Advantages of a 4 WR set

[waldoputty]

Yikes.............

Our there advantages to a 4 WR set? Sure. I'm a Mike Leach guy.

For this team is there any real advantage to a 4 WR set? NOOOOOO!!!!

This is a run and play-action based team because that's where the talent it. This OL And Zeke are the best weapons. Dak using his RPO ability to get 1st downs. His ability to limit turnovers by hitting open guys. This isn't the Saints or Pats offense.

4 WR sets means going to a Nickel or Dime. You don't have to play man in those sets you can play zone. You can blitz that extra DB off the edge to shut down the run. You give up ANY blocking for your QB except that 1 back. So Zeke then becomes a blocker only in the passing game.

That's just dumb football.

Put Dalton Shultz on the field and take the 4th WR off so Zeke can block then release or release right away.

If you only block 5 guys and the defense in anything pother than prevent mode doesn't make you pay that DC will be fired shortly thereafter.

sure defense can play zone with 6 dbs.
but 2 of those wrs are really fast.

they also have to defend the run up the middle.
they probably only get at most 6 in the box.

wasnt it a real problem for us running against 8 in a box.
granted, no fb, but that is still equivalent to 7 in a box.

there is also nothing to stop zeke from going in a pattern if db does not blitz.
but in a pass play, we would already have 4 wrs going into pattern, and 2 of those have 4.3 speed.

 

[JD_KaPow]

The math is wrong, and the argument is, well, not great.

Your math is only right if you are saying that the tackling DB gets knocked out of the game 20% of the time,not 10%. Both numbers are nuts, but one is way more nuts than the other. If you really mean 10%, the result is 77.5%, not 80%. Not that this matters.

Furthermore, you said yourself that Zeke would have "essentially one DB to beat most of the time," but you don't account for plays where he doesn't get wide because the end or LB gets there. And runs wide like this are stopped for a loss more often than other kinds of runs, when the end or LB breaks through and stuffs the RB or turns him back or when the defense strings you along down the line and doesn't let you turn the corner, so you have to account for that.

And of course, the defense will be prepared for it if they do it a lot, so the LB and other DBs have a good chance of getting in on the play.
And you're not going to knock guys out in one-on-one tackling situations anywhere near 10% of the time: that's just ridiculous.
And a 2-yard gain is not a successful running play.

 

[McKDaddy]

Don't know that i would make it the base offense but yes spread the field & isolate the strength of your team (Oline) & your best player against a defense that can't stack the box. Wait a minute, I have seen this show before. Hmmm, teams with creative coaches that understand strategy & winning by design. As a prime example, i will take The Greatest Show on Turf for $1000, Alex.

 

[waldoputty]

Because Zeke is STILL the teams best player the defense knows it.
They aren't going to just turn their back to Zeke and chase TWill down the field, ROFL.
This is not hard.

They know what you are good at so you simply be good enough that it doesn't matter.

We didn't run 4 WR for Emmitt Smith.
We didn't draft all these OL that high to give up in the trenches and be scared of power football.

We are the bullies, we aren't the scared ones who need tricks; at least when the OL is healthy. We were 4th in the NFL in scoring last year until Tyron went down.

this is the 1990s attitude that garrett subscribes to.
it is obsolete.
everybody knows what to do against zeke
1. get 2 big DTs
2. 8 in a box

the 90's offense is great against 80% of the teams.
when you play in games that count, the defenses are good.

 

[waldoputty]

The math is wrong, and the argument is, well, not great.

Your math is only right if you are saying that the tackling DB gets knocked out of the game 20% of the time,not 10%. Both numbers are nuts, but one is way more nuts than the other. If you really mean 10%, the result is 77.5%, not 80%. Not that this matters.

Furthermore, you said yourself that Zeke would have "essentially one DB to beat most of the time," but you don't account for plays where he doesn't get wide because the end or LB gets there. And runs wide like this are stopped for a loss more often than other kinds of runs, when the end or LB breaks through and stuffs the RB or turns him back or when the defense strings you along down the line and doesn't let you turn the corner, so you have to account for that.

And of course, the defense will be prepared for it if they do it a lot, so the LB and other DBs have a good chance of getting in on the play.
And you're not going to knock guys out in one-on-one tackling situations anywhere near 10% of the time: that's just ridiculous.
And a 2-yard gain is not a successful running play.

it is 80% not 77.5%.
the db gets hit whether he stops zeke for a short gain or gets dragged for a couple more yards.
so it is 50% * 10% = 5%
50% + 25% + 5% = 80%

the purpose is not to run exclusively wide.
it is to force the defense into a bad personnel set against the run
when running wide, he has a db to beat.
when running up the middle, you have 5 ol against 4 DL + 2 dbs (or 1 db + 1 lb)
so that is still 1 to beat, though 1 could be a lb or db.
obviously if an end beats an ol, then there is an extra defender.
if you compare this to 8-in-a-box, the numbers are far far better.

