Random question -- are we seeing any 22 personnel packages?

[Imgrandojji]

It seems to me that this roster is really well built for a couple 22 packages because it's a personnel suite that plays well to our current strengths.

 

For those who aren't sure what I'm talking about, 22 personnel is 2 TE, 2 backs (2RB or RB/FB), and 1 WR.  The patriots used it heavily when they had Gronk and Bennett or Allen a few years back and they famously used 22 spread (22 personnel spread out and the backs positioned as receivers) to devestating effect in the latest Superbowl

 

Since our WR corps is a bit thin after TY at the moment, and we have very strong TE and RB groups, this is a personnel package I'd expect to see out there a lot, taking advantage of Ebron, Doyle, Mack and Hines each being among our top weapons and solid depth at both TE and RB.  And I think 22 personnel might be a package that could allow us to making the best possible use of TY without exposing our issues with WR depth.

 

Both 22 tight (22 run blocking formation) and 22 spread (receiving formation) are offensive formations we could and should be working from, given the way the roster is built, but I haven't had the chance to see every game and I don't know how much we've actually seen it.  Has anyone gotten the all-22 and can tell if we're using this formation?

[GRUMPY OLD MAN]

15 hours ago, Imgrandojji said:

It seems to me that this roster is really well built for a couple 22 packages because it's a personnel suite that plays well to our current strengths.

 

For those who aren't sure what I'm talking about, 22 personnel is 2 TE, 2 backs (2RB or RB/FB), and 1 WR.  The patriots used it heavily when they had Gronk and Bennett or Allen a few years back and they famously used 22 spread (22 personnel spread out and the backs positioned as receivers) to devestating effect in the latest Superbowl

 

Since our WR corps is a bit thin after TY at the moment, and we have very strong TE and RB groups, this is a personnel package I'd expect to see out there a lot, taking advantage of Ebron, Doyle, Mack and Hines each being among our top weapons and solid depth at both TE and RB.  And I think 22 personnel might be a package that could allow us to making the best possible use of TY without exposing our issues with WR depth.

 

Both 22 tight (22 run blocking formation) and 22 spread (receiving formation) are offensive formations we could and should be working from, given the way the roster is built, but I haven't had the chance to see every game and I don't know how much we've actually seen it.  Has anyone gotten the all-22 and can tell if we're using this formation?

it sounds worth a try

[Imgrandojji]

I think so.  The presence of Hines dictates that 22 spread will have a chance to be effective.  I could wish for a proper fullback for 22 run blocking packages.  But maybe Wilkins can step in and claim the role as a blocking RB

[chad72]

This is THE game to spread out the Pittsburgh LBs in coverage vs Ebron and Hines to create mismatches. 

[Imgrandojji]

Yeah I was thinking of that.  The Patriots did that to them in the AFCCG in 16 and they had no answer

[SteelCityColt]

Not quite what you're saying, but like this? 

 

 

I've thought Doyle would make a serviceable FB, so it was interesting that they put Nelson in there as a legitimate receiving option. Would have been the play of the year to see his TD celebration... 

[BigQungus]

3 minutes ago, SteelCityColt said:

Not quite what you're saying, but like this? 

 

 

I've thought Doyle would make a serviceable FB, so it was interesting that they put Nelson in there as a legitimate receiving option. Would have been the play of the year to see his TD celebration... 

 

Instead we got the Catch of the Year so far... bummer...

 

(I'm being facetious, I wanted a Q touchdown as well lol)

[SteelCityColt]

Also for anyone interested, this might be of use:

https://www.sharpfootballstats.com/personnel-grouping-frequency.html

 

However I'm not 100% sure on the veracity as it doesn't seem to have the play above in it, unless I'm being blind. 

[Imgrandojji]

1 hour ago, SteelCityColt said:

Not quite what you're saying, but like this? 

 

 

I've thought Doyle would make a serviceable FB, so it was interesting that they put Nelson in there as a legitimate receiving option. Would have been the play of the year to see his TD celebration... 

That's what I've been calling 22 tight.  Two ways you can run it, both effective.  you can stack both TE on one side to maximize your ability to make a hole in the D or create an opening to reach the edge, or you can use your TE to hold off the edge rusher and use a FB to lead block for the RB.

 

Both are probably better than the kind of improvised weirdness we've seen Mack running on some plays. 

 

I think getting Mack a really good lead blocker has to be a priority if we want to live on the running game.  Doesn't have to be an FB, but they're probably easier to find than high end blocking RBs

 

And Q would make an excellent fullback if he wasn't already so dominant where he was

 

Another guy I'd love to see experimented with at fullback is Bobby Okereke.  Dunno why, I just have a hunch watching him play that he'd be really good at lead blocking.

