definitely interesting. seems like the ball would HAVE to come out a few seconds after the snap or else the QB would get creamed. i guess having the extra QB in the backfield gives you the option of a screen or lateral if everyone is covered.
Yeah, the thrown ball is faster than a person is the same reason basketball has things like triangle offenses. But as NoMich said, on the pro level you'd be putting a lot of pressure on your QB to get rid of the ball, fast. Those NFL defenses are comprised of very large, very fast athletes, and if you're just going to cede 7 yards in the hopes of buying time, you might be disappointed when you're knocked for a 10-15 yard loss every time you can't throw a pass.
Also, I'd hate to be QB1 when he laterals to QB2- would the roughing the passer rules still apply?
That said, it'd be interesting to see what that would look like in the NFL. It would be hard to defend because you'd basically be doing a man-to-man, where as soon as you got 3 steps away the ball would be zipped laterally, and the defense would be confused as hell. The premise is that you'd move the ball like they do in basketball, but every throw is an increased chance to drop the ball, and that could get dicey. Every play would look like something from a Harlem globetrotters routine.
It sometimes seems to me that in the two footballs- especially the more boring non-US version- there's a frightening lack of innovation. When I ask soccer fans why soccer teams and coaches don't try out radically innovative strategies, I get laughed at. But every great idea usually has forgettable innovations that didn't work out- you just don't know which is which until you try.
It sometimes seems to me that in the two footballs- especially the more boring non-US version- there's a frightening lack of innovation. When I ask soccer fans why soccer teams and coaches don't try out radically innovative strategies, I get laughed at
But they do, Hal. International football (soccer) is constantly innovating. The game is radically different to that played 10, 20 or 30 years ago. For example, no-one plays with a Beckenbauer-style sweeper any more, even though everyone did in the 1970s. The game has a rich history of innovations in formations, approaches and styles. Further, good coaches will ensure that teams can alter tactics and formations during actual games e.g. 4-4-2 to 3-5-2, and so on.
I would write more, but I realise this is about quarterbacks...
Huh- apparently I've been talking to ignorant soccer fans. :)
Sounds like there's a lot more going on than I see with my eyes- much like basketball novices won't appreciate things like pick and rolls, screens, or the triangle offense- but I still don't understand why soccer hasn't innovated ways of routinely putting 10+ goals a game in. I know soccer needs no help becoming popular, but I think the principle reason soccer never interests me is that it's frustrating watching pass after pass get kicked 50 feet from any teammate as the two teams jerk off around midfield. Is it against soccer rules to do shit like, I don't know, form a 6 man phalanx around the player with the ball while he patiently and slowly dribbles it upfield?
That was meant semi-sarcastically, but from the casual viewer's perspective it almost seems like soccer players have an unspoken agreement that no one would do anything as gauche as repeatedly and brutally attack the goal by any means necessary.
Is it against soccer rules to do shit like, I don't know, form a 6 man phalanx around the player with the ball while he patiently and slowly dribbles it upfield?
What, you seriously think that would make for a better game? (And yes, it would be an indirect free kick for obstruction.)
Listen. Association Football is by far the most popular spectator sport in the world. It doesn't need Americans monkeying about with the rules to make it more popular over there. (In fact, MLS got rid of the innovations which marked it out as different: Fixed clock, shootout, etc.) As owlhouse pointed out, there have been plenty of rule changes over the last 30 years, and plenty of innovations in tactics. Just because you don't see them doesn't mean they don't exist. I don't know of tactical or rule changes in basketball, but I'm sure they exist.
Back to the a11 offense. I'm sure it could work at high school level, and it might even work at college level. But NFL? Sounds like a great way to get both of your quarterbacks out for the season.
Football has evolved to the point were no more innovation is needed, a pinicle few can share. American Football, however, is a much slower and more rigid sport; the recent innovations such as the West coast, the spread, no-huddle, and run-and-shot actually make the the game faster and more fluid. I'm not sure the A11 stratergies would hold up in the NFL, but it sure was fun watching the little clip on Rivals.
you can't edit your posts anymore?!? Now everyone can see my horrible spelling...
High school teams have always had various schematics in which interior linemen were eligible to receive passes. My favorite was our guard eligible play that had about a 20% success rate, but it was fun to watch the 250 pound guy we named Moose try to catch a ball.
Defensive units will quickly adapt to this. You switch out your bigger linemen for faster linebacker/d-back types. While all offensive players might be eligible on various plays, on any specific play most will not be eligible. Since the running game is very limited, once the defense learns to read which players are eligible, that will free up others to rush the QBs.
I think this will quickly become a "trick play' format as opposed to something many teams will institute as their primany offense.
