Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 42

Thread: The Case For Cumberland - 3WR/2TE

  1. #1

    The Case For Cumberland - 3WR/2TE

    The Jets, in my memory, have never had two tight ends that offer the same pass catching threat as Keller and Cumberland. It is no coincidence then that the Jets have also never consistently employed the 3WR/2TE set as a viable alternative to the 4WR set. Considering how often Schotty tends to go to the 4WR set, particularly on third and medium/short, I think it's worth analyzing whether the 4WR is our best option in those situations.

    My contention is that the 3WR/2TE offers many distinct advantages to 4WR, and [U]should be[/U] Schotty's weapon of choice in 3rd and medium situations. Let's dig deeper.

    To help visualize, here is what I am proposing. (I realize the circle/X usage both on offense is unorthodox, but the design tool doesn't offer many options)
    [img]http://www.footballplaybookonline.com/PlayImages/1313690013359.png[/img]

    It does not take a brilliant football mind to see the many potential possibilities for this formation:

    [B]1-[/B] Against man coverage, there will be single coverage somewhere.

    [B]2-[/B] Against an underneath zone, having 2TE's affords a great opportunity to plop into a zone gap for a short completion and YAC. You might argue that this potential also exists in the 4WR/1TE, but when Keller is deployed solo as a zone gap sitter he has trouble breaking the first tackle, as we all saw last year. Cumberland looks [I]at this early stage[/I] to be a better YAC option than Keller, and thus employing him in this role would yield better results than Keller alone.

    [B]3-[/B] Against underneath man/secondary zone, Keller and Cumberland are not a fair match for LB's in coverage. As a result, secondary players will naturally "Cheat up" on their zones, leaving deeper zone gaps open for our thoroughbred WR's.

    [B]4-[/B] Against full zone, both Keller and Cumberland are good flat options if there is nothing downfield (Cumberland's YAC potential comes into play here) but they are also both good seam options; they certainly would at least be able to match the seam/slant production of a Kerley instead if we operated in the 4WR role.

    [B]5-[/B] [B]Perhaps most importantly[/B], Sanchez has always looked most comfortable when he is reading a pattern that has at least one tight end as a primary option. He seems to struggle most on quick spread timing patterns; in a way, the more WR on the field, the worse off he is. I'd love to get a statistical breakdown on this (ven0m? :) ) but from my observation the slow developing routes of TE's seem to put him in a better, less frantic decision making mindset.

    There's many examples I can recall, including our reliance in these types of patterns in the playoffs, but just to give a very recent example, there was a play in the first series of the Texans preseason game where we had 2TE on a rollout crossing pattern, Keller was covered but Sanchez threw on the run beautifully to a wide open Mulligan who botched it. That's the kind of play Sanchez thrives in, it seems to be something about having a TE or two in his progression that slows and betters his decisions.

    [B]6-[/B] Finally, the more we use a 2TE set as a passing option, the more we develop flexibility for 3rd and shorts. As it currently stands, Schotty completely gives away short yardage situations whenever we are going to run, because he brings in the extra TE which we usually never pass with. Once we start effectively [I]passing[/I] with 3WR/2TE on second or third and mediums, it becomes a lot easier to swap a WR for a RB on third and short, keep the jumbo package, and still convince the defense we have legitimate intentions of either running or passing.

    All of the above rationale is a case for the 3WR/2TE instead of 4WR, and I'll readily admit that some of the numbered advantages exist equally in either set (#1 and #4 in particular). I also realize that Kerley would see less of the field, but I still would envision him as an alternate to Mason on some downs to give the latter a rest. On the whole, I can't help but think that the 3WR/2TE better suits our personnel, play style, and offers us greater flexibility than the 4WR which Schotty has already proven that he seems to struggle with.
    Last edited by Astoria; 08-18-2011 at 02:47 PM.

  2. #2
    Hall Of Fame
    Charter JI Member

    Join Date
    May 1999
    Location
    Manalapan, NJ/Boca Raton, Fl
    Posts
    15,569
    Caster and Barkum?

    They switched their positions around, but same idea in reality.

  3. #3
    I think this is what you're looking for....

