Run Pass Option Plays

[Techster]

Let's get this out of the way first: CPJ's offense works. When clicking on all cylinders, it's pretty devastating.

That said, teams are getting far better at defending it. Not only that, but it seems like defenders are not even pretending to respect some of their responsibilities anymore. DBs are abandoning their coverage to crash down the pitch man or QB. Teams play us with one safety, and sometimes no safety because they'll take their chances against our pass game and what they've seen on film: for the most part, our ABs and WRs are pretty much going to just block on pass plays. If DBs don't need to worry about one side of an offense, it makes their job SO much easier.

The beauty of option offenses is that it's supposed to take away the defenses numerical advantage. In most offenses, the QB isn't accounted for because they just sit back and deal the ball. Because our offense allows safeties to crash the box, or bring extra defenders into the box, we lose that numerical advantage. Lately, it seems if we can't "out athlete" teams, we are usually in trouble.

How about adding a wrinkle into what we do? Enter the Run - Pass Option, or RPO as they like to say. I saw Ole Miss run an RPO play that looked VERY similar to our triple option play, except their WRs didn't try to block the CBs, they took off down the field. It was very similar to this play:



The difference was, Chad Kelly (Ole Miss QB) had a pitch man next to him like we do on our 3-O plays. Now, you're creating true stress on the defense because the corners and safeties have to be responsible for the Pass AND Run. Corners and safeties can no longer crash the box like they are doing now against us. Not only are we creating stress on the perimeter defense, but you're also making the defense hesitate because now they have to choose. Crash the "play box" or turn the receiver loose. As we know, when it comes to the option, hesitation equals devastation.

 

[AE 87]

This idea comes up every year, and it has merit. However, we always have to remember the tradeoff is down field blocking by OL. So, for those who may be uncleat, we can't just add a pass option to a current running play.

We already do this, to some extent with our roll outs.

 

[gtg936g]

We used the run/pass option in 2014. JT scored on it.

 

[Techster]

This idea comes up every year, and it has merit. However, we always have to remember the tradeoff is down field blocking by OL. So, for those who may be uncleat, we can't just add a pass option to a current running play.

We already do this, to some extent with our roll outs.

That's where tweaking OL blocking comes in. It's not written in stone that we need to be married to what we're currently doing, and I doubt CPJ does that. He's said plenty of times our blocking is based on what he sees and the play.

In that video, the OL isn't even pass blocking, they're drive blocking for the run. Therein is the beauty of the RPO. It's designed to look like a run play, but the QB/RBs/WRs are self contained to what they're doing.

 

[ATL1]

Run/pass is apart of Clemson's offense and very effective.
Watson can either give it to Wayne, keep it, or toss it to a WR in the form of a screen or roll out.

 

[bke1984]

There's one wrinkle that allows the pass option. If the ball is caught behind the LOS, linemen can be downfield.

We could seriously add this as the real third option on some plays instead of the A back and it would totally freak out defenses with aggressive corners.

 

[Techster]

Adding a few RPO plays isn't necessarily about the plays itself. What some are missing is it's a way for us to throw a wrench in defensive tendencies, which in turn creates stress on the defense.

I promise you, if GT does this a few times, those corners are a lot more hesitant in crashing down on the play...and if we do it well, it will cause DCs to leave both safeties high. Our option game looks a lot different without extra defenders inside the play box. Also, it takes away the need to have peferctly blocked plays on the perimeter...something we struggle with against more talented teams.

 

[UgaBlows]

Email this to CPJ please!

 

[AE 87]

That's where tweaking OL blocking comes in. It's not written in stone that we need to be married to what we're currently doing, and I doubt CPJ does that. He's said plenty of times our blocking is based on what he sees and the play.

In that video, the OL isn't even pass blocking, they're drive blocking for the run. Therein is the beauty of the RPO. It's designed to look like a run play, but the QB/RBs/WRs are self contained to what they're doing.

... which is why I specifically said "downfield blocking" and mentioned our roll-outs where we block the L.O.S. without forming a pocket. I'm not an expert, and it may be an easy adjustment. However, the Seahawks also had 2 Tight Ends in that play. And, when we have blocking like that CU play, we get equal if not more yards.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not disagreeing with the notion that it would be nice to have some magic play when our O is getting shut-down. I'm just a little skeptical that it's that simple.

I'm also still not convinced that the problem isn't just guys who make the plays and get their assignments right in practice all week, don't on game day for some unknown reason

 

[dressedcheeseside]

Email this to CPJ please!

NO NEED, JUST CALL IT IN TONIGHT.

 

[UgaBlows]

Why not just bring in two more o-linemen as Abacks when were having problems blocking- focus on midline, dive, getting B-back runs and max protect for passes

 

[ATL1]

Why not just bring in two more o-linemen as Abacks when were having problems blocking- focus on midline, dive, getting B-back runs and max protect for passes

Jumbo package. I like the idea, but wouldn't work in this offense.

 

[Ggee87]

I just wish that when we're getting whipped up front that we could close the gaps on the Oline some and change the alignment of our Abacks presnap. That 1 play where we had an Aback out wide and motioned him like he was going to come across the formation... and then he put his foot in the ground and we ran the play back to the side he came from. Also why wait until the 2nd half to start running the BBack off tackle instead of straight up the middle? Small things like that are what irk me about CPJ. Don't bang your head against the wall any longer than you have to is my thoughts. By the way... I like the RPO as well... I just feel we'd find a way to screw it up with our blocking.

 

[Techster]

... which is why I specifically said "downfield blocking" and mentioned our roll-outs where we block the L.O.S. without forming a pocket. I'm not an expert, and it may be an easy adjustment. However, the Seahawks also had 2 Tight Ends in that play. And, when we have blocking like that CU play, we get equal if not more yards.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not disagreeing with the notion that it would be nice to have some magic play when our O is getting shut-down. I'm just a little skeptical that it's that simple.

I'm also still not convinced that the problem isn't just guys who make the plays and get their assignments right in practice all week, don't on game day for some unknown reason

Why is downfield blocking even a concern? Who are we blocking downfield if the play is designed to be an option between QB run and pass to the uncovered CB? That's the point of the RPO, it's designed to mimic a play, but in turn, the it's really a 2 (or 3 man) game between the QB and WR. Our OL will still be diving at defenders knees, and the perimeter downfield blocking is nullified because the the CB is either covering the WR streaking into the open gap, or crashing down on the QB/pitch man. At that point, if it's a pass, and the WR catches the ball...he's 1v1 versus any safety that didn't crash down into the box like they do on every play we run an option on.

If the QB chooses to run, that's because the CB took off with the streaking WR. That's one less defender in the box than what is going on now. I'll take my chances with JeT and Qua both at even numbers.

To me, the ultimate goal of an RPO is to act like the our BB dive. It's a constraint play on the DBs. Keeps them from crashing the box skewing the numbers back in favor of the defense.

 

[dressedcheeseside]

How hard is it for JT to spot a corner blitz and just throw the smoke to the wr on that side? I know the safety can't get there in time to break it up and we have physical enough wr's to manage 5 to 10 a pop.

 

[dressedcheeseside]

Why is downfield blocking even a concern? Who are we blocking downfield if the play is designed to be an option between QB run and pass to the uncovered CB? That's the point of the RPO, it's designed to mimic a play, but in turn, the it's really a 2 (or 3 man) game between the QB and WR. Our OL will still be diving at defenders knees, and the perimeter downfield blocking is nullified because the the CB is either covering the WR streaking into the open gap, or crashing down on the QB/pitch man. At that point, if it's a pass, and the WR catches the ball...he's 1v1 versus any safety that didn't crash down into the box like they do on every play we run an option on.

If the QB chooses to run, that's because the CB took off with the streaking WR. That's one less defender in the box than what is going on now. I'll take my chances with JeT and Qua both at even numbers.

To me, the ultimate goal of an RPO is to act like the our BB dive. It's a constraint play on the DBs. Keeps them from crashing the box skewing the numbers back in favor of the defense.

Call in, dude.

 

[Techster]

Call in, dude.

Nah, CPJ gets 3milly a year to figure this stuff out. If he wants my help, he can visit this board or hire me.

 

[dressedcheeseside]

Nah, CPJ gets 3milly a year to figure this stuff out. If he wants my help, he can visit this board or hire me.

I just want to hear an answer to your question. I doubt you'll be satisfied by anything any of us have to say. On second thought, I doubt you'd be satisfied with anything coach has to say, either.

I bet he'd say something along the lines of we have enough stuff to fix w/o throwing more at 'em.

I think we need to do what he is so famous for telling our DC's to do. Make it simpler.

 

[AE 87]

Why is downfield blocking even a concern? Who are we blocking downfield if the play is designed to be an option between QB run and pass to the uncovered CB? That's the point of the RPO, it's designed to mimic a play, but in turn, the it's really a 2 (or 3 man) game between the QB and WR. Our OL will still be diving at defenders knees, and the perimeter downfield blocking is nullified because the the CB is either covering the WR streaking into the open gap, or crashing down on the QB/pitch man. At that point, if it's a pass, and the WR catches the ball...he's 1v1 versus any safety that didn't crash down into the box like they do on every play we run an option on.

If the QB chooses to run, that's because the CB took off with the streaking WR. That's one less defender in the box than what is going on now. I'll take my chances with JeT and Qua both at even numbers.

To me, the ultimate goal of an RPO is to act like the our BB dive. It's a constraint play on the DBs. Keeps them from crashing the box skewing the numbers back in favor of the defense.

As you say, it's "designed to mimic a play," but it doesn't mimic one of our plays. In a B-Back dive, the QB doesn't keep the ball. We already have a play action pass of the dive motion which doesn't take as long to develop. In both of the RPO's in this thread, the QB's are in shot-gun. We also already roll-out which gives JT a run-option as well.

Like I've said, I've got nothing against the idea, just saying that I'm not convinced that it's as simple as simply tweeking something we're already doing.

 

[Techster]

I just want to hear an answer to your question. I doubt you'll be satisfied by anything any of us have to say. On second thought, I doubt you'd be satisfied with anything coach has to say, either.

I bet he'd say something along the lines of we have enough stuff to fix w/o throwing more at 'em.

I think we need to do what he is so famous for telling our DC's to do. Make it simpler.

I'll tell you the same thing CPJ tells his coaches when they come to him with ideas: Tell me why it would work, and tell me how it would be defended. If CPJ can poke holes in it, he won't use it. If the assistant can prove that it works, he'll implement it.

Well, no one has given any GOOD reason why it wouldn't work. We know it works, and it works well, because teams like Ole Miss, Baylor, Clemson, Ohio State, Houston, Oregon, etc are implementing RPO with high degrees of success.

Like I said above, it's not the play itself (the QB throwing to WR or running) that really intrigues me about this concept, it's the constraint it provides making the DBs hesitant to crash the box on every play.