The wildcat is a gimmick play formation, but Sparano seems to think he can make it work. I'll give him the benefit of the doubt because he has the players who can pull it off. If Schottenheimer were calling the wildcat, he would try to trick it up even more and end up confusing his own team, see the difference? The Jets probably won't be calling the wildcat too much this year, I'm thinking they were throwing people off more than anything. The point is that on traditional formations, Sparano isn't going to try to get cute and make these stupid little trick changes because he thinks he's smarter that everyone else but isn't. He's just going to call a decent fucking play and get it executed straight
You're too in love with your argument to make a better case for it, apparently. The Jets in fact had success with the wildcat when Smith was with the team, but it became less effective because other teams countered it. There is no evidence it was dropped because the Jet CS got "too cute" with it. You also said they would not use "the wildcat" too much this year. I was not specifically talking about the wildcat in the technical meaning, but instead in the broader meaning of the use of Tebow as an alternate Qb. You are predicting the Jets will not be using that "too much" this year? They arguably used it too much in the first game, but putting that aside, I don't konw what your prediction is based on.
I don't think we've seen all they have planned for the wildcat, much like the pre-season, there was no real need to show any of it. I don't think what we did see was "wildcat", but rather just a change of pace type of play. What we saw was no worse than what we would have expected from Greene on a first and 10 run play...2-3-4 yards. It didn't seem to effect Sanchez in a negative manner, it did give him a few extra minutes to discuss the next play (which all were successful), in effect it's a 3 yard gain time out. Smith did have success, but he also had 2-3-4 yard runs, as well as a few for losses and there wasn't a huge threat of him passing. We may not see Tebow break out 25 yarders, but it's not hard to imagine 6-10 yard runs, he can bull his way forward and if there is someone really open, he can chuck the ball. Just my take on it with a small sample size to measure.
The wildcat/seminole is not "trickery", its a straight forward read option offensive scheme based more on the run than the pass. Of course, you need certain personell to pull it off. If it's used successfully, it enhances ball control and clock usage. Again, not trickery. Trickery is calling a WR end around double reverse on 1st down that goes for -2 yds. Schotty was amazing at that.
The people on this thread defending shotty are fucking delusional and should seriously be sterilized to prevent their spawn from infecting future society, especially given all the shit that has come out in the off season. The QB having to call routes for every receiver in the huddle? Running new plays with complex formations ONCE in practice during the week? If you have ever written a post in support of Shotty the best thing you can do is crawl back into your hole and hope that people forget your display of utter stupidity.
I saw the Ravens use reverses, double reverses, etc., to great effect. But the main point is it is merely semantics to define trickery as you imply. Trickery to you is a play that does not work. If it works, is it still "trickery"? Semantics. Semantics. To me bringing in Tebow is trickery. It's certainly non-standard as an offensive play call. If anything what we can anticipate from the Jets this year is more trickery, not less.
But if Bills beat the Jets convincingly: "I told ya so. Schotty was not the problem." How convenient, eh? In retrospect, Schottenheimer's offense always had hard time even against below average defenses. BUT that fact will not come to the light - SDF will choose to ignore that.
Were we ever this efficient under Schotty on 3rd downs specifically 3rd and longs? Schotty's offense was outthinking the defense when we had the personal to straight up impose our will on a defense. I don't think Schotty was as poor as a lot of people make him out to be, but he clearly needed a fresh start not another QB here.
