[TrumpCard]

I have felt for the last year that Stanford should never run the wildcat.  It was one thing when Shaw used it as a way for Hogan to get some reps as a redshirt freshman in a simpler offensive set.  Same with Lloyd.  Both of those guys could throw the ball out of the wildcat, so the formation was really more of a read option.  Not my favorite, but it was fine.  However, I did not understand it with Gaffney.  In the back of my mind, I thought that Gaffney must be able to throw the football based on the fact that he has a good arm from the outfield in baseball.  But Gaffney never did successfully throw the ball.  And I think the same will end up being true with Montgomery.  If the wildcat has only two options -- TM rush or KY end around -- then it is not going to be effective.  The U$( game is great evidence of that.  Stanford ran the wildcat 4 times, with the following results: TM rush for 2, TM rush for 1, botched snap for -16, KY rush for 7.  Even the one time it worked, the gain was only moderate.  I almost wish KY never had that 55 yard touchdown against Arizona that unleashed the beast.

[TrumpCard]

I have felt for the last year that Stanford should never run the wildcat.  It was one thing when Shaw used it as a way for Hogan to get some reps as a redshirt freshman in a simpler offensive set.  Same with Lloyd.  Both of those guys could throw the ball out of the wildcat, so the formation was really more of a read option.  Not my favorite, but it was fine.  However, I did not understand it with Gaffney.  In the back of my mind, I thought that Gaffney must be able to throw the football based on the fact that he has a good arm from the outfield in baseball.  But Gaffney never did successfully throw the ball.  And I think the same will end up being true with Montgomery.  If the wildcat has only two options -- TM rush or KY end around -- then it is not going to be effective.  The U$( game is great evidence of that.  Stanford ran the wildcat 4 times, with the following results: TM rush for 2, TM rush for 1, botched snap for -16, KY rush for 7.  Even the one time it worked, the gain was only moderate.  I almost wish KY never had that 55 yard touchdown against Arizona that unleashed the beast.

[washingtonismoney]

Not to debate the broader issue, but I think this a bit deceptive. Surely a botched snap isn't the wildcat's fault. And I believe the 2-yard run was a 3rd-and-1 run that resulted in a conversion -- i.e. modest statistically, but successful.

[washingtonismoney]

Not to debate the broader issue, but I think this a bit deceptive. Surely a botched snap isn't the wildcat's fault. And I believe the 2-yard run was a 3rd-and-1 run that resulted in a conversion -- i.e. modest statistically, but successful.

[AtlantaBadger]

With all due respect to WIM and garvin, the wildcat is stupid.  I am TOTALLY on board with getting Ty the ball in almost as many ways as we can -- dude is a playmaker.  But the Wildcat has virtually NO deception.  If you want Ty in as a running back, then have him line up as a tailback and then at least we have the possibility of play action or some other play when Hogan has his hands on the ball.  Or maybe even line up Ty next to Kevin in a pistol, with Ty taking a direct snap once in a while -- at least then there is SOME guesswork on the defense.  As has been posted a lot, the only deception we have is whether or not KY is going to get the ball on the fly sweep, and probably at least half the time we don't even have him in motion.  Furthermore, most of the time when we run it (not all, but most), we have Hogan lined up out wide, effectively taking him out of the play entirely, so we're running a play with 10 players against 11.  What is the point?  Ty picked up 7 on the fourth try, but negative yardage or minimal on the first three; I am pretty confident he could pick that up as a RB with even a minimally well designed running play.

Yes, the bad snap was not Ty's fault, but he is not as accustomed to receiving shotgun snaps as the QB, so the likelihood of something bad like that happening is increased, in my view. 

I just don't see the risk/reward equation being in favor of the wildcat.  Use Ty all you want, but make him a RB for a few plays, or get him in motion on the fly sweep, or whatever. 

Finally, as someone pointed out in another article online, and I thought it was an excellent point, Shaw seems to employ the wildcat at times when the offense is just getting into a nice rhythm, and the wildcat disrupts it.  Why?  What is the perceived advantage of running the wildcat versus making your stud offensive player into a RB for that play?

