dave mcbride Posted January 17, 2017 Share Posted January 17, 2017 We ran mostly pro set under GRo. And with dual threats at RB and with a re-engaged Felton, it complements our personnel. From what Sal tweeted earlier today, Olson is adaptable in his scheme, so I'm not sure why we're worried about what he's run elsewhere. I don't profess to know what will or won't work. And I'm calling BS on everybody who does namely because we have no f'ing clue who the QB will be. The only preference I have for any kind of coaching is a guy who is not married to his scheme. For me, this is more important to the offense than the defense because of how personnel can change week to week. All I care about is we have a guy who makes the opposing defense account for Watkins, Clay and Shady on every play. And I want a quarterback who can read and distribute the ball on time and to a spot. Fair points - I appreciate this. Olsen is one of "those guys," but it turns out that he did adapt when he was stuck working with Terrelle Pryor at QB (lots of read option). The big red flag, though, is the constant failure after occasionally promising starts (Bortles and Freeman). Maybe it was just those individual qbs, but there is a trend that we shouldn't ignore. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Big Cat Posted January 17, 2017 Share Posted January 17, 2017 Its hilarious. I lost all respect after the constant brain drilling of "everyone but Rex" the last two years. Still looking for that link? No one disagrees with that. No one. Your problem (as I've pointed out to you before) is that you crave simplicity - you need there to be one and only one answer, and you enforce that need with insults and snark. Isn't it possible that it's BOTH the players and the coaches, sometimes? Insults? Hmm. Also, I find it curious that in all of this I'm the one with one note to play. Is there anything in particular you'd rather I clarify in this thread? That defense of Dick Jauron back in the day was classic TBC. Then the inevitable pivot occurred and it was on to defending Gailey and crew. I am 100% vindicated in what I said then about Dick Jauron and the putrid talent he had on both sides of the ball to work with. That the man even made it to 7-9 is beyond miraculous. Players make plays. Would you prefer I link to the abominations we called rosters in those days? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coach Tuesday Posted January 17, 2017 Share Posted January 17, 2017 Fair points - I appreciate this. Olsen is one of "those guys," but it turns out that he did adapt when he was stuck working with Terrelle Pryor at QB (lots of read option). The big red flag, though, is the constant failure after occasionally promising starts (Bortles and Freeman). Maybe it was just those individual qbs, but there is a trend that we shouldn't ignore. Except his point about Felton is simply wrong - Felton was ignored by GRo and was revitalized by Lynn, who did a much better job adapting the scheme to the talent on hand. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Big Cat Posted January 17, 2017 Share Posted January 17, 2017 Fair points - I appreciate this. Olsen is one of "those guys," but it turns out that he did adapt when he was stuck working with Terrelle Pryor at QB (lots of read option). The big red flag, though, is the constant failure after occasionally promising starts (Bortles and Freeman). Maybe it was just those individual qbs, but there is a trend that we shouldn't ignore. Right, but the other trend there is QB's who couldn't find it in them to turn it around even after he left. Freeman? Wasn't he out of the league shortly thereafter? Bortles? It's not secret that he did virtually no work in the offseason before this year. It's why his mechanics completely went to **** and likely why he looked like he was discovering football for the first time every time he dropped back. Making assumptions about a guy's ability to coach an offense when we're pointing to how productive he was with Freeman, Bortles and Pryor leading the charge strikes me as questionable, at best. To make matters worse, none of us can be confident that won't happen here...since we don't have a clue who the QB will be. So, again, that anyone has made up their mind about this guy or any OC candidate at this point is incomprehensible to me. Except his point about Felton is simply wrong - Felton was ignored by GRo and was revitalized by Lynn, who did a much better job adapting the scheme to the talent on hand. Um. That is my point. Seems your toggle switch is stuck at "disagree." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coach Tuesday Posted January 17, 2017 Share Posted January 17, 2017 Right, but the other trend there is QB's who couldn't find it in them to turn it around even after he left. Freeman? Wasn't he out of the league shortly thereafter? Bortles? It's not secret that he did virtually no work in the offseason before this year. It's why his mechanics completely went to **** and likely why he looked like he was discovering football for the first time every time he dropped back. Making assumptions about a guy's ability to coach an offense when we're pointing to how productive he was with Freeman, Bortles and Pryor leading the charge strikes me as questionable, at best. To make matters worse, none of us can be confident that won't happen here...since we don't have a clue who the QB will be. So, again, that anyone has