screen lateral/pass. I agree that Vereen going back to Brady in the shotgun to get a handoff or lateral would typically take so long that the defense would come up and stuff the run. Now if Vereen took the handoff and then threw a pass... 
 

bakahump

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jan 8, 2001
7,568
Maine
A double Pass out of this formation!
 
Nahhhh.  The Pats would never do it.  And who would they have that could  confidently catch the reverse pass....then make a spot on deep pass.   You would have to make a guy like that in a lab or something.
 
Plus I think the collective mind of every other NFL coach would explode.
 

Harry Hooper

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jan 4, 2002
34,628
Yes, I stuck with Vereen and didn't name the obvious candidate for the purposes of simplification.
 

Gunfighter 09

wants to be caribou ken
Moderator
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2005
8,550
KPWT
Besides deception which makes the greater Harbaugh cry, the key advantage of the formation, probably better illustrated by the philly formation, is that the defense is outnumbered on both edges.

Of course the offense is outnumbered in the center of the field and closest to the QB, so the question is whether the QB can get an accurate pass out to the edges to one of the eligible receivers before an unblocked DE or OLB destroys him. Of course, given time to adjust a defense would further spread out to counter the numbers advantage... Which might make them vulnerable to the QB keeping and getting through an unfilled gap at the line etc. etc.

Just like with the wildcat, we will see ten cool versions and even more effective counters to this next year and then it will fade away.
 

Super Nomario

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 5, 2000
14,024
Mansfield MA
Harry Hooper said:
In the event Brady were lined up under center, there would be the possibility of an uncovered Vereen taking about 3 steps backward at the snap and getting a quick screen lateral/pass. I agree that Vereen going back to Brady in the shotgun to get a handoff or lateral would typically take so long that the defense would come up and stuff the run. Now if Vereen took the handoff and then threw a pass... 
You want to line Brady under center and have him take a drop with a TE playing LT? Seems pretty risky to me. Plus, QB drops are fast. Vereen would have to be really moving backwards to be in position to catch a lateral at the bottom of a three-step drop. That doesn't make a lot of sense to me. If you compare to the lateral to Edelman, Brady was under center, didn't even take a full drop, and Edelman started the play well back of the LOS. The only way I could see something like what you're describing working is if you have a mobile QB run towards the ineligible receiver and use him as a pitch man in a sort of option look - obviously not the sort of thing you want to do with Brady.
 

ivanvamp

captain obvious
Jul 18, 2005
6,104
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - 47 - 63 - 66 - 62 - 76 - - - - - - - 34 - - - - 19
- - - 87 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -12 - - - - - - - - - - (77) - - - - 77        - Solder can line up in either spot there
 
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 11 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
 
Ok, very strange formation, right?  But it satisfies all the requirements.  7 guys on the line, the five ineligibles are Connelly, Stork, Wendell, Vollmer, and Vereen.  The five eligibles are Gronk, Hooman, LaFell, Solder, and Edelman.
 
What are the defense's priorities?  Well, you leave Gronk one-on-one on the left, and he can beat you short or deep against almost any coverage.  Edelman can take a handoff or a pitch and run like a RB (not all game long, but for a few plays here and there).  He's so dynamic with the ball.  Hooman can block well enough to hold up for a moment or two anyway against smaller defensive ends.  Edelman is tough enough to pick up a blitzed coming from Brady's left - again, maybe not for long, but enough to save Brady's bacon.  Solder you don't worry about catching passes, of course, but out of this set, you have some incredible blocking potential on the right side.  A decent enough blocking RB in Vereen, Solder is a really good blocking Tackle, and LaFell is an excellent blocker for a WR.  
 
Patriots options off this:
 
1.  A straight handoff or pitch to Edelman to the right - run behind Wendell, Vollmer, Vereen, Solder, and LaFell.  
2.  A short slant to Gronk on the left.
3.  A seam pattern to Hooman.
4.  After Gronk and Hooman clear out the left, a screen or swing pass to Edelman in space on the left.
5.  Have Vereen step back for a lateral with Edelman pushing forward and he, Vollmer, Solder, and LaFell blocking for Vereen.
6.  A WR screen to LaFell behind Vereen and Solder.
 
Obviously you can't run your whole offense like this all day long, but there are a TON of interesting and creative things you could do just from this basic set.  And if you wanted more passing options and less blocking, put Wright in there for Solder.  He's a better blocker than a typical WR, but a better receiver than Solder (obviously).  If teams waste a defender to cover Solder then that opens space elsewhere.  If they don't, you overwhelm them blocking with a numbers advantage.  Or, because Solder used to play TE, I presume he can catch a soft, wide-open pass a few yards downfield, so you run LaFell on a fly pattern to clear out the space and you hit Solder who will be wide open.
 
So much you could do off this.
 

Kevin Youkulele

wishes Claude Makelele was a Red Sox
Gold Supporter
SoSH Member
Jul 12, 2006
8,935
San Diego
If you switch the positions of Solder and Vereen, a screen to Vereen need not be a backward pass.  The alignment becomes more like a basic unbalanced line, no one needs to declare ineligible, and if there are only two defenders over Vereen and LaFell, Solder can probably blow up one of them and LaFell can clear out the other with a go route or block, making the screen rather attractive.  If they have three defenders there, then either the pass rush is 3-man (suggesting an Edelman run) or two of 11, 47, and 87 are single-covered.
 