    [code]
    BY OFFENSIVE FORMATION CMP ATT YDS CMP% AVG LNG TD INT SACK RAT ATT YDS AVG LNG TD
    Shotgun 117 221 1,451 52.9 6.57 74 6 6 13 71.3 8 66 8.3 20 1
    2 Backs Split 0 0 0 0.0 0.00 0 0 0 0 0.0 1 11 11.0 11 0
    I-Formation 0 0 0 0.0 0.00 0 0 0 0 0.0 4 10 2.5 7 1
    Lone Setback 175 325 2,087 53.8 6.42 74 11 10 15 72.2 22 61 2.8 20 2
    BY WR FORMATION CMP ATT YDS CMP% AVG LNG TD INT SACK RAT ATT YDS AVG LNG TD
    2 Wide Receivers 89 151 1,079 58.9 7.15 67 2 2 9 79.9 7 13 1.9 6 0
    3 Wide Receivers 100 195 1,102 51.3 5.65 42 9 5 7 73.1 7 50 7.1 14 1
    4+ Wide Receivers 73 140 977 52.1 6.98 74 4 6 9 66.3 5 33 6.6 20 1
    BY TE FORMATION CMP ATT YDS CMP% AVG LNG TD INT SACK RAT ATT YDS AVG LNG TD
    0 Tight Ends 91 180 1,183 50.6 6.57 74 5 7 10 64.7 6 52 8.7 20 1
    1 Tight End 148 256 1,711 57.8 6.68 67 10 5 13 83.0 8 34 4.3 12 1
    2 Tight Ends 31 61 320 50.8 5.25 38 0 1 4 59.5 6 13 2.2 6 0
    3+ Tight Ends 8 10 77 80.0 7.70 39 2 0 0 138.3 10 6 0.6 9 1[/code]
    Last edited by Ven0m; 08-18-2011 at 03:10 PM.

  4. #4
    Good analysis....and I agree.

    You could have potentially saved some time and had the analysis be:

    Cumberland seems, tall, fast, good after the catch and ready to contribute. Perfect to put into a 3WR - 2 TE set and a huge upgrade over Ben "Penalties are my Friend" Hartstock

  5. #5
    [QUOTE=eaglenj;4108708]Good analysis....and I agree.

    You could have potentially saved some time and had the analysis be:

    Cumberland seems, tall, fast, good after the catch and ready to contribute. Perfect to put into a 3WR - 2 TE set and a huge upgrade over Ben "Penalties are my Friend" Hartstock[/QUOTE]

    Yup, he's obviously an upgrade over Hartsock or Mulligan, that's only half the argument though...the other part of the argument is that 3WR/2TE is (for our team) a better option than 4WR/1TE or 4WR/1RB.

  6. #6
    [QUOTE=Astoria;4108728]Yup, he's obviously an upgrade over Hartsock or Mulligan, that's only half the argument though...the other part of the argument is that 3WR/2TE is (for our team) a better option than 4WR/1TE or 4WR/1RB.[/QUOTE]

    Well 4WR/1Te is insane and the only reason you probably listed it is because schotty constantly tries to make things as confusing as possilbe.

    Either way I think our best formations are:

    3WR, 1TE, 1RB to spread the field. It amazes me how little this was used last year. This formation lets sanchez really get to see the defense and find the single coverage. Plus running out of this gives us good lanes, especially for a straight line runner like greene. Also our line is strong enough that we dont need a TE in there every time.

    2 WR, 2 TE, 1RB...using Keller as H-back or in the slot and cumberland on the line. Again this creates mismatches as keller needs a safety to cover him and cumberland should be tall/fast enough to beat a LB, especially down the seam.

    Then in the 2nd half, when hopefully the defense is a bit worn down, put terminator in and start to grind things out a little more.

  7. #7
    Jets Insider VIP
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Ormond Beach, Florida
    Posts
    12,749
    [QUOTE=Astoria;4108651]The Jets, in my memory, have never had two tight ends that offer the same pass catching threat as Keller and Cumberland. It is no coincidence then that the Jets have also never consistently employed the 3WR/2TE set as a viable alternative to the 4WR set. Considering how often Schotty tends to go to the 4WR set, particularly on third and medium/short, I think it's worth analyzing whether the 4WR is our best option in those situations.

    My contention is that the 3WR/2TE offers many distinct advantages to 4WR, and [U]should be[/U] Schotty's weapon of choice in 3rd and medium situations. Let's dig deeper.

    To help visualize, here is what I am proposing. (I realize the circle/X usage both on offense is unorthodox, but the design tool doesn't offer many options)
    [img]http://www.footballplaybookonline.com/PlayImages/1313690013359.png[/img]

    It does not take a brilliant football mind to see the many potential possibilities for this formation:

    [B]1-[/B] Against man coverage, there will be single coverage somewhere.

    [B]2-[/B] Against an underneath zone, having 2TE's affords a great opportunity to plop into a zone gap for a short completion and YAC. You might argue that this potential also exists in the 4WR/1TE, but when Keller is deployed solo as a zone gap sitter he has trouble breaking the first tackle, as we all saw last year. Cumberland looks [I]at this early stage[/I] to be a better YAC option than Keller, and thus employing him in this role would yield better results than Keller alone.

    [B]3-[/B] Against underneath man/secondary zone, Keller and Cumberland are not a fair match for LB's in coverage. As a result, secondary players will naturally "Cheat up" on their zones, leaving deeper zone gaps open for our thoroughbred WR's.

    [B]4-[/B] Against full zone, both Keller and Cumberland are good flat options if there is nothing downfield (Cumberland's YAC potential comes into play here) but they are also both good seam options; they certainly would at least be able to match the seam/slant production of a Kerley instead if we operated in the 4WR role.

    [B]5-[/B] [B]Perhaps most importantly[/B], Sanchez has always looked most comfortable when he is reading a pattern that has at least one tight end as a primary option. He seems to struggle most on quick spread timing patterns; in a way, the more WR on the field, the worse off he is. I'd love to get a statistical breakdown on this (ven0m? :) ) but from my observation the slow developing routes of TE's seem to put him in a better, less frantic decision making mindset.

    There's many examples I can recall, including our reliance in these types of patterns in the playoffs, but just to give a very recent example, there was a play in the first series of the Texans preseason game where we had 2TE on a rollout crossing pattern, Keller was covered but Sanchez threw on the run beautifully to a wide open Mulligan who botched it. That's the kind of play Sanchez thrives in, it seems to be something about having a TE or two in his progression that slows and betters his decisions.

    [B]6-[/B] Finally, the more we use a 2TE set as a passing option, the more we develop flexibility for 3rd and shorts. As it currently stands, Schotty completely gives away short yardage situations whenever we are going to run, because he brings in the extra TE which we usually never pass with. Once we start effectively [I]passing[/I] with 3WR/2TE on second or third and mediums, it becomes a lot easier to swap a WR for a RB on third and short, keep the jumbo package, and still convince the defense we have legitimate intentions of either running or passing.

    All of the above rationale is a case for the 3WR/2TE instead of 4WR, and I'll readily admit that some of the numbered advantages exist equally in either set (#1 and #4 in particular). I also realize that Kerley would see less of the field, but I still would envision him as an alternate to Mason on some downs to give the latter a rest. On the whole, I can't help but think that the 3WR/2TE better suits our personnel, play style, and offers us greater flexibility than the 4WR which Schotty has already proven that he seems to struggle with.[/QUOTE]

    Great thread Astoria. My good friend is from Astoria! Tony Bennett

  8. #8
    Practice Squad
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Yonkers
    Posts
    256
    or even 2 te 2 wr 1rb sets.

  9. #9
    [QUOTE=Mark TJ Sanchez;4108799]or even 2 te 2 wr 1rb sets.[/QUOTE]

    I think that this is the strongest set, given that we are a run heavy team. With 2 tight ends and a rb, they have to respect the run, pre-snap. With Cumberland, Keller, Holmes and Plax in the pattern after the snap, major mismatches against a base D. If they go with a light box, run it down therir throats until they change back to a base D.