Sorry for the rant, but I just want to vomit every time I see us line up in that play.  The rare times when it has REALLY worked do not justify it to me.  But of course it is totally in keeping with our largely deception-free approach to running.

Eric

[AtlantaBadger]

With all due respect to WIM and garvin, the wildcat is stupid.  I am TOTALLY on board with getting Ty the ball in almost as many ways as we can -- dude is a playmaker.  But the Wildcat has virtually NO deception.  If you want Ty in as a running back, then have him line up as a tailback and then at least we have the possibility of play action or some other play when Hogan has his hands on the ball.  Or maybe even line up Ty next to Kevin in a pistol, with Ty taking a direct snap once in a while -- at least then there is SOME guesswork on the defense.  As has been posted a lot, the only deception we have is whether or not KY is going to get the ball on the fly sweep, and probably at least half the time we don't even have him in motion.  Furthermore, most of the time when we run it (not all, but most), we have Hogan lined up out wide, effectively taking him out of the play entirely, so we're running a play with 10 players against 11.  What is the point?  Ty picked up 7 on the fourth try, but negative yardage or minimal on the first three; I am pretty confident he could pick that up as a RB with even a minimally well designed running play.

Yes, the bad snap was not Ty's fault, but he is not as accustomed to receiving shotgun snaps as the QB, so the likelihood of something bad like that happening is increased, in my view. 

I just don't see the risk/reward equation being in favor of the wildcat.  Use Ty all you want, but make him a RB for a few plays, or get him in motion on the fly sweep, or whatever. 

Finally, as someone pointed out in another article online, and I thought it was an excellent point, Shaw seems to employ the wildcat at times when the offense is just getting into a nice rhythm, and the wildcat disrupts it.  Why?  What is the perceived advantage of running the wildcat versus making your stud offensive player into a RB for that play?

Sorry for the rant, but I just want to vomit every time I see us line up in that play.  The rare times when it has REALLY worked do not justify it to me.  But of course it is totally in keeping with our largely deception-free approach to running.

Eric

[Bruce Wang]

The Wildcat makes no sense when you have a QB like Hogan.  The advantage of the Wildcat is an extra blocker from not having a QB in the play.  However, if you have a QB that's a running threat, the defense has to account for him anyway.  By taking Hogan out, you are mostly reducing the threat of a pass.  The play needs to be erased from the iPads.

[Bruce Wang]

The Wildcat makes no sense when you have a QB like Hogan.  The advantage of the Wildcat is an extra blocker from not having a QB in the play.  However, if you have a QB that's a running threat, the defense has to account for him anyway.  By taking Hogan out, you are mostly reducing the threat of a pass.  The play needs to be erased from the iPads.

[BostonCard]

The point of the wildcat is not to win by deceiving the opposing team.  The point of the wildcat is to enable you to use one additional blocker in the play.  In conventional plays, with a QB handing off to a RB, you have 9 blockers, 1 rusher, and the QB, going up against 11 defenders.  In the wildcat, you dispense the QB and have 10 blockers and 1 rusher or 9 blockers and 2 potential rushers.

There are some plays, for example play action, where the goal is to create a mismatch by having the defense think one thing (rush) when you execute another, thereby keeping the defenders out of position and giving your receivers an inside edge.  There are other plays, Power comes to mind, where there is no deception involved, but rather by pulling the Guard, you create a mismatch in terms of sheer number of blockers at the point of attack.

I believe that you should have both types of plays; plays that rely on deception to create wide open opportunities, and plays where you create a mismatch through execution and blocking at the point of attack.

BC

[BostonCard]

The point of the wildcat is not to win by deceiving the opposing team.  The point of the wildcat is to enable you to use one additional blocker in the play.  In conventional plays, with a QB handing off to a RB, you have 9 blockers, 1 rusher, and the QB, going up against 11 defenders.  In the wildcat, you dispense the QB and have 10 blockers and 1 rusher or 9 blockers and 2 potential rushers.

