Daboll's preferred offense and QB.

[BobbyC81]

On January 15, 2018 at 9:32 AM, Logic said:

Below are some great articles about the Erhardt-Perkins offense, which our new offensive coordinator will be running. The first talks about the system in general, with some great diagrams of plays to give examples. The second article talks about Daboll's offense specifically.

http://grantland.com/features/how-terminology-erhardt-perkins-system-helped-maintain-dominance-tom-brady-patriots/

http://www.al.com/alabamafootball/index.ssf/2017/11/why_alabamas_offense_is_like_a.html

 

"The backbone of the Erhardt-Perkins system is that plays — pass plays in particular — are not organized by a route tree or by calling a single receiver’s route, but by what coaches refer to as “concepts.” Each play has a name, and that name conjures up an image for both the quarterback and the other players on offense. And, most importantly, the concept can be called from almost any formation or set. Who does what changes, but the theory and tactics driving the play do not. “In essence, you’re running the same play,” said Perkins. “You’re just giving them some window-dressing to make it look different.”

The biggest advantage of the concept-based system is that it operates from the perspective of the most critical player on offense: the quarterback. In other systems, even if the underlying principles are the exact same, the play and its name might be very different. Rather than juggling all this information in real time, an Erhardt-Perkins quarterback only has to read a given arrangement of receivers. “You can cut down on the plays and get different looks from your formations and who’s in them. It’s easier for the players to learn. It’s easier for the quarterback to learn,” former Patriots offensive coordinator Charlie Weis said back in 2000. “You get different looks without changing his reads. You don’t need an open-ended number of plays.”

 

Let’s look at a play that has long been a staple of the Patriots attack. This is actually two different concepts put together — “ghost/tosser,” which has the Patriots run the ghost concept to one side and the tosser concept to the other. Ghost has the outermost receiver, whoever it is, run a vertical route, one inside receiver run to a depth of roughly eight yards before breaking flat to the outside, and the innermost receiver run immediately to the flat. It’s a form of the “stick” or “turn” concept that essentially every NFL team uses. On the other side, tosser means that the receivers run the double-slant concept. The page below is from the Patriots’ playbook.

The theory here is that no matter the formation, there is an outside receiver, an inside receiver, and a middle receiver, and each will be responsible for running his designated route. For the quarterback, this means the play can be run repeatedly, from different formations and with different personnel, all while his read stays effectively the same. Once receivers understand each concept, they only have to know at which position they’re lined up. The personnel and formation might cause the defense to respond differently, but for New England those changes only affect which side Brady prefers or which receiver he expects to be open. This conceptual approach is how the Patriots are able to run the same basic plays, whether spreading the field with four or five receivers or using multiple tight ends and running backs.

And from Daboll:

"You choose what you want to do and each week based on what the other team does, based on the coverages that they play," he said. "You don't just draw up new stuff every week...We can expand that or contract it or use the things that we think are best based on what the other team plays. I think that's what we've tried to do all year long and that's what gives the players the best chance to execute."

After reading these articles and diving into the Erhardt-Perkins offense in general, I feel pretty excited about Buffalo's offensive future. The diversity that the offense offers -- while still using verbiage that is simpler than many other systems -- is enticing. I get the sense that with this offense, and with Daboll's recent experience coaching the college game, we're going to see a much more diverse, modern, interesting offensive attack in Buffalo next year. An attack that adjusts from week to week to exploit opponent's weaknesses and find advantageous personnel matchups. Unlike many on these forums, I think the hire of Daboll was an excellent one and I can't wait to see his offense in action.

GO BILLS!!!

 

 

So after facing the Pats offense with Brady for 17 years and having their defense turn apart, the Bills finally may have a similar offense?  It took this long to "join them" instead of trying to"beat them"? How many head coaches and offensive coordinators have the Bills had who never came up with this idea?

[LeGOATski]

34 minutes ago, LittleJoeCartwright said:

 

So after facing the Pats offense with Brady for 17 years and having their defense turn apart, the Bills finally may have a similar offense?  It took this long to "join them" instead of trying to"beat them"? How many head coaches and offensive coordinators have the Bills had who never came up with this idea?

Lol, no. This isn't a unique system. I'm pretty sure Gailey's was very similar.

[Gigs]

On 1/15/2018 at 1:25 PM, Logic said:

Agreed. It would be nice to see a 2018 passing offense rather than a 1998 passing offense.

 

On 1/15/2018 at 2:30 PM, eball said:

 

Fixed for accuracy.