 

[waldoputty]

Don't know that i would make it the base offense but yes spread the field & isolate the strength of your team (Oline) & your best player against a defense that can't stack the box. Wait a minute, I have seen this show before. Hmmm, teams with creative coaches that understand strategy & winning by design. As a prime example, i will take The Greatest Show on Turf for $1000, Alex.

i think the greatest show did win a superbowl?

 

[GMO415]

Without Witten I think we will see more 4 WR sets.

 

[JD_KaPow]

it is 80% not 77.5%.
the db gets hit whether he stops zeke for a short gain or gets dragged for a couple more yards.
so it is 50% * 10% = 5%
50% + 25% + 5% = 80%

Yes, and that's the math that is wrong. Sometimes, in your formulation, those injuries happen when he gets dragged by zeke, so it's not 25% + 5%. To be precise, it works out to:

50%: Zeke bypasses DB entirely
22.5%: Zeke drags DB, DB doesn't get injured
22.5%: Zeke gets stopped by DB, DB doesn't get injured
2.5%: Zeke drags DB, DB gets injured
2.5%: Zeke gets stopped by DB, DB gets injured

From your perspective, the "good" outcomes happen 77.5% of the time. The "bad" outcome (Deke gets stopped by DB, DB doesn't get injured) happens 22.5% of the time.

 

[Hardline]

If we had Ernest Givens, Drew Hill, Hayward Jeffries and Curtis Duncan as the WRs and Warren Moon was our QB and Highsmith was our RB I would agree with it.

 

[waldoputty]

Yes, and that's the math that is wrong. Sometimes, in your formulation, those injuries happen when he stops zeke, so it's not 25% + 5%. To be precise, it works out to:

50%: Zeke bypasses DB entirely
22.5%: Zeke drags DB, DB doesn't get injured
22.5%: Zeke gets stopped by DB, DB doesn't get injured
2.5%: Zeke drags DB, DB gets injured
2.5%: Zeke gets stopped by DB, DB gets injured

From your perspective, the "good" outcomes happen 77.5% of the time. The "bad" outcome (Deke gets stopped by DB, DB doesn't get injured) happens 22.5% of the time.

you are right.
i was double counting the case where zeke drags the db and db gets injured as double win.
but as you said, 77.5% or 80% is irrelevant.

 

[McKDaddy]

i think the greatest show did win a superbowl?

Yes sir, they did. With Marshall putting up silly numbers. Not only that but they took some "conventional wisdom" about offensive football out behind the woodshed & beat the crap out of them. I rejoiced. Damn, they were fun to watch!!

 

[Ranching]

here is a simple question.

if zeke is in space against a db who is 5 yards away, what chance do you give zeke for winning the matchup?
50-50 is a reasonable assumption for what could be a big play?
and even if the db tackles zeke, what chance do you give zeke for dragging the db for at least 2 yards?
50-50 is a conservative assmption for a decent play?
and even if stopped for a short gain, what chance do you give for the db to be dinged after impact?
10% is a reasonable assumption for taking out a 'starter' in the dime?

if you add up those odds, that is pretty damn good.
zeke would gain at least good yardage and/or ding/take out one of the opponent's dbs the great majority of the time.
that is 50%+25%+25% * 10% (for good yardage + injury) + 25% * 10% (for poor yardage + injury)
we get a positive play 80% of the time - based on these reasonable/conservative assumptions.

if this is correct, should we not make 4 wr formation the base formation?
that forces the defense to go at least nickel if not dime.
dime would generally mean 1 lb at the max.
when zeke runs wide, the db's would be primarily be tasked to stop the run
and they have to stop zeke in space going full-speed.

to keep the defense honest, have austin and thompson with the deep speed as 2 of the 4 wr
hurns and gallup could then be the other 2 wrs.
thompson, hurns and gallup are both at least the same size as dbs so they should block reasonably well.

austin and thompson are both return speed guys so they could both run the jet sweep
in fact, we could have austin and thompson take turns running jet sweep action on most plays to give zeke even more opportunities.

yes, i think we should make the 4wr spread offense the base offense.
when zeke runs up the middle, there would likely be at most 6 in the box.
of course, dak would play-action the hell out of this if zeke becomes a big problem.

We would need a new coordinator to change offensive philosophy. Linehan is to set in his ways to make the switch. Personally, I like our base offense, we just need to execute and stop being so predictable.

 

[waldoputty]

We would need a new coordinator to change offensive philosophy. Linehan is to set in his ways to make the switch. Personally, I like our base offense, we just need to execute and stop being so predictable.

i am hoping that such a change is in happening.
perhaps this is the reason that garrett has been removed from offensive gameplanning.
he may be resisting change as this is too different from the 90's offense - where you let the other team know what you do and still impose your will on them.
evidence to point to such possible change in philosophy.
dez is gone and they say wr1 not needed.
witten is gone.
i think flagship people are talking about multiple wr sets.

