For the sake of discussion only, I'm going to ignore Coach Meyer's words of caution and go ahead and "jump the gun" in assuming Braxton Miller's move to H-back is a foregone conclusion. I'm also going to work under the assumption that he makes the transition so smoothly that he'll either start or be heavily involved in the rotation.
No matter how you look at it, that's one more player at a position where we were already looking particularly deep. Assuming he's healthy, Dontre Wilson is expected to rejoin Jalin Marshall in the H-back rotation. Let's not forget, Dontre was performing well up to the point of his injury.
And speaking of Jalin - the coaches were experimenting with him as a wide receiver in spring practice. But the story at the time was that it was mainly to make room for Curtis Samuel to join the H-back rotation, as well. UFM said he wanted to find a way to get Curtis more snaps. H-back seems like a logical way to do that while, of course, keeping Zeke in the line-up.
I've also heard/read several favorable reports about what a dynamic athlete Paris Campbell is. Yet another player who's versatility might make him an exceptional H-back. And remember, Noah Brown had a (minor) part of the H-back rotation last season.
That's a lot of players who are all realistically capable of filling the multiple roles we ask of our H-backs. Looking at Jalin as an example, he's probably better suited at H than he is for a (more classic) wide receiver position. He is every bit as dangerous running the ball as he is as a receiver.
So the thought occurred to me - why not embrace the situation and, essentially, play two H-backs at once. Granted - I'm going to over-simplify things a bit for the sake of demonstration - so please keep that in mind.
Teams started using the x, y, and z designations for receivers years ago because the old classifications of split end, tight end and flanker no longer work very well in today's offenses for a variety of reasons.
For instance, in our offense the y (usually our tight end - but not always) will sometimes line up a couple of steps back from the line of scrimmage - technically putting himself in the backfield in the process. Of course, that requires somebody in the formation (usually the z) to step up to the line.
Obviously, in a situation like that, the two H-back idea would not work. But since we're talking about moving at least one of our Hs over to z, anyway - so what? The z would simply fulfill his role as a 'split end' in that scenario.
But for all those situarions in which the z remains essentially a 'flanker' - think of the posibilities. For example, imagine Braxton at H - but split out wider than we would typically position our H - and Jalin lining up where our z would generally line up. As long a Jalin is technically still in the 'backfield', what would keep them from switching roles for a play?
Braxton could fulfill the normal z resposibility for that play - and Jalin could motion back toward the middle of the formation in a variation of the H's classic role. They could then, play by play, continue to switch back and forth - irregularly. It would have to be at least somewhat confusing to the defense. (For that matter, I've probably explained it so poorly - it may be confusing to anyone reading this).
Look at it as a defender. A safety or a nickel might be thinking: "Ok - I've got the H on this play - but that guy was a z on the last play. Is the corner picking him up - or should I?" Even if such a scenario only provides an instant's hesitation, it could result in a big advantage.
It's more than just semantics. I'm talking about players who are all just about as threatening (if not more so) as runners as they are as receivers. This would be far more incorporated in to the attack than the occasional wide receiver reverse, or what have you.
We have enough former quarterbacks and running backs in the mix who have the versatility (and flat out speed) to pull this kind of a scheme off. In fact, by my count we could to it with a three-deep rotation.
Or have I completely lost my mind?