 

You both realize the NFL wasn’t just a run first even back then? Air Coryel? 1978? Looks like kids these days think anything before their time was run only. You youngins need to do your research and realize there have been pass happy offenses since the days of the first forward lateral. Yeah, I get it, hard to believe but it’s true. 

 

There were prolific passers and passing offenses before Tom Brady and Peyton Manning. 

 

Not to mention nearly every passing and receiving record were untouchable UNTIL the NFL made it easy for Brady with the Ty Law rule. The single game passing yards record I believe is still intact from the FIRST time the Rams were in LA. Norm Van Brocklyn...look him up...Flying Dutchman...554 yards in a game in the 50s. Where’s Brady?

 

Did Johnny Unitas play in the 2000s? Or YA Tittle? What about that famous KGun? Was it a 2010s offense or a late 80s early 90s offense? 

 

Kids, stop assuming the way the world was before your time, especially when !@#$ing Google exists. 

 

Tl:dr the NFL was pass happy in the beginning, balanced and leaned towards the run between 1980s-2006 (you know, when every running back and their mother were aiming to beat OJ?) and has since gotten almost where it used to be, but it’s WAY easier to accumulate stats nowadays. 

Edited January 17, 2018 by Gigs

[YoloinOhio]

3 hours ago, LittleJoeCartwright said:

 

So after facing the Pats offense with Brady for 17 years and having their defense turn apart, the Bills finally may have a similar offense?  It took this long to "join them" instead of trying to"beat them"? How many head coaches and offensive coordinators have the Bills had who never came up with this idea?

Their defense was torn apart by Tom Brady, not E-P. E-P is not a new concept.

[eball]

2 hours ago, Gigs said:

 

 

You both realize the NFL wasn’t just a run first even back then? Air Coryel? 1978? Looks like kids these days think anything before their time was run only. You youngins need to do your research and realize there have been pass happy offenses since the days of the first forward lateral. Yeah, I get it, hard to believe but it’s true. 

 

There were prolific passers and passing offenses before Tom Brady and Peyton Manning. 

 

Not to mention nearly every passing and receiving record were untouchable UNTIL the NFL made it easy for Brady with the Ty Law rule. The single game passing yards record I believe is still intact from the FIRST time the Rams were in LA. Norm Van Brocklyn...look him up...Flying Dutchman...554 yards in a game in the 50s. Where’s Brady?

 

Did Johnny Unitas play in the 2000s? Or YA Tittle? What about that famous KGun? Was it a 2010s offense or a late 80s early 90s offense? 

 

Kids, stop assuming the way the world was before your time, especially when !@#$ing Google exists. 

 

Tl:dr the NFL was pass happy in the beginning, balanced and leaned towards the run between 1980s-2006 (you know, when every running back and their mother were aiming to beat OJ?) and has since gotten almost where it used to be, but it’s WAY easier to accumulate stats nowadays. 

 

Lighten up, Francis.

[26CornerBlitz]

4 hours ago, Gigs said:

 

 

You both realize the NFL wasn’t just a run first even back then? Air Coryel? 1978? Looks like kids these days think anything before their time was run only. You youngins need to do your research and realize there have been pass happy offenses since the days of the first forward lateral. Yeah, I get it, hard to believe but it’s true. 

 

There were prolific passers and passing offenses before Tom Brady and Peyton Manning. 

 

Not to mention nearly every passing and receiving record were untouchable UNTIL the NFL made it easy for Brady with the Ty Law rule. The single game passing yards record I believe is still intact from the FIRST time the Rams were in LA. Norm Van Brocklyn...look him up...Flying Dutchman...554 yards in a game in the 50s. Where’s Brady?

 

Did Johnny Unitas play in the 2000s? Or YA Tittle? What about that famous KGun? Was it a 2010s offense or a late 80s early 90s offense? 

 

Kids, stop assuming the way the world was before your time, especially when !@#$ing Google exists. 

 

Tl:dr the NFL was pass happy in the beginning, balanced and leaned towards the run between 1980s-2006 (you know, when every running back and their mother were aiming to beat OJ?) and has since gotten almost where it used to be, but it’s WAY easier to accumulate stats nowadays. 

 

That was actually the Mel Blount Rule that legislated against bump and run coverage beyond 5 yards past the line of scrimmage. 

Edited January 17, 2018 by 26CornerBlitz

[K-9]

15 minutes ago, 26CornerBlitz said:

 

That was actually the Mel Blount Rule that legislated against bump and run coverage beyond 5 yards past the line of scrimmage. 

