[OutsiderFan]

https://twitter.com/timkawakami/status/8...4075235329

This tweet gets me thinking.  Does this approach still require a QB looking at a defense to change what was called in the huddle based on an unexpected defensive look, or one that otherwise would be a bad defense for the called play, at the LOS?  Or, instead, does it require all the players to recognize what the defense is doing, and to react accordingly, based on the defense they recognize?

To me, pre-snap recognition and the chess match of called plays is probably 50% of the competitive equation on a given play.  Whichever team can know what to do based on what the other team is doing, faster than the opponent, has the advantage.  So I'm certainly curious to know exactly what Kyle Shanahan means by not believing in changing plays, but instead having options off the play called, and how those options get implemented.

This seems to be different than what Stanford's offense does, calling three plays, and then choosing the best one at the LOS, but I can't really tell for sure.  Anyone have any insight to share on this topic? 

[OutsiderFan]

https://twitter.com/timkawakami/status/8...4075235329

This tweet gets me thinking.  Does this approach still require a QB looking at a defense to change what was called in the huddle based on an unexpected defensive look, or one that otherwise would be a bad defense for the called play, at the LOS?  Or, instead, does it require all the players to recognize what the defense is doing, and to react accordingly, based on the defense they recognize?

To me, pre-snap recognition and the chess match of called plays is probably 50% of the competitive equation on a given play.  Whichever team can know what to do based on what the other team is doing, faster than the opponent, has the advantage.  So I'm certainly curious to know exactly what Kyle Shanahan means by not believing in changing plays, but instead having options off the play called, and how those options get implemented.

This seems to be different than what Stanford's offense does, calling three plays, and then choosing the best one at the LOS, but I can't really tell for sure.  Anyone have any insight to share on this topic? 

[stupac2]

I assume he's talking about the same thing as this article: https://www.si.com/nfl/2016/01/22/tom-br...ion-routes

(That's just the first one that I googled that mentions it, NE's offense is pretty famous for option routes.) Option routes as an idea date back to the Run 'n' Shoot, so it has a pretty long history in the NFL. The idea is incredibly sound, like the read option you make it so the defender is always wrong, but it's less susceptible to defensive tricks since it's way more than two options to cover. The problem, of course, is that everyone has to be on the same page and seeing the same thing, which is a lot harder to pull off.

McCaffrey's opening score in the Rose Bowl was, IIRC, a halfback option. That was sure fun to run, hopefully Love and whoever's our QB can pull it off too.

[stupac2]

I assume he's talking about the same thing as this article: https://www.si.com/nfl/2016/01/22/tom-br...ion-routes

(That's just the first one that I googled that mentions it, NE's offense is pretty famous for option routes.) Option routes as an idea date back to the Run 'n' Shoot, so it has a pretty long history in the NFL. The idea is incredibly sound, like the read option you make it so the defender is always wrong, but it's less susceptible to defensive tricks since it's way more than two options to cover. The problem, of course, is that everyone has to be on the same page and seeing the same thing, which is a lot harder to pull off.

McCaffrey's opening score in the Rose Bowl was, IIRC, a halfback option. That was sure fun to run, hopefully Love and whoever's our QB can pull it off too.

[OutsiderFan]

Well, we know Stanford is known for not only changing the pass play at the line, but also checking into a better run play than was called.  So I'm a little confused at the difference between changing a play call, to the play staying the same, but having a different option run based on the defense.

I personally like the notion of everyone on the offense knowing what to do in a given play call, based on the defense they see.  It gets away from all the complex terminology that bogs down the West Coast Offense.

[OutsiderFan]

Well, we know Stanford is known for not only changing the pass play at the line, but also checking into a better run play than was called.  So I'm a little confused at the difference between changing a play call, to the play staying the same, but having a different option run based on the defense.

I personally like the notion of everyone on the offense knowing what to do in a given play call, based on the defense they see.  It gets away from all the complex terminology that bogs down the West Coast Offense.

