MONDAY MORNING QUARTERBACK

It's the entire theory, pertaining explicitly to Tom Brady.

 

If the discussion is whether or not to take the penalty or rush the play when the personnel is in the wrong place, you're almost forced to take the penalty or expect the outcome to go against you (assuming it's a no time-out situation). The outlier would be if you can still run it without getting flagged for misalignment, you have a running play that is good to go in the mess, or your receiving option is something like a fade or quick slant/out where the primary target is matched up how you want, regardless of the rest of the offense.

If the discussion is whether or not a team would prefer to have 7 yards instead of two at the goal line, I don't think the Bucs are the best example for that. However, if you swap out Tampa Bay for a team like the Cardinals, with the situation being James Conner on the sidelines, then I think it's much easier for them to spread it out, find favorable match ups and create running lanes for Kyler Murray with that additional 5 yards.

Is this along the lines of what is being discussed?

 

Even the Cardinals would want Murray closer to the goal line.

Yes the extra 5 gives him room to do something special but it’s also 15 feet of space for the defense to tackle him that wouldn’t otherwise exist.

As dline pointed out….the closer to the goal line the less room for error for the defense.

 

I would side with the idea that it is still completely situational.

It almost always comes down to strength/weakness and where it most benefits either side of the ball.

But it's interesting that you guys are viewing it through different lenses (if I'm understanding correctly), being that he's looking at the advantage for the offense and you're seeing the advantage for the defense.

 

I'm not sure on that.

He operates better in space, and the odds may favor him having room to get out of the pocket to scramble in rather than trying to push in from two.

He is just a wee fella, after all. lol

 

There's truth in that to a degree, but if you have an offense that has problems with receivers getting immediate separation and no bull back to drive it up the gut, having the additional time for routes to develop, or for the play to breakdown for a moving passer, may aid the offense a great deal.

On the flip side - If you have a front 7 full of teeth gnashers that has a high chance of killing the run and getting to the passer quickly, but a secondary that struggles to stick in man, then it probably favors the defense to give the wideouts as little opportunity in space as possible.

 

He is a little guy but going 2 yards is easier than 7 regardless of who you are. The goal line is in play from the 2. A quick screen thrown correctly is probably a touchdown in a high percentage of plays. A bootleg can sometimes be a walk in.

The defense is playing man coverage almost exclusively in those scenarios so one mistake by one guy on the D in coverage and it can't be recovered.

If we are keeping this to game ending situations only.....4th and goal from the 2 means the offense can do just about anything. 4th and goal from the 7.....99% of the plays ran are likely a pass of some sort and a healthy percentage of those are throws to the endzone. It's a more limited playbook that allows the defense to be better prepared (theoretically, some defenses just suck) for the play.

The coverage you'd see in each scenario is probably drastically different. From the 2 the defense is in man and might have a safety in a linebackers gap. From the 7 you're probably rushing 4 although a risk taking DC will call a blitz there a good percentage of the time. So you have 6-7 guys in coverage. You could have corners playing man and safeties over the top. You could rush 3 and drop 8 and clog every lane if you really wanted to. There's far more at the defenses disposal.

 

There's also the idea of the corner fade route and whether or not having that additional 5 would change the arc/angle enough to add some significance.

I haven't done any study on it, but there might be something there.

I'm willing to throw 50 passes to the corner if one of you two is willing to catch while the other buys the beer?

 

I agree with this, which is why I believe the situation (especially regarding personnel) is important for this.

I agree again, and I would basically repeat the same idea of personnel (strength/weakness) being the bigger factor.

If you look at the Chiefs, CEH has been awful at finding the end zone in the kind of situation we're discussing. Maybe having Mahomes try to sneak in from 2 has better odds than being at the 7, or maybe quick passing with the receiving group they have is still better from 2 yards out, but the threat of the run is lessened some with CEH.

I'm not saying definitively that I think a team would be better off from 7 rather than 2, but I can see situations where an offense would have certain strengths come into play with more space than less.

There's also the question of the 'optimum' distance for the offense or the defense, if you are looking at 2 yards or more.

 

Your arm will fall out the socket before you get to 25 throws.

 

BASTARD!!!

 

You're welcome.

 

Biggest advantage on the corner fade for the offense is a defenders lack of time to react. That changes with a longer throw.

I’ll buy the beer. Not sure my old knees could take running to the corner over and over.

 

I remember reading something specifically about the fade, where the advantage was completely based on ball placement related to a receivers ability to high point/box out, regardless of if the back knew it was coming. So long as the situation was one on one, and the ball was coming in where the receiver had the chance to put his frame into play, it didn't matter if the DB had a chance or not.

I think it was an article on Plaxico Burress when he was with the Giants and the advantage of receiver size over defensive back size.

 

Done right….it’s nearly impossible to stop.

 

If you have one of these guys that are 6'5" with a 40" vertical, the odds are so far in your favor over the average DB based on the physical ability alone.

 

I'm willing to run the routes, I just probably will need a ride to the hospital shortly thereafter. Save me a beer, please.

My thing is this - theoretically, you could make the argument that it works in either side's favor. Practically, though, I think it boils down to the fact that the defense is reactive, and more space means more time for them to react.

An offense can create space if they really want, if that's what they really need - shotgun, boots, etc. But the defense having five fewer yards to react... I can't see how that will ever really benefit them. Take that fade you guys talked about - if you're sitting on the two yard line, you're likely either getting single man coverage, or the defense is clearly bracketing one player. In the former case, you snap it and throw it. Latter, you know you've got numbers elsewhere. The defense doesn't have enough time / space to have a safety play an area and react, or to not crowd the tackle box. They have to guard every inch without compromise.

I just have a hard time seeing any situation where 7 yards vs 2 yards is strategically beneficial to an offense, even one that predicates itself on small / speedy players, etc.

 

If you wanted to stretch the field you might want to get a personal foul penalty under the ridiculousness discussed here. 2 yards is always better than 7+ yards to gain.

 

I understand the point, but that space is different compared to space that is over-the-top or non-existent middle ground when you're at the two. Creating space for the passer can come from the shotgun/deep drop, but having more time for routes to develop or for layered routes to exist can only come from the additional yardage.

If the two point conversion percentage and the 3rd and 5-7 yard percentage are similar, the numbers would suggest the difference is nominal. However, having the hard line at the back of the end zone changes the options for the offense as far as how much you stretch the field to create underneath.

I think there are definitely situations where having the additional yardage can be beneficial, but it is completely dependent on personnel and offensive success out of certain sets.

If it's more than 7, I think this is a great point. However, at 7 yards the reaction time for a safety to break is still extremely short, and you can also run the fade with more space as you will be able to throw it in from the sideline at the goal line with the rest of the end zone as a cushion.

We just need @IrishDawg42 to play some cornerback and we're all set.


Like I mentioned earlier, and just to make sure I'm clear on what I'm posting - I'm not definitively saying that it's better to be 7 back with certain personnel, but that there is space (see what I did there?) in the conversation to discuss the benefits/disadvantages.

 

The problem with being 7 yards away on a two point conversion is it takes me option to run out of the equation. That gives the defense the advantage of only having to worry about the pass.