made up their mind about this guy or any OC candidate at this point is incomprehensible to me. No one has made up their minds - folks are rightly skeptical about losing good coaches and going backwards as a result, which happened when we went from Schwartz to Rex and may well happen going from Lynn to Olson. Still looking for that link? Insults? Hmm. Also, I find it curious that in all of this I'm the one with one note to play. Is there anything in particular you'd rather I clarify in this thread? I am 100% vindicated in what I said then about Dick Jauron and the putrid talent he had on both sides of the ball to work with. That the man even made it to 7-9 is beyond miraculous. Players make plays. Would you prefer I link to the abominations we called rosters in those days? And all of us are 100% vindicated about all of the coaches we were skeptical about when they were hired... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Big Cat Posted January 17, 2017 Share Posted January 17, 2017 No one has made up their minds - folks are rightly skeptical about losing good coaches and going backwards as a result, which happened when we went from Schwartz to Rex and may well happen going from Lynn to Olson. Oh, the likelihood of the offense taking a step back is stupendously high, mostly because of uncertainty at QB. But make no mistake, said step back will be seriously overstated because it will be coming from the assumption that the 2016 was good enough to win. 1-8 when your opponent scores 20 points or more suggests that they were not. 0-4 when the opponent score more than 30 1-3 when the opponent scored between 20 and 30 So again, clinging to those rankings and waving them as evidence that the offense was good in 2016 is dishonest. And even though it won't matter, people will be PISSED that we don't match those rankings next year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dave mcbride Posted January 17, 2017 Share Posted January 17, 2017 Right, but the other trend there is QB's who couldn't find it in them to turn it around even after he left. Freeman? Wasn't he out of the league shortly thereafter? Bortles? It's not secret that he did virtually no work in the offseason before this year. It's why his mechanics completely went to **** and likely why he looked like he was discovering football for the first time every time he dropped back. Making assumptions about a guy's ability to coach an offense when we're pointing to how productive he was with Freeman, Bortles and Pryor leading the charge strikes me as questionable, at best. To make matters worse, none of us can be confident that won't happen here...since we don't have a clue who the QB will be. So, again, that anyone has made up their mind about this guy or any OC candidate at this point is incomprehensible to me. Um. That is my point. Seems your toggle switch is stuck at "disagree." Like I said, it's a trend. Maybe it is all the individual qbs, but it's worrying. On the flipside, though, Carr had show clearly signs of improvement in the last half dozen games of his rookie season. He was fired, but probably not for performance (the whole coaching staff was fired after Carr's rookie season). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coach Tuesday Posted January 17, 2017 Share Posted January 17, 2017 Oh, the likelihood of the offense taking a step back is stupendously high, mostly because of uncertainty at QB. But make no mistake, said step back will be seriously overstated because it will be coming from the assumption that the 2016 was good enough to win. 1-8 when your opponent scores 20 points or more suggests that they were not. 0-4 when the opponent score more than 30 1-3 when the opponent scored between 20 and 30 So again, clinging to those rankings and waving them as evidence that the offense was good in 2016 is dishonest. And even though it won't matter, people will be PISSED that we don't match those rankings next year. I've never seen an offense's success measured in relation to the opposition's offense, and for good reason. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bleeding Bills Blue Posted January 17, 2017 Share Posted January 17, 2017 We ran mostly pro set under GRo. And with dual threats at RB and with a re-engaged Felton, it complements our personnel. From what Sal tweeted earlier today, Olson is adaptable in his scheme, so I'm not sure why we're worried about what he's run elsewhere. My biggest gripe with GRo was that he wasn't a pro style at all. We ran few screens, no bubbles, and no swings. We don't bunch receivers, and we don't have rub routes. We ran like 80something percent of plays out of shotgun. Wed jam our receivers closer to the ball so we can create rushing seams easier, but all this really does is make it harder for the middle of the field to work. It was anything but an under center pro style offense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dave mcbride Posted January 17, 2017 Share Posted January 17, 2017 My biggest gripe with GRo was that he wasn't a pro style at all. We ran few screens, no bubbles, and no swings. We don't bunch receivers, and we don't have rub routes. We ran like 80something percent of plays out of shotgun. Wed jam our receivers closer to the ball so we can create rushing seams easier, but all this really does is make it harder for the middle of the field to work. It was anything but an under center pro style offense. yeah, if Roman is considered pro-set style, the term becomes so capacious that it loses its meaning. His offenses were visibly different from everyone else's in the league. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Big Cat Posted January 17, 2017 Share Posted January 17, 2017 yeah, if Roman is considered pro-set style, the term becomes so capacious that it loses its meaning. His offenses were visibly different from everyone else's in the league. a pro set is literally two backs in the backfield. what did you mean when you asked about pro set? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bleeding Bills Blue Posted January 17, 2017 Share Posted January 17, 2017 (edited) Oh, the likelihood of the offense taking a step back is stupendously high, mostly because of uncertainty at QB. But make no mistake, said step back will be seriously overstated because it will be coming from the assumption that the 2016 was good enough to win. 1-8 when your opponent scores 20 points or more suggests that they were not. 0-4 when the opponent score more than 30 1-3 when the opponent scored between 20 and 30 So again, clinging to those rankings and waving them as evidence that the offense was good in 2016 is dishonest. And even though it won't matter, people will be PISSED that we don't match those rankings next year. We were 0-6 when the opponent scores 30+... And the Other 2 were 27 and 28 points. We had 1 win when a team scored 21. We were 0-8 when the other team scored more than 27 points... The Steelers were 0-4 when they allowed 30 btw Edited January 17, 2017 by dneveu Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jumbalaya Posted January 17, 2017 Share Posted January 17, 2017 Olson is completely underwhelming. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bleeding Bills Blue Posted January 17, 2017 Share Posted January 17, 2017 a pro set is literally two backs in the backfield. what did you mean when you asked about pro set? I dunno - audibles... taking more than 1/10 snaps under center... no huddle... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Big Cat Posted January 17, 2017 Share Posted January 17, 2017 We were 0-6 when the opponent scores 30+... And the Other 2 were 27 and 28 points. We had 1 win when a team scored 21. We were 0-8 when the other team scored more than 27 points... For reference, AFC playoff teams when opponents scored 20 or more in 2016: KC: 5-1 https://goo.gl/DSlLpV MIA: 7-5 https://goo.gl/PBTlNm HOU: 4-7 https://goo.gl/6vGvJl PIT: 4-5 https://goo.gl/6vGvJl NE: 4-1 https://goo.gl/ubLr64 OAK: 9-4 https://goo.gl/ubLr64 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bleeding Bills Blue Posted January 17, 2017 Share Posted January 17, 2017 For reference, AFC playoff teams when opponents scored 20 or more in 2016: KC: 5-1 https://goo.gl/DSlLpV MIA: 7-5 https://goo.gl/PBTlNm HOU: 4-7 https://goo.gl/6vGvJl PIT: 4-5 https://goo.gl/6vGvJl NE: 4-1 https://goo.gl/ubLr64 OAK: 9-4 https://goo.gl/ubLr64 We were supposed to be a running defense first team! and we gave up 30 points 6 times! and 200 yards rushing 3 times! How is that not an issue in peoples minds? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Big Cat Posted January 17, 2017 Share Posted January 17, 2017 We were supposed to be a running defense first team! and we gave up 30 points 6 times! and 200 yards rushing 3 times! How is that not an issue in peoples minds? It was an issue with virtually everyone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dave mcbride Posted January 17, 2017 Share Posted January 17, 2017 (edited) a pro set is literally two backs in the backfield. what did you mean when you asked about pro set? I meant pro style ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pro-style_offense) - my apologies. I'm thinking primarily of Coryell and his followers, Bills/Giants era Gilbride, and other familiar names. Here's a pretty good breakdown of what I'm talking about -- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_England_Patriots_strategy#Erhardt-Perkins_offensive_system . Edited January 17, 2017 by dave mcbride Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FireChan Posted January 17, 2017 Share Posted January 17, 2017 Oh, the likelihood of the offense taking a step back is stupendously high, mostly because of uncertainty at QB. But make no mistake, said step back will be seriously overstated because it will be coming from the assumption that the 2016 was good enough to win. 1-8 when your opponent scores 20 points or more suggests that they were not. 0-4 when the opponent score more than 30 1-3 when the opponent scored between 20 and 30 So again, clinging to those rankings and waving them as evidence that the offense was good in 2016 is dishonest. And even though it won't matter, people will be PISSED that we don't match those rankings next year. 2016 KC didn't have a win where the opponent scored more than 30. If we go .500 in those 4 games we let up more than 30 by allowing less points, we're probably in the playoffs. Please just stop. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Big Cat Posted January 17, 2017 Share Posted January 17, 2017 2016 KC didn't have a win where the opponent scored more than 30. If we go .500 in those 4 games we let up more than 30 by allowing less points, we're probably in the playoffs. Please just stop. If ifs and buts were nickels and nuts every day would be Christmas. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts