The Future is Here: The NFL and the Pistol Offense

[JoeRedskin]

Originally Posted by hooskins

Ah I get it! So you're saying the read option and pistol are the same thing?

Well, and both are simply synonyms for the wildcat - which is why MS is in hot pursuit of Tebow.

herp derp

[los panda]

it's better known as the crab claw offense in those parts

[The Goat]

Originally Posted by Lotus

To repeat: the pistol is a formation, not a play. You can run the pistol without the QB's EVER keeping the ball.

When people talking about RGIII making good reads, as described above, they are talking about a play, the read option, not a formation. The read option can be run from formations other than the pistol. The read option and the pistol are not the same thing.

I cannot understand why this concept is so difficult to understand.

Wow, just wow. Do you have invented arguments with your walls at home too lol? Nobody, including me, ever implied the pistol is a play rather than a formation. The forest through the trees issue here is whether it can be an effective formation (run, pass, pitch, toss) without the threat of the QB keeping the ball X percent of plays per game. I'm far from the only person asking this question. The analyst discussions have gone something like this:

The pistol's effectiveness is based on 1) keeping the defense back on its heels trying to diagnose the play and 2) quicker development. If Seattle's corners can effectively crash from the outside to stop major gains on the keeps, then we're limited to pass, hand-off, or pitch in a loaded backfield. The defense already has the luxury of stacking the box, and now we're seeing defenses come with heavy blitzes too. You've seen this on a few occasions where RG looks to pass out of the pistol. Unless he finds a target immediately open the pocket collapses around him. When he was in top form he could often escape and even turn it into a positive gain. Last week was a different story. He took a sack out of the pistol while trying to pass, and on another play like it near the goal line he got hurried and threw into coverage, luckily avoiding an INT. Passing out of pistol hasn't looked terribly effective to you, has it?

So again, there's absolutely no confusion what the pistol is. There's a debate whether it can be an effective formation if the defense finds a way to shut down RG on X number of designed keeps. It should be obvious that you give up a lot with the pistol. It forces you by its nature to load up the backfield, and therefor keeps you from putting more than two receivers out wide. Some d coordinators, to be sure, will see this as an opportunity. To highlight this, offenses who've had success with the pistol (Washington, Seattle, and SanFran to a lesser extent) have very mobile QBs who, once again, keep the ball X number of times. The Steelers on the other hand didn't find much success with it, though they tried using it to cover Ben's immobility when he played with injury.

It is why, IMO, we don't see, and won't see, elite pocket passers like Manning and Brady use it beyond a gimmick set, if at all.

[NC_Skins]

Like I said. Lots of HERP DERP up in here.

[Lotus]

Originally Posted by The Goat

Wow, just wow. Do you have invented arguments with your walls at home too lol? Nobody, including me, ever implied the pistol is a play rather than a formation. The forest through the trees issue here is whether it can be an effective formation (run, pass, pitch, toss) without the threat of the QB keeping the ball X percent of plays per game. I'm far from the only person asking this question. The analyst discussions have gone something like this:

The pistol's effectiveness is based on 1) keeping the defense back on its heels trying to diagnose the play and 2) quicker development. If Seattle's corners can effectively crash from the outside to stop major gains on the keeps, then we're limited to pass, hand-off, or pitch in a loaded backfield. The defense already has the luxury of stacking the box, and now we're seeing defenses come with heavy blitzes too. You've seen this on a few occasions where RG looks to pass out of the pistol. Unless he finds a target immediately open the pocket collapses around him. When he was in top form he could often escape and even turn it into a positive gain. Last week was a different story. He took a sack out of the pistol while trying to pass, and on another play like it near the goal line he got hurried and threw into coverage, luckily avoiding an INT. Passing out of pistol hasn't looked terribly effective to you, has it?

So again, there's absolutely no confusion what the pistol is. There's a debate whether it can be an effective formation if the defense finds a way to shut down RG on X number of designed keeps. It should be obvious that you give up a lot with the pistol. It forces you by its nature to load up the backfield, and therefor keeps you from putting more than two receivers out wide. Some d coordinators, to be sure, will see this as an opportunity. To highlight this, offenses who've had success with the pistol (Washington, Seattle, and SanFran to a lesser extent) have very mobile QBs who, once again, keep the ball X number of times. The Steelers on the other hand didn't find much success with it, though they tried using it to cover Ben's immobility when he played with injury.

It is why, IMO, we don't see, and won't see, elite pocket passers like Manning and Brady use it beyond a gimmick set, if at all.

You have more than implied that the pistol is a play. You have presumed it in repeated posts, including the very post here.

For the last time, the pistol can be run without the QB EVER keeping the ball (I repeat, EVER). The pistol in no way prima facie presumes that the QB will keep the ball at any % above zero. Thus the concerns you expressed in your post are completely moot.

You can only make the argument that you make above if the pistol is a play - which it is not.

Goat, I have responded to your posts when others have ignored you in the hope that you will come around to seeing things clearly. Now I'm done.

[JoeRedskin]

Originally Posted by Lotus

You have more than implied that the pistol is a play. You have presumed it in repeated posts, including the very post here.

For the last time, the pistol can be run without the QB EVER keeping the ball (I repeat, EVER). The pistol in no way prima facie presumes that the QB will keep the ball at any % above zero. Thus the concerns you expressed in your post are completely moot.

You can only make the argument that you make above if the pistol is a play - which it is not.

Goat, I have responded to your posts when others have ignored you in the hope that you will come around to seeing things clearly. Now I'm done.

Easier to hope for world peace. Just ignore - his equivocation, historical inconsistencies and logical fallacies provide him an unassailable platform to spout his particular brand of lunacy.