There are some plays, for example play action, where the goal is to create a mismatch by having the defense think one thing (rush) when you execute another, thereby keeping the defenders out of position and giving your receivers an inside edge.  There are other plays, Power comes to mind, where there is no deception involved, but rather by pulling the Guard, you create a mismatch in terms of sheer number of blockers at the point of attack.

I believe that you should have both types of plays; plays that rely on deception to create wide open opportunities, and plays where you create a mismatch through execution and blocking at the point of attack.

BC

[washingtonismoney]

I wasn't talking about wildcat as a whole. Just don't think Saturday is the best example, for the reasons I'd explained.

As a whole though, I'm not a big fan of the wildcat and wouldn't mind seeing it carted off to the dustbin. Unless the runner offers the possibility of a throw, it just don't offer enough to pose a threat and teams (in general) have figured it out. Put it this way: Gus Malzahn invented the formation. You still see him using it? No.

[washingtonismoney]

I wasn't talking about wildcat as a whole. Just don't think Saturday is the best example, for the reasons I'd explained.

As a whole though, I'm not a big fan of the wildcat and wouldn't mind seeing it carted off to the dustbin. Unless the runner offers the possibility of a throw, it just don't offer enough to pose a threat and teams (in general) have figured it out. Put it this way: Gus Malzahn invented the formation. You still see him using it? No.

[Spiny_Norman]

My feelings for the wildcat are the same as for the Utah pass (aka, the shovel pass).  Can we please retire it too?  I shuddered when Stanford ran the Utah pass on Saturday.  I had flashbacks to the Buddy Era. 

[Spiny_Norman]

My feelings for the wildcat are the same as for the Utah pass (aka, the shovel pass).  Can we please retire it too?  I shuddered when Stanford ran the Utah pass on Saturday.  I had flashbacks to the Buddy Era. 

[OutsiderFan]

Whenever I see the wildcat, I get nervous.  I feel like the "normal" offense has been put on the shelf and now here comes an experiment.  It feels like a 4th down every time, like if this doesn't work, the whole possession is lost.  If I were a coach my team would never run that play ever.

[OutsiderFan]

Whenever I see the wildcat, I get nervous.  I feel like the "normal" offense has been put on the shelf and now here comes an experiment.  It feels like a 4th down every time, like if this doesn't work, the whole possession is lost.  If I were a coach my team would never run that play ever.

[fullmetal]

If I were a coach, I'd only run that play with a solid run-blocking OL and a RB receiving the snap who had actual passing skills.  You can run the single-wing playbook if you have the personnel to do it, but your OL has to be able to execute.

[fullmetal]

If I were a coach, I'd only run that play with a solid run-blocking OL and a RB receiving the snap who had actual passing skills.  You can run the single-wing playbook if you have the personnel to do it, but your OL has to be able to execute.

[slide]

The point of the wildcat is not to win by deceiving the opposing team.  The point of the wildcat is to enable you to use one additional blocker in the play.  In conventional plays, with a QB handing off to a RB, you have 9 blockers, 1 rusher, and the QB, going up against 11 defenders.  In the wildcat, you dispense the QB and have 10 blockers and 1 rusher or 9 blockers and 2 potential rushers.

There are some plays, for example play action, where the goal is to create a mismatch by having the defense think one thing (rush) when you execute another, thereby keeping the defenders out of position and giving your receivers an inside edge.  There are other plays, Power comes to mind, where there is no deception involved, but rather by pulling the Guard, you create a mismatch in terms of sheer number of blockers at the point of attack.

I believe that you should have both types of plays; plays that rely on deception to create wide open opportunities, and plays where you create a mismatch through execution and blocking at the point of attack.

BC

Hogan often stays on the field with the wildcat so we don't get the advantage of the extra blocker.  we sometimes run the jet sweep out of wildcat but with no threat of a pass.

[slide]

The point of the wildcat is not to win by deceiving the opposing team.  The point of the wildcat is to enable you to use one additional blocker in the play.  In conventional plays, with a QB handing off to a RB, you have 9 blockers, 1 rusher, and the QB, going up against 11 defenders.  In the wildcat, you dispense the QB and have 10 blockers and 1 rusher or 9 blockers and 2 potential rushers.

