Discussion Issue, Offensive Run Middle Plans

[Charlie-49ers]

Many seasons ago we had limitations on the Offensive Run Middle category! The League had become all sweep plays for Run Middle and we required that at least 20% or 2 in 10 of the Run Middle plays be between the Tackles. In watching the games today, it seems like we are back to the old days of all sweeps, which I am at fault also. Question: for next season should we implement some percentage requirement for Run Middle between the Tackles? I already know all the pros and cons since I have been down this road before, but I would like to hear from you. There is no right or wrong opinion here, and based on the responses I would put it up to a vote as opposed to an executive decision.

[James-Eagles]

Many seasons ago we had limitations on the Offensive Run Middle category! The League had become all sweep plays for Run Middle and we required that at least 20% or 2 in 10 of the Run Middle plays be between the Tackles. In watching the games today, it seems like we are back to the old days of all sweeps, which I am at fault also. Question: for next season should we implement some percentage requirement for Run Middle between the Tackles? I already know all the pros and cons since I have been down this road before, but I would like to hear from you. There is no right or wrong opinion here, and based on the responses I would put it up to a vote as opposed to an executive decision.

I guess I don't see it as a problem. I think sweeps work more than they don't but when they don't they they are usually negative plays.
we aren't that far off the NFL yard per carry. I think it is something we should watch but I don't think it is a problem right now.
https://www.nfl.com/stats/team-stats/of ... 22/reg/all

[Matt-Jacksonville]

I don't think it's a huge issue. Eventually people will start using defenses to shut those down and force people to use more OT and Inside running plays. I used a sweep heavy game plan against New Orleans and it backfired pretty badly, as such, I don't think it's a huge issue.

[Shuggy-Packers]

I was guilty of this by calling all sweeps in the RM and RR catagories this week while calling zero sweeps in the RM category and all sweeps in the RR catagory the week before. Sorry, I didn't know there was a rule about that. However and I know I am the last person to comment on rules and stuff, but I think we should have the option to call whatever running plays we want. For example, I really wanted to run the ball and not get caught in 2nd and longs (seems everytime a pass is a sack) so I pounded the ball on first down then called plays depending on the result. Either a sweep on 2nd 6-10 or another up the middle on 2nd and 2-5. This plan would not be possible if sweeps were required on RM for example because a sweep can often be dropped for a loss unless playing the Rams when tackles are missed and the RB runs for 30 yards, Also I don't think we should not be forced to run up the middle. (And are those quick pitch plays, are they sweeps or "up the middle"?) Coaches that try to run the ball should not be penalized for trying. I don't remember running AI plays (a couple like a pitch forward or a blocker throwing a fake to freeze pursuing defenders) as compared to a ton of passing AI plays. We already have safe guards keeping coaches from calling the same play over and over. So there is built in variety in almost every case.

[Dean-Atlanta]

I don't see the need for such a rule. the 21 and 22 series RM plays still work well as well as the off tackle stuff (24, 25 series) that was not used much in the old days when sweep dominated.

If a team uses a far too unbalanced RM rushing attack, the opposing team scouting that can prepare the right defense for that and stop it. Problem solved. The learns to be more balanced in its RM running plays.

Adding a rule requiring or limiting certain categories of running plays is a solution in search of a non-existent problem. And it would also be yet another rule complicating that much more the process of creating PPPs, for little or no benefit.

[Charlie-49ers]

Nick, just to be clear, there is no rule currently. My reference was to seasons past when we made a rule and after several seasons eliminated it. Currently, you call what you want. All sweeps, no sweeps, or any combination thereof is fine. The only restriction on Run Middle is the number of QB runs that you can use.

[Mitch-Oilers]

No need for additional regulations. The market will take care of itself.

[Matt-Jacksonville]

If a team uses a far too unbalanced RM rushing attack, the opposing team scouting that can prepare the right defense for that and stop it. Problem solved. The learns to be more balanced in its RM running plays.

THIS...I did this against NO and paid the price.

[Barney - Vikings]

IMHO no need to change.

[Steve-LA Chargers]

I don’t want to harm the running game by placing restrictions on it, but I understand the concern. I don’t think sweeps (runs outside the field numbers) are as much of a problem though as pitches (runs between the OT and the field numbers). Sweeps are high risk/reward plays that tend to either go for big gains or painful losses. Pitches seem almost unstoppable, but we are finally seeing more defenses being created that defend them well. There are several between the OT runs that work really well too.

Maybe don’t restrict in the game plans but temporarily restrict custom submissions? I would not allow new pitches for a while. We have way too many. In addition to more effective runs between the OTs, we need more sweeps that are better at blocking defenders on the corner.