Jump to content

Does a great RB make Play Action passing better?


Recommended Posts

50 minutes ago, nine said:

I'd say it probably depends on how disciplined the defense is.    If they focus strictly on executing their assignments and reading their keys, then the RB probably doesn't matter as much.   


But there's also the element of human nature and defenders who are less disciplined.    They know Henry's reputation and they've seen what he does.....so when he's on the field,  they're probably going to be more aggressive and take more risks than they would if it was McNichol or Sargent in the backfield.

 

Only after the handoff. If LBs did what you suggests, they would be out of position all the time and get benched. The reason Playaction works an insane amount of the time is precisely because LBs have to honor the fake unless they prediagnose pass. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 733
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Woof. This thread is truly just a who’s who of screaming at the top of their lungs to let others know how little they actually understand the sport

Greg Cosell talks about this all the time.   Defenses line up vs formation and tendency. If the Titans line up with two TEs/FB(heavy sets). The defense is going to play a run defense and lik

On one side you have all  the board retards, on the other side everyone else.  

Posted Images

HOF players always are outliers.  Anyone who thinks Tannehill drives Henry is clueless.  Henry is the engine in this Ferrari.  Achievement is talent plus preparation and anyone who sees what Henry puts into his craft knows he is avery serious about his craft. He also loves it.  Hard work is a prison sentence only if it does not have meaning.

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, oldschool said:

 

Only after the handoff. If LBs did what you suggests, they would be out of position all the time and get benched. The reason Playaction works an insane amount of the time is precisely because LBs have to honor the fake unless they prediagnose pass. 

Care to explain how the 2014-2015 Packers offense changed so tremendously those two years?

 

In 2015, the Packers were literally the worst play-action passing team in the league, ranking dead last according to Football Outsiders.  To compound matters, the Packers were actually pretty respectable at passing the ball normally, ranking 9th in the league.  Given that the Packers ranked 2nd in play-action plays in 2014. So what has changed during those two years? It was the decline of Eddie Lacy that resulted in poor play-action, after all if conventional wisdom is correct, an ineffective Lacy would result in defenses playing for the pass, which diminishes the play-action passing game. 

 

The best way that the play action pass works without the run game is situational football, and even then it has to be properly executed. Situations such as 3rd-and-short, for example, can particularly be a good time to call this because the defense is unable to key in on what the offense will do run or pass, thus keeping them honest and having to respect both possibilities, consequently giving the offense the upper hand.  

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, oldschool said:

 

The reason Playaction works an insane amount of the time is precisely because LBs have to honor the fake unless they prediagnose pass. 

Contradiction at its finest. You are saying a bunch of nothing. 

 

23 minutes ago, oldschool said:

 

If LBs did what you suggests, they would be out of position all the time and get benched. 

No they wouldn't because its not like play action passed get called alot, they get called about 20% or 25% of the time in each game.

Link to post
Share on other sites

You obviously don't need a great RB to deploy effective PA, that I think everyone can agree on. JAG running backs can be used in a heavy PA system and those offenses can work great doing it.

 

That doesn't necessarily mean a great RB doesn't improve upon this, but the data doesn't support this theory. So, for those that still believe it does, what data can you show to support the idea the Titans PA is even better because of Henry? obviously it will be hard to show with and without Henry, but there should be something substantial that supports this theory.

Edited by OzTitan
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, OzTitan said:

You obviously don't need a great RB to deploy effective PA, that I think everyone can agree on. JAG running backs can be used in a heavy PA system and those offenses can work great doing it.

 

That doesn't necessarily mean a great RB doesn't improve upon this, but the data doesn't support this theory. So, for those that still believe it does, what data can you show to support the idea the Titans PA is even better because of Henry? obviously it will be hard to show with and without Henry, but there should be something substantial that supports this theory.

 

There is none. When I first started posting about this 3 years ago hardly anyone agreed. Now its gaining steam and rightfully so. The initial findings in 2018 have stood the test of time. Where Henry busts the analytics is in running against 8 man fronts. Its absurd how successful he is in these situations which proably factors into why the Titans do it so often. Regardless, it does not affect the Playaction game as shown above.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, oldschool said:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Lol. That play was ran in 2018, guess who was on the backfield that year, and guess who was one of the best RBs?

