There are 59 users in the forums

Remember
Not a member? Register Now!

Is WR switching at all plausible?

is it crazy to switch the two starting receivers on different series?

example:
series 1 -- flanker/se = bruce/crabtree
series 2 -- flanker/se = morgan/jones
hill used in the slot on both.
or switch to morgan/hill on series 2 with jones in the slot (since that's where he says he plays best)

1. i have vets with young players in this ideology so the QB can still rely on an experienced guy out there running good routes/having sure hands/good head on their shoulders, etc.
2. this mixes up the offense completely every other series. it shows new looks, allows for different play-calling based on the personnel, and makes it harder for defenses to catch onto a QB and WR's tendencies.

this is all for fun -- whaddya guys think?
you can to a degree and thats what they are doing with morgan. morgan was an x last year, but they used him as z this offseason- most likely so crabtree can play x whenever he starts. rule of thumb i read- x's can learn z, but z's cant learn x. the reason being that most z's are thinner, faster guys who will need to learn to be phyiscal at the x. if you are physical at the x, but posses the speed and jump of the z, you can learn the z.
Originally posted by BurritoSmuggler:
you can to a degree and thats what they are doing with morgan. morgan was an x last year, but they used him as z this offseason- most likely so crabtree can play x whenever he starts. rule of thumb i read- x's can learn z, but z's cant learn x. the reason being that most z's are thinner, faster guys who will need to learn to be phyiscal at the x. if you are physical at the x, but posses the speed and jump of the z, you can learn the z.

so... couldn't we go X=bruce/Z=morgan; X=Crabtree/Z=Hill and slot = Jones for both?

or are my hopes and dreams of something unique like WR switching shattered?
If you have two receivers who can play the X (think Zona), then sure, you can absolutely do it.

The question to ask is WHY you would do it.

For the sake of argument, let's assume Morgan and Crabs are starting (we'll just make it the second half of the season in this scenario).

1) First thing to consider is that a receiver running the wrong route is probably the most dangerous pass play you can have as far as turnovers go, particularly when going up against zone coverage (going deep into double coverage is probably second).

2) Morgan and Crabs are both first year full time starters and they're also playing in a new offense. Even if they can both get off the line in an X, it's still a horrible idea to have them switching positions unless you're going to get significant gains from it.

3) On gains, what gains do you get? The first two CBs are probably going to be shadowing anyway, so you don't get an advantage there.

4) If you want your guys on opposite sides of the field, just flip the play and let them run their same routes.


I guess I just don't see the advantage of it, and there's a palpable down side.
You put your best players on the field as much as possible if bruce crabtree are the best you have why put them on the bench
Don’t we already do this to some extent? I think I remember reading that they have the guys learning all of the positions. Crabtree, Morgan, Hill and Jones are all around the same height (6’0” – 6’1”) and weight (somewhere @ 215lbs). Hill is a little lighter then the other three at only 200lbs. Of course one or two are a little faster, but none of them are turtles. All of them also have pretty good hands. I say this to point out the fact that the 4 guys most likely to be our top WRs for the next few years are pretty similar. These days the game is about versatility. I expect that we’ll see those guys changing places and moving all over the field. It’s all about giving the defense something extra to think about.
Yes, but like a previous poster said- to an extent... If you look at teams that employ multiple WR sets, not only do all the activated WR's play at that time, they also switch up to give each other breathers and to bring in the next play/plays.
  • AgentShorty
  • Info N/A
I know there are differences but is THAT many differences between the 5 WRs to switch them around and throw the defense off? Is that even possible?
No, I wouldn't do it for the same reason I think its a mistake to carry on the QB competition too far into TC - It screws up the chemistry imo.

We don't have great talents at either QB or WR, or at least not the type of talent that has shown an ability to overcome all obstacles. QB's need to have a "feel" for their WR's, as each guy makes slightly different pre-snap reads and runs routes slightly differently. The only way you can build trust between those two positions is simply by getting a lot of reps together - ensuring everyone develops confidence in the system and in everyone else. The QB has to know the WR will run the correct route and the WR has to know the QB will put the ball in the right spot, etc.

Constantly switching out WR's seems like it would just create one more obstacle to overcome. I don't think we need to make things any harder than they have to be.

jmho
Originally posted by chico49erfan:
Originally posted by BurritoSmuggler:
you can to a degree and thats what they are doing with morgan. morgan was an x last year, but they used him as z this offseason- most likely so crabtree can play x whenever he starts. rule of thumb i read- x's can learn z, but z's cant learn x. the reason being that most z's are thinner, faster guys who will need to learn to be phyiscal at the x. if you are physical at the x, but posses the speed and jump of the z, you can learn the z.

so... couldn't we go X=bruce/Z=morgan; X=Crabtree/Z=Hill and slot = Jones for both?

or are my hopes and dreams of something unique like WR switching shattered?

i dont think bruce can do the x. he's a pure z. hes smaller and faster. i dont think he could beat the jam that teh x faces. morgan can play x or z. crabtree can play x. hill can play z. in my opinion
...