[chad72]

4 minutes ago, Imgrandojji said:

That's what I've been calling 22 tight.  Two ways you can run it, both effective.  you can stack both TE on one side to maximize your ability to make a hole in the D or create an opening to reach the edge, or you can use your TE to hold off the edge rusher and use a FB to lead block for the RB.

 

Both are probably better than the kind of improvised weirdness we've seen Mack running on some plays. 

 

I think getting Mack a really good lead blocker has to be a priority if we want to live on the running game.  Doesn't have to be an FB, but they're probably easier to find than high end blocking RBs

 

And Q would make an excellent fullback if he wasn't already so dominant where he was

 

Another guy I'd love to see experimented with at fullback is Bobby Okereke.  Dunno why, I just have a hunch watching him play that he'd be really good at lead blocking.

 

I'd say use Mo Allie Cox as a FB/lead blocker, and every once in a while use him as a guy in the flat that will make people miss, sometimes pretty easily because people will be surprised by his athleticism, IMO. 

[Imgrandojji]

I could see it but if you're using 2  TEs Allie-Cox is in the TE rotation and won't be available in all situations.   That's why I'm thinking about borrowing a defensive player.

[SteelCityColt]

8 minutes ago, Imgrandojji said:

That's what I've been calling 22 tight.  Two ways you can run it, both effective.  you can stack both TE on one side to maximize your ability to make a hole in the D or create an opening to reach the edge, or you can use your TE to hold off the edge rusher and use a FB to lead block for the RB.

 

Both are probably better than the kind of improvised weirdness we've seen Mack running on some plays. 

 

I think getting Mack a really good lead blocker has to be a priority if we want to live on the running game.  Doesn't have to be an FB, but they're probably easier to find than high end blocking RBs

 

And Q would make an excellent fullback if he wasn't already so dominant where he was

 

Another guy I'd love to see experimented with at fullback is Bobby Okereke.  Dunno why, I just have a hunch watching him play that he'd be really good at lead blocking.

Purely from personnel on show I was considering that a 2-3 rather than 2-2 but I’m probably wrong.

[Imgrandojji]

Just now, SteelCityColt said:

Purely from personnel on show I was considering that a 2-3 rather than 2-2 but I’m probably wrong.

I'm no expert.  I've learned a thing or two but my knowledge is by no means perfect or even all that good.

[Rally5]

19 hours ago, Imgrandojji said:

It seems to me that this roster is really well built for a couple 22 packages because it's a personnel suite that plays well to our current strengths.

 

For those who aren't sure what I'm talking about, 22 personnel is 2 TE, 2 backs (2RB or RB/FB), and 1 WR.  The patriots used it heavily when they had Gronk and Bennett or Allen a few years back and they famously used 22 spread (22 personnel spread out and the backs positioned as receivers) to devestating effect in the latest Superbowl

 

Since our WR corps is a bit thin after TY at the moment, and we have very strong TE and RB groups, this is a personnel package I'd expect to see out there a lot, taking advantage of Ebron, Doyle, Mack and Hines each being among our top weapons and solid depth at both TE and RB.  And I think 22 personnel might be a package that could allow us to making the best possible use of TY without exposing our issues with WR depth.

 

Both 22 tight (22 run blocking formation) and 22 spread (receiving formation) are offensive formations we could and should be working from, given the way the roster is built, but I haven't had the chance to see every game and I don't know how much we've actually seen it.  Has anyone gotten the all-22 and can tell if we're using this formation?

Not as much as we should, one of our deepest personnel groups is TE.  We can actually run 22 personnel with 3 TE's with the addition of Cox who could fill the FB spot.  So in short no we probably don't do it enough and yes I like the idea of running it more and leveraging our TE depth.  Typically 22P is used as a short yardage, goal line, 2pt conversion formation so it won't be a big play type alignment.  NE uses it to great effect because of their patience with the short passing game.  Good post.

[Imgrandojji]

2 minutes ago, Rally5 said:

 Typically 22P is used as a short yardage, goal line, 2pt conversion formation so it won't be a big play type alignment.  NE uses it to great effect because of their patience with the short passing game.  Good post.

In other words exactly the style of offense Reich pays lip service to

[throwing BBZ]

1 hour ago, Imgrandojji said:

In other words exactly the style of offense Reich pays lip service to

 

 Doyle was very good at FB a few years ago. He hasn't been at his best in-line blocking lately it appears to me. We do need some new plays, blocking schemes, to mix things up.

[LuckyHorseShoe§]

22 personnel? I thought you could only have 11 guys on the field at once. I think they might notice if we ran out 22

[Jdubu]

12 hours ago, chad72 said:

 

I'd say use Mo Allie Cox as a FB/lead blocker, and every once in a while use him as a guy in the flat that will make people miss, sometimes pretty easily because people will be surprised by his athleticism, IMO. 

Is MAC still on this team because he has been pretty much MIA imho. I’m disappointed in the offense, the play calling and the Lossnof excitement we had before the start of the season. At one point we expected EE to blow up, expected DF to get his grabs and we really looked forward to watching the maturation of Cain and see those jet sweeps and screens and short passes ran far down the field by PC. None of this has occurred. We also keep saying MAC is on the verge of breaking out and he hasn’t done a thing. He has 4 catches for 38 yards this season. WTH?? It’s like watching the Pep Hamilton offense out there again. And it amazes me that we are 5-2 no explanation for how really. The team needs a burst of excitement because even though we are winning, not a large swath of people really are thinking we are SB material. 

[HOZER]

You guys making my brain hurt, in a good way!

 

[SteelCityColt]

Just as a (related) aside,  and I'd have to double check the exact wording, I heard an interesting factoid that the teams with the best 5 records so far this year are the teams with the higher % of snaps under center. 

 

The theory was that as now the college games is down to only 10% of snaps being taken under cetner (I want to double check this) so defensive players don't have the experience of going up against this style of football and if you have a QB who is comfortable taking snaps under center it can be quite an advantage.

 

[EastStreet]

3 hours ago, SteelCityColt said:

Just as a (related) aside,  and I'd have to double check the exact wording, I heard an interesting factoid that the teams with the best 5 records so far this year are the teams with the higher % of snaps under center. 

 

The theory was that as now the college games is down to only 10% of snaps being taken under cetner (I want to double check this) so defensive players don't have the experience of going up against this style of football and if you have a QB who is comfortable taking snaps under center it can be quite an advantage.

 

The old is now the new/exotic.....  lol

[EastStreet]

Not sure we'd ever go old school 22, but Hines is as much or more WR, so Mack/Hines/Ebron/Doyle/TY is technically 22, but still has 2 small 4.4 receiving threats in the mix.

 

When Funch is back, we'll be running a fair amount of what is really 13 packages. 

 

Personally, I'd go bonkers for a few 10 (4vert) packages per game when the DBs start biting in.

[aaron11]

10 hours ago, Jdubu said:

 And it amazes me that we are 5-2 no explanation for how really. 

 

the texans were the only good team we played all year, and they are not that great 

 

im glad the colts are winning but its been a really weird year for the league, especially in the AFC

[EastStreet]

2 minutes ago, aaron11 said:

 

the texans were the only good team we played all year, and they are not that great 

 

im glad the colts are winning but its been a really weird year for the league, especially in the AFC

 

It reminds me of ND's 2012 year. Great record, lot's of close wins, then... 

[Imgrandojji]

1 hour ago, aaron11 said:

 

the texans were the only good team we played all year, and they are not that great 

wut

 

Come on man, you can't even make that argument without mentioning that the Chiefs only started to look mortal after we beat them.

 

As for the Texans not being that great, they're like half a game back of us in the division, if they're not great what are we?

 

What are you talking about?

[aaron11]

23 minutes ago, Imgrandojji said:

wut

 

Come on man, you can't even make that argument without mentioning that the Chiefs only started to look mortal after we beat them.

 

As for the Texans not being that great, they're like half a game back of us in the division, if they're not great what are we?

 

What are you talking about?

its true the chiefs were not good when we played them

 

they were missing their best receivers and mahomes was off after his linemen stepped on his foot

 

the texans are not what i would call a "great" team either, i said they were good

[Imgrandojji]

Everybody has injuries.  We certainly did.

 

I get tired of people claiming that games somehow don't count because of injuries when everyone's down a few players here and there.

[Jdubu]

6 hours ago, aaron11 said:

 

the texans were the only good team we played all year, and they are not that great 

 

im glad the colts are winning but its been a really weird year for the league, especially in the AFC

Denver may not be a good team offensively but their defense is one of the best we’ve played this year. 

[Rally5]

On 11/1/2019 at 5:11 PM, Jdubu said:

Denver may not be a good team offensively but their defense is one of the best we’ve played this year. 

Top 5 D, just no O.