Advantages of a 4 WR set

[Future]

The Pats are not a run first team. The last 5 years they have thrown the ball 58% of the time. They also use a blocking TE extensively - 4 WR sets is not the base offense.

They pass more than they run b/c they get matchups in the passing game. They use the threat of a running game to do that, not the other way around.

I didn't say 4 WR sets is the base offense.

 

[waldoputty]

The way to handle Dez is not to let him break through the line of scrimmage and try and run him down with a DB, it's to try and stop him from breaking through to begin with.

As for all the talents you have mentioned the team has, those translate into success in a 2-3 WR set too, and the QB and RB will have additional blocking.

i dont remember but i doubt defenses pressed dez all of the time.

those advantages do play out in 2-3 wr sets, but they play out more with more wrs as we have more wr2/wr3 types and defenses dont have many top cb/s.

teams have defended us by having more in the box to stop zeke first, and more wrs spread them more - and i am not just talking 1 for 1. furthermore, having less in the box to start with is even more important when the scheme/plays finesse an extra blocker.

 

[OmerV]

They pass more than they run b/c they get matchups in the passing game. They use the threat of a running game to do that, not the other way around.

I didn't say 4 WR sets is the base offense.

The OPs proposal to use a 4 WR set as our base offense is what this thread is about. Maybe you were on a side discussion and missed that, if so, I apologize.

And I disagree with you on New England. Thier offense isn't predicated on teams having to respect the running game, and that in turn opens up the passing game. It's easily, and notably the other way around. Hell, most Patriot RBs are better receivers than runners. The offense is built to pass the ball, including a lot to the RBs.

The Patriots running game has averaged 3.9 yards per carry or less in 3 of the last 5 years, and is typically one of the least effective running teams. And that is not because opposing defenses are more concerned with stopping guys like James White and Deion Lewis from running the ball than they are with stopping Brady from passing all over the field,

 

[Verdict]

If you are talking about throwing in wrinkles to create mismatches, I agree. And the Cowboys do that at times, although maybe not as often as some. But that's different than using those wrinkles as a base offense.

The OP is extrapolating what "can" (not always) happen with runs in 4 WR sets on teams that pass 75% of the time as if it would work exactly the same if the run/pass ratio were 50/50, and that's not logical. It assumes defenses wouldn't/couldn't adjust - that they would somehow have to defend the same against a 50/50 run pass ratio as they would with a 25/75 run pass ratio. Defenses adjust against any style of offense based on what the opposing team prefers to do within that offense, and a 4 WR set isn't somehow or magically an exception to that. It's plain flawed logic by the OP, and it's refusal to accept that different variables result in different circumstances and results.

As for the idea that we "can't know unless we try", this suggests NFL teams and coaches are going blind on this and have no basis for rejecting these kinds of offenses as their base offense. Again, it's not as if teams and coaches are working in a hole with no knowledge of or experience with 4 WR sets. It's not as if they don't understand its strengths and weaknesses. It would be ludicrous to suggest they are blind on this.

I am suggesting something "in between" is probably more realistic. For instance the year we played Green Bay in the playoffs (which was probably Dez' last reasonably good game of his career) Green Bay fielded a high schoolish level of talent in the secondary. The game plan against a team like that probably should be different than facing the Seattle secondary in its prime.

The blanket statement that we should employ the 4 WR set as a base is probably not any more outrageous than saying stick with a more traditional base defense. Both theories ignore that they do not operate in a vacuum and what works well against one team may not work well at all against another.

I'm not saying you are wrong and the OP is right. I am just saying that Zeke matched up on a DB is bad news for the DB, and in most instances, VERY bad news if he is getting physical against a smallish corner. If you were able to force that matchup 10 plays in a row the odds of that small corner getting hurt are significant. If he is their best cover corner all of a sudden the DB that replaces him is probably your 5th best DB at best. I don't know about you---but I like that matchup even better.

 

[Verdict]

The OPs proposal to use a 4 WR set as our base offense is what this thread is about. Maybe you were on a side discussion and missed that, if so, I apologize.