While true that the chuck rule barred bump and run coverage downfield in 1978, the league paid lip service to its enforcement until Ty Law was seen mugging Marvin Harrison up and down the field, play after play in the playoffs on national TV that they got serious about it.

[26CornerBlitz]

1 minute ago, K-9 said:

While true that the chuck rule barred bump and run coverage downfield in 1978, the league paid lip service to its enforcement until Ty Law was seen mugging Marvin Harrison up and down the field, play after play in the playoffs on national TV that they got serious about it.

 

That has gone back and forth with tight or loose enforcement of coverage tactics in the league since 1978.  One example is with the Seahawks who have been pretty aggressive in coverage since their Legion of Boom secondary has been in place. 

[K-9]

1 minute ago, 26CornerBlitz said:

 

That has gone back and forth with tight or loose enforcement of coverage tactics in the league since 1978.  One example is with the Seahawks who have been pretty aggressive in coverage since their Legion of Boom secondary has been in place. 

The idea being that the refs wouldn’t possibly call illegal contact on every play so let the DBs have at it, kinda like holding calls against offensive linemen. Understandable strategy especially if the infraction doesn’t have any impact on the play it won’t get called. But Ty Law’s muggings in that playoff game against the Colts brought the most scrutiny since the chuck rule change to that point, anyway. 

[26CornerBlitz]

 

[Shaw66]

On 1/15/2018 at 4:00 PM, Buffalo716 said:

 

To a point.

 

Again, everybody runs the same plays to a degree. The difference is some teams (good teams) will add a few more concepts than bad teams 

 

in the west coast offense the verbiage is all memory. To oversimplify, the system uses what is essentially a memory system. On running plays, the same two-digit numbering system as most NFL and college teams is used. Passing plays, however, are typically denoted by the primary receiver’s route, such as Z- in x- hook , while the rest of the players are required to memorize their task. These plays can be 15 words long sometimes longer 

 

The Coryell system is similar to the west coast but relaces the verbiage with the route tree. So you can have a play called 896 and all receivers would know what to do . but the 1 back system has rendered this all but obsolete because you must add in west coast verbiage as well

 

the erhardt/ Perkins verbiage is based all around the concepts of the offense. So you can have choice combinations , in combinations, flood, etc and they all mean something to everyone when called 

I just looked through the first page and a half of posts, and it seems most people except you are making more of this article than it is. 

 

As you say, the article is verbiage, nomenclature.    And as you say, regardless of nomenclature, most teams, including the Pats, run the same plays.   The interesting point to me was that this system tends to be more QB-centric, that is, it allows the QB to talk about plays in ways that help him think about what's happening.   Simply by using one word, he knows what all his receivers are doing on one half of the field.    It makes life easier for the QB, and it makes a life a little more complicated for the receivers, because they have to know which route to run depending on where he's lined up in the formation.   That is, it off loads some responsibility from the QB to other players.   Brady doesn't have to know which wideout is second from the outside and tell the wideout what to do.  All he has to know is whoever that wideout is, he's running a particular pattern.   And, playing for Belichick, if you're the wideout and you don't know your assignment, you're sitting.  

 

None of this says much about the offensive philosophy.   It doesn't say the offense will be run- or pass-oriented.   Remember, it's just about how the plays are communicated to the players, not about the nature of the plays.

 

It's also noteworthy that in one of the articles there was a suggestion that it was time for Daboll to leave Alabama because Saban wants to go to more of a spread-formation college-type offense.   In other words, more passing and less running.   So I wouldn't be quick to expect Daboll to be a pass-first guy.   I think McD is a run-first guy - he's a fundamental-football guy, and I don't think he called up Daboll and asked him how he'd like to run an offense that throws the ball 40 plays a game.   

 

One thing I think about this change is that it's another indication that McD isn't planning on Tyrod being the guy.  If he wanted to keep Tryrod around, he wouldn't be changing systems.   He'd want to keep Tyrod in the same system for a second season.   With a new system being installed, Tyrod has no advantage over anyone else competing for the job.  

 

I think we have to wait and see.  

[Shaw66]

On 1/16/2018 at 10:50 AM, Hapless Bills Fan said:

 

Fair enough.  So to contribute, E-P offenses have been run successfully with quite a range of quarterbacks.  Belicheck may (not sure) be the first who recognized its potential to support a high powered, sophisticated passing game, and it's evolved during Brady's 16 yr tenure from a run-first (or balanced run-pass) offense to what it is today (actually, it seems to vary cyclically depending on their current RBs and WR).