  10. #10
    All Pro
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Hawthorne NJ
    Posts
    7,948
    I agree this would be great if Cumberland can block a little. Btw it is an illegal formation there. You have to bring a couple of those guys off the line. :P

  11. #11
    When you go empty backfield, you're begging for your QB to get rocked, that's why it's not used that much and usually they go shot gun when it's an empty backfield. But it looks good on paper and it works when no one's expecting it.

  12. #12
    Hall Of Fame
    Charter JI Member

    Join Date
    May 1999
    Location
    East Coast of the United States - subject to change on short notice
    Posts
    20,592
    [QUOTE=Slikmojet;4108859]When you go empty backfield, you're begging for your QB to get rocked, that's why it's not used that much and usually they go shot gun when it's an empty backfield. But it looks good on paper and it works when no one's expecting it.[/QUOTE]

    That's what 3 step drops & boot-legs are for.

  13. #13
    All Pro
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Hawthorne NJ
    Posts
    7,948
    [QUOTE=Slikmojet;4108859]When you go empty backfield, you're begging for your QB to get rocked, that's why it's not used that much and usually they go shot gun when it's an empty backfield. But it looks good on paper and it works when no one's expecting it.[/QUOTE]

    That's why it works better with TEs, but they have to be able to pass block a little. Then they can chip or go in motion, or even drop back into the backfield.

  14. #14
    A double TE package is also fantastic to run behind. Defenses don't know if we're going to pass or power rush from that formation. I'd love to see it used more often.

    And we seem to be deep at TE and not so deep at WR (will the Plax experiment even work ?). So the double TE setup plays to the strength of our roster.

  15. #15
    [QUOTE=eaglenj;4108758]Well 4WR/1Te is insane and the only reason you probably listed it is because schotty constantly tries to make things as confusing as possilbe.

    Either way I think our best formations are:

    3WR, 1TE, 1RB to spread the field. It amazes me how little this was used last year. This formation lets sanchez really get to see the defense and find the single coverage. Plus running out of this gives us good lanes, especially for a straight line runner like greene. Also our line is strong enough that we dont need a TE in there every time.

    2 WR, 2 TE, 1RB...using Keller as H-back or in the slot and cumberland on the line. Again this creates mismatches as keller needs a safety to cover him and cumberland should be tall/fast enough to beat a LB, especially down the seam.

    Then in the 2nd half, when hopefully the defense is a bit worn down, put terminator in and start to grind things out a little more.[/QUOTE]
    I like the sound of this - mismatch formations for quick strike opportunities. This will allow us to jump to early leads, then our D can prey on the desperate opposition. In the second half double doses of War Machine and Terminator to close out the game, and we can pile on more points in the fourth quarter.

    Tom Moore should help greatly in unlocking the full potential of out TE's. Keller's got to knuckle down and live up to his billing as well.

  16. #16

    Cumberland joins Keller in double-tight end formations

    [url]http://www.nj.com/jets/index.ssf/2011/08/jets_jeff_cumberland_joins_dus.html?utm_medium=twitter&utm_source=twitterfeed[/url]

    [QUOTE]The Jets’ Jeff Cumberland remembers the bodies they’d trot out to stop him in high school.

    First, a defensive end to jam him at the line and keep him from running a route. When that didn’t work, they’d stack a linebacker behind the defensive end. And when that didn’t work, a safety pressed up behind the other two to follow Cumberland around when he made it out in the open.

    “And when they started doing that, I’d just split out and go one-on-one with a cornerback,” Cumberland said. “Then, I’d just go to work.”

    He knows it isn’t as easy in the NFL, but is sure that the idea remains the same. The more bodies accountable for him, the less accountable for Dustin Keller on the opposite end of the line, or Santonio Holmes split out wide. At 6-4 and 260 pounds, with sub-4.5 speed in the 40-yard dash, Cumberland is built like a prototype, growing into a role that, his teammates feel, is tailor-made for him.

    Amid a league-wide landscape that rewards the use of two balanced, pass-catching tight ends, Cumberland’s growth could parallel a heightened potency within the Jets’ passing game.

    Against the Houston Texans in the team’s preseason opener, he led all Jets in receiving with six catches for 77 yards.

    “It can open things up tremendously,” said Cumberland, who spent most of his rookie season last year on the inactive list, appearing only in the season finale. “Two tight ends with tremendous speed, receiver-type hands, it will be hard to cover. It will do a lot of damage.”