There are some plays, for example play action, where the goal is to create a mismatch by having the defense think one thing (rush) when you execute another, thereby keeping the defenders out of position and giving your receivers an inside edge.  There are other plays, Power comes to mind, where there is no deception involved, but rather by pulling the Guard, you create a mismatch in terms of sheer number of blockers at the point of attack.

I believe that you should have both types of plays; plays that rely on deception to create wide open opportunities, and plays where you create a mismatch through execution and blocking at the point of attack.

BC

Hogan often stays on the field with the wildcat so we don't get the advantage of the extra blocker.  we sometimes run the jet sweep out of wildcat but with no threat of a pass.

[Spiny_Norman]

[quote author=Boston Card link=topic=10593.msg97615#msg97615 date=1410289763]
The point of the wildcat is not to win by deceiving the opposing team.  The point of the wildcat is to enable you to use one additional blocker in the play.  In conventional plays, with a QB handing off to a RB, you have 9 blockers, 1 rusher, and the QB, going up against 11 defenders.  In the wildcat, you dispense the QB and have 10 blockers and 1 rusher or 9 blockers and 2 potential rushers.

There are some plays, for example play action, where the goal is to create a mismatch by having the defense think one thing (rush) when you execute another, thereby keeping the defenders out of position and giving your receivers an inside edge.  There are other plays, Power comes to mind, where there is no deception involved, but rather by pulling the Guard, you create a mismatch in terms of sheer number of blockers at the point of attack.

I believe that you should have both types of plays; plays that rely on deception to create wide open opportunities, and plays where you create a mismatch through execution and blocking at the point of attack.

BC

Hogan often stays on the field with the wildcat so we don't get the advantage of the extra blocker.  we sometimes run the jet sweep out of wildcat but with no threat of a pass.
[/quote]

From today's presser (via Drukarev) - When split out in Wildcat, Kevin Hogan says DBs don't generally pay him much attention: "I'd like to say I'm Calvin Johnson's 2nd coming."

[Spiny_Norman]

[quote author=Boston Card link=topic=10593.msg97615#msg97615 date=1410289763]
The point of the wildcat is not to win by deceiving the opposing team.  The point of the wildcat is to enable you to use one additional blocker in the play.  In conventional plays, with a QB handing off to a RB, you have 9 blockers, 1 rusher, and the QB, going up against 11 defenders.  In the wildcat, you dispense the QB and have 10 blockers and 1 rusher or 9 blockers and 2 potential rushers.

There are some plays, for example play action, where the goal is to create a mismatch by having the defense think one thing (rush) when you execute another, thereby keeping the defenders out of position and giving your receivers an inside edge.  There are other plays, Power comes to mind, where there is no deception involved, but rather by pulling the Guard, you create a mismatch in terms of sheer number of blockers at the point of attack.

I believe that you should have both types of plays; plays that rely on deception to create wide open opportunities, and plays where you create a mismatch through execution and blocking at the point of attack.

BC

Hogan often stays on the field with the wildcat so we don't get the advantage of the extra blocker.  we sometimes run the jet sweep out of wildcat but with no threat of a pass.
[/quote]

From today's presser (via Drukarev) - When split out in Wildcat, Kevin Hogan says DBs don't generally pay him much attention: "I'd like to say I'm Calvin Johnson's 2nd coming."

[Extra Point]

One advantage of the wildcat is that opposing teams have to take the time to prepare for it. And, this means less preparation in other areas.

In the past, Stanford has thrown passes out of the wildcat. Luck was the recipient of one of these passes. Unfortunately, Gaftney did not have the ability to do this. If he did, Stanford would have scored another touchdown in the Rose Bowl. But, Dallas Lloyd does have this ability. I wouldn't be at all surprised to see a wildcat pass or two at opportune times.

[Extra Point]

One advantage of the wildcat is that opposing teams have to take the time to prepare for it. And, this means less preparation in other areas.

