Should More Teams Use 2 RB Sets?

turcorox911 · Postby **turcorox911** » Fri Jun 01, 2018 8:34 am

Should More Teams Use 2 RB Sets?

I ask because I like what I've seen from these sets, and with RBs becoming more versatile, it might not be a bad idea, especially since most teams have a pass-catching specialist now, in addition to power backs, speed backs, finesse backs, etc..

I say yes, but of course that means taking a WR or a TE off the field. But even so, you can audible and put 1 or both RBs on the LOS as a WR. I've seen good things when that happens with the likes of the Pats and Saints. Seahawks did it once with Lynch that I remember it turned into a huge gain. My Cowboys rarely ever move a RB from the backfield to the LOS as a WR, but when they have, I've liked the results.

For what it's worth, I do like how the Panthers, Browns, and Falcons have used weapons like CMC, Duke Johnson, and Tevin Coleman in the passing game.

Just food for thought.

Space Cowboy · Postby **Space Cowboy** » Fri Jun 01, 2018 8:41 am

Yes. The bears should have used that 30% of the time with their lack of talent. Cohen and Howard next to each other, or even Howard at fb for short yardage while you fake a pitch to cohen. Cohen can motion to the slot. It's not fun for a defender to see stuff like that.

Postby **hockeyBjj** » Fri Jun 01, 2018 8:52 am

I'll agree with Space Cowboy. RBs are more versatile as ever and having two in the huddle can really throw off your D schemes and personel. A Cohen or McCafrey type back can motion to the slot or lineup as a halfback with the "normal" runningback down as the full in an I or power I gives you many options and the chance to do whichever makes more sense for the number of linebackers or D backs on the field. Get you a mismatch with either an OLB trying to cover your slot runningback, or run it with a TE or even tackle murdering a poor corner

This was actually a good thread for once Turco

Postby **ColdZealDonkeyStrike** » Fri Jun 01, 2018 2:56 pm

As long as they've got a back who is a weapon in the receiving game, yes.

Postby **ericanadian** » Fri Jun 01, 2018 4:00 pm

If you're talking about a situation like Chicago where they had no receivers to begin with and then lost a few to injury, sure.. why not? However, that's mostly just a desperation play and probably not something you want to aspire to. If you see a specific hole in an opponents defense, and you have the personnel to take advantage, then sure, but I think teams are already doing this about as effectively as they are capable of.

If you start mixing a lot of this stuff into an offense, you're probably being fancy just for the sake of being fancy. I think the lost time practicing the fundamentals and increased complexity of the playbook leading to more mistakes will offset any gains you make and when the defense adjusts, they'll be able to take advantage of the weaknesses you create in your offense.

Postby **honcho55** » Fri Jun 01, 2018 5:48 pm

Seems to me like there’s two breeds of good coaches, the ones that tailor a system for the players they have, and the ones that make their system work regardless of the personnel they have. It’s the bad coaches that try to force a system that doesn’t work, or force players into roles to poor result.

So for an actual answer, it depends.

Pullo Vision · Postby **Pullo Vision** » Fri Jun 01, 2018 6:45 pm

Why restrict to a 2nd RB? Guys like Charles Clay and Chris Cooley started as Backs and developed into quality, if smaller sized, TEs. It's one reason Jaylen Samuels intrigues me.

Postby **Ice** » Fri Jun 01, 2018 7:31 pm

turcorox911 wrote: ↑Fri Jun 01, 2018 8:34 am Should More Teams Use 2 RB Sets?

I ask because I like what I've seen from these sets, and with RBs becoming more versatile, it might not be a bad idea, especially since most teams have a pass-catching specialist now, in addition to power backs, speed backs, finesse backs, etc..

I say yes, but of course that means taking a WR or a TE off the field. But even so, you can audible and put 1 or both RBs on the LOS as a WR. I've seen good things when that happens with the likes of the Pats and Saints. Seahawks did it once with Lynch that I remember it turned into a huge gain. My Cowboys rarely ever move a RB from the backfield to the LOS as a WR, but when they have, I've liked the results.

For what it's worth, I do like how the Panthers, Browns, and Falcons have used weapons like CMC, Duke Johnson, and Tevin Coleman in the passing game.

Just food for thought.

Not really, its all about the quality of the players. Even if teams do they will simply split them out pre-snap. Some teams will, others will use two TE's or 4/5 receivers. It is always about putting the best athletes on the field.

The Cowboys would lose some effectiveness if they overused those sets given they are such a good running team. That said, with T. Ausiin in the fold expect a few more sets like you have described and several more jet sweep type plays to take advantage of his speed which is significant.

Play action would suffer in two back sets as safeties won't bite.

Postby **_yeti** » Mon Sep 17, 2018 6:15 am

You got some issues, Turco, I think you need some counseling
To help your a** from bouncing off the walls when you get down some

I hope you get to read this letter, I just hope it reaches you in time
Before you hurt yourself, I think that you'll be doin' just fine
If you relax a little, I'm glad I inspire you, but Turco
Why are you so mad? Try to understand, that we do want you as a fan
I just don't want you to do some crazy s**
I seen this one s** on the forum a couple weeks ago that made me sick

Dynasty League Football Forum