Parrish /Lynch Wildcat formation.

[Confused]

That would be sick. we need to try this. Direct snap to Roscoe, fake to the Beast, I would bet the first time we ran this paly it would be a TD from anywhere on the field. I hope we do it against miami. Roscoe can throw as well. heck, so can Marshawn!!!

[OpIv37]

hell no.

First, it leaves Trent too vulnerable. Second, Parrish is too small to run a direct snap up the middle so the other team won't take it as a serious threat. Third, this is a gimmick for offenses that have little else. Our offense has been good enough that it doesn't need gimmicks.

If we did this, it would have to be Jackson and Lynch in the backfield, but I still think it's a bad idea.

[Dozerdog]

Ummm.....no

Maybe put Jackson and Lynch back there.

[Dozerdog]

hell no.

First, it leaves Trent too vulnerable. Second, Parrish is too small to run a direct snap up the middle so the other team won't take it as a serious threat. Third, this is a gimmick for offenses that have little else. Our offense has been good enough that it doesn't need gimmicks.

If we did this, it would have to be Jackson and Lynch in the backfield, but I still think it's a bad idea.Only if JP is in the game

[Dozerdog]

This formation is a gimmick at best


Teams will be stuffing this play in another week or two

[Confused]

killjoy

[methos4ever]

We already run it with Lynch and Jackson, with Jackson in the backfield. That gives Lynch an opportunity to throw (since he would be going across the line ala a sweep/jet motion) as he did vs the Bengals in the traditional HB Option Pass.

As for Edwards, unless it's a play like Pennington's where he's getting the ball to throw it he should just get out of bounds and stay there after the snap.

[RedEyE]

Mularkey?

[Nighthawk]

This formation is a gimmick at best


Teams will be stuffing this play in another week or two

I agree. The reason people run gimmick plays is because those teams are not good enough to beat teams straight up.

[DrGraves]

confused, i like your idea. i dont know where the love is on this board sometimes.


snap it to roscoe, fake a hand off going to marshawn on the left, roscoe sweeps right and beats everyone to sideline

[Lexwhat]

hell no.

First, it leaves Trent too vulnerable. Second, Parrish is too small to run a direct snap up the middle so the other team won't take it as a serious threat. Third, this is a gimmick for offenses that have little else. Our offense has been good enough that it doesn't need gimmicks.

If we did this, it would have to be Jackson and Lynch in the backfield, but I still think it's a bad idea.

If the Bills think it will work and give a good result, then what's wrong with it? And JP can play in place of Trent in those situations.

I'm watching the Browns game right now, and they've been using it too.

Whatever helps us win, I'm all for it (except cheating).

[pintonick96]

If the Bills think it will work and give a good result, then what's wrong with it? And JP can play in place of Trent in those situations.

I'm watching the Browns game right now, and they've been using it too.

Whatever helps us win, I'm all for it (except cheating).

If youre not trying to cheat youre not trying to win.

[Mr. Pink]

Why not put Roscoe and Evans in the backfield and start running the option too!

[LtFinFan66]

It has been said by many experts...it is NOT a gimmick. It's just another way to get the ball into the running backs hands quicker to let them make plays. And I am not saying that just because I am a Fin fan. Do some research:up:

[jamze132]

Whatever about the Wildcat offense, I could care less, but what I do want to see is some more trickery. Can't Roscoe throw the football? Do the reverse thingy and before crossing the LOS, throw it.

[Billz_fan]

Wildcat ? no thanks

Wishbone ? Vere ? lol

[BlackMetalNinja]

It has been said by many experts...it is NOT a gimmick. It's just another way to get the ball into the running backs hands quicker to let them make plays. And I am not saying that just because I am a Fin fan. Do some research:up:
gim·mick http://cache.lexico.com/dictionary/graphics/luna/thinsp.png <script type="text/javascript"> var interfaceflash = new LEXICOFlashObject ( "http://cache.lexico.com/d/g/speaker.swf", "speaker", "17", "18", "http://www.billszone.com/fanzone/ (http://www.billszone.com/fanzone/)", "6"); interfaceflash.addParam("loop", "false"); interfaceflash.addParam("quality", "high"); interfaceflash.addParam("menu", "false"); interfaceflash.addParam("salign", "t"); interfaceflash.addParam("FlashVars", "soundUrl=http%3A%2F%2Fcache.lexico.com%2Fdictionary%2Faudio%2Fluna%2FG01%2FG0157700.mp3"); interfaceflash.write(); </script><embed type="application/x-shockwave-flash" src="http://cache.lexico.com/d/g/speaker.swf" id="speaker" quality="high" loop="false" menu="false" salign="t" flashvars="soundUrl=http%3A%2F%2Fcache.lexico.com%2Fdictionary%2Faudio%2Fluna%2FG01%2FG0157700.mp3" align="top" width="17" height="18"><noscript>http://cache.lexico.com/g/d/speaker.gif (http://dictionary.reference.com/audio.html/lunaWAV/G01/G0157700)</noscript> /ˈgɪmhttp://cache.lexico.com/dictionary/graphics/luna/thinsp.pngɪk/ Pronunciation Key (http://www.billszone.com/fanzone/) - Show Spelled Pronunciation (http://www.billszone.com/fanzone/)[gim-ik] Pronunciation Key (http://www.billszone.com/fanzone/) - Show IPA Pronunciation (http://www.billszone.com/fanzone/) –noun <table class="luna-Ent"><tbody><tr><td class="dn" valign="top">1.</td><td valign="top">an ingenious or novel device, scheme, or stratagem, esp. one designed to attract attention or increase appeal. </td></tr></tbody></table> <table class="luna-Ent"><tbody><tr><td class="dn" valign="top">2.</td><td valign="top">a concealed, usually devious aspect or feature of something, as a plan or deal: An offer that good must have a gimmick in it somewhere. </td></tr></tbody></table>