 

The Steelers (since 2004) and Panthers (since 2013) are two other successful, prominent examples of teams running E-P systems, as were the Giants (2004-2013) during some of Eli Manning's most successful years (5 playoff appearances, 2 SB wins).

 

I think the point is, it's a system that can be run successfully with a number of different styles of QB play, from classic pocket passer to guy who can run.

 

I wouldn't expect the offensive system to affect their draft choices too much, but if they want a vet to anchor the QB room for a rookie, I would expect them to look for a vet who has had some success in an EP system (if they want the vet to be "the man", I think they'd just look for a guy who's still mentally flexible)

 

Cousins and Smith have played (afaik) entirely in WC systems. 

 

 

 

Erm....most of Daboll's experience in the NFL is with New England.  If they don't run a complex NFL level passing attack, who does?

As I think about it, what's particularly interesting is the comment in the article about week to week changes.   

 

You mention that it's hard to know whether the Pats are run- or pass-oriented from week to week.  The article talks about how it's easy in any week to install variations off the concepts.   That is, the receivers learn that this week when they're running this concept, they make an in-cut instead of an out-cut.   The nomenclature doesn't change; it's still fundamentally the same pattern, but the receiver breaks it off a different way.   

 

Again, this spreads the responsibility - instead of the QB needing to change how he calls the play so he gives the receiver all the info he needs to run his route, the QB calls the same play and the QB knows this week the cut is different.   It puts more responsibility on the receiver, because he has to have learned the weekly change, too.  

 

The more I learn about what Belichick does, the more I marvel at his ability to train his players to be active thinkers on the field.   They all have to understand what's going on in this play or that play, they all are expected to understand how the play may be run differently at different times in the game.   All the complexity he sees gets down-loaded to players - the players only learn the principles that govern their play and the play of the guys around them, the QB has to learn it all.  Belichick has remarkable success getting his players to think along with him.  

 

Just because Daboll was worked in the system doesn't mean that he can get players to perform that way.   However, I think McD imposes the same kind of expectations on his players as Belichick does, so maybe Daboll is a good fit.  We'll see.  

[Bleeding Bills Blue]

I think Daboll's preferred QB will be one who doesn't suck.  Like every qb he's been saddled with as a o-coordinator.

 

1 hour ago, Shaw66 said:

I just looked through the first page and a half of posts, and it seems most people except you are making more of this article than it is. 

 

As you say, the article is verbiage, nomenclature.    And as you say, regardless of nomenclature, most teams, including the Pats, run the same plays.   The interesting point to me was that this system tends to be more QB-centric, that is, it allows the QB to talk about plays in ways that help him think about what's happening.   Simply by using one word, he knows what all his receivers are doing on one half of the field.    It makes life easier for the QB, and it makes a life a little more complicated for the receivers, because they have to know which route to run depending on where he's lined up in the formation.   That is, it off loads some responsibility from the QB to other players.   Brady doesn't have to know which wideout is second from the outside and tell the wideout what to do.  All he has to know is whoever that wideout is, he's running a particular pattern.   And, playing for Belichick, if you're the wideout and you don't know your assignment, you're sitting.  

 

None of this says much about the offensive philosophy.   It doesn't say the offense will be run- or pass-oriented.   Remember, it's just about how the plays are communicated to the players, not about the nature of the plays.

 

It's also noteworthy that in one of the articles there was a suggestion that it was time for Daboll to leave Alabama because Saban wants to go to more of a spread-formation college-type offense.   In other words, more passing and less running.   So I wouldn't be quick to expect Daboll to be a pass-first guy.   I think McD is a run-first guy - he's a fundamental-football guy, and I don't think he called up Daboll and asked him how he'd like to run an offense that throws the ball 40 plays a game.   

 

One thing I think about this change is that it's another indication that McD isn't planning on Tyrod being the guy.  If he wanted to keep Tryrod around, he wouldn't be changing systems.   He'd want to keep Tyrod in the same system for a second season.   With a new system being installed, Tyrod has no advantage over anyone else competing for the job.  

 

I think we have to wait and see.  

 

Tyrod's on the same timetable as last year.  If we sign someone in the first 3 days he's obviously gone.  If we don't go hard at QBs, he's going to have to take a paycut.

 

As for the spread - they have run a spread offense for years.  Most college teams run it in one shape or form.  There's that air-raid type that throws 50 times.  There's urban meyer teams that barely throw at all.  Those rich rodriguez/art briles combo teams.  The lane kiffin RPO type spread.  

 

I doubt saban all of a sudden wants to throw it 70 times a game when he wins 13 games a year with a legit bad QB in hurts.  He'll probably add more PA, and screens - now that it looks like hurts is out.

Edited January 17, 2018 by dneveu

[Buffalo716]

2 hours ago, Shaw66 said:

I just looked through the first page and a half of posts, and it seems most people except you are making more of this article than it is. 

 

As you say, the article is verbiage, nomenclature.    And as you say, regardless of nomenclature, most teams, including the Pats, run the same plays.   The interesting point to me was that this system tends to be more QB-centric, that is, it allows the QB to talk about plays in ways that help him think about what's happening.   Simply by using one word, he knows what all his receivers are doing on one half of the field.    It makes life easier for the QB, and it makes a life a little more complicated for the receivers, because they have to know which route to run depending on where he's lined up in the formation.   That is, it off loads some responsibility from the QB to other players.   Brady doesn't have to know which wideout is second from the outside and tell the wideout what to do.  All he has to know is whoever that wideout is, he's running a particular pattern.   And, playing for Belichick, if you're the wideout and you don't know your assignment, you're sitting.  

 

None of this says much about the offensive philosophy.   It doesn't say the offense will be run- or pass-oriented.   Remember, it's just about how the plays are communicated to the players, not about the nature of the plays.

 

It's also noteworthy that in one of the articles there was a suggestion that it was time for Daboll to leave Alabama because Saban wants to go to more of a spread-formation college-type offense.   In other words, more passing and less running.   So I wouldn't be quick to expect Daboll to be a pass-first guy.   I think McD is a run-first guy - he's a fundamental-football guy, and I don't think he called up Daboll and asked him how he'd like to run an offense that throws the ball 40 plays a game.   

 

One thing I think about this change is that it's another indication that McD isn't planning on Tyrod being the guy.  If he wanted to keep Tryrod around, he wouldn't be changing systems.   He'd want to keep Tyrod in the same system for a second season.   With a new system being installed, Tyrod has no advantage over anyone else competing for the job.  

 

I think we have to wait and see.  

Great post Shaw. You make a lot of very valid points. I have never been a QB but I have always been told how QB centric or friendly the system is. As you said, one word tips the QB off to everything. No thinking, no processing, just a simple football concept and everybody knows their jon

 

nobody knows what kind of offense Dabol will run with McDermott... but as you said McDermott is definitely a ball control guy and a fundamental guy so I still expect a heavy dose of pounding the Rock next year 

[JohnBonhamRocks]

I would think, given Daboll's scheme, that a more intelligent QB would have a leg up. 

 

Who would you all consider the most cerebral QB in this class?

 

 

[SouthNYfan]

On 1/15/2018 at 5:16 PM, KHAN said:

 

I was going to say this. But I was too scared. 

 

Don't you mean "scarred" ?

[BigDingus]

Does the simplicity make it easier for defenses to figure out what handful of plays we could be running though? 

I feel that if I can understand it & pick it up so easily, it must be even easier for people trained to read & understand it on the field.

[Shaw66]

8 minutes ago, BigDingus said:

Does the simplicity make it easier for defenses to figure out what handful of plays we could be running though? 

I feel that if I can understand it & pick it up so easily, it must be even easier for people trained to read & understand it on the field.

All the articles say all teams run more or less the same plays.   So I don't think Ehrhardt Perkins teams are coming at you with fewer plays or a more simplified offense.   It's more that the way plays are identified is simpler.   

 

The basic point seems to be that a route tree from half the field has a name, like "slick."   If the QB says right slick, the three receivers who will line up on the right know that the outside receiver does one thing, the slot guy does a second and the inside receiver does a third thing.   Now, you can do it out of any formation, so if you're in trips, the three receivers all know what's what.   But if you have one wideout and a tight end with a guy in the slot, the slot guy still knows what he's doing.  But if the slot guy goes in motion to the left, now the tight end is the second guy and the running back is the third.   So you can run the route tree from all different formations.   If you have six named route trees and four formations, that's essentially 24 different passing plays.    And that's just on the right.   You're doing something similar on the left.   

