Does anyone have a reliable source inside the organization?

[Marguide]

This is a habit from playing in a read zone option. When the zone read is working, which it was in the beginning of last year for us and is still working for some like Seattle, 49ers and Washington, you tend to end up with WIDE OPEN receivers when the defense has to commit an extra man to stop your rushing quarterback. The whole idea behind is it gives you a 1 man advantage over traditional offenses, and it's proven to work, just inconsistently. If anyone watched the Redskins-Cowboys game you would have seen just how sickly wiiiide freaking open his receivers got at times against the Cowboys. That's because the zone read completely got the defense to bite on his rushing, and failed to cover one of their receivers. We had the same thing with Steve Smith in the beginning of last year. It becomes very easy to complete passes when you have guys wide freaking open.

It's posts like this that prove you don't watch the games.

We didn't run read option early last year. Not at all. The read option was added late in the year, but was not used extensively until the beginning of this year.

We also ran many more plays from under center last year than this year. Furthermore, many of our best drives have come when we run under center plays. Reference the Denver game if you need an example.

Stick to pulling stats off NFL.com. Your cognitive bias is getting in the way.

[ReturnOfPFFL]

It's posts like this that prove you don't watch the games.

We didn't run read option early last year. Not at all. The read option was added late in the year, but was not used extensively until the beginning of this year.

We also ran many more plays from under center last year than this year. Furthermore, many of our best drives have come when we run under center plays. Reference the Denver game if you need an example.

Stick to pulling stats off NFL.com. Your cognitive bias is getting in the way.

No? I didn't just sat here and watch all the games while posting in the chat room? Tell me more...

Yes we did. Quite often actually. We ran it out of the pistol formation, and it was based on the Air Coryell, but we still ran spread and read option plays. Don't try to outhink yourself there Marguide. They are many variations of pretty much the same thing with funny little names.

But perhaps you'd like to enlighten me with your expert opinion of the difference between our option, the college spread option, Air Coryell, and what exactly it has to do with what I said above? How about it?

[Bwood]

How can this guy type so much stuff but know so little?

[Originalman]

Agreed that we disagree. But respectfully, you say that there is nothing to suggest that Cam is anything other than "normal" and then give things to suggest he is below normal and make excuses for them. However, I am in the business of analyzing, and assessing intelligence. I speak at symposiums and seminars on the subject. Most recently: The negligence of higher education on the development of divergent thinking skills. I am taking a group of undergraduate students to present at Duke University tomorrow (Google: State of NC undergraduate research and creativity symposium at Duke University if you need verification. We present at 9:15 in the Engineering facility.) Discount that if you want, but I don't tell Mechanics about transmissions or try to explain the law to attorneys, even though I pretend to know about both. (I know people are going to comment on that, but that is the truth and sorry if it sounds arrogant-just explaining why I know what I am talking about).

Cam has done little to demonstrate inelligence. Whether it be behind a microphone or a center, I am not seeing nornal for a pro QB. Look at the QBs from this year and last: RGIII, Andy Dalton, Andrew Luck, Tannehill, C. Ponder, Gabbert, Locker, Russell Wilson, Weeden, etc --that is normal. Most on this list were picked much later than Cam, and many are outperforming him. They are learning and growing--Is Cam?

So let me get this straight Ponder and Gabbert are intelligent QBs? These are two men who look like some of the dumbest QBs I have ever seen play. So intelligence is based on how well a person speaks the English language. Hmmm so all these back wood red neck professors my up north yankee self had in college (when working on my undergrad, masters and PHD in the deep south) who sounded like Terry Bradshaw and I could barely understand with my Jack and Jill education were actually unintelligent. Well I guess your learn something new everyday.

[Originalman]

So does that mean magic Johnson mr. self made damn near billionaire. Who doesn't have a great command of the English language is unintelligent. So if I had a million dollars and had a choice to ask Magic or Mark Brunell what to invest in to make my money grow I should ask Brunell correct? You know since he speaks English so well.

[Originalman]

He audibled the 3rd offensive play this year against Tampa. I'm sure there are more examples; I just happened to see that play last night.

At some point he was obviously told to stop. Your take on that is it's due to his stupidity.

Based on what we've seen this year, Chud may be the one with the intelligence issues.

So does that mean all of Steve Spurrier's offensive players in Washington were dumb..because you know he didn't allow them to call hot routes. Or was it because his dumb ass who was a suppose to be a genius didn't have hot routes in his offense.

[Originalman]

Andrew Luck has a 2-14 team that was rebuilding at 6-3. He audibles and is smart.

RGIIII audibles and the Skins offense is eplosive--complettion rate over 70%-he audibles and is smart.

The Ravens have never been known for their offensive prowess and Flacco has not lived up to his potential..

I did say that Cam is not a smart QB now. That is not to say that he will not grow and learn, nor is it to say that he is the only one who does not audible because he is not smart.

Actually the Shanahan's don't allow audibles in their offense. Mike and his son have admitted such. Now if you said Josh Freeman and Wilson then you would be correct.

[Marguide]

No? I didn't just sat here and watch all the games while posting in the chat room? Tell me more...

Yes we did. Quite often actually. We ran it out of the pistol formation, and it was based on the Air Coryell, but we still ran spread and read option plays. Don't try to outhink yourself there Marguide. They are many variations of pretty much the same thing with funny little names.

But perhaps you'd like to enlighten me with your expert opinion of the difference between our option, the college spread option, Air Coryell, and what exactly it has to do with what I said above? How about it?

Sorry, but you're not talking yourself out of this one. You said we ran read option early in the year last

year and it fooled people, allowing Cam to put up big numbers. Find me an example from say the Arizona game, or the GB game or the Chicago game when we ran the read option. While you're at it, please note the relatively high percentage of plays run from under center.