I would say it fits the definition. It certainly attracts attention, and I would consider it devious, in that it's unconventional and makes defenses wonder where the ball is going more so than usual.

[LtFinFan66]

gim·mick http://cache.lexico.com/dictionary/graphics/luna/thinsp.png <SCRIPT type=text/javascript> var interfaceflash = new LEXICOFlashObject ( "http://cache.lexico.com/d/g/speaker.swf", "speaker", "17", "18", "http://www.billszone.com/fanzone/ (http://www.billszone.com/fanzone/)", "6"); interfaceflash.addParam("loop", "false"); interfaceflash.addParam("quality", "high"); interfaceflash.addParam("menu", "false"); interfaceflash.addParam("salign", "t"); interfaceflash.addParam("FlashVars", "soundUrl=http%3A%2F%2Fcache.lexico.com%2Fdictionary%2Faudio%2Fluna%2FG01%2FG0157700.mp3"); interfaceflash.write(); </SCRIPT><EMBED id=speaker align=top src=""http://cache.lexico.com/d/g/speaker.swf width=17 height=18 type=application/x-shockwave-flash flashvars="soundUrl=http%3A%2F%2Fcache.lexico.com%2Fdictionary%2Faudio%2Fluna%2FG01%2FG0157700.mp3" salign="t" menu="false" loop="false" quality="high"><NOSCRIPT>http://cache.lexico.com/g/d/speaker.gif (http://dictionary.reference.com/audio.html/lunaWAV/G01/G0157700)</NOSCRIPT> /ˈgɪmhttp://cache.lexico.com/dictionary/graphics/luna/thinsp.pngɪk/ Pronunciation Key (http://www.billszone.com/fanzone/) - Show Spelled Pronunciation (http://www.billszone.com/fanzone/)[gim-ik] Pronunciation Key (http://www.billszone.com/fanzone/) - Show IPA Pronunciation (http://www.billszone.com/fanzone/) –noun <TABLE class=luna-Ent><TBODY><TR><TD class=dn vAlign=top>1.</TD><TD vAlign=top>an ingenious or novel device, scheme, or stratagem, esp. one designed to attract attention or increase appeal. </TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE><TABLE class=luna-Ent><TBODY><TR><TD class=dn vAlign=top>2.</TD><TD vAlign=top>a concealed, usually devious aspect or feature of something, as a plan or deal: An offer that good must have a gimmick in it somewhere. </TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>

I would say it fits the definition. It certainly attracts attention, and I would consider it devious, in that it's unconventional and makes defenses wonder where the ball is going more so than usual.Yeah but it's not a gimmick the way these guys mean it

[Dozerdog]

Yeah but it's not a gimmick the way these guys mean itHow do we "mean it?"


Bill Cower on NFL Radio said he could easilly defend it this way-


1- Put both safties in the box and blitz them up the middle.

2- Single man on man coverage on your recievers, he even suggested leaving the QB uncovered-dare your RB to make the perfect throw to him. It is a free "kill shot" on the QB-or give the QB one hell of a free shot inside the 5 yard chuck area. I hope Miami has a couple of QBs capable of the punishment.It's one thing if you have Seneca Wallace or a "slash" type QB like Kordell Stewart.

3- Ronnie Brown witht he safties blasting up the middle now can be caught for a 5-7 yard loss, instead of your zero yard gain when a run blitz is called. He isn't going to make any reads (IE check downs) because he doesn't have the time or even ability to do so. Figure out who his primary reciever is and cover him. Ronnie Brown also isn't Brett Favre, he's not going to float the perfect pass into or around god coverage. Unless the reciever is uncovered and had plenty of time/room to adjust to the ball, you have a higher chance of defending or even forcing a turnover.


The Pats got suckered because they didn't take it seriously, and that they didn't know Ronnie Brown was a left handed passer. When he ran to the left they gave up on the pass protection.

[HHURRICANE]

That would be sick. we need to try this. Direct snap to Roscoe, fake to the Beast, I would bet the first time we ran this paly it would be a TD from anywhere on the field. I hope we do it against miami. Roscoe can throw as well. heck, so can Marshawn!!!

Let's try the hook and ladder while we are at it. Maybe bring out the leather helmets.