Why no T? (1 Viewer)

[wikkidpissah]

Stewart/McCaffrey. Hyde/Breida. Howard/Cohen. Gillislee/White (Burkhead/Lewis). Blount/Smallwood. Crowell/DJohnson. Kelley/Thompson. Freeman/Coleman. Ingram/Kamara

At least half the teams in the NFL have two backs of nearly equal ability and most of them have tandems where at least one is regularly sent wide. So why no T-formations?! Is it because the larger backs in the league would resent being sent into the line without the ball (you'd think w the present-day disposability of RBs, they'd quickly get over that). Is it the eminence of the shotgun? What, then. Maybe i'm biased, having grown up with it but regular use of it seems smarter than telegraphing plays by which back you have in. What am i missing (besides those discarded 70s braincells)?

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

I don't know, I thought Belichick started doing this in the Saints game with White & Burkhead in a T and boom Burkhead took in a pass for a TD. It seemed effective and thought it would be a wrinkle but Burkhead got hurt.

 

[worrierking]

Why no T?

I thought you were asking about my testosterone levels.

 

[wikkidpissah]

I don't know, I thought Belichick started doing this in the Saints game with White & Burkhead in a T and boom Burkhead took in a pass for a TD. It seemed effective and thought it would be a wrinkle but Burkhead got hurt.

BB's used a shotgun T/umbrella? backfield quite a bit - as have some other coaches - but i dont recall one with QB under center. The flow chart of plays is pretty strong with RBs as willing to be lead blockers as be out in formation.

 

[otb_lifer]

there's a very bodacious OC at little known Huxtable College by the name of Barabelli ... he is revolutionizing the game by going all retro, with a playbook repleat with T formation goodies, and very simplistic lingo:

"hey diddle diddle, the cat and the fiddle, this time we gonna go straight uppa the middle"

"Humpty Dumpty sat on the wall, this time Professor Wagstaff gets-a the ball"

 

[VikingFrog]

Why no T?

I thought you were asking about my testosterone levels.

Why Low T?

If you’ve ever been to a Texas Rangers game, every single bathroom in that place is sponsored by a Low T Center and it always makes me second guess my levels. 

 

[Leroy Hoard]

Not exactly a classic T, but I saw Carolina score a TD from what looked like an option 2 back set with the rookie getting the ball on a forward pitch.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8M2v-9h5B1A

 

[Stompin' Tom Connors]

Interesting question. I am far from a football strategist, so these are my own semi-uninformed opinions, but I think the T has naturally evolved over time into more dynamic and effective sets like the shotgun/pistol and pro/offset I sets, giving offenses more options in playcalling from a single formation.

The traditional T doesn’t employ WRs - twin TEs are used to bolster the line, which in itself may be limiting to modern day offenses. The T also seems to be less of a spread formation - again, while you can pass out of the T, imagine both the routes and the skill sets needed in that formation limit what you can do.

Today’s game is super fast with players that literally defy human physiology - you have near 300 lb defensive tackles running sub 4.5 40s and ends who are super quick up the middle and especially around edges. So a T in the pro level just might bottleneck your own backfield.

Every now and again, seems like the NFL tries out a few old school/college type of formations - remember the Wildcat craze? But the modern day style of play and the ability of the players today seem to negate the effectiveness of these formations as modern Ds catch hold of it.

All that said, trends come and go and what’s old sometimes becomes new again, so wouldn’t totally surprise me to see some team try this out on a play or two and be effective if only because it’s been so long since DCs had to scheme against it.