Go ahead. Do it.

[CatMan72]

How can this guy type so much stuff but know so little?

I was just thinking that myself, LOL

[ReturnOfPFFL]

Sorry, but you're not talking yourself out of this one. You said we ran read option early in the year last

year and it fooled people, allowing Cam to put up big numbers. Find me an example from say the Arizona game, or the GB game or the Chicago game when we ran the read option. While you're at it, please note the relatively high percentage of plays run from under center.

Go ahead. Do it.

No problem. Here.

What do you think that is? It's not Power I, I can tell you that.

We ran it from the get go. Whether the play ended up a passing play, hand off or a keep it and run play depended on what the defense did. Against Arizona, there were rarely any instances where it called for a rush because they kept blitzing the entire game.

And I don't know the exact percentages but I can look at the play by play on ESPN.com and figure out how many times we were under center.

For example against Green Bay, by my count, we passed 68 times and 48 were out of shotgun...so only about 29% from under center and 71% out of shotgun, or pistol, if you will.

http://espn.go.com/n...918029&period=0

Feel free to click, and scan through and check the other two yourself. I have no idea where you are getting that Cam was taking a high percentage amount of snaps from under center.

I await your response...

[Marguide]

No problem. Here.

What do you think that is? It's not Power I, I can tell you that.

We ran it from the get go. Whether the play ended up a passing play, hand off or a keep it and run play depended on what the defense did. Against Arizona, there were rarely any instances where it called for a rush because they kept blitzing the entire game.

And I don't know the exact percentages but I can look at the play by play on ESPN.com and figure out how many times we were under center.

For example against Green Bay, by my count, we passed 68 times and 48 were out of shotgun...so only about 29% from under center and 71% out of shotgun, or pistol, if you will.

http://espn.go.com/n...918029&period=0

Feel free to click, and scan through and check the other two yourself. I have no idea where you are getting that Cam was taking a high percentage amount of snaps from under center.

I await your response...

Review our first drive against Green Bay. We ran 9 plays from under center. 2 of those were called back for illegal formation. So make it 7 official plays. 3 plays were run out of the gun.

Maybe you remember the drive...we had to score twice due to our formation problems. Cam passed to Olsen in the end zone but it got called back. He then hit LaFell in the back of the end zone for the TD.

Last year, we typically ran 70% or slightly less out of the gun. I'm not sure of our current number for this year, but as of a few games ago we were over 80%. I think you will find that many of our successful drives featured a high % of plays from under center with 2 TE's. Again, a good example from this year is our first scoring drive against Denver. So those that say Cam can't run a traditional pro offense are just flat wrong, and the fact we do not run it more is why so many people are upset with Chud.

As to your photo, that is a typical shotgun formation. That says nothing about read option. Peyton Manning uses that same formation frequently, but he has never run the read option to my knowledge. A handoff to a back out of the gun does not equal read option.

[Gucci Mane]

The read option is a play type..not a formation. You have two options, and you read the backside DE.

[TheRed]

Not this thread too.. Does this guy not sleep?

[ReturnOfPFFL]

Review our first drive against Green Bay. We ran 9 plays from under center. 2 of those were called back for illegal formation. So make it 7 official plays. 3 plays were run out of the gun.

Maybe you remember the drive...we had to score twice due to our formation problems. Cam passed to Olsen in the end zone but it got called back. He then hit LaFell in the back of the end zone for the TD.

Last year, we typically ran 70% or slightly less out of the gun. I'm not sure of our current number for this year, but as of a few games ago we were over 80%. I think you will find that many of our successful drives featured a high % of plays from under center with 2 TE's. Again, a good example from this year is our first scoring drive against Denver. So those that say Cam can't run a traditional pro offense are just flat wrong, and the fact we do not run it more is why so many people are upset with Chud.

As to your photo, that is a typical shotgun formation. That says nothing about read option. Peyton Manning uses that same formation frequently, but he has never run the read option to my knowledge. A handoff to a back out of the gun does not equal read option.

That's our basic pistol formation and it is a read option formation. Newton has the option to pass, hand off the ball to one of the two RB's on his side, or keep it himself...on every single one of those formations we run unless the coaches design it a particular way. Cam will read the defense, then make a decision on which direction of his 3 options he's going to go. Pass, run or keep. That's all the read option means.

In the end they are all the same in concept. The entire idea is the 1 man rushing advantage you gain by having a dual threat quarterback, as well as the benefit of beating the blitz pretty easily.

And you should go back and read more carefully what I said. It had less to do with what formation he is in. Whether he is under center or in shotgun, the issue is him reading coverages fast enough, and throwing with anticipation to a designated point in his receiver's route.

What I said was the read option makes it easier, and he has relied on that primarily because it often gives way to wide open receivers. It's really easy to figure out who to throw to when your guy is wiiiiiide open right? Spread option offenses makes quarterbacking really easy when it works. But it becomes a lot harder when it gets shut down, and you have to properly read the defense, locate your best match up, and throw with anticipation before your receiver even gets to that spot.

And my point was, if he has trouble doing it out of the pistol or shotgun, there is no question he has trouble doing it from under center. It's common sense that it is harder. It requires more steps. You have to do your drop steps back, sometimes it requires that you turn your back to the defense to fake a hand off, pull off play action, then turn back again....and finally you still have do all the things you have to do from the pistol of shotgun anyway. All the things I explained above, still apply. There's just even more to deal with.

But just for the record in today's NFL, nobody's really killing the Power I anymore either. Most NFL offenses today are in shotgun over 50% of the time running some sort of spread option or West Coast offense.