Just sayin’.

Nerdy, but yeah….

…the original “TC” had the receiver against the weakside TE, and the two TEs on the strong side were next to each other (by the RT).

I advocated moving the WR out (to pull a CB as well as to divide the attention of the FS), and pulling the right-most TE behind the line (since wide blitzes are already accounted for with two TEs; to allow an extra lead blocker, and to present an additional screen threat).

I’ve had a few “experimental” formations thrown at me (always from kids I coached), and (not to sound disrespectful) they were always flawed. This “TC” doesn’t look too shabby though, and I think Broncofan91 deserves the praise for coming up with a formation that (modified) seems to come close to the NDBox.

I’ve never heard of the NDbox (BIG hole in my historical reading), but I’m going to look for some more on it.

and in the backfield is always a receiving threat. But you have to have someone to throw the ball. Screens don’t work when there are packed boxes and no one spreading the field.

Putting 8 or even 9 in the box doesn’t mean the ends aren’t covered, in fact they are more likely to be coevered bedaucse you can’t put all those people between the tackles.

Why do you think Miami wants a runnin QB for their wioldcat formation? Defenses were stopping it cold at the end of the year with no credible passing threat.

Like I said, this is a short yardage, goal line formation that could be excellent to the point of attack. But its not good for much more than that, in my opinion. Hope that clarifies. Interesting post though.

after 6 months without football, I’ll take it!

on both points.

since OBrien is in the huddle the defense doesn’t know that it’s a Wildcat until they actually line up. That keeps the defense from substituting a special counter package.

The defense has to send a CB out wide to cover the QB, taking him out the play. If they don’t cover the QB he is a threat as a receiver and as the relay in a flea-flicker play.