 

Then, from week to week, they may decide that against the defense they're facing they need a different tree, or they need one receiver to cut the opposite way.   So for that week there may a new route tree.   Or "slick" might get varied.   Over the course of the season, you're modifying and growing the offense.   

 

What's nice about it is that it's easier for the QB.   Under the other systems, each receiver gets a pattern that's identified in the play call, so the QB essentially is telling each guy what do to on each play.   If during the week they add some wrinkles, it's new instructions to give to each receiver.   It sounds like it gets really cumbersome, and you're layering more and more stuff on the QB.    The EP system makes all of that simpler.   It means the receivers have to be doing their homework during the week and paying attention on Sunday, because "slick" may be a little different this week.   

 

One of the benefits in the EP system, if you have continuity in the system and the personnel, is that you can install something for week 2 and come back to it in week 17, and it's familiar to everyone.  I read somewhere that the Pats will go back several YEARS to bring back a scheme they used in one game or another.  Brady's smart and he remembers them, but the point isn't so much Brady's memory as it is that with very little difficulty they add or bring back wrinkles with names that fit right into the system, so everyone gets it.  

 

 

[NastyNateSoldiers]

It sounds like the perfect QB for this system would be Baker Mayfield. 

[26TrapDraw]

One thing for sure Tyrod is as good as gone. He's too stupid for this offense.

[keepthefaith]

18 minutes ago, BeefCurtns said:

One thing for sure Tyrod is as good as gone. He's too stupid for this offense.

I don't think that's a fair comment at all.  Being able to read defenses quickly and react is not his strong suit but that's not necessarily an intelligence thing.  Some minds just do things like that better regardless of the underlying smarts.

 

Example:  Some people who are highly intelligent and drive a car all the time have a very hard time judging the difference between a quarter mile, half mile or 2 miles.  They're intelligent but struggle at things like spacial relationships. 

 

By no means am I saying that TT should stay. 

Edited January 17, 2018 by keepthefaith

[billsredneck1]

On 1/15/2018 at 2:18 PM, dneveu said:

 

I think it's really just in conceptualizing the offense,  and naming plays.  

 

You said it better.  I think it lends to a better no huddle attack once everyone is on the same page - but that might just be brady being good.  

sounds like it's similar to what kelly ran. have a dozen formations/plays  that you are good at and have the ability to pick which variation to use based on the situation.

[26TrapDraw]

12 minutes ago, keepthefaith said:

I don't think that's a fair comment at all.  Being able to read defenses quickly and react is not his strong suit but that's not necessarily an intelligence thing.  Some minds just do things like that better regardless of the underlying smarts.

 

Example:  Some people who are highly intelligent and drive a car all the time have a very hard time judging the difference between a quarter mile, half mile or 2 miles.  They're intelligent but struggle at things like spacial relationships. 

 

By no means am I saying that TT should stay. 

I didn't mean to come off dooshy there but the point of the comment rings true. His inability to read a defense is why he would fail miserably in a cerebral offense such as this one. I also am incredibly bitter of that putrid performance against the jags in a very winnable game so there's that

 

Edited January 17, 2018 by BeefCurtns

[billsredneck1]

On 1/15/2018 at 4:56 PM, 145B4IDIE said:

I'm being serious, sounds like Peterman's scouting report

give him a good oline and he can be every bit as effective as alex smith....minus giving up picks and cap, while still having a rookie in the fold. i think peterman is plenty cerebral and accurate to get us 10 wins next year. he may not have been drafted as high as wentz or geoff, but he can have similar success. still waiting for castillo to be gone...

Edited January 17, 2018 by billsredneck1

[Punching Bag]

On 1/15/2018 at 4:56 PM, 145B4IDIE said:

I'm being serious, sounds like Peterman's scouting report

If you include opposing team members as part of receiving group.

[Punching Bag]

On 1/16/2018 at 10:29 AM, ddaryl said:

I prefer fresh threads over 20 page long reads myself...

 

I think we will grab a vet whom is a crap shoot right now until the tags are dolled outr.. We also will draft a QB.. Depending on which FA we pick up it oculd be a move up and grab a top QB sit where we are and grap one with out picks in the 1st or wait and pick up a day 2 or 3 guy who would comepte with Peterman to be the a possible successor.

 

I don't think anyone wants to keep their eggs in the Peterman basket alone..

 

There are some backet cases who want to keep their scrambled eggs in the Peteredman basket alone but many of them were advocating tanking this year.