In the past, Stanford has thrown passes out of the wildcat. Luck was the recipient of one of these passes. Unfortunately, Gaftney did not have the ability to do this. If he did, Stanford would have scored another touchdown in the Rose Bowl. But, Dallas Lloyd does have this ability. I wouldn't be at all surprised to see a wildcat pass or two at opportune times.

[AtlantaBadger]

Extra Point wrote: "I wouldn't be at all surprised to see a wildcat pass or two at opportune times."

I would be very surprised -- we haven't done it for about 3 years, why start now?  Or maybe that is Shaw's master plan -- bait them into thinking we won't pass by not doing it for 3 years, and then, at one big opportune moment, we'll throw and fake them all out. 

Right.

Eric

[AtlantaBadger]

Extra Point wrote: "I wouldn't be at all surprised to see a wildcat pass or two at opportune times."

I would be very surprised -- we haven't done it for about 3 years, why start now?  Or maybe that is Shaw's master plan -- bait them into thinking we won't pass by not doing it for 3 years, and then, at one big opportune moment, we'll throw and fake them all out. 

Right.

Eric

[Extra Point]

Extra Point wrote: "I wouldn't be at all surprised to see a wildcat pass or two at opportune times."

I would be very surprised -- we haven't done it for about 3 years, why start now?  Or maybe that is Shaw's master plan -- bait them into thinking we won't pass by not doing it for 3 years, and then, at one big opportune moment, we'll throw and fake them all out. 

Right.

Eric

I did not say it was a master plan. It could not happen in the last 3 years because passing was not in Gaftney and Taylor's skill set. Lloyd has the ability and it would not surprise me. If, Stanford revealed a passing threat, then opposing teams could not stack the box to stop the run. This is what MSU did in the Rose Bowl.

[Extra Point]

Extra Point wrote: "I wouldn't be at all surprised to see a wildcat pass or two at opportune times."

I would be very surprised -- we haven't done it for about 3 years, why start now?  Or maybe that is Shaw's master plan -- bait them into thinking we won't pass by not doing it for 3 years, and then, at one big opportune moment, we'll throw and fake them all out. 

Right.

Eric

I did not say it was a master plan. It could not happen in the last 3 years because passing was not in Gaftney and Taylor's skill set. Lloyd has the ability and it would not surprise me. If, Stanford revealed a passing threat, then opposing teams could not stack the box to stop the run. This is what MSU did in the Rose Bowl.

[Rally]

Gaffney was going to throw in one of the games last year, but pulled it back when his receiver was covered. But I think the premise of this argument is wrong. The wildcat is fundamentally a running formation that (as Boston Card noted) confuses defenses by putting an extra blocker in the backfield. The quarterback lines up as a wideout -- a position from which blocking help wouldn't be expected except on a sweep. Passing from a wildcat formation -- not just ours, but anybody's -- is rare.

Why not replace the qb with an extra blocker somewhere?

[Rally]

Gaffney was going to throw in one of the games last year, but pulled it back when his receiver was covered. But I think the premise of this argument is wrong. The wildcat is fundamentally a running formation that (as Boston Card noted) confuses defenses by putting an extra blocker in the backfield. The quarterback lines up as a wideout -- a position from which blocking help wouldn't be expected except on a sweep. Passing from a wildcat formation -- not just ours, but anybody's -- is rare.

Why not replace the qb with an extra blocker somewhere?

[fullmetal]

Sometimes the defense cheats and doesn't cover the QB.  I believe that's how Luck earned a that well-documented sideline reception of his...

[fullmetal]

Sometimes the defense cheats and doesn't cover the QB.  I believe that's how Luck earned a that well-documented sideline reception of his...

[Viking_Guy]

Just a short thing on the snap - does it appear to anyone else that Ty in the wildcat was standing a couple of steps deeper than Hogan in the shotgun?  I only am curious because when Shuler snaps to Hogan in the shotgun, the ball is coming toward him fast and on a fairly steep upward trajectory; I've noticed Hogan catching the ball up almost into his facemask a few times.  If he's standing closer than Ty does in the wildcat, and Shuler's making a similar snap, it would sail high.