    Tom Moore, the team’s offensive consultant and the coordinator behind the recent success of the Indianapolis Colts offense, has seen the destruction a good double-tight end formation can cause. Defenses might attack it differently, but must sacrifice something either way. Stuffing extra defensive backs on the field to help cover the tight ends will allow the opponent to run the ball. Adding extra linebackers will make it easier to throw.

    “It’s how they want to substitute with their people, a question of what they feel is best for them for matchup purposes,” Moore said. “The more problems you can present, the better it is. So, the chess match begins.”

    To prepare them, each tight end in position coach Mike Devlin’s system must shed the one-dimensional stereotype. Keller, a wide receiver in high school, became a more aggressive blocker, much like Cumberland has tried to do.

    Together they toil underneath a contraption Devlin calls “The Cage of Life,” a massive chute with a chest-high roof that sits between practice fields one and two, right next to a scissor lift.

    Straight out of the time-tested offensive line drills Devlin used to buzz through as a center at Marlton’s Cherokee High School, tight ends must crouch underneath the flat top and stay low while blocking one another.
    The drill teaches them leverage by forcing them lower and harnessing an explosive drive.

    All this to make them better decoys. The pass-catching tight ends can stay in for more run plays and the defense will have a harder time anticipating when they’ll break out for a route.

    “You can’t just be known as a pass-catcher,” Devlin said. “The more they can stay on the field in regular offensive sets, and not just get subbed in when they run routes, it always helps.”

    The idea now is that, because of the tight ends, opposing defenses will have too many questions to answer when game-planning for them.

    “Who ya taking? Who are you doubling? You got Plaxico (Burress), you have Holmes, you have Derrick Mason, you have all these good guys,” Devlin said, “and now you have to contend with the tight ends as well.”[/QUOTE]

    Let's hope he gets better at blocking, if they can both stay on the field at the same time, I would love to see the matchup problems they cause.

  17. #17
    All Pro
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Alexandria, VA
    Posts
    7,232
    Heh, I just finished reading this article and made me very excited. Please, please Schotty, learn for Tom Moore and used this formation regularly. Neither Plav nor mason are going to be able to play more than 75% of the offensiive plays, imo. This is great way to rest one of them and go 2wr, 2 te, 1 rb and keep Defenses guessing all day.

    Damn, that makes way to much sense for Schotty to implement.

  18. #18
    It might be a bit of a stretch, but I honestly feel that a potent 2-TE set is the best way for the Jets to make up for the lack of explosive players on offense.

    There's only one guy on the team who even resembles a deep threat, so why not hit defenses with a steady does of double TEs? Defenses won't be able to key on run with passing game threats like Keller and Cumberland on the field, but when the Jets do run they'll have the blocking advantage.

    Much better scenario than bringing in some clown like Hartsock or Mulligan; guys who are nothing more than a tackling sled.

    It's 3rd and 5, and the Jets come out in a 2 TE set with LT in the backfield, Holmes/Plax split out wide, and Keller in the slot. What do you do on defense? Conversely, the Jets can run pretty much any play in the book from that formation, with that talent.

  19. #19
    [url]http://www.jetsinsider.com/forums/showthread.php?t=232639[/url]

    Yes! Double barrel :shoot:

  20. #20
    [QUOTE=brady's a catcher;4110548]Heh, I just finished reading this article and made me very excited. Please, please Schotty, learn for Tom Moore and used this formation regularly. Neither Plav nor mason are going to be able to play more than 75% of the offensiive plays, imo. This is great way to rest one of them and go 2wr, 2 te, 1 rb and keep Defenses guessing all day.

    Damn, that makes way to much sense for Schotty to implement.[/QUOTE]

    LT is perfect for this 2TE, 2WR, 1RB set, but Greene could also prosper with his improved receiving skills. Consider , big trips, a formation with Plax, Cumby and Keller, in close on the strongside, and Holmes isolated by his lonesome on the weakside. I like the running possabilities, but I also like a big guy exploding out of the pack, and they better not leave Holmes one on one.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Follow Us