[SmootSmack]

I'm not sure any QB has better passing numbers against extra rushers than RG3

[BigHairedAristocrat]

Originally Posted by Lotus

You have more than implied that the pistol is a play. You have presumed it in repeated posts, including the very post here.

For the last time, the pistol can be run without the QB EVER keeping the ball (I repeat, EVER). The pistol in no way prima facie presumes that the QB will keep the ball at any % above zero. Thus the concerns you expressed in your post are completely moot.

You can only make the argument that you make above if the pistol is a play - which it is not.

Goat, I have responded to your posts when others have ignored you in the hope that you will come around to seeing things clearly. Now I'm done.

Good post. Goat makes some nicely worded arguments, but theyre based on a completely faulty premise. There's no sense arguing with someone who doesnt understand what theyre arguing.

[The Goat]

Originally Posted by Lotus

You have more than implied that the pistol is a play. You have presumed it in repeated posts, including the very post here.

For the last time, the pistol can be run without the QB EVER keeping the ball (I repeat, EVER). The pistol in no way prima facie presumes that the QB will keep the ball at any % above zero. Thus the concerns you expressed in your post are completely moot.

You can only make the argument that you make above if the pistol is a play - which it is not.

Goat, I have responded to your posts when others have ignored you in the hope that you will come around to seeing things clearly. Now I'm done.

Again, nobody has debated whether you can use the pistol without the QB ever keeping the ball. The debate is whether it can be effective without the QB ever keeping the ball. Looking at the data, successful use of the pistol formation thus far is limited to offenses where the QB indeed keeps the ball X number of times in a game, you cannot possibly believe the debate is settled.

I think maybe where you got confused (starting in another thread) is when I compared the initial success of the Wildcat, as something new defenses had to adjust for, to the emergence of the pistol as something new defenses have to adjust for? My post was probably lazy and resulted in your confusion.

[The Goat]

Originally Posted by SmootSmack

I'm not sure any QB has better passing numbers against extra rushers than RG3

When he could extend those plays with his feet this was true. The passing game, including out of the pistol, has suffered since he can't escape as well.

Regardless, no QB in history is better against the blitz than P Manning. I would put Brady, Ryan and Rogers next. Then it's a toss up between a bunch of guys including RG, which is amazing since he's a rookie.

[scowan]

The beauty of the Redskin's offense from the pistol set, wheither they run the read-option or not is that their running game is so strong, LBs have to stay up close to the line to stop the threat of the run. Then with play action, you just throw over their heads or behind them. 2 RB's or bringing in a 3rd in the form of a WR, all just go to present the allusion that someone (even though you don't know who) is getting the ball to run in the backfield. Yes there are less WRs going down field, but they are in one-on-one situations because of the "box-stacking" to stop the run. You are dictating trems with a defense. They can't stay back in a zone because of the run threat and they can't completely stack because of the playaction. You need good playaction and ball movement which RGIII does really well and accurate passing, again a strength.

[Chico23231]

Originally Posted by SmootSmack

I'm not sure any QB has better passing numbers against extra rushers than RG3

nice try SS.

But yeah I think Jaws had a stat like a month a ago where the 3rd had the highest passer rating against the blitz. Oh wait by extra rushers do you mean formation or a play?

[BigHairedAristocrat]

Originally Posted by The Goat

Again, nobody has debated whether you can use the pistol without the QB ever keeping the ball. The debate is whether it can be effective without the QB ever keeping the ball. Looking at the data, successful use of the pistol formation thus far is limited to offenses where the QB indeed keeps the ball X number of times in a game, you cannot possibly believe the debate is settled.

I think maybe where you got confused (starting in another thread) is when I compared the initial success of the Wildcat, as something new defenses had to adjust for, to the emergence of the pistol as something new defenses have to adjust for? My post was probably lazy and resulted in your confusion.

We've run the pistol in games were Griffin only kept the ball once or twice. Because he is RGIII, and he is a THREAT to run at any time, defenses have to respect that threat and, therefore, the pistol will work. The reason you'll never see guys like Peyton Manning run the pistol is because there is no point in doing it. Manning is terribly immobile. He's not a THREAT to run, so defense dont have to respect that threat.

The pistol will always be effective as long as the quarterback is a THREAT to run.

[The Goat]

Originally Posted by BigHairedAristocrat

We've run the pistol in games were Griffin only kept the ball once or twice. Because he is RGIII, and he is a THREAT to run at any time, defenses have to respect that threat and, therefore, the pistol will work. The reason you'll never see guys like Peyton Manning run the pistol is because there is no point in doing it. Manning is terribly immobile. He's not a THREAT to run, so defense dont have to respect that threat.

The pistol will always be effective as long as the quarterback is a THREAT to run.

Agree with everything here, though it remains to be seen how the mad scientist d coordinators will adjust during an off-season etc. Nobody focused on defending the pistol formation prior to this year.

The Shanahans were brilliant in adopting/implementing it. On the other hand, I was equally impressed to see Mike's old school west coast offense at work in Cleveland. I have no doubt in the Shanahans' offensive genius now given the right tools.

[MTK]

Originally Posted by SmootSmack

I'm not sure any QB has better passing numbers against extra rushers than RG3

From last week:

I’ve already discussed Griffin’s dominance against the blitz. With 11 touchdowns, one interception, and 11.3 YPA, RGIII is about to break the record for highest passer rating against the blitz for any quarterback in NFL history at 141.8

Cowboys Vs Redskins: Defensive Game Plan for Dallas | NBC 5 Dallas-Fort Worth