As Poker alluded to above, this would be about matchups. It would not be a standard offense. It would be to throw off balance a defense and get them confused and on their heels. If we throw it in there and they can’t handle it, then we could use it more.
To me it would be a coaches decision as to who we would temporarily replace for a play or two as long as we have Pena and Gadsden in. With linebackers or a safety trying to cover our RBs in the flat I don’t see how we wouldn’t have a field day with Pena and Gadsden one on one.
Who knows if this would work or not but it seems to me like it would cause a lot of extra planning for them to have to prepare for. And I’m not even sure they could plan for it effectively.
Plus, if you go no huddle with no subs and force them to adjust on the fly with the personnel they have, they might drop a safety down to help out - thus opening things up over the top for the WRs you keep on the field.
And regarding the play you drew up and matchups you talked about, one of the cool things about this is that it can also open up the run game - which is why I like going 2 RB, 2 TE, 1 WR. If their LBs can't cover our RB, then they may counter by going lighter the next time we run the package out. So maybe they're in nickel or dime, now we run it down their throats with 2 TE and 2 RB. If they keep 3 LB on the field, well, good luck covering.
As much as we're talking about the RB here, a big part of this is also the versatility of OG and Villari. Of course with Villari you can basically consider him like an H back and go 1 RB, 2 TE, 2 WR. Villari can line up at TE, split out, in the backfield as a lead blocker, or in the backfield to be a ball carrier.
Essentially there are a few combinations of personnel packages that we can use that can actually line up in several different formations and ask a defense a lot of questions related to the versatility of THEIR personnel.