Harry Hooper

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jan 4, 2002
34,628
Super Nomario said:
You want to line Brady under center and have him take a drop with a TE playing LT? Seems pretty risky to me. Plus, QB drops are fast. Vereen would have to be really moving backwards to be in position to catch a lateral at the bottom of a three-step drop. That doesn't make a lot of sense to me. If you compare to the lateral to Edelman, Brady was under center, didn't even take a full drop, and Edelman started the play well back of the LOS. The only way I could see something like what you're describing working is if you have a mobile QB run towards the ineligible receiver and use him as a pitch man in a sort of option look - obviously not the sort of thing you want to do with Brady.
 
Brady has been running the play for years where he's under center, gets the snap, straightens up more than drops, and very quickly fires a flat pass out to a receiver. I was proposing a variation on that if the defense decided to ignore ineligible Vereen on the LOS.
 

ivanvamp

captain obvious
Jul 18, 2005
6,104
Kevin Youkulele said:
If you switch the positions of Solder and Vereen, a screen to Vereen need not be a backward pass.  The alignment becomes more like a basic unbalanced line, no one needs to declare ineligible, and if there are only two defenders over Vereen and LaFell, Solder can probably blow up one of them and LaFell can clear out the other with a go route or block, making the screen rather attractive.  If they have three defenders there, then either the pass rush is 3-man (suggesting an Edelman run) or two of 11, 47, and 87 are single-covered.
 
Right, but having Solder eligible and Vereen not makes it much more confusing for the defense.  
 
M

MentalDisabldLst

Guest
TMQ adds his two cents:
 
 
 
In other NFL news, following the Ravens' defeat in Massachusetts, John Harbaugh complained that the Patriots' completely legal tactic of confusing the defense about which receivers were eligible was "not something that anybody's ever done before."
 
Really? The action was similar to the unbalanced-line illusion Baylor created in its bowl game just two weeks ago -- in that case, an eligible receiver appeared to the defense to be the left tackle. The estimable Peter King of Sports Illustrated notes that Nick Saban's Alabama squad has used the split-ineligible action. Emory & Henry College, a Division III program, has been employing split linemen for decades. Your columnist has seen many variations on this alignment in high school play. The entire All-11 offense fad, which swept the California prep landscape a decade ago, was based on confusing defenses by splitting out ineligible players. All-11 offenses also put two quarterbacks on the field at the same time. How soon until Belichick does that, and defeated coaches claim it was somehow unfair?
 
He also spends 500 words arguing that coach/QB continuity leads to playoff appearances and success... without bothering to make any mention of the correlation/causation question there, much less make a compelling case that the former leads to the latter and not vice-versa.
 
edit: later, TMQ gives more context, although nothing that will surprise most people in this thread...
 


Sweet 'N' Sour Play: New England had fallen behind 28-14 in the third quarter and seemed to be staring down the barrel of yet another postseason loss to Baltimore. The home crowd -- it's been some time since TMQ has called the place where the Patriots play the "Our Next Razor Will Have 12 Vibrating Palladium Blades Plus GPS Stadium" -- was eerily silent. As the Patriots' offense slouched onto the field, its body language was all wrong. The Flying Elvii looked beat. Then Belichick did something he never does: he gave the green light to trick plays.
 
Reaching second-and-6 on the Baltimore 24, the Patriots had tailback Shane Vereen report ineligible. He split wide right as part of a double-double formation, with two guys wide on each side. Vereen was a split tackle in an unbalanced line. Looking at the Patriots' seven men on the line of scrimmage from Tom Brady's perspective, it was an unbalanced line of tight end Michael Hoomanawanui; left guard; center; right guard; tackle No. 1; tackle No. 2 (Vereen); right end. Looking from the Baltimore defensive perspective, Vereen seemed like a wide receiver while Hoomanawanui seemed like the left tackle.
 
At the snap, Vereen stepped backward -- he couldn't go downfield -- while Hoomanawanui shot up the field uncovered for a catch to the Baltimore 10. The play not only positioned the Patriots to score a touchdown but also electrified the crowd, getting home energy back into the game. Sweet.
 
There's no rule there must be five offensive linemen on the field, only that there must be five ineligible players on the line of scrimmage, known as ineligible to the defense. New England complied. Offensive linemen could place themselves all along the line of scrimmage -- they do sometimes at Oregon, and in this standard Emory & Henry alignment. There's no rule saying the ball must be snapped by a guy at the center; it can be snapped by anyone on the line of scrimmage. Five huge guys bunched in the middle is a custom, not a rule. Sour that Baltimore didn't know this -- and especially sour that, confronted with a very unusual formation, the Ravens didn't simply call time.
 
After the touchdown that followed the trick formation, Baltimore went three-and-out. New England called a wide receiver pass with Julian Edelman, a quarterback in college, lobbing a 51-strike to an uncovered man. In the past three seasons, New England has been running an ungodly number of hitch screens: the play began by looking like a hitch screen, drawing up the secondary. Sweet. Suddenly the contest was tied, with Baltimore losing a 14-point lead in less than three minutes. Sour.
 
He gets a lot of crap for beating the dead Spygate horse, but I think he really does admire Belichick.
 

Super Nomario

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 5, 2000
14,024
Mansfield MA
Harry Hooper said:
 
Brady has been running the play for years where he's under center, gets the snap, straightens up more than drops, and very quickly fires a flat pass out to a receiver. I was proposing a variation on that if the defense decided to ignore ineligible Vereen on the LOS.
Well sure, but usually that guy's in the slot and thus is starting the play behind the LOS, and the pass doesn't have to backwards. It's a different animal if the "receiver" is starting the play on the LOS and the pass cannot be a forward pass. The timing and geometry is off - either Brady has to "lead" Vereen backwards, or he has to stand there and wait (behind a 4 OL line) for Vereen to get behind him.