What to call the wildcat formantion

newenglandhusker said:
AllTheGoodNamesAreTaken said:
i'll admit that it worked for us, and has worked wonders for other teams, but i have an honest question. whats the difference between running the wildcat and any other offense if your QB can run?
Click to expand...
There's a huge difference if your entire offense isn't predicated on using a running QB often. The distinction is in that, in a wildcat, you are using 2 very competent runners, as opposed to one very competent (RB) and one marginally competent (QB) runner. There aren't enough legitimate running threat QBs to go around and, even if there were, it wouldn't behoove every offense to turn to using them.

In my opinion it is still substandard to a triple-option package, though.
Click to expand...

this. this is why i dislike the wildcrap.

teams that revert to this are cheaply covering for a marginal qb, by installing another marginal, predictable qb.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
mmmtodd said:
newenglandhusker said:
AllTheGoodNamesAreTaken said:
i'll admit that it worked for us, and has worked wonders for other teams, but i have an honest question. whats the difference between running the wildcat and any other offense if your QB can run?
Click to expand...
There's a huge difference if your entire offense isn't predicated on using a running QB often. The distinction is in that, in a wildcat, you are using 2 very competent runners, as opposed to one very competent (RB) and one marginally competent (QB) runner. There aren't enough legitimate running threat QBs to go around and, even if there were, it wouldn't behoove every offense to turn to using them.

In my opinion it is still substandard to a triple-option package, though.
Click to expand...
this. this is why i dislike the wildcrap.

teams that revert to this are cheaply covering for a marginal qb, by installing another marginal qb.
Click to expand...
Agreed. It's funny because I tend to think of offensive styles are cyclically en vogue. It seems this is a variation and one that wants to say "wow a running quarterback really is a good idea" yet saying "we don't value that enough to make it a full-time position." It just goes to show you having a higher quantity of competent ball carriers is harder to defend, just like it always has been.

 
I read in SI a while back that the Wildcat is anything but gimmicky, but more of a smashmouth formation. It's a good way to work that old school component into the game when the base scheme and QB run a different philosophy.

 
Well, yes and no. It's my understanding that the formation is a variation of the ancient single-wing (wing-t) formation. It was resurrected by Bill Snyder, who gave it the name "Wildcat." After that, Gus Malzahn, while the OC under Houston Nutt at Arkansas, started using it and Nutt began the "tradition" of rebranding the formation with a cutesy, school-specific name (Wild Hog / Wild Rebel). It is an old-school formation in that its roots are in the days before quarterbacks regularly took direct snaps, and it certainly qualifies as smash-mouth rather than a typical deception/finesse play. It's a gimmick in that it was an unusual thing to do when it resurfaced at KSU.

 
y don't we just call it the wildcat? y do we need a special name? it is not like by calling it something different it gives our wildcat special powers. the wildcat is basically ran the same way by all teams.

 
VA Husker2 said:
I was thinking the "Wild Cob"

What else?
Click to expand...
I like the Wild Cob and it has been mentioned on this board prior by me and others. :corndance

The Maize also is pretty cool.

I do believe we ran it as The Joker last year with Lucky as has been mentioned.

Wild Cob, from fan perspective, seems like it would really stick because everyone now knows what the WildCat is...I say Wild Cob! :corndance :corndance :corndance

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Yup, and there's no reason it can't be known by several names, or different names to the team running it and the fans watching it. The Maize is really clever, but not sure it has quite the ring of 'Wild Cob'...

 
zoogies said:
Yup, and there's no reason it can't be known by several names, or different names to the team running it and the fans watching it. The Maize is really clever, but not sure it has quite the ring of 'Wild Cob'...
Click to expand...
It's great to see my phrase is finally catching on. With any luck I'll be cashing in on this sucker like my own personal "Three Pete"!

 
Corn Chucker...

Why must we name stuff? :dunno

Wildcat seems like too much of an homage to KSU/UA/Kentucky

Maze sounds a little too much like one of Mechicken's colors (Maise and Blue).

Hopefully we'll just call it "TOUCH DOWN"

 
Last edited by a moderator:
so instead of "the cornhuskers are giving Texas a bit of a Wild Cob look"...

"the cornhuskers are giving texas some wildhead..."

Hmm. Not sold on that one :)

 
Thanks for the response, did not think it would generate this kind of interest.

Now let me offer this, why don't we call it what it really is

THE SINGLE WING

 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top