[stupac2]

Well, we know Stanford is known for not only changing the pass play at the line, but also checking into a better run play than was called.  So I'm a little confused at the difference between changing a play call, to the play staying the same, but having a different option run based on the defense.

I personally like the notion of everyone on the offense knowing what to do in a given play call, based on the defense they see.  It gets away from all the complex terminology that bogs down the West Coast Offense.

I think in general the difference would be that option plays change based on how the defender moves post-snap. They're presumably also affected by pre-snap alignment, but I've typically seen it as a decision a receiver makes while he's already running. I'm hardly an expert here, though, that was just my guess about what Shanny meant.

[stupac2]

Well, we know Stanford is known for not only changing the pass play at the line, but also checking into a better run play than was called.  So I'm a little confused at the difference between changing a play call, to the play staying the same, but having a different option run based on the defense.

I personally like the notion of everyone on the offense knowing what to do in a given play call, based on the defense they see.  It gets away from all the complex terminology that bogs down the West Coast Offense.

I think in general the difference would be that option plays change based on how the defender moves post-snap. They're presumably also affected by pre-snap alignment, but I've typically seen it as a decision a receiver makes while he's already running. I'm hardly an expert here, though, that was just my guess about what Shanny meant.

[johnnyo53]

https://twitter.com/timkawakami/status/8...4075235329

This tweet gets me thinking.  Does this approach still require a QB looking at a defense to change what was called in the huddle based on an unexpected defensive look, or one that otherwise would be a bad defense for the called play, at the LOS?  Or, instead, does it require all the players to recognize what the defense is doing, and to react accordingly, based on the defense they recognize?

To me, pre-snap recognition and the chess match of called plays is probably 50% of the competitive equation on a given play.  Whichever team can know what to do based on what the other team is doing, faster than the opponent, has the advantage.  So I'm certainly curious to know exactly what Kyle Shanahan means by not believing in changing plays, but instead having options off the play called, and how those options get implemented.

I THOUGHT STANFORD'S APPROACH WAS TO GET A DELAY OF GAME PENALTY AND THEN CALL TIME OUT ON THE FIELD AFTER THE PENALTY BECAUSE THEY STILL COULDN'T GET THE CALL IN, OR AT LEAST RIGHT...

EVERY TEAM HAS A GAME PLAN.  USUALLY IT'S INDEXED TO SITUATION, E.G., DOWN AND DISTANCE, T.O.LS, FIELD POSITION, AND PERSONNEL.  EVERYTHING IS LOOSELY SCRIPTED OFF THOSE VARIABLES, WHICH ALSO CHANGE AS THE GAME GOES ON DUE TO WEATHER, INJURIES, AND ACTUAL CAPABILITIES IN PERSONNEL MATCHUPS.  THAT BEING SAID, THE PRE-SNAP READ GENERALLY CONFIRMS THE CALL, OR VARIANTS OFF THE CALL IF IT'S OBVIOUSLY INAPPROPRIATE AGAINST WHAT THE OPPOSITION IS SHOWING YOU.  I DON'T THINK WHAT SHANAHAN IS SAYING DIFFERS IN ACTUAL MEANING FROM WHAT EVERYBODY DOES- CHANGING A CALL CAN INVOLVE A LINE BLOCK CHANGE, A REROUTING OF RECEIVERS, A CHANGE IN BLOCKING PICK UP ASSIGNMENTS AND OPTIONS IN THE BACKFIELD, AND A FUNDAMENTAL CHANGE FROM A RUNNING PLAY TO A PASS- AND SOMETIMES IT ENCOMPASSES ALL OF THE ABOVE REFERENCED FACTORS...  THERE ARE "HOT" CALLS THAT ARE MADE PRE SNAP THAT ALERTS EVERYONE TO LISTEN CAREFULLY TO A COMPLETELY DIFFERENT TYPE OF PLAY FROM WHAT WAS CALLED IN THE HUDDLE.  I HAVE NO IDEA WHAT SHAWVITAGREN'S SYSTEM IS, AND SOMETIMES NEITHER DO OUR PLAYERS.  I THINK WE GET AN INORDINATE AMOUNT OF DELAY OF GAME PENALTIES FOR A SMASHMOUTH FB TEAM, I FOUND THIS PARTICULARLY UNACCEPTABLE WHEN WE HAD A 5 YEAR VETERAN QB AT THE HELM, BUT I'M NOTORIOUSLY HYPERCRITICAL.

