YoloinOhio Posted January 17, 2017 Share Posted January 17, 2017 (edited) id love him, except he will almost certainly either A) go with kyle shannahan to the 49ers as his OC or be promoted in Atlanta as OC...either way, not Buffalo Sounds like Tom Cable might get the SF job was that the Ohio St. championship back in 2000? yeah coaches can never get better, especially young ones doing something for the first time. 2003 yes Edited January 17, 2017 by YoloinOhio Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CommonCents Posted January 17, 2017 Share Posted January 17, 2017 Too bad Herman and Applewhite both got HC gigs id take either one of them over the Jacksonville reject! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ndirish1978 Posted January 17, 2017 Share Posted January 17, 2017 ' Boy, our longitudinal understanding of another team's OC sure did crystallize quickly! It must be nice to "win" all discussion points with one-liners that don't actually address the issue. Cool beans Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Big Cat Posted January 17, 2017 Share Posted January 17, 2017 It must be nice to "win" all discussion points with one-liners that don't actually address the issue. Cool beans Hadn't realized there was a scoreboard. Might help you make up ground if you (or anybody else certain this will fail) clarified your expertise on OC's from around the league. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Jokeman Posted January 17, 2017 Share Posted January 17, 2017 The only place that the idea that Childress "may" be out of the running seems to be a Vic tweet. I would not automatically assume this to be the truth. It may ultimately turn out to be true, who knows now, but it's a flimsy case for it being true. One Vic tweet, saying he "may" be out of the running. Edit: For clarity sake, Vic said that Childress "Appears" to be out of the picture, not "may" be. Same thing, but since I used the quotes... and lately Vic has been bad at predicting things as he pretty much thought it was all but certain Lynn be our HC. While I have read reports that Childress was set to retire last year I can see where he could connect the dots but until we don't see Childress I will question Vic's sources. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GunnerBill Posted January 17, 2017 Share Posted January 17, 2017 Exactly the point. You have no idea what the playcalls are, what the QB's freedom to change them is, how many different calls the QB can make at the line, etc, etc, etc. "Playcalling" is probably the dumbest things fans complain about. We know this because it's a complaint that's nearly gone extinct now that we have access all-22 analyses, without which we can't even begin to guess at what the objective of any given play was. But even the most diligent all-22 analysts freely admit that their ability to understand things is severely limited...by not knowing the playcall. So, again. I actually agree with you that this is true. But when something becomes a repeated pattern time and time again I think you are able to make some reasonable assumptions. Doesn't mean you are 100% right but it is still a fair assumption. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Big Cat Posted January 17, 2017 Share Posted January 17, 2017 I actually agree with you that this is true. But when something becomes a repeated pattern time and time again I think you are able to make some reasonable assumptions. Doesn't mean you are 100% right but it is still a fair assumption. Funny how the NFL's best OC's always have great QB's. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GunnerBill Posted January 17, 2017 Share Posted January 17, 2017 Funny how the NFL's best OC's always have great QB's. Of course - because it gives you a bigger playbook from which to call plays. But you can run an effective offense without a top QB. Anthony Lynn and Greg Roman proved that here. You don't have to be ranked in the bottom 3rd of the league just because you don't have a franchise Quarterback. Olson in my opinion is pretty good working with some relatively lowly QBs.... but he is not a good in game playcaller. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Big Cat Posted January 17, 2017 Share Posted January 17, 2017 (edited) Of course - because it gives you a bigger playbook from which to call plays. But you can run an effective offense without a top QB. Anthony Lynn and Greg Roman proved that here. You don't have to be ranked in the bottom 3rd of the league just because you don't have a franchise Quarterback. Olson in my opinion is pretty good working with some relatively lowly QBs.... but he is not a good in game playcaller. ALynn and GRoman ran offenses intended to complement a dominant defense. They were not effective on their own. I don't want any more of that razor's edge, ****. See Chiefs, KC. From 2015-16 the Bills were 2-16...read that again...2-16 when their opponent scored 20 or more points. Stop telling me the offense was good enough. Edited January 17, 2017 by The Big Cat Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gugny Posted January 17, 2017 Share Posted January 17, 2017 You don't have to be ranked in the bottom 3rd of the league just because you don't have a franchise Quarterback. Well, we ranked 31st in passing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dave mcbride Posted January 17, 2017 Share Posted January 17, 2017 (edited) Of course - because it gives you a bigger playbook from which to call plays. But you can run an effective offense without a top QB. Anthony Lynn and Greg Roman proved that here. You don't have to be ranked in the bottom 3rd of the league just because you don't have a franchise Quarterback. Olson in my opinion is pretty good working with some relatively lowly QBs.... but he is not a good in game playcaller. +1. Roman is in my opinion an objectively good play caller because even without top qbs, he's creative enough to make it work. Guys like Olsen strike me as products of the generic NFL coordinator factory - all favoring standard issue pro offenses. Big Cat is right in that it really comes down to the QB with this type of guy. Kevin Gilbride, who was actually creative relative to the rest of league at one point in his career, had an up and down career that can be traced solely to the QB. But Gilbride operated in the straitjacket of the classic pro offense. Roman -- and for that matter Lynn -- did not. Guys like Olsen are truly generic, and because they haven't had success they never get the good jobs - the ones with the good qbs. They may get a job with a promising young qb (Carr, Bortles), but their genericness and the unevenness of the young qb's performance