On 1/16/2018 at 12:25 PM, Hapless Bills Fan said:

It does discourage me when I click on a nice juicy link and run into a paywall.  Alas I refuse to pay for the privilege of reading Gleason and Sullivan's stuff, whatever good stuff they may have besides.

 

I look at the paywall as being a vaccine against the internet's equivalent to CTE but some not are using their brain for anything but keeping their ears warm so I understand why the Suck Its for Sullivan think he is worth it.

[Punching Bag]

6 hours ago, Shaw66 said:

Again, this spreads the responsibility - instead of the QB needing to change how he calls the play so he gives the receiver all the info he needs to run his route, the QB calls the same play and the QB knows this week the cut is different.   It puts more responsibility on the receiver, because he has to have learned the weekly change, too.  

 

The more I learn about what Belichick does, the more I marvel at his ability to train his players to be active thinkers on the field.   They all have to understand what's going on in this play or that play, they all are expected to understand how the play may be run differently at different times in the game.   All the complexity he sees gets down-loaded to players - the players only learn the principles that govern their play and the play of the guys around them, the QB has to learn it all.  Belichick has remarkable success getting his players to think along with him.  

 

This is why some players go there and are very successful and others are not.  They look for certain type of players rather than the "I run down the field and QB overthrows me so I run under it" players.

7 hours ago, Shaw66 said:

One thing I think about this change is that it's another indication that McD isn't planning on Tyrod being the guy.  If he wanted to keep Tryrod around, he wouldn't be changing systems.   He'd want to keep Tyrod in the same system for a second season.   With a new system being installed, Tyrod has no advantage over anyone else competing for the job.  

 

There was no advantage for any QB in that system - it was too inconsistent.  But I think the blocking philosophy had as much to do with offense woes as OC play calls.

[thunderingsquid]

I've always been a big Perkins fan.

 

[YoloinOhio]

1 hour ago, thunderingsquid said:

I've always been a big Perkins fan.

 

Tiger Woods agrees

[hondo in seattle]

On 1/16/2018 at 10:19 AM, TigerJ said:

What I get from the article on Erhardt-Perkins is that it doesn't dictate reliance on either the running game or the passing game dominance.  In essence, it provides a framework for organizing and communicating plays, which are mostly the same plays in the other two systems (Coryell and West Coast).  As a framework, Grantland maintains it has an advantage in that is simplifies understanding and communication, and is thus easier for QBs to master.  So depending on the personnel Daboll is working with, he could in theory have a run heavy offense or a pass happy offense, or anything in between.

 

Exactly.  Lots of dissimilar offenses run the E-P.  It's not the same everywhere in every game.  But it is good news that Daboll learned from the modern day E-P masters up in NE.  

 

And, btw, has Daboll said he's running the E-P?  It's probably a good guess but I haven't heard him speak yet.  

[26CornerBlitz]

After a wild ride and the end of the drought, the Bills’ offseason began with an offensive coordinator change. Out is Rick Dennison and in is Western New York native Brian Daboll, back with the power running concept and a reputation of adjusting well and maximizing the talents of his players, and not forcing then into a poor scheme fit. Today, I’m starting the “Should he stay or should he go” series with QB Tyrod Taylor.

Tyrod finished his third season as the Bills’ starting QB with maybe his worst year in that role. But even in a down year he threw for, playoffs included, 2933 yards and 14 TDs to only 5 INTs (two coming from drops by his receivers), completed 61.3% of his passes, and finished with a solid 85.5 QB rating. His Pro Football Focus 79.7 passer rating was rock solid. He also added 446 yards and 4 TDs on the ground, with a very good 86.5 PFF rushing grade. His 83.0 PFF overall grade was good for the 14th-best QB in the league, in front of guys like Goff, Winston, Cousins, and Newton.

The problem with Taylor is well documented; it’s not about the plays he makes, but the ones he refuses to attempt. He was sacked 47 times this season, always risk averse and ultra conservative. Media members and fans are more than ever ready to turn this page and go all in into a new QB plan, but after the hire of Daboll as the team’s new OC, I think Tyrod’s odds to come back for his 4th year with the Bills just got higher.

[BringBackFlutie]

On 1/17/2018 at 4:05 AM, LeGOATski said:

Lol, no. This isn't a unique system. I'm pretty sure Gailey's was very similar.

 

Exactly.  This is not new.

 

https://www.ganggreennation.com/2015/1/14/7545199/everything-you-need-to-know-about-chan-gaileys-offense

 

"What Gailey does instead is to change the formation and personnel, but running the same core concepts from each, to give you fifteen different looks of what is, at its most basic function, the same play. For further reading, I suggest you take a look at BuffaloRumblings."