And I disagree with you on New England. Thier offense isn't predicated on teams having to respect the running game, and that in turn opens up the passing game. It's easily, and notably the other way around. Hell, most Patriot RBs are better receivers than runners. The offense is built to pass the ball, including a lot to the RBs.

The Patriots running game has averaged 3.9 yards per carry or less in 3 of the last 5 years, and is typically one of the least effective running teams. And that is not because opposing defenses are more concerned with stopping guys like James White and Deion Lewis from running the ball than they are with stopping Brady from passing all over the field,

I agree with you on all of this, for what it's worth.

 

[Verdict]

The Pats are not a run first team. The last 5 years they have thrown the ball 58% of the time. They also use a blocking TE extensively - 4 WR sets is not the base offense.

The right. The Patriots only run the ball to keep defenses honest.

 

[OmerV]

I am suggesting something "in between" is probably more realistic. For instance the year we played Green Bay in the playoffs (which was probably Dez' last reasonably good game of his career) Green Bay fielded a high schoolish level of talent in the secondary. The game plan against a team like that probably should be different than facing the Seattle secondary in its prime.

The blanket statement that we should employ the 4 WR set as a base is probably not any more outrageous than saying stick with a more traditional base defense. Both theories ignore that they do not operate in a vacuum and what works well against one team may not work well at all against another.

I'm not saying you are wrong and the OP is right. I am just saying that Zeke matched up on a DB is bad news for the DB, and in most instances, VERY bad news if he is getting physical against a smallish corner. If you were able to force that matchup 10 plays in a row the odds of that small corner getting hurt are significant. If he is their best cover corner all of a sudden the DB that replaces him is probably your 5th best DB at best. I don't know about you---but I like that matchup even better.

The problem is you can't force Zeke on a DB 10 plays in a row. Again, it's a false assumption that there will be no LBs to be found and that opposing defenses wouldn't play a 4 WR set that runs the ball 50% of the time differently than we have traditionally seen them play 4 WR sets that run the ball 25% of the time. If I believed the LBs would somehow be out of the picture and Zeke would be left alone to consistently break through the LOS for a big game with only a DB to try and stop him, I would be all on board, but that's a simplistic and unrealistic view of how it would work.

Consider this (and I admit it's not a perfect analogy) ..... if a team were to run a surprise onside kick 10 times over a season, they might be successful 4 out of the 10 times. But if they were to run it 50 times, does that mean they would be effective 20 times? The answer is absolutely not because opponents would learn the team's tendencies and plan for it. The same applies to this. A 4 WR set can open up some nice running lanes at times when the opposing defense is defending against a team that passes 75% of the time, but if the team ran the ball 50% of the time the rate of success would go down because opponents would learn the team's tendencies and plan for it.

 

[OmerV]

The right. The Patriots only run the ball to keep defenses honest.

Right. They do on a rare occasion go run heavy in an individual game, which can be effective because opponents put so much effort into game planning for Brady and the passing game, but that is far and away an exception to what they normally do.

 

[waldoputty]

The problem is you can't force Zeke on a DB 10 plays in a row. Again, it's a false assumption that there will be no LBs to be found and that opposing defenses wouldn't play a 4 WR set that runs the ball 50% of the time differently than we have traditionally seen them play 4 WR sets that run the ball 25% of the time. If I believed the LBs would somehow be out of the picture and Zeke would be left alone to consistently break through the LOS for a big game with only a DB to try and stop him, I would be all on board, but that's a simplistic and unrealistic view of how it would work.

Consider this (and I admit it's not a perfect analogy) ..... if a team were to run a surprise onside kick 10 times over a season, they might be successful 4 out of the 10 times. But if they were to run it 50 times, does that mean they would be effective 20 times? The answer is absolutely not because opponents would learn the team's tendencies and plan for it. The same applies to this. A 4 WR set can open up some nice running lanes at times when the opposing defense is defending against a team that passes 75% of the time, but if the team ran the ball 50% of the time the rate of success would go down because opponents would learn the team's tendencies and plan for it.

it does not work quite like that.

