Advantages of a 4 WR set

[jterrell]

So all we had to versus ATL last year was just go 4 wide... man why I didn't I think of that?!?!?!?!?!?!?

 

[CowboysFaninHouston]

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.

so why did you draft Zeke?

its difficult to run from a 4 WR set. as much as people want to think that blocking works better, it often doesn't. that's why run and shoot teams didn't have a long stay in the NFL.

also based on your 50% assumption, then you math doesn't work. if he has a 50% of making a play of about 5 yards, then how did you end up with 80% probability of positive play for each pass or is that 80% of 50%? or in essence 40% positive play. is that new math?

and based on the 50% success rate...then 50% of the time you are stopping the clock. and gives the other team advantage of TOP.

the only team that recently has been able to effectively use this is a base offense is New England, where with their slot WRs and Brady, its almost like a 5 yard hand off.

 

[jterrell]

Ok. Here’s a good example

It is. And the D has 7 in the box with 1 guy about to charge up. Running here would be futile.
But you do have a coupe decent options on the bottom of the screen for a Fly pattern or come back from the wide R. Or a quickout from the slot.
That LB labnled Middle Hook could simply blitz and overload that side.

 

[waldoputty]

Nonsense.
You gotta block a fairly long time for 4.3 WRs to get deep.
And those guys gotta get off the lime of scrimmage.
Press those little dudes at line and blitz.
Game over.

And no, you aren't running 50% of the time with two small WRs in the formation and 0 TEs or other Backs to help block.

Dallas will go 6 OL but it will very likely not go 10.
Give it up. Bad idea.

obviously you are not suggesting selling out all the time and rush 7 and press the 4 wr.

i guess you will press the 4 wr then rush 6 while playing 1 safety deep.
the ol and zeke can pick up 6 defenders, and dak can scramble or wait for the pattern to develop for the 4 wrs.
if you rush 6 and zeke runs wide, then 1 missed tackle and zeke may be off to the races.
that is because your 4 pressing dbs are engaged with the wrs are much more likely to be blocked then if they play a 5-10 yards back.
and of the 4 wrs (hurn, gallup, austin, thompson), only austin is a small guy and you can line him up the most wide.

your suggestion is also prone to getting beat by the jet sweep.
again because your dbs are too close to the wrs and much easier to get blocked.

 

[ESisback]

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.

Why can’t we utilize both? Keep ‘em guessing.

 

[waldoputty]

So all we had to versus ATL last year was just go 4 wide... man why I didn't I think of that?!?!?!?!?!?!?

this assumes a dominant ol, not a ol with 4.5 men

 

[jterrell]

Here’s some interesting info I found. I’m not for or against running from the 10 personnel because I haven’t studied it enough from the nfl side



When college football teams line up in four- and five-wide sets, it is more often than not to throw the ball. In fact, the end result of those packages was a pass or sack more than two-thirds of the time in Football Study Hall's 2012 charting data.

Still, that leaves plenty of action on the ground. Runs take up a not-insignificant section of the pie chart below. Even guys like Mike Leach feel the need to hand the ball off every so often.



Running out of an empty or nearly-empty backfield comes with the benefit of a scattered defense looking to cover the outside. But that also comes without a lead blocker. How does that balance play out in the end?

It turns out that extra space is allowing for extra yardage on the ground. It's logical that quarterback runs would gain more, as the QB can survey the reaction of the defense and run to daylight, but running backs are having similar success without an extra blocker in the way.

As the table shows, QBs are gaining almost a yard-and-a-half extra when they hold on to the ball in four and five-wide sets. Overall, runs gain close to a yard more in the wideout-heavy sets.

It's not some new revelation that spread-type offenses with more wideouts tend to gain more yardage. They've been at the top of the NCAA offensive rankings for years. However, that has been primarily on the back of the pass. The teams that run out of the spread (like Oregon) use plenty of tight ends and multiple-back sets.

The chart below (sorry about the small print) shows that YPC trends upward until a fifth wide receiver is added.



Does this mean teams should consider leaning more towards more wideouts and less running backs when they want to pick up yardage on the ground? Well, it isn't quite that simple.

Of course, part of the success that stems from running out of these passing personnel groupings is just that -- it tends to catch the defense by surprise, and the average down and distance in the table above could be telling.

Runs out of four and five-wide sets are coming with more yards needed for a first down, and likely more often coming in typical passing downs. Defenses aren't just leaning towards the pass because of the formation, they are doing so because a pass makes more sense in the average situation.

Still, it is a positive sign for pass-heavy spread attacks that running without tight ends and fullbacks isn't hindering their ability to pick up yardage on the ground, at least in a typical situation.

https://www.footballstudyhall.com/2...4/college-football-spread-running-average-ypc

The key takeaway is that in 4 or 5 WR sets teams pass 70% of the time.
Given many of these sets were used in 2 minute or game ending type situations that number is insanely high.
As to YPC stuff of course we've seen Lance Dunbar in this situation run for 10-12 yards. Of course it'd often be used on 3rd and 27 not 1st and 10.

 

[waldoputty]

so why did you draft Zeke?

its difficult to run from a 4 WR set. as much as people want to think that blocking works better, it often doesn't. that's why run and shoot teams didn't have a long stay in the NFL.

also based on your 50% assumption, then you math doesn't work. if he has a 50% of making a play of about 5 yards, then how did you end up with 80% probability of positive play for each pass or is that 80% of 50%? or in essence 40% positive play. is that new math?

and based on the 50% success rate...then 50% of the time you are stopping the clock. and gives the other team advantage of TOP.

the only team that recently has been able to effectively use this is a base offense is New England, where with their slot WRs and Brady, its almost like a 5 yard hand off.

no, it is 77.5%
if zeke drags a db for extra yardage after impact, that is a positive play as he is probably in positive territory already.
what do you mean stopping the clock - this is rushing?

 

[jterrell]

Why can’t we utilize both? Keep ‘em guessing.

Because they only let you run 1 play a time.
Didn't realize that was actually confusing.
Power running is about sticking to the script, pounding people and wearing them down so you run downhill in the second half.
Not going 4 WR so they rest all their big defenders and play smaller back ups.

NFL teams have smallish roster and a set salary cap.
Dallas clearly spent their money on OL/RB after a decade at QB/WR.

 

[waldoputty]

It is. And the D has 7 in the box with 1 guy about to charge up. Running here would be futile.
But you do have a coupe decent options on the bottom of the screen for a Fly pattern or come back from the wide R. Or a quickout from the slot.
That LB labnled Middle Hook could simply blitz and overload that side.

they have 7 in a box because the wrs are not lined up wide enough.

 

[jterrell]

no, it is 77.5%
if zeke drags a db for extra yardage after impact, that is a positive play as he is probably in positive territory already.
what do you mean stopping the clock - this is rushing?

my lord man please stop trying to make other people dumber.
Zeke dragging a blitzing DB a yard does not make it a "positive" play.
And this entire line of stuff is such rampant BS is it is getting hard to breathe in here.

If anything being in 10 personnel greatly enhances chances for big plays both ways. More losses and turnovers when unblocked defenders hit RB or QB in backfield and more big plays if a speed guy gets open in space.

 

[jterrell]

they have 7 in a box because the wrs are not lined up wide enough.

Good deal bro you are smarter than Payton Manning and the SB winning Broncos, LOL.

2 players out very wide can be covered by 1 defender. That's why you don't see it very often at all.
And even when you do that leaves 7 in the box as in the SEA/NE example.

No NFL team is putting only 6 in the box versus Zeke no matter what stupid idea crossed your mind.

 

[waldoputty]

my lord man please stop trying to make other people dumber.
Zeke dragging a blitzing DB a yard does not make it a "positive" play.
And this entire line of stuff is such rampant BS is it is getting hard to breathe in here.

If anything being in 10 personnel greatly enhances chances for big plays both ways. More losses and turnovers when unblocked defenders hit RB or QB in backfield and more big plays if a speed guy gets open in space.

the 4wr can be used to take 4 defenders far from the action.
how the defense deploy the remaining 7, that is up for debate.
one would assume as least 1 safety deep, so that is more like 6 defenders vs. 5 ol.
in the simplest case, you got dak a capable runner and you got zeke.
that extra defender needs to worry about both.

 

[waldoputty]

Good deal bro you are smarter than Payton Manning and the SB winning Broncos, LOL.

2 players out very wide can be covered by 1 defender. That's why you don't see it very often at all.
And even when you do that leaves 7 in the box as in the SEA/NE example.

No NFL team is putting only 6 in the box versus Zeke no matter what stupid idea crossed your mind.

good, then go defend the bubble screen.

ne/sea example is red zone with less real estate to defend.

 

[ConstantReboot]

i think the greatest show did win a superbowl?

The greatest show on turf's coach was Linehan. Or was he the OC? I could be wrong.

Nonetheless, the offense has been too vanilla and too predictable for many years. Its time we change things up.

 

[waldoputty]

The greatest show on turf's coach was Linehan. Or was he the OC? I could be wrong.

Nonetheless, the offense has been too vanilla and too predictable for many years. Its time we change things up.

i just remember martz

 

[waldoputty]

good luck trying to stop zeke up the middle with this.
and this is hoodie's d

 

[sbark]

Smash mouth spread...with rpo to force indecision in the key def. player

 

[ConstantReboot]

i just remember martz

Oh Linehan replaced Martz. Did an awful job as HC and was canned 2 years later.

Frankly, I don't trust Linehan and Garrett to do anything with the offense. Same vanilla plays with different set of crew.

 

[waldoputty]

Oh Linehan replaced Martz. Did an awful job as HC and was canned 2 years later.

Frankly, I don't trust Linehan and Garrett to do anything with the offense. Same vanilla plays with different set of crew.

i am hoping that some change in offensive philosophy is what drove garrett away from offense game planning.
garrett probably objected to anything different than 90's style game plan.
perhaps the FO took him out of game planning to remove the resistance.