This seems to be different than what Stanford's offense does, calling three plays, and then choosing the best one at the LOS, but I can't really tell for sure.  Anyone have any insight to share on this topic?

[johnnyo53]

https://twitter.com/timkawakami/status/8...4075235329

This tweet gets me thinking.  Does this approach still require a QB looking at a defense to change what was called in the huddle based on an unexpected defensive look, or one that otherwise would be a bad defense for the called play, at the LOS?  Or, instead, does it require all the players to recognize what the defense is doing, and to react accordingly, based on the defense they recognize?

To me, pre-snap recognition and the chess match of called plays is probably 50% of the competitive equation on a given play.  Whichever team can know what to do based on what the other team is doing, faster than the opponent, has the advantage.  So I'm certainly curious to know exactly what Kyle Shanahan means by not believing in changing plays, but instead having options off the play called, and how those options get implemented.

I THOUGHT STANFORD'S APPROACH WAS TO GET A DELAY OF GAME PENALTY AND THEN CALL TIME OUT ON THE FIELD AFTER THE PENALTY BECAUSE THEY STILL COULDN'T GET THE CALL IN, OR AT LEAST RIGHT...

EVERY TEAM HAS A GAME PLAN.  USUALLY IT'S INDEXED TO SITUATION, E.G., DOWN AND DISTANCE, T.O.LS, FIELD POSITION, AND PERSONNEL.  EVERYTHING IS LOOSELY SCRIPTED OFF THOSE VARIABLES, WHICH ALSO CHANGE AS THE GAME GOES ON DUE TO WEATHER, INJURIES, AND ACTUAL CAPABILITIES IN PERSONNEL MATCHUPS.  THAT BEING SAID, THE PRE-SNAP READ GENERALLY CONFIRMS THE CALL, OR VARIANTS OFF THE CALL IF IT'S OBVIOUSLY INAPPROPRIATE AGAINST WHAT THE OPPOSITION IS SHOWING YOU.  I DON'T THINK WHAT SHANAHAN IS SAYING DIFFERS IN ACTUAL MEANING FROM WHAT EVERYBODY DOES- CHANGING A CALL CAN INVOLVE A LINE BLOCK CHANGE, A REROUTING OF RECEIVERS, A CHANGE IN BLOCKING PICK UP ASSIGNMENTS AND OPTIONS IN THE BACKFIELD, AND A FUNDAMENTAL CHANGE FROM A RUNNING PLAY TO A PASS- AND SOMETIMES IT ENCOMPASSES ALL OF THE ABOVE REFERENCED FACTORS...  THERE ARE "HOT" CALLS THAT ARE MADE PRE SNAP THAT ALERTS EVERYONE TO LISTEN CAREFULLY TO A COMPLETELY DIFFERENT TYPE OF PLAY FROM WHAT WAS CALLED IN THE HUDDLE.  I HAVE NO IDEA WHAT SHAWVITAGREN'S SYSTEM IS, AND SOMETIMES NEITHER DO OUR PLAYERS.  I THINK WE GET AN INORDINATE AMOUNT OF DELAY OF GAME PENALTIES FOR A SMASHMOUTH FB TEAM, I FOUND THIS PARTICULARLY UNACCEPTABLE WHEN WE HAD A 5 YEAR VETERAN QB AT THE HELM, BUT I'M NOTORIOUSLY HYPERCRITICAL.

This seems to be different than what Stanford's offense does, calling three plays, and then choosing the best one at the LOS, but I can't really tell for sure.  Anyone have any insight to share on this topic?