HawkShack.com

Pretty cool article put together by ESPN about how the Hawks use the jet sweep. Nothing mind blowing as it has been around forever. I used it when I played football and have used it as a coach and coached against it. I have also seen other NFL teams doing it a little this year, but not nearly as crisp as the Hawks. A good example was last night as the Steelers tried to run it with Brown, the timing, the mesh, Ben's ball handling all looked bad and telegraphed who was going to get the ball. Anyway, nobody in the NFL runs it like the Hawks and I think ET sums up why in the article:

"Nobody does it quite like us because we have the dynamic three with Russ, Marshawn and Percy," Seahawks safety Earl Thomas said. "You don't know who's getting the ball. And we have the timing down right. I noticed most of those other teams don't. With Russ, everything is right on time. But with the other teams, it looks kind of shaky."

It is clear they have spent a lot of time on the timing. Rus getting the snap at he exact moment is key. It is nice to be able to do it from the shotgun. It will be interesting to see how close the timing is when they are on the road, as getting the snap at the exact right time may be a little hard in a loud environment.

http://espn.go.com/espn/feature/story/_ ... -opponents

To be honest they are only talking about one facet of the "jet Sweep" which is really a "jet Sweep Read Option" and there are few QBs that could run it do to the quick decisions needed, as well as ball handling skills, running skills, and passing skills. The variations they can be run off of this formation are mind boggling.

Hand to Harvin
Hand to Lynch
run himself
pass to Harvin
pass to Lynch once through the line
pass to someone else off role out
pass to someone else off drop back
fake jet sweep wr screen
rb screen
etc
etc

To many variables

mykc14 wrote:Pretty cool article put together by ESPN about how the Hawks use the jet sweep. Nothing mind blowing as it has been around forever. I used it when I played football and have used it as a coach and coached against it. I have also seen other NFL teams doing it a little this year, but not nearly as crisp as the Hawks. A good example was last night as the Steelers tried to run it with Brown, the timing, the mesh, Ben's ball handling all looked bad and telegraphed who was going to get the ball. Anyway, nobody in the NFL runs it like the Hawks and I think ET sums up why in the article:

"Nobody does it quite like us because we have the dynamic three with Russ, Marshawn and Percy," Seahawks safety Earl Thomas said. "You don't know who's getting the ball. And we have the timing down right. I noticed most of those other teams don't. With Russ, everything is right on time. But with the other teams, it looks kind of shaky."

It is clear they have spent a lot of time on the timing. Rus getting the snap at he exact moment is key. It is nice to be able to do it from the shotgun. It will be interesting to see how close the timing is when they are on the road, as getting the snap at the exact right time may be a little hard in a loud environment.

http://espn.go.com/espn/feature/story/_ ... -opponents

I keep on watching that first time they tried this in the Super Bowl against Denver when PH11 almost busted it down the sidelines to the house. I watched in slo mo, and the timing is unreal. RW3 snaps the ball as PH11 is cutting across and by the time the ball hits his hands, he is in full flight across the field. He has a running start on everyone.

The threat of that play certainly opens it up for Wilson or Lynch. It is so dynamic and even if a defense knows it's coming, it is difficult to stop it for less then a 7-8 yard gain minimum. If they guess right I guess it could be stopped for less, but if they guess and Harvin doesn't get the ball, it will open up a bigger play somewhere else.

Gotta love it..

I've heard it referred to as the fly sweep, I assume that they are one and the same, no?

The play happens so quickly that I don't think there's enough time for a blitz between the tackles to get into the backfield quick enough to blow it up so long as our OL are smart enough to drop their blocking assignment and get a piece of the blitzing LB. I'd be worried about a corner blitz or something coming from the outside, but since it seems like we run it in non passing situations, like on first down, getting it blown up by a blitz is less of a concern.

Unless I've been inobservant, we haven't run this play for less than 10 yards since Harvin became part of the offense. It's a great play to keep as an ace in the hole, use it only a few times a game, and run other options off it.

49ers did this a lot with Ted Ginn in 2011. I am a bit surprised everyone has forgotten that. If you have a blazer, it's a good play that keeps the D off balance.

No one is saying this is a new thing. The jet/fly sweep has been around for ages. That being said Ted Ginn is not Percy Harvin or Corderralle Patterson which is why no one cared about it in 2011.

kalibane wrote:No one is saying this is a new thing. The jet/fly sweep has been around for ages. That being said Ted Ginn is not Percy Harvin or Corderralle Patterson which is why no one cared about it in 2011.

The article on NFL.Com did have a general tenure which made this seem like a new trend. In reality Harvin carried the ball 52 times at Minn in 2011 and other teams were using it with their own WRs that yr as well (SF, Philly).

True, Ginn is not Harvin, but he did make a huge impact on STs. His skillset was equally suited for this play, which requires only pure speed to be run sucessfully. The net result with Ginn has been about the same as with Harvin. It's good on average for about 8-10 yds, with a couple chunk plays pulling up the average. It is a good change up and I am not surprised that Seattle is running it. A couple months ago I speculated that they'd use Harvin, Michael, Lynch and Wilson in some form in a multiple option set, which I thought coud be a nightmare to defend. It just makes sense when you have that many guys who are so good in space.

Futureite wrote:[The article on NFL.Com did have a general tenure which made this seem like a new trend. In reality Harvin carried the ball 52 times at Minn in 2011 and other teams were using it with their own WRs that yr as well (SF, Philly).

True, Ginn is not Harvin, but he did make a huge impact on STs. His skillset was equally suited for this play, which requires only pure speed to be run sucessfully. The net result with Ginn has been about the same as with Harvin. It's good on average for about 8-10 yds, with a couple chunk plays pulling up the average. It is a good change up and I am not surprised that Seattle is running it. A couple months ago I speculated that they'd use Harvin, Michael, Lynch and Wilson in some form in a multiple option set, which I thought coud be a nightmare to defend. It just makes sense when you have that many guys who are so good in space.

Nothing against Ted Ginn Jr. He's a great return man, perhaps the best in the game, if not one of the best. He almost singlehandedly beat us a couple of years ago.

But the discussion isn't about special teams, it's about the jet sweep, and the point Kal was making is that Harvin is a lot more dangerous of an offensive threat than Ted Ginn Jr. could have ever have dreamed of being.

Rest assured Future we get it.

You don't like the Seahawks getting this shine and you want the 49ers to get credit for this "innovation" because the 49ers ran it as a gadget play a couple time back in 2011. If it makes you feel any better I remember Eric Metcalf running the same play a few times 20 years ago and they didn't mention him either. Does that soothe your wounded ego?

As usual your inferiority complex is causing you to miss the mark. The Seahawks didn't break out the plaly as a gadget a couple of times over the course of the season. They ran the Jet sweep action more times in one game than Ginn has run it in his NFL career. They built off the original play design to open up plays in the passing game and to make holes for Lynch. They are forcing teams to make a decision on trying to contain three gifted runners.

Ginn was not as effective as Percy Harvin (or Patterson) and if he was he'd still be wearing a Miami Dolphins uniform, and never would have even played for the 49ers. Harvin and Patterson as threats running the ball are in a completely different league than Ginn.

How about you devote some of this energy that you are using whining about the jet sweep to owning up to how wrong you were about the Seahawks screen game?

RiverDog wrote:I've heard it referred to as the fly sweep, I assume that they are one and the same, no?

The play happens so quickly that I don't think there's enough time for a blitz between the tackles to get into the backfield quick enough to blow it up so long as our OL are smart enough to drop their blocking assignment and get a piece of the blitzing LB. I'd be worried about a corner blitz or something coming from the outside, but since it seems like we run it in non passing situations, like on first down, getting it blown up by a blitz is less of a concern.

Unless I've been inobservant, we haven't run this play for less than 10 yards since Harvin became part of the offense. It's a great play to keep as an ace in the hole, use it only a few times a game, and run other options off it.

I could be wrong, a lot of times terms become mixed up and changed based on what staff is using the term, but when I was coaching a "fly sweep" was a slot receiver coming across and a "jet" was the outside y or z receiver. I'm not sure that is the difference, but that is how they ran it. Typically the FB or RB is an option with a ball fake going to them either on a trap or dive.

The offensive team had a bunch of variations, but the "jet" was always the outside receiver, and the "fly" was always the slot ( there was also if I remember correctly always a TE to the Jet side, but not to the fly side, but that could have just been coaches preference, I didn't spend a lot of time attempting to understand it LOL).

HumanCockroach wrote:I could be wrong, a lot of times terms become mixed up and changed based on what staff is using the term, but when I was coaching a "fly sweep" was a slot receiver coming across and a "jet" was the outside y or z receiver. I'm not sure that is the difference, but that is how they ran it. Typically the FB or RB is an option with a ball fake going to them either on a trap or dive.

The offensive team had a bunch of variations, but the "jet" was always the outside receiver, and the "fly" was always the slot ( there was also if I remember correctly always a TE to the Jet side, but not to the fly side, but that could have just been coaches preference, I didn't spend a lot of time attempting to understand it LOL).

Thanks for the explanation, HC.

Heck, when I was playing, we had a similar play called an end around, but since it didn't involve a man in motion, it wasn't nearly as quick and explosive a play as the jet or fly sweep.

It's all semantics. It's essentially the same thing though. Some places the difference is the alignment of the WR going in motion like HC is talking about. Some places the difference is whether the QB is under center or in the shotgun. It really could be anything or no difference at all. It pretty much boils down to the verbiage a particular coach chooses to use which we all know varies.

And yeah the End Around is a completely different play.

kalibane wrote:It's all semantics. It's essentially the same thing though. Some places the difference is the alignment of the WR going in motion like HC is talking about. Some places the difference is whether the QB is under center or in the shotgun. It really could be anything or no difference at all. It pretty much boils down to the verbiage a particular coach chooses to use which we all know varies.

And yeah the End Around is a completely different play.

There are some similarities. On an end around, the end around came from the outside in and ran parallel to the LOS, just like the fly/jet sweep. We used it as a misdirection play, faking the ball first to a running back going through the 3 or 5 hole before handing off to an end or receiver running horizontally. The opposite is true with the jet or fly sweep, with the first option being to the outside player and the second option being to hand off to the RB running vertically, or in our case, a 3rd option with the QB keeping the ball.

I love the way we run it. The play affords an OC like Bevell that has an active imagination a lot of things he can do off of it, like he did with that pass play to Lockette off the read option last week.

kalibane wrote:Rest assured Future we get it.

You don't like the Seahawks getting this shine and you want the 49ers to get credit for this "innovation" because the 49ers ran it as a gadget play a couple time back in 2011. If it makes you feel any better I remember Eric Metcalf running the same play a few times 20 years ago and they didn't mention him either. Does that soothe your wounded ego?

As usual your inferiority complex is causing you to miss the mark. The Seahawks didn't break out the plaly as a gadget a couple of times over the course of the season. They ran the Jet sweep action more times in one game than Ginn has run it in his NFL career. They built off the original play design to open up plays in the passing game and to make holes for Lynch. They are forcing teams to make a decision on trying to contain three gifted runners.

Ginn was not as effective as Percy Harvin (or Patterson) and if he was he'd still be wearing a Miami Dolphins uniform, and never would have even played for the 49ers. Harvin and Patterson as threats running the ball are in a completely different league than Ginn.

How about you devote some of this energy that you are using whining about the jet sweep to owning up to how wrong you were about the Seahawks screen game?

Lol I was commenting on the tenor of the article moreso than the Seahawks. But to offer you a touche', I can already see the desire to make this a "Seattle thing" because "it was done before but not this much or this well". Dude we did the exact same things with Ginn, Gore, etc in 2011. Fake it, throw from it or hand it off to Gore. And YES, Ginn and Harvin have had about the same success on that partIcular play. Look at their yds/carry. But I get it, my references to other teams threatened your fragile ego .

I actually read that article on NFL.Com a couple days before I saw this thread and I had the same reaction then. Bucky Brooks (I believe) wrote the article as if it were a new trend, but it's not. And neither is Harvin rushing the ball, as he was a hybrid in college and rushed 52 times in 2011. I am not really surprised by this because again, I posted mothns ago that I expected to see Harvin, Michaels and Lynch in the backfield in some form or combination running multiple option plays. It just made sense with all if that speed.

If Seattle does it better than we did good on them. You seem to have better, more explosive personnel for it.

Well there are some pretty big differences. The end around is very much dependent on misdirection up front. The QB also gives the ball to the receiver coming around deeper in the backfield and the receiver goes behind the QB in stead of in front. If there is a fake it goes to the RB first help the misdirection where as the fly sweep the fake comes after the handoff to the WR to hold the defense a half step. It's a longer to developing play and carries a much bigger risk of a big loss (7-8 yards) if the play is sniffed out. Also if you're faking the end around you essentially are taking one WR out of the pattern except as a check down option.