 

[9darter]

So ... with one of the best RBs in the league ... one of the best OLs ... one of the worst deep threat QBs ... we entertain the idea of lining up said RB as a receiver and run 4WR sets on a frequent basis?

That's fantasy over realism.

 

[Prime21]

SMASH SPREAD FTW!!!

 

[waldoputty]

So ... with one of the best RBs in the league ... one of the best OLs ... one of the worst deep threat QBs ... we entertain the idea of lining up said RB as a receiver and run 4WR sets on a frequent basis?

That's fantasy over realism.

this about mostly about zeke running, not receiving.
thought it does not preclude zeke from going into the pattern and let someone like austin be a rb sometimes.

 

[ShiningStar]

if you re going to have this discussion, might as well have the discussion, do we draft a shutter next year. same useful conversation.

 

[OmerV]

here is a simple question.

if zeke is in space against a db who is 5 yards away, what chance do you give zeke for winning the matchup?
50-50 is a reasonable assumption for what could be a big play?
and even if the db tackles zeke, what chance do you give zeke for dragging the db for at least 2 yards?
50-50 is a conservative assmption for a decent play?
and even if stopped for a short gain, what chance do you give for the db to be dinged after impact?
10% is a reasonable assumption for taking out a 'starter' in the dime?

if you add up those odds, that is pretty damn good.
zeke would gain at least good yardage and/or ding/take out one of the opponent's dbs the great majority of the time.
that is 50%+25%+25% * 10% (for good yardage + injury) + 25% * 10% (for poor yardage + injury)
we get a positive play 80% of the time - based on these reasonable/conservative assumptions.

if this is correct, should we not make 4 wr formation the base formation?
that forces the defense to go at least nickel if not dime.
dime would generally mean 1 lb at the max.
when zeke runs wide, the db's would be primarily be tasked to stop the run
and they have to stop zeke in space going full-speed.

to keep the defense honest, have austin and thompson with the deep speed as 2 of the 4 wr
hurns and gallup could then be the other 2 wrs.
thompson, hurns and gallup are both at least the same size as dbs so they should block reasonably well.

austin and thompson are both return speed guys so they could both run the jet sweep
in fact, we could have austin and thompson take turns running jet sweep action on most plays to give zeke even more opportunities.

yes, i think we should make the 4wr spread offense the base offense.
when zeke runs up the middle, there would likely be at most 6 in the box.
of course, dak would play-action the hell out of this if zeke becomes a big problem.

Your scenario ignores that even with 4 WRs there will still be LBs on the field ... LBs with nobody to block them. At least 1 LB who can focus almost solely on Zeke.

 

[waldoputty]

Your scenario ignores that even with 4 WRs there will still be LBs on the field ... LBs with nobody to block them. At least 1 LB who can focus almost solely on Zeke.

if it is dime, there may be 1 lb, who has to be up the middle to start the play as there are 5 ol to 4 dl.
zeke has 4.4 speed so he would outrun almost any lb to the edge.
so the defender zeke will likely see first will be a db by himself.

 

[LocimusPrime]

Less Effective Shotgun Runners

Ezekiel Elliott was a revelation for the Cowboys last season, but he wasn’t quite the runner out of shotgun as he was from under center. On 53 attempts out of shotgun, Zeke compiled 234 rushing yards and just two touchdowns. From under center, Zeke buttered the bread, racking up 1,396 yards on 269 carries and 13 touchdowns. This came as a surprise as Zeke came from a spread offense in college and had Dak Prescott’s rushing threat to keep defenses honest on the backside. In Dak’s second season in the league, Zeke could be lined up in shotgun more than you may expect, so he needs to improve in this area. In total, The Cowboys ran 541 plays out of the shotgun and 533 from under center. When under center the team had the highest run percentage in the league at 77.9%. In shotgun, they had the sixth lowest run rate at 20.7%. Some more variation in formations with an athletic quarterback at his side could make Zeke even more dangerous, but if not power football worked like a charm last season.

DeMarco Murray is always the name brought up when you talk about running from under center and out of shotgun, and while it might be slightly overblown, it has some merit. Under center, Murray has been excellent, with 1,081 career rushes for 5,037 yards and 32 touchdowns. Out of shotgun, Murray has just 339 career carries for 1,478 yards and 11 rushing scores. Half of Murray’s rushing attempts from shotgun came in his 2015 season in Philly and he averaged just 3.6 yards per attempt on them that year. On the other 173 career carries from the shotgun, Murray has compiled 884 yards or 5.11 yards a rush. So while Murray’s numbers don’t look great because of 2015, that may not be indicative of his true talent as a spread runner. Last season Murray averaged 5.4 yards per carry from the shotgun and 4.2 from under center. Murray continues to be an underrated performer at the running back position.

http://www.sharpfootballanalysis.com/blog/2017/the-nfls-best-and-worst-shotgun-runners