LNBS: Altering the Smash Concept

[Chiefs=Champions]

There is a counter for everything in football. I would also suggest that teams run this quite often. Problem is throwing a deep ball requires time and good touch. Its a low percentage pass and if the d calls the right play, such a blitz which gets there before the wr gets open ull be in trouble.

[Sorter]

Originally Posted by Chiefs=Good

There is a counter for everything in football. I would also suggest that teams run this quite often. Problem is throwing a deep ball requires time and good touch. Its a low percentage pass and if the d calls the right play, such a blitz which gets there before the wr gets open ull be in trouble.

You need to read more carefully.

The majority of teams run coverages that are favorable to this play on early downs, simply due to philosophy. Of course this is likely to change once teams begin to gameplan for it but you can also add it in with additional pckgs and plan accordingly. Yes, protection is an issue but that can be remedied by having a back or a TE on the opposite side staying in to block (and release after a chip) and providing another hot. It really isn't that deep of a pass; ideally the inside receiver running the corner will stem any where from 7-12 yds max depending on when he sees the corner turn his hips and follow the X. He would be permitted to break it off earlier if the QB signals at the LOS that pressure is indicated, stemming to maybe 5 yds and breaking to about 8-10 on the sideline.

It really isn't low percentage, considering the amount of possible built in hots, possible added protections, and the ability to design a play that can put stress/quick reactions on both safeties and both corners, while also enabling a probable matchup of an inside receiver with a LB, especially if you shift to this or have 2 competent TEs/pass catching RBs.

I'm not saying its perfect, no play is. It does however, IMO provide unique problems to most coverages philosophically and based on what most teams run out of base downs.

Just my opinion of course.

[Chiefs=Champions]

Originally Posted by Sorter

You need to read more carefully.

The majority of teams run coverages that are favorable to this play on early downs, simply due to philosophy. Of course this is likely to change once teams begin to gameplan for it but you can also add it in with additional pckgs and plan accordingly. Yes, protection is an issue but that can be remedied by having a back or a TE on the opposite side staying in to block (and release after a chip) and providing another hot. It really isn't that deep of a pass; ideally the inside receiver running the corner will stem any where from 7-12 yds max depending on when he sees the corner turn his hips and follow the X. He would be permitted to break it off earlier if the QB signals at the LOS that pressure is indicated, stemming to maybe 5 yds and breaking to about 8-10 on the sideline.

It really isn't low percentage, considering the amount of possible built in hots, possible added protections, and the ability to design a play that can put stress/quick reactions on both safeties and both corners, while also enabling a probable matchup of an inside receiver with a LB, especially if you shift to this or have 2 competent TEs/pass catching RBs.

I'm not saying its perfect, no play is. It does however, IMO provide unique problems to most coverages philosophically and based on what most teams run out of base downs.

Just my opinion of course.

I like you as a poster, but this is a silly concept, or maybe im just not getting what you are saying. Are you suggesting that teams should run x deep and then have the slot run a corner route because teams play a lot of cover 3? Well ok but they dont exclusively, teams mix it up and blitz too. You are allowing for the offense to change the play add in hot routes etc, but then ignoring the fact that defenses scheme too. If teams knew exactly what a play a defense would run on every down this concept would work, but youre not accounting for variation. Teams do run plays like this and then defenses shift.

[Sorter]

Originally Posted by Chiefs=Good

I like you as a poster, but this is a silly concept, or maybe im just not getting what you are saying. Are you suggesting that teams should run x deep and then have the slot run a corner route because teams play a lot of cover 3? Well ok but they dont exclusively, teams mix it up and blitz too. You are allowing for the offense to change the play add in hot routes etc, but then ignoring the fact that defenses scheme too. If teams knew exactly what a play a defense would run on every down this concept would work, but youre not accounting for variation. Teams do run plays like this and then defenses shift.

I realize this and acknowledged this in the OP. Additionally, the route concepts hypothetically open up against soft spots in zone against Cover 2, 3,6 and against man provided you have receivers that gain separation.

Byhaving the X run a go, the slot run a corner and additionally having the furthest inside run a post/seam/dig option, you free up a 1-1 matchup the majority of the time.


In the above image, by having the listed Z run a 9, you force the closest safety to chose between covering the seam, help over the top to help against the go route by the Z, or jumping the corner. The whole idea of this play is to obtain a 1-1 matchup for a deep gain down the field. You can make this play even more productive if you will, by adding a hot on the opposite side and an additional blocker or another 1 deep/1hot combo (curl/flat, deep out/flat/ smash, etc.)