1. you put 4 wr - each of which are wr2/2r3 types. of those 4 receivers, a couple of them will get the 3rd and 4th cbs of the defense. furthermore, all the wrs are decent route runners unlike a couple wrs that are no longer with the team. some of you are talking like these wrs are like wr4, but thompson was the top receiver in buffalo last season and is a decent route runner. hurns is at least a wr2. beas demands more than single defender...
2. the defense can go 5 dbs and 6 dbs. you cannot force them to go 6dbs, but you have 2 wrs that run 4.3, and 2 of the wr are likely to have an advantage of their cb3 and cb4. if the wrs win enough, then the defense will be forced to have less lb and more dbs.
3. the goal is to force the defense to have less in the box and have more dbs. one way you do that is to put more speed in the wrs - we have done that. the other way is to line up more players wide, 4wrs does that.
4. so the most the defense can have is 7 in the box, and that is really risky if a couple wrs have advantages over their cbs. furthermore, you can attack the 7 in a box by having motion like jet sweep. if they are in a zone, you will get an extra blocker with a jet sweep if the rb goes in the same direction as the jet sweep.
5. so dak can simply read the defense with the motion. if he sees it is zone and if zeke is designed to go in the opposite direction, he could take the ball himself (pass or scramble) and follow the jet sweep because he will have a man advantage. if it is zone and zeke is designed to follow the jet sweep in the same direction, then he would give zeke or the wr the ball. if it is man and zeke is designed to go in the opposite direction, then he could give zeke the ball and he would only have the cb to beat. on and on...
6. it is not as if no one in the nfl runs rpo from the 10 personnel. i already shown examples with the eagles.

 

[buybuydandavis]

Everything I like a pendulum in the NFL. It swings too far in one direction and then the other. NFL defenses are built to stop the pass, but the over commitment to that makes a team vulnerable to the run.

A lot of "genius" is having the right personal biases at the right time.

 

[waldoputty]

A lot of "genius" is having the right personal biases at the right time.

very true

 

[Verdict]

Right. They do on a rare occasion go run heavy in an individual game, which can be effective because opponents put so much effort into game planning for Brady and the passing game, but that is far and away an exception to what they normally do.

That's correct.

 

[Irvin88_4life]

This is the kind of discussion you have when you have a great corps of WRs, not when you have a great RB.

The way the Cowboys are built, defenses will be optimized to stop Elliott - regardless of the formation. If their safeties and LBs can cover your #3 and #4 receivers, I don't think many teams will have to put themselves in a position where a DB will be alone playing the run very often.

LBs wouldn't be able to cover the speed of Thompson and Austin

 

[waldoputty]

LBs wouldn't be able to cover the speed of Thompson and Austin

i think the disagreement centers on the ability of 4 wr2/wr3 type to beat press coverage.
those that think that the wrs we have suck do not think it will work.
i think the wr we have in 2018 are an improvement over 2017 and plenty good enough to force the defense to go to dime, which would mean more fun for zeke to run over.

 

[GhostOfPelluer]

we may not have a wr1 but we have several wr2/wr3 types. i think many of you are worrying about the lack of a wr1. hurns, thompson, austin and beas all are wr2/wr3 types, and the rookie could be though we shall see. it plays to the type of game that green bay plays where all the wr are good route runners, and on top of that, we have 2 guys that run 4.3s that green bay did not have. that is just another reason to put more wrs on the field as the 4th cb on the other team has to deal with a wr2/wr3 threat.

in your defense, you are pressing (with no single safety deep) 4 wrs of which 2 has 4.3 speed, and thompson was the best receiver at buffalo last season (yes their wrs sucked) while hurns had a 1000 yard year in the year he was not injured. if they play beas, he has shown that more than 1 guy was needed to cover him in the slot (assuming last year was not a real decline)...

if you have 7 in the box to stop zeke, you are simply asking for it in terms of a dak roll out buying time for 4 wr2/wr3 types getting open against single coverage. also 2 pairs of wrs (assuming 2 on each side) can be running pick plays. 1 successful pick, it could be 6. a jet sweep would give you an extra blocker against a zone if the jet sweep and zeke go in the same direction. dak can read the d reacting to jet sweep and could hand it to zeke (against a zone) or roll out to the other side in man coverage.

