PDA

View Full Version : Moore versus Spaeth/McHugh



flippy
01-06-2009, 12:55 PM
All the talk about the I formation versus the 2/3 TE sets got me thinking. Are we putting the 5 best offensive skill players on the field?

Could Parker and Moore do some things in the backfield together?

Moore is a better receiver (getting open and running after the catch) than our #2/#3 TE.

And the threat of Moore carrying the ball is bigger than the threat of the #2/#3 TE blocking. And defenders would have a harder time keying on Parker to run the ball in predictable running situations.

If you are out there Bruce, how about a little Pony package with Moore and Parker?

Anyone else remember Bruce talking about practicing this at the beginning of the season with Shard and Parker only to never see it again.

Moore is such a good receiver it also will help Ben get rid of the ball and avoid so many darn sacks.

MeetJoeGreene
01-06-2009, 12:59 PM
If you recall my prediction in the "call the first play" thread, this is exactly what I called for/dreamed of.

I agree.

RuthlessBurgher
01-06-2009, 01:04 PM
With Parker in there, I want McHugh playing FB in front of him for run blocking purposes, with Miller as the true TE, and Holmes and Ward out wide. Willie runs better out of the I formation with a FB in front of him to open a hole.

With Moore in there, I prefer single back with 1 TE (Miller) and 3 WR (Ward, Holmes, and Washington). That spreads the field for Moore, who can run a draw or catch a screen out of that formation.

SidSmythe
01-06-2009, 01:06 PM
only in passing situations ...
BUT
Our problems are blocking ... niether will help in that department.

flippy
01-06-2009, 01:07 PM
With Parker in there, I want McHugh playing FB in front of him for run blocking purposes, with Miller as the true TE, and Holmes and Ward out wide. Willie runs better out of the I formation with a FB in front of him to open a hole.

With Moore in there, I prefer single back with 1 TE (Miller) and 3 WR (Ward, Holmes, and Washington). That spreads the field for Moore, who can run a draw or catch a screen out of that formation.

Willie's biggest runs come out of the 3 WR sets, no matter what he says he prefers.

Oviedo
01-06-2009, 02:20 PM
With Parker in there, I want McHugh playing FB in front of him for run blocking purposes, with Miller as the true TE, and Holmes and Ward out wide. Willie runs better out of the I formation with a FB in front of him to open a hole.

With Moore in there, I prefer single back with 1 TE (Miller) and 3 WR (Ward, Holmes, and Washington). That spreads the field for Moore, who can run a draw or catch a screen out of that formation.

I agree. I want McHugh pounding out a hole for FWP to run through. McHugh as a TE is also a option for a play action pass. I'd also like to see McHugh in front of Russell.

I like Moore as the one back in a one back set. My modification on you second description would be 1 RB (Moore), 2 TE (Miller and Spaeth) and 2 WR Hines and Holmes. This provide plenty of targets all of whom can catch. Washington IMO is part of the problem with Ben holding the ball waiting for him to get open deep. I want the structure to be such that Ben's options are short not long so he dumps the ball.

Mick'sTeam
01-06-2009, 02:41 PM
I think putting Parker & Moore in the backfield together could be very productive. You could always put Moore in motion to the slot, which should create a mis-match with a Linebacker due to Moore's speed. Would help open things up in the middle for Ward or Miller's crossing routes.

I'm with you Flippy!

MeetJoeGreene
01-06-2009, 02:59 PM
With Parker in there, I want McHugh playing FB in front of him for run blocking purposes, with Miller as the true TE, and Holmes and Ward out wide. Willie runs better out of the I formation with a FB in front of him to open a hole.

With Moore in there, I prefer single back with 1 TE (Miller) and 3 WR (Ward, Holmes, and Washington). That spreads the field for Moore, who can run a draw or catch a screen out of that formation.

I agree. I want McHugh pounding out a hole for FWP to run through. McHugh as a TE is also a option for a play action pass. I'd also like to see McHugh in front of Russell.

I like Moore as the one back in a one back set. My modification on you second description would be 1 RB (Moore), 2 TE (Miller and Spaeth) and 2 WR Hines and Holmes. This provide plenty of targets all of whom can catch. Washington IMO is part of the problem with Ben holding the ball waiting for him to get open deep . I want the structure to be such that Ben's options are short not long so he dumps the ball.

That is a very interesting and thought provoking observation. You could be on to something there.

mshifko
01-06-2009, 03:31 PM
to me i think that moore is far too valuable to be sitting on the bench all game...he has that ability to make plays in the passing game and he's a decent ball-toter...

i dislike the double tight set, so i would rather see us use carey davis/sean mchugh as our FB in the I and use moore in passing situations and to spell FWP

SidSmythe
01-06-2009, 03:59 PM
With Parker in there, I want McHugh playing FB in front of him for run blocking purposes, with Miller as the true TE, and Holmes and Ward out wide. Willie runs better out of the I formation with a FB in front of him to open a hole.

With Moore in there, I prefer single back with 1 TE (Miller) and 3 WR (Ward, Holmes, and Washington). That spreads the field for Moore, who can run a draw or catch a screen out of that formation.



I agree. I want McHugh pounding out a hole for FWP to run through. McHugh as a TE is also a option for a play action pass. I'd also like to see McHugh in front of Russell.

I like Moore as the one back in a one back set. My modification on you second description would be 1 RB (Moore), 2 TE (Miller and Spaeth) and 2 WR Hines and Holmes. This provide plenty of targets all of whom can catch. Washington IMO is part of the problem with Ben holding the ball waiting for him to get open deep . I want the structure to be such that Ben's options are short not long so he dumps the ball.

That is a very interesting and thought provoking observation. You could be on to something there.

Ben at times is very hesistant on the deep ball also. He has a mediocre deep ball so he needs to get the ball out early.

What i've noticed lately is the quick pass early and it works. Takes the pressure off Ben, but then by the 2nd quarter it's back to 5 and 7 step drop.

I think the 5 and 7 step drop is important too help the running game, but i wanna see a good mix.

flippy
01-06-2009, 04:24 PM
With Parker in there, I want McHugh playing FB in front of him for run blocking purposes, with Miller as the true TE, and Holmes and Ward out wide. Willie runs better out of the I formation with a FB in front of him to open a hole.

With Moore in there, I prefer single back with 1 TE (Miller) and 3 WR (Ward, Holmes, and Washington). That spreads the field for Moore, who can run a draw or catch a screen out of that formation.

I agree. I want McHugh pounding out a hole for FWP to run through. McHugh as a TE is also a option for a play action pass. I'd also like to see McHugh in front of Russell.

I like Moore as the one back in a one back set. My modification on you second description would be 1 RB (Moore), 2 TE (Miller and Spaeth) and 2 WR Hines and Holmes. This provide plenty of targets all of whom can catch. Washington IMO is part of the problem with Ben holding the ball waiting for him to get open deep . I want the structure to be such that Ben's options are short not long so he dumps the ball.

That is a very interesting and thought provoking observation. You could be on to something there.

The only problem is Nate's the only guy who gets open consistently.

Oviedo
01-06-2009, 04:27 PM
With Parker in there, I want McHugh playing FB in front of him for run blocking purposes, with Miller as the true TE, and Holmes and Ward out wide. Willie runs better out of the I formation with a FB in front of him to open a hole.

With Moore in there, I prefer single back with 1 TE (Miller) and 3 WR (Ward, Holmes, and Washington). That spreads the field for Moore, who can run a draw or catch a screen out of that formation.



I agree. I want McHugh pounding out a hole for FWP to run through. McHugh as a TE is also a option for a play action pass. I'd also like to see McHugh in front of Russell.

I like Moore as the one back in a one back set. My modification on you second description would be 1 RB (Moore), 2 TE (Miller and Spaeth) and 2 WR Hines and Holmes. This provide plenty of targets all of whom can catch. Washington IMO is part of the problem with Ben holding the ball waiting for him to get open deep . I want the structure to be such that Ben's options are short not long so he dumps the ball.

That is a very interesting and thought provoking observation. You could be on to something there.

Ben at times is very hesistant on the deep ball also. He has a mediocre deep ball so he needs to get the ball out early.

What i've noticed lately is the quick pass early and it works. Takes the pressure off Ben, but then by the 2nd quarter it's back to 5 and 7 step drop.

I think the 5 and 7 step drop is important too help the running game, but i wanna see a good mix.

This is what I have been saying for two years yet people turn their noses up and say it is "west coast offense." Whatever label you want to put on it it works and Ben is better at that than doing 1970's & 80's Oakland Raider crap throwing the ball deep.

If we get get a new OC in the off season I hope he does come from the Bill Walsh lineage. It would be the best thing that could happen to ben's career even though he may not know it. If that would happen watch the sacks drop significantly.

flippy
01-06-2009, 04:41 PM
With Parker in there, I want McHugh playing FB in front of him for run blocking purposes, with Miller as the true TE, and Holmes and Ward out wide. Willie runs better out of the I formation with a FB in front of him to open a hole.

With Moore in there, I prefer single back with 1 TE (Miller) and 3 WR (Ward, Holmes, and Washington). That spreads the field for Moore, who can run a draw or catch a screen out of that formation.



I agree. I want McHugh pounding out a hole for FWP to run through. McHugh as a TE is also a option for a play action pass. I'd also like to see McHugh in front of Russell.

I like Moore as the one back in a one back set. My modification on you second description would be 1 RB (Moore), 2 TE (Miller and Spaeth) and 2 WR Hines and Holmes. This provide plenty of targets all of whom can catch. Washington IMO is part of the problem with Ben holding the ball waiting for him to get open deep . I want the structure to be such that Ben's options are short not long so he dumps the ball.

That is a very interesting and thought provoking observation. You could be on to something there.

Ben at times is very hesistant on the deep ball also. He has a mediocre deep ball so he needs to get the ball out early.

What i've noticed lately is the quick pass early and it works. Takes the pressure off Ben, but then by the 2nd quarter it's back to 5 and 7 step drop.

I think the 5 and 7 step drop is important too help the running game, but i wanna see a good mix.

This is what I have been saying for two years yet people turn their noses up and say it is "west coast offense." Whatever label you want to put on it it works and Ben is better at that than doing 1970's & 80's Oakland Raider crap throwing the ball deep.

If we get get a new OC in the off season I hope he does come from the Bill Walsh lineage. It would be the best thing that could happen to ben's career even though he may not know it. If that would happen watch the sacks drop significantly.

or we could just get him a randy moss or larry f and cover up all his deficiencies....