 

Yup, Todd Gurley. Their back up racked up 400 yards as well. 

 

8 minutes ago, oldschool said:

 Henry is an amzing RB and teams clearly have to game plan for him.

Thank you for acknowleding the fact that teams game plan for the biggest threat on offense., and not neccesarily Tannehill. You're honesty is appreciated.

 

11 minutes ago, oldschool said:

 We are simply saying his success has litrtle or no bearing on the success of the Playaction game.

No one is literally arguing this fact, you are right Henry benefits little from play action pass, the QB benefits the most. We are all arguing that the only reason why Tannehill is successful is because of the play action pass, and that is due to a monster on the backfield making it work. If a threat like that never existed on the field, DCs would game plan different and would game plan to stop Tannehill not Henry, which then would make Tannehill jobs much more difficult.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The reason play action works is because of the threat of the run.  Not who the running back is.  If it was, say, the Arizona Cardinals where the defense knows the tendencies are to throw a lot more than run then it’s not gonna work as well.  Linebackers aren’t going to bite because they know that chances are he’s throwing so ignore the run threat.

Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, OzTitan said:

 

 

That doesn't necessarily mean a great RB doesn't improve upon this, but the data doesn't support this theory. So, for those that still believe it does, what data can you show to support the idea the Titans PA is even better because of Henry? obviously it will be hard to show with and without Henry, but there should be something substantial that supports this theory.

Because alot of successful coaches throughout the league said so. For a PA to work without a RB it would require an OL to play at an elite level, and we don't have the personnel to do so. And you don't need such a data to prove it, and anyone that has played at a pro level would agree.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I’d be curious to see the effectiveness of play action situationally.  For example, generally speaking, is play action as effective down multiple scores in the fourth quarter?  Do linebackers adjust their keys and play the pass more than the run in certain situations?

 

I think this is where the presence of a game breaking RB like Henry might change things.  A hand off to Henry remains a deep play threat.  LBs can’t cheat knowing that at worst they’ll give up maybe a first down.

 

It’s a theory that would need to be validated.

Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, unauthorizedcinnamon said:

 

 

Lol. That play was ran in 2018, guess who was on the backfield that year, and guess who was one of the best RBs?

 

Yup, Todd Gurley. Their back up racked up 400 yards as well. 

 

Thank you for acknowleding the fact that teams game plan for the biggest threat on offense., and not neccesarily Tannehill. You're honesty is appreciated.

 

No one is literally arguing this fact, you are right Henry benefits little from play action pass, the QB benefits the most. We are all arguing that the only reason why Tannehill is successful is because of the play action pass, and that is due to a monster on the backfield making it work. If a threat like that never existed on the field, DCs would game plan different and would game plan to stop Tannehill not Henry, which then would make Tannehill jobs much more difficult.

 

Not sure how you ended up off my ignore list, something I will correct shortly but I can't let this go.

 

Rams/49ers clip - This shows that playaction can mess with a LBs head. the point is that the Rams are so good at running/passing out of conflicted downs Foster didn't know what to do and he violated his keys which was to step up on the run fake. It shows the impact of playaction, not the running game. you really have no clue what you are talking about when it comes to football

 

Henry - I've said for years Henry is amazing, ever since he turned it around in 2018. The fact is Tannehill transformed this offense in 2019, not Henry who was already here. 33ppg vs 16ppg. The data shows good Qb's are the single most impactful indicator to playaction success, not the quality of the RB. read the link I posted and stop embarrassing yourself.

 

Third point - Not worth commenting on its so stupid and shows a complete lack of understanding of the game of football.

Edited by oldschool
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, pat said:

I’d be curious to see the effectiveness of play action situationally.  For example, generally speaking, is play action as effective down multiple scores in the fourth quarter?  Do linebackers adjust their keys and play the pass more than the run in certain situations?

 

I think this is where the presence of a game breaking RB like Henry might change things.  A hand off to Henry remains a deep play threat.  LBs can’t cheat knowing that at worst they’ll give up maybe a first down.

 

It’s a theory that would need to be validated.

Yup.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.


×
×
  • Create New...