week 1 2009, Mark Sanchez's 1st game on the road in a hostile environment. 8-15(on 15th we got to 4th and 1 and converted) including conversions on 3rd and 10, 3rd and 10, 3rd and 7, 3rd and 9, 3rd and 10(30 yd TD), 3rd and 7
i've been getting this alot. here's the thing,the jets completely blew the bills doors off. that is what good teams do to bad teams.if it had been a more closely contested game then i would agree. but as it stands one team was way better and it showed
B I will give your post the respect of an intelligent response, as opposed to the first person that responded to it. First off, stop calling everything that includes a player not being the uninjured and unbenched starting QB the 'Wildcat'. I've been harping on this for a couple of years, but I really want to stress it since I have been arguing with Tebots and it broke through that whenever we had Brad Smith in the backfield, it resembled the read option more than it did anything the Dolphins ever did with Ronnie Brown and Ricky Williams. Not the Wildcat. Second off, stop blaming the scheme and concept for Schotty's overall failure since Brad Smith left. Smith was the only reason it ever succeeded. Not Schotty, although some moron in this thread will argue the opposite. Here's the long and short. There was a handful, a small handful, of times that Brad Smith in the shotgun was successful when Brad Smith wasn't the ball carrier. A couple of tosses that gained a few yards and from my recollection, and one inaccurate pass to Cotchery. Maybe junc or someone else can prove me wrong on that with their encyclopedic remembrance of the games, but I doubt it. Why did the Jets hardly ever pass from that formation? Why was it always Brad Smith carrying the ball? Was it because Brad Smith was an arrogant asshole? I think it was because none of the players other than Smith and the O-line, who during the successful 'wildcat years' with Smith on the roster wer being coached by Callahan in a scheme Schotty didn't coach, were not comfortable or confident in the scheme. Beccause they never really executed it well enough ffor Smith to dish the ball to a player in position to blow a hole in the defense. It showed, many times. Smith took it upon himself to make plays, in spite of his unprepared teammates. It wasn't the fault of every offensive skill player not named Brad Smith. They just hadn't gained confidence in practice. Brian Schottenheimer is not a good practice coach. You can blame certain small execution flaws on players (while some idiots blame every execution flaw on players), but when execution falters most of the time, it's not the players. The players didn't buy into the schemes. And I'm not just talking about Brad Smith in the shotgun. There were many, many times where the line did their job and the rest of the offense did not. Blame it on the position coaches if you want, I'd rather blame it on the guy that was running the rest of the offense. Maybe Jeff Fisher can teach Schotty to run a practice. Because Schotty started out under his buddy Mangini, who stuck straight to the defense and left the offense to a guy who had mostly failed as a QB coach. Then Brian kept his job under Ryan, who kept to the defense as well. Hell, Schotty's father was a defensive coach as well. Maybe the problem is that Bryan Schottenheimer should have been a cornerbacks coach and was too much of an arrogant shithead to realize it.
While it's a form of trickery, I agree, the essential execution of it is simple (or atleast so far has been simple). For example, Schotty might try to get Tebow to lateral to Kerley, and then have Kerley throw it downfield back to Tebow kind of thing, where he takes something from it's fundamental use, and tries to make it uber-complicated. Sporano seems to employ it much more like a simple double read option of a running play, albeit, it wasn't effective. And by having the read option, with a QB that can throw (...not very well), it gives defenses something else to think about and worry about. The actual execution of the play is simple so far, read defenses, keep or hand off to RB. Sporano took the complexity out of it, which I'm fairly sure Schotty would not have, and tried to do too much. My whole premise is that, whatever formation is on the field, Sporano wants a simple play executed, while Schotty wanted an exotic play executed. For example, the Hill touchdowns. One was a straight go route, and the only exotic element to it was a pump fake. The second, an in route. I believe with Schotty, on the first, he might have had another WR near Hill, breakaway at the time of the pumpfake. On paper, this looks great, and in review, if it works, it would look great as well. But in reality, the CB covering the other WR would have been closer to Hill than in what happened in reality on Sunday, and been able to help out better. So Hill not only would've had to contend with his own CB covering him, but now the other CB. The added pressure then detracts from Sanchez's ability to put more loft under the ball (and use Hill's height advantage), thus providing more opportunity for either CB to swat the ball away. Obviously these are all hypothetical situations, since we can't know for sure what Schotty would have done with these personnel, but judging from years past, I'd say it's safe to guess that he would have tried to make it more complicated.