tends to get them fired before too long. Any way you shake it, though, Olsen is about as uninspiring as it gets - an NFL lifer who bounces from job to job because QB-less teams with new head coaches need someone to dial up the sort of standard issue NFL playcalling that is regarded as competent coordination. He's kinda like the new Chris Palmer -- a pro set guy who is often hired and often fired. Edited January 17, 2017 by dave mcbride Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ndirish1978 Posted January 17, 2017 Share Posted January 17, 2017 Hadn't realized there was a scoreboard. Might help you make up ground if you (or anybody else certain this will fail) clarified your expertise on OC's from around the league. Feel free to mischaracterize what I said. I said that my observation of his playcalling last season was that it was predictable. Google his name and predictable if you want to confirm if this has been an issue for him at his various stops. There is not ground to make up. I don't think he will be good based on my observation and opinion. You are free to disagree with my opinion. However, if you feel the need to keep telling me I am seeing things incorrectly and my opinion is not valid, perhaps it would be best for you to PM me and not derail the thread with constant comments on how you think my conclusion is wrong? This is after all, a thread for discussing the relative merits of Olson as an OC. If your input to the discussion is simply "prove it" and then "prove it more", I suspect you will be predictably disappointed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dave mcbride Posted January 17, 2017 Share Posted January 17, 2017 Well, we ranked 31st in passing. This is simply false - they ranked 19th. https://www.teamrankings.com/nfl/stat/average-team-passer-rating Feel free to mischaracterize what I said. I said that my observation of his playcalling last season was that it was predictable. Google his name and predictable if you want to confirm if this has been an issue for him at his various stops. There is not ground to make up. I don't think he will be good based on my observation and opinion. You are free to disagree with my opinion. However, if you feel the need to keep telling me I am seeing things incorrectly and my opinion is not valid, perhaps it would be best for you to PM me and not derail the thread with constant comments on how you think my conclusion is wrong? This is after all, a thread for discussing the relative merits of Olson as an OC. If your input to the discussion is simply "prove it" and then "prove it more", I suspect you will be predictably disappointed. As I say above, he's a generic pro set guy that would look good with a great qb. He's not the sort of guy like Roman or even Chan Gailey, who can occasionally spin silk from a sow's ear because they're not wedded to the conventional approach to offensive coordination. Guys like Olsen are gonna do just fine with Matt Ryan as their qb, but they're gonna fail in a place like Buffalo. That is just so freaking obvious. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GunnerBill Posted January 17, 2017 Share Posted January 17, 2017 ALynn and GRoman ran offenses intended to complement a dominant defense. They were not effective on their own. I don't want any more of that razor's edge, ****. See Chiefs, KC. From 2015-16 the Bills were 2-16...read that again...2-16 when their opponent scored 20 or more points. Stop telling me the offense was good enough. I have not told you it was good enough. I have told you it still outranked what Olson has done without a top level QB. It isn't as simple as the offenses rank 1 to 32 based on their Quarterback. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Big Cat Posted January 17, 2017 Share Posted January 17, 2017 This is simply false - they ranked 19th. https://www.teamrankings.com/nfl/stat/average-team-passer-rating TT's inflated rating has been roundly analyzed and accredited to his low attempt volume and aversion to turnovers. It is exceptionally misleading to suggest this ranking reflects the 19th best passing offense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dave mcbride Posted January 17, 2017 Share Posted January 17, 2017 TT's inflated rating has been roundly analyzed and accredited to his low attempt volume and aversion to turnovers. It is exceptionally misleading to suggest this ranking reflects the 19th best passing offense. Aversion to turnovers -- I thought that was a positive thing. Silly me. And rating has absolutely nothing (statistically speaking) to do with low attempt volume. Absolutely zero. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Big Cat Posted January 17, 2017 Share Posted January 17, 2017 I have not told you it was good enough. I have told you it still outranked what Olson has done without a top level QB. It isn't as simple as the offenses rank 1 to 32 based on their Quarterback. That wasn't aimed at you. There is abundant hand wringing over how the new OC is bound to ruin what was a great offense. It wasn't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Big Cat Posted January 17, 2017 Share Posted January 17, 2017 Aversion to turnovers -- I thought that was a positive thing. Silly me. And rating has absolutely nothing (statistically speaking) to do with low attempt volume. Absolutely zero. You're seriously going to make us start at zero with this conversation? You're going to pretend like TT's unwillingness/inability to make the kind of risky throws necessary to win in the NFL is totally completely brand new to you? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jeffismagic Posted January 17, 2017 Share Posted January 17, 2017 Cool. Let's hope Olsen just uses Romans/Lynns playbook because that playbook seems to work a hell of a lot more then Olsens. Not going to happen. Roman has left the building as well as Lynn. Maybe Olson will be smart enough to steal some of the best plays but that remains to be seen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dave mcbride Posted January 17, 2017 Share Posted January 17, 2017 That wasn't aimed at you. There is abundant hand wringing over how the new OC is bound to ruin what was a great offense. It wasn't. No one said it was a great offense. It's about creativity with a limited resource set. Roman and Lynn did a good job in recognizing a limited QB's real strengths. Without question, Olsen ain't that type of coordinator. If he gets hired, I wouldn't be surprised to see them move on to a more conventional QB, and I would certainly expect him to fail. If they go this route, they'll be looking for a new coordinator by 2019. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts