The Non-Dribbled Non-OSK "Kick From Scrimmage" Again

[theaardvark]

Lets get rid of he rouge, lets add a down, shrink the field...

No.

Its stuff like this that creates 4 page threads discussing the unique nature of the CFL game.  It happens almost never, and adds to the "No lead is safe" part of the CFL.

[TecnoGenius]

Lets get rid of he rouge, lets add a down, shrink the field...

No.

Its stuff like this that creates 4 page threads discussing the unique nature of the CFL game.  It happens almost never, and adds to the "No lead is safe" part of the CFL.

Ya, but: true or false, this one feels different, like it's overstepping some line.  Besides, all the other things you mentioned have been in the CFL forever, whereas this trick play is brand spanking new.  You could take it away tomorrow and in 2 seasons no one will ever even remember it.

[TecnoGenius]

I think we have practiced it, and as I posted earlier, I think we tried to do it lastgame.  Doesn't work great for us though as our deep threat is not respected, and noone is leaving Brady open.

What was the time when you think they tried to use it?  My opinion is MOS instructs his O to avoid tricks like this.

And if we can't do it because Brady is never left alone, then put JA27 in for the play.  It works in MTL because they have their #2 RB as their dedicated Antwi-Antics player.  Therefore if we're going to do it, we make one of our lesser/backup players "the guy", not Brady.  Also makes sense because Brady needs to focus on practicing being the best RB; Johnny has time to devote to learning a trick.

[BomberFan73]

What was the time when you think they tried to use it?  My opinion is MOS instructs his O to avoid tricks like this.

And if we can't do it because Brady is never left alone, then put JA27 in for the play.  It works in MTL because they have their #2 RB as their dedicated Antwi-Antics player.  Therefore if we're going to do it, we make one of our lesser/backup players "the guy", not Brady.  Also makes sense because Brady needs to focus on practicing being the best RB; Johnny has time to devote to learning a trick.

It was vs CGY lastgame, late.  We were 2nd & 20.  I'm surprised you didn't catch it, you love the little things like that.
Even with JA in, I don't think it works because it's Strev at QB. It might with Zach back there. 

[Pete]

hard to believe we have 5 pages of posts on this topic. And please dont say great minds want to know.
on the other hand our coaches seem to have forgotten the entertainment value of trick plays..
the bomberuski.
the metcalf kickoff down the middle that was caught in the air to set up the great mtrl comeback win
the kickoff return where everyone pretended it was going to the opposite side of the field
these are special moments in bomber history and we need more

I've often wondered why we dont station two recievers behind the punter and have him kick it sky high. the chances of recovering would be 50/50.

[theaardvark]

hard to believe we have 5 pages of posts on this topic. And please dont say great minds want to know.
on the other hand our coaches seem to have forgotten the entertainment value of trick plays..
the bomberuski.
the metcalf kickoff down the middle that was caught in the air to set up the great mtrl comeback win
the kickoff return where everyone pretended it was going to the opposite side of the field
these are special moments in bomber history and we need more

I've often wondered why we dont station two recievers behind the punter and have him kick it sky high. the chances of recovering would be 50/50.

Starting the gunners behind the punter, on side, and having them hit the spot at speed (punt waggle), if you have a 4.40 guy doing that, you could outrun the punt, and possibly either recover the kick or at least legally blow up the returner.

Even just one gunner... what would it remove from coverage having one guy heck bent on destruction coming downhill at full speed?  Might even be enough to make a returner bobble the kick, knowing there is a legal heat seeking missile coming his way.

[TecnoGenius]

I've often wondered why we dont station two recievers behind the punter and have him kick it sky high. the chances of recovering would be 50/50.

Because we don't have a kicker who can do that?  You need a Jon Ryan type guy who can air it that much.

And it won't work in CGY and EDM, lol (speaker in the middle!).

Other than that, I love the idea!

[TecnoGenius]

Starting the gunners behind the punter, on side, and having them hit the spot at speed (punt waggle), if you have a 4.40 guy doing that, you could outrun the punt, and possibly either recover the kick or at least legally blow up the returner.

I think the returner is protected from excessive blow-ups within the halo, even if the blower-upper is onside?

[dd]

I think the returner is protected from excessive blow-ups within the halo, even if the blower-upper is onside?

Correct. Even though you're onside, you can't run in and smoke the punt returner, it would be a 15 yd no yards call and a 15 yd UR, or 30 yd penalty.

[Pete]

Cant smoke him but you can defend him as if you were a db and cause a free ball, both ford and holm are speedy enough

[TecnoGenius]

Ya, but execution of a super-high kick and on-side recovery in the air would have to be up there with OSK-level success rate...

The Antwi-Antics play, if practiced enough, and only attempted when the conditions are perfect, could have a 90%+ success rate.

Why not focus on the slam-dunk play?

[TecnoGenius]

Ok, I have the perfect name for the Antwi-Antics play:

The Dropsie-Flopsie

You drop the ball, you flop your body on top... which leads me to another try:

The Drop & Flop

Or how about The Drop-Kick Trick.  Come on, we need some more name ideas!  We're gonna see MTL do it again... you can bet money on it.

[Pete]

Ya, but execution of a super-high kick and on-side recovery in the air would have to be up there with OSK-level success rate...

The Antwi-Antics play, if practiced enough, and only attempted when the conditions are perfect, could have a 90%+ success rate.

Why not focus on the slam-dunk play?

One does not preclude the other. It depends on the coverage and situation.

[theaardvark]

I think the returner is protected from excessive blow-ups within the halo, even if the blower-upper is onside?

Pretty sure the halo does not exist for onside players, they can chase the ball into it, and blow up a returner if they can get there in time.  Sure, you can't torpedo spear a returner without at least looking for the ball, but no reason you can't hit him as he is receiving the ball, or a split second after.

It has to be a high, short punt for an onside player to make up that 12 yard head start and still get there before/as the ball comes down.  Hence trying the waggle start.  Maybe have a guy on the sideline calling out to the onside guy if he times it right, or calling him off if he isn't onside when the punter kicks the ball.

[Sir Blue and Gold]

Pretty sure the halo does not exist for onside players, they can chase the ball into it, and blow up a returner if they can get there in time.  Sure, you can't torpedo spear a returner without at least looking for the ball, but no reason you can't hit him as he is receiving the ball, or a split second after.

It has to be a high, short punt for an onside player to make up that 12 yard head start and still get there before/as the ball comes down.  Hence trying the waggle start.  Maybe have a guy on the sideline calling out to the onside guy if he times it right, or calling him off if he isn't onside when the punter kicks the ball.

You can go after the ball but you cannot blow a guy up. It's a minimum 15-yard penalty if you do. You just have to apply common sense as to why.