Don't have the fortitude to rewatch the video, but if anyone else is brave enough, let me know.

VG

[Viking_Guy]

Just a short thing on the snap - does it appear to anyone else that Ty in the wildcat was standing a couple of steps deeper than Hogan in the shotgun?  I only am curious because when Shuler snaps to Hogan in the shotgun, the ball is coming toward him fast and on a fairly steep upward trajectory; I've noticed Hogan catching the ball up almost into his facemask a few times.  If he's standing closer than Ty does in the wildcat, and Shuler's making a similar snap, it would sail high.

Don't have the fortitude to rewatch the video, but if anyone else is brave enough, let me know.

VG

[BrevinsBest]

Fundamentally, the wildcat is a horrible play. OK, maybe not fundamentally, but in practice it is a horrible play, especially when Stanford runs it. In my mind, there is a reason why the offensive coordinators in the NFL stopped calling the wildcat in 2010. They realized it didn't work and it didn't fool anybody. By the way, it is possible to run a jet sweep from a non-wildcat formation, but I'm not sure Bloomgren realizes this.

Let's just say this. There is a collective groan from the crowd when Stanford lines up in the wildcat formation.

The wildcat is worse than autocorrect. It's that bad.

[BrevinsBest]

Fundamentally, the wildcat is a horrible play. OK, maybe not fundamentally, but in practice it is a horrible play, especially when Stanford runs it. In my mind, there is a reason why the offensive coordinators in the NFL stopped calling the wildcat in 2010. They realized it didn't work and it didn't fool anybody. By the way, it is possible to run a jet sweep from a non-wildcat formation, but I'm not sure Bloomgren realizes this.

Let's just say this. There is a collective groan from the crowd when Stanford lines up in the wildcat formation.

The wildcat is worse than autocorrect. It's that bad.

[Rally]

Just a short thing on the snap - does it appear to anyone else that Ty in the wildcat was standing a couple of steps deeper than Hogan in the shotgun?  I only am curious because when Shuler snaps to Hogan in the shotgun, the ball is coming toward him fast and on a fairly steep upward trajectory; I've noticed Hogan catching the ball up almost into his facemask a few times.  If he's standing closer than Ty does in the wildcat, and Shuler's making a similar snap, it would sail high.

Don't have the fortitude to rewatch the video, but if anyone else is brave enough, let me know.

VG

I had the same impression.  Standing further back than Hogan does.

[Rally]

Just a short thing on the snap - does it appear to anyone else that Ty in the wildcat was standing a couple of steps deeper than Hogan in the shotgun?  I only am curious because when Shuler snaps to Hogan in the shotgun, the ball is coming toward him fast and on a fairly steep upward trajectory; I've noticed Hogan catching the ball up almost into his facemask a few times.  If he's standing closer than Ty does in the wildcat, and Shuler's making a similar snap, it would sail high.

Don't have the fortitude to rewatch the video, but if anyone else is brave enough, let me know.

VG

I had the same impression.  Standing further back than Hogan does.

[BostonCard]

Sometimes the defense cheats and doesn't cover the QB.  I believe that's how Luck earned a that well-documented sideline reception of his...

Note, the Andrew Luck catch was not off a wildcat, it was on a reverse (Luck under center, tosses it to the running back [Gaffney?], who gave it to Drew Terrell who threw it to Luck).  The UCLA linebacker was late to recognize that Luck was a possible receiver, but he also had contain if Terrell actually was supposed to run.  The safety also was way out of the play.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3X0VJT1CmV0

BC

[BostonCard]

Sometimes the defense cheats and doesn't cover the QB.  I believe that's how Luck earned a that well-documented sideline reception of his...

Note, the Andrew Luck catch was not off a wildcat, it was on a reverse (Luck under center, tosses it to the running back [Gaffney?], who gave it to Drew Terrell who threw it to Luck).  The UCLA linebacker was late to recognize that Luck was a possible receiver, but he also had contain if Terrell actually was supposed to run.  The safety also was way out of the play.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3X0VJT1CmV0

BC