Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New media
New media comments
New resources
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Resources
Latest reviews
Search resources
Members
Current visitors
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Forums
Open Football Discussion
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
All the draft complaining...let's look over the past 10 seasons...
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="HardRightEdge" data-source="post: 878687"><p>That first bold statement above? That's exactly my point, is it not? You cannot check the numbers on jerseys in the huddle, check their positional designations on the roster sheet, and know what position they are playing until the snap. He's a guy playing flanker. In the X-Y-Z nomenclature, as noted previously, there is no such thing as a slot receiver so it's a good thing you didn't say your flanker is playing slot because then he wouldn't exist.</p><p></p><p>Contributing to the problem is that the NFL by rule has number ranges available to particular positions. For example, a RB can have only a number between 20-49. Would you persist in telling me that Montgomery was a WR wearing number 88 when he was unquestionably playing RB? The rules do not have a specified range for FBs; they get RB numbers. Well, calling a FB who never runs the ball a RB because he wears a "running back" number makes about as much sense as calling Montgomery a WR when playing RB is the only thing he's doing wearing 88.</p><p></p><p>As for that second bold statement above, I said the exact opposite. If he quacks like a DE then that's what he is on that play, regardless of what position it says he plays on the roster sheet. If the Packers play a 4-3 variation, as they sometimes do, and one of the guys you think of as an OLB is playing hand in the dirt at the DE position which happens on occasion, then on that play he is a DE. Are you sure it's not you who would want to call him an OLB on that play?</p><p></p><p>The receivers who typically play wideout are no longer differentiated as "flanker" (off the line) or "split end" (on the line) on roster sheets. While there is still a techincal difference between the two positions in order to avoid an illegal formation penalty, receivers play the different positions interchangeably. And that nomenclature doesn't even account for the existance slot receivers, just like X-Y-Z does not.</p><p></p><p>If course none of this has to do with coaches making things too complicated. This is about properly describing what is happening on the field. Frankly, I don't think you would fare very well putting a 1977 offense on the field running 21 personel on d*mn near every play with your generic X-Y-Z except when running a 22 on short yardage. Rule changes piled upon rule changes favoring the passing game starting in 1979 have gradually led to more and more schematic complexity and player positional versatility to work passing game matchups. Defense reacts to offensive innovation, so you get the same thing on the other side of the ball to counter. There is no going back.</p><p></p><p>Even so, you cannot confuse an emphasis on execution as mutually exclusive of complexity. The Power Sweep was not just a play. It was one play in a pretty complex running scheme. There is a series of videos on youtube where Lombardi describes the variations. It just so happens the rules and other factors such as weather and primitive field conditions by today's standards favored running the ball.</p><p></p><p>To take this to it's logical conclusion, when New Orleans puts in one of those plays where they break huddle with Hill at QB and Brees out wide (a gadget that's been around forever), Hill is the QB on that play and Brees is a WR. I see no way around it. And you'd have an especially hard time arguing otherwise if Hill actuall threw Brees the ball. <img src="/styles/default/xenforo/smilies/wink.png" class="smilie" loading="lazy" alt=";)" title="Wink ;)" data-shortname=";)" /> I don't know if New Orleans has done that, but I can assure you others have.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="HardRightEdge, post: 878687"] That first bold statement above? That's exactly my point, is it not? You cannot check the numbers on jerseys in the huddle, check their positional designations on the roster sheet, and know what position they are playing until the snap. He's a guy playing flanker. In the X-Y-Z nomenclature, as noted previously, there is no such thing as a slot receiver so it's a good thing you didn't say your flanker is playing slot because then he wouldn't exist. Contributing to the problem is that the NFL by rule has number ranges available to particular positions. For example, a RB can have only a number between 20-49. Would you persist in telling me that Montgomery was a WR wearing number 88 when he was unquestionably playing RB? The rules do not have a specified range for FBs; they get RB numbers. Well, calling a FB who never runs the ball a RB because he wears a "running back" number makes about as much sense as calling Montgomery a WR when playing RB is the only thing he's doing wearing 88. As for that second bold statement above, I said the exact opposite. If he quacks like a DE then that's what he is on that play, regardless of what position it says he plays on the roster sheet. If the Packers play a 4-3 variation, as they sometimes do, and one of the guys you think of as an OLB is playing hand in the dirt at the DE position which happens on occasion, then on that play he is a DE. Are you sure it's not you who would want to call him an OLB on that play? The receivers who typically play wideout are no longer differentiated as "flanker" (off the line) or "split end" (on the line) on roster sheets. While there is still a techincal difference between the two positions in order to avoid an illegal formation penalty, receivers play the different positions interchangeably. And that nomenclature doesn't even account for the existance slot receivers, just like X-Y-Z does not. If course none of this has to do with coaches making things too complicated. This is about properly describing what is happening on the field. Frankly, I don't think you would fare very well putting a 1977 offense on the field running 21 personel on d*mn near every play with your generic X-Y-Z except when running a 22 on short yardage. Rule changes piled upon rule changes favoring the passing game starting in 1979 have gradually led to more and more schematic complexity and player positional versatility to work passing game matchups. Defense reacts to offensive innovation, so you get the same thing on the other side of the ball to counter. There is no going back. Even so, you cannot confuse an emphasis on execution as mutually exclusive of complexity. The Power Sweep was not just a play. It was one play in a pretty complex running scheme. There is a series of videos on youtube where Lombardi describes the variations. It just so happens the rules and other factors such as weather and primitive field conditions by today's standards favored running the ball. To take this to it's logical conclusion, when New Orleans puts in one of those plays where they break huddle with Hill at QB and Brees out wide (a gadget that's been around forever), Hill is the QB on that play and Brees is a WR. I see no way around it. And you'd have an especially hard time arguing otherwise if Hill actuall threw Brees the ball. ;) I don't know if New Orleans has done that, but I can assure you others have. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Members online
Schultz
DoURant
weeds
XPack
Cornelius Weems
gatorpack
Latest posts
2024 Packer UDFA Tracker....
Latest: XPack
4 minutes ago
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
Green Bay to Host '25 Draft!
Latest: weeds
4 minutes ago
NFL Discussions
The 11th Annual Amish Draft Contest 2024
Latest: Pokerbrat2000
5 minutes ago
Draft Talk
2024 draft discussion thread
Latest: Pokerbrat2000
18 minutes ago
Draft Talk
2024 Draft Prospect Discussions
Latest: Pokerbrat2000
29 minutes ago
Draft Talk
Forums
Open Football Discussion
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
All the draft complaining...let's look over the past 10 seasons...
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
Accept
Learn more…
Top