Similar on the surface but in the execution not so much.

Considering other teams are using it with more frequency after Seattle started unveiled it in the Super Bowl it's by definition a trend. But your commitment to the truth is brittle at best. I don't think that makes Seattle some kind of trailblazer, after all the play has been used for decades. There is no doubt that Bevell cribbed this from college/high school offenses. You are the one who felt the need to talk about SF using it first.

And you are also just continuing to lie. The fly sweep has been used as a gadget in the past. The 49ers did not in any way shape or form use it in the way Seattle is using it now. And again I couldn't care less if they had. Roman has done some very inventive things but expanded use of the fly sweep just isn't one of them. Not at Stanford and not in SF. It really doesn't matter who started using if first. This is about you once again telling obvious unnecessary lies. You're like an 8 year old with chocolate on your face telling their mother they weren't the one who ate the cookies.

You talked just as confidently about how often Seattle throws screens only to be proven definitively wrong (which I will continue to remind you about until you own up), but it's becoming more and more apparent that you just talk. You don't really pay attention to football at all.

now we know how to stop the jet sweep, run nothing but the sweep with no other otions

kalibane wrote:Considering other teams are using it with more frequency after Seattle started unveiled it in the Super Bowl it's by definition a trend. But your commitment to the truth is brittle at best. I don't think that makes Seattle some kind of trailblazer, after all the play has been used for decades. There is no doubt that Bevell cribbed this from college/high school offenses. You are the one who felt the need to talk about SF using it first.

And you are also just continuing to lie. The fly sweep has been used as a gadget in the past. The 49ers did not in any way shape or form use it in the way Seattle is using it now. And again I couldn't care less if they had. Roman has done some very inventive things but expanded use of the fly sweep just isn't one of them. Not at Stanford and not in SF. It really doesn't matter who started using if first. This is about you once again telling obvious unnecessary lies. You're like an 8 year old with chocolate on your face telling their mother they weren't the one who ate the cookies.

You talked just as confidently about how often Seattle throws screens only to be proven definitively wrong (which I will continue to remind you about until you own up), but it's becoming more and more apparent that you just talk. You don't really pay attention to football at all.

Uh, yes Roman did. I watch 16 49er games per yr and you do not. After Braylon Edwards and Josh Morgan went down for the season we had no WRs. Roman was using the fly sweep and everything else under the sun to generate O, especially with Alex as our QB. In 2012 we drafted LMJ and hired spread option coach Paul Wulf from EWU. I even predicted that yr that we'd draft LMJ, and once the Wulf hiring was final I knew we'd have college type packages with Kaep.

And before you comment on Wulf; yes, I am aware that their O is a spread pass O, not run. I use to live 15 min awsy from that campus.

Now as to Hawks? Their personnel is better suited to run this O than ours. RW is better in short spaces than Kaep. Lynch is far more explosive than Gore and obviously Harvin is a bigger playmaker than Ginn. So I am not surprised Hawks are running this more with better success. It is still no staple of any NFL O though. If anything proved that today's result should have.

Again, my comment was directed at the article - not you or the Seahawks. You don't write an article about a college type O unless you believe it is a new trend or innovation that will effect the entire league.

http://www.pro-football-reference.com/p ... nnTe00.htm

Not for nothing, but Ginn ran the ball a total of 9 times after Harbaugh arrived . Not sure what you're attempting to prove on this one, but he obviously wasn't running that play on a consistent basis ( and he certainly wasn't having much success at it)...

Maybe you should follow your own advice on this one, you claim to watch '16 niners games a year' while we don't, how many games do you think all of us watch each year with the Seahawks playing ( which you do not) and yet, here you are, thread after thread, explaining to us, about OUR team, on OUR board. Figure it out Future.

Old but Slow wrote:The only fear I have about the play, is that because the ball must be snapped when Percey is is near Russell, the defense can anticipate the snap, and blow up the play. It has not happened, yet,that I have seen, but it could become a problem.

It happened yesterday, but we waited until there was 3 minutes left in the game, deep in our own territory, and were in an obvious passing situation.

I watch 16 49er games per yr and you do not.

A shame you couldn't put this wisdom to use in reverse when you decided to try and teach us about the Seahawks offensive use of screen passes.

Not for nothing, but Ginn ran the ball a total of 9 times after Harbaugh arrived .

Exactly, obvious and unnecessary lies. It's really getting pathetic.