let say you are in a zone defense, and you have austin running a jet sweep while zeke is in the back field. what are you 1 or 2 lbs going to do? are they going to shift over a bit? if not, we can have an extra blocker if zeke and austin run in the same direction. if they do shift over, the play can also have zeke run wide in the other direction and get a db to beat up on. the lbs and dbs have to make up their mind really quick.

if you have 6 in the box, many teams have also implement plays that finesse one dl. for example, simply 'ignoring' a DE and running to the other side (chiefs did that). that again gets you the advantage running wide. the defense would have the same dilemma with the jet sweep.

all at the same time, the defense ALSO has to defend zeke running up the middle with a dominant OL. are they going to spread out a bit with all this motion or are they going to worry about zeke running up the middle?

I’ve already answered the question. D-coordinators would take their chances w the suspect passing game and your offense would be sans blockers and Zeke becomes an afterthought. The passing game has to be considered a weakness until proven otherwise. Your talk of WR 1s and 2s and 3s doesn’t mean anything. Either they can get open and catch the ball or they can’t. I know what I would take my chances w as a coordinator and if you put 4WR on the field you’d be playing right into my game plan.

 

[Verdict]

I’ve already answered the question. D-coordinators would take their chances w the suspect passing game and your offense would be sans blockers and Zeke becomes an afterthought. The passing game has to be considered a weakness until proven otherwise. Your talk of WR 1s and 2s and 3s doesn’t mean anything. Either they can get open and catch the ball or they can’t. I know what I would take my chances w as a coordinator and if you put 4WR on the field you’d be playing right into my game plan.

That is possibly true, but it remains to be seen. I am optimistic and believe we will have an advantage no matter what our personnel grouping! I am hoping the tight ends don't let me down.

 

[waldoputty]

I’ve already answered the question. D-coordinators would take their chances w the suspect passing game and your offense would be sans blockers and Zeke becomes an afterthought. The passing game has to be considered a weakness until proven otherwise. Your talk of WR 1s and 2s and 3s doesn’t mean anything. Either they can get open and catch the ball or they can’t. I know what I would take my chances w as a coordinator and if you put 4WR on the field you’d be playing right into my game plan.

well we like to call dez a wr1 or at least formerly a wr1.
beas has shown the ability to get open unless he receives more attention which he did last year.
thompson was the best receiver on the bills last year (in a bad group)
hurns was a 1000 yard receiver when he was healthy.
so yes i do think they can get open.
i tend to think that with 4wr, that at least 2 of the 4 would have a good chance as they get the 3rd and 4th best db on the defense.

having said that, EVEN if you play 7 in a box daring a pass, this is no worse than what zeke typically sees.
and you have put the defense in a situation that when we pass, one slip-up/pick could end up with a very big play.
and when you run a jet sweep, you can finesse an extra blocker if the sweep and zeke go in the same direction while defense plays zone.

 

[Irvin88_4life]

i think the disagreement centers on the ability of 4 wr2/wr3 type to beat press coverage.
those that think that the wrs we have suck do not think it will work.
i think the wr we have in 2018 are an improvement over 2017 and plenty good enough to force the defense to go to dime, which would mean more fun for zeke to run over.

The receivers we have now are great route runners. Imagine a bunch if Wittens but with speed and agility

 

[Billyd]

How quickly we forget..Dallas ran their version two or three years ago..It left at that level after Romo got killed in it. K?

 

[waldoputty]

The receivers we have now are great route runners. Imagine a bunch if Wittens but with speed and agility

that is right, and i think we are finally moving to the green bay type receivers that some of us have been clamoring for last season.
i think hurns had much better separation than dez did.
i remember seeing those stats here but have no idea where to dig it up.

personally, i think dez and witten were progress stopping dak.
dez was affecting his psychology of satisfying dez.
witten was this safety blanket that is not a big threat.