 

And

 

https://www.buffalorumblings.com/2012/6/21/3105714/buffalo-bills-offense-chan-gailey-spread

 

"Gailey's offense is complex only in the sense that it uses a variety of different personnel groupings, formations and motions to execute the same play calls."

 

Gailey's offense was also often compared to the Pats' offense in that it ran a lot of stacked sets of WRs and rub routes.   His offense was better, in some ways, though.  His running and screen game was unmatched.  Nothing could stop his offense if he had a Ryan Fitzpatrick that could throw past 15 yards.  I always believed that's why we had so much trouble scoring points after the first half of the season- Fitz's arm was dead.  I don't think it had much to do with the offense being "figured out."

[transplantbillsfan]

Gotta say, both of these were really interesting reads.

 

It actually sounds like a system that has a ton of options yet, at the same time, really organizes itself and simplifies itself for all the offensive players, particularly QB. Sounds promising for some potentially quick success for a young rookie QB.

 

McDermott hired him quickly... I assume there are reasons  

[Augie]

8 minutes ago, transplantbillsfan said:

Gotta say, both of these were really interesting reads.

 

It actually sounds like a system that has a ton of options yet, at the same time, really organizes itself and simplifies itself for all the offensive players, particularly QB. Sounds promising for some potentially quick success for a young rookie QB.

 

McDermott hired him quickly... I assume there are reasons  

 

So....Super Bowl???    

[transplantbillsfan]

44 minutes ago, Augie said:

 

So....Super Bowl???    

 

Well... obviously. We just made the playoffs, isn't winning the Super Bowl the next natural step?  

[Hapless Bills Fan]

On 1/17/2018 at 8:31 PM, hondo in seattle said:

Exactly.  Lots of dissimilar offenses run the E-P.  It's not the same everywhere in every game.  But it is good news that Daboll learned from the modern day E-P masters up in NE.  

 

And, btw, has Daboll said he's running the E-P?  It's probably a good guess but I haven't heard him speak yet.  

 

He has not said a word, but it's the only offensive system he's worked in.  It would be bizarre indeed for a new OC to install a system he's never before used.

9 hours ago, BringBackFlutie said:

 

Exactly.  This is not new.

 

https://www.ganggreennation.com/2015/1/14/7545199/everything-you-need-to-know-about-chan-gaileys-offense

 

"What Gailey does instead is to change the formation and personnel, but running the same core concepts from each, to give you fifteen different looks of what is, at its most basic function, the same play. For further reading, I suggest you take a look at BuffaloRumblings."

 

And

 

https://www.buffalorumblings.com/2012/6/21/3105714/buffalo-bills-offense-chan-gailey-spread

 

"Gailey's offense is complex only in the sense that it uses a variety of different personnel groupings, formations and motions to execute the same play calls."

 

Gailey's offense was also often compared to the Pats' offense in that it ran a lot of stacked sets of WRs and rub routes.   His offense was better, in some ways, though.  His running and screen game was unmatched.  Nothing could stop his offense if he had a Ryan Fitzpatrick that could throw past 15 yards.  I always believed that's why we had so much trouble scoring points after the first half of the season- Fitz's arm was dead.  I don't think it had much to do with the offense being "figured out."

 

What used to drive me bug!@#$ about Gailey was his play selection.  He would move away from that unmatched running and screen game, and call plays that could utilize Aaron Rodgers when he had Ryan Fitzpatrick instead.

[transplantbillsfan]

On 1/15/2018 at 10:44 AM, chris heff said:

I’m still confused,it’s a conceptual offense? Not to bring up a sore subject, but when EJ was the QB one of the criticisms was that he came from dumbed down offense at FSU. That offense really only had a handful of plays that were run out of multiple formations. Isn’t that what Perkins/Erhardt offense is?

 

Well, yes, this sounds essentially like a dumbed down offense that can be spiced up depending on players and QB.

 

EJ, unfortunately, was just a serious choke job of a QB and seemed to fold in the most epic manners.

On 1/15/2018 at 10:45 AM, Hapless Bills Fan said:

 

The fundamental principle as I understand it is you can run the exact same passing routes and combinations of passing routes under any of these systems.  But in the WCO, it's all spelled out precisely for each skill player.  The same play executed on the left or the right has a different playcall.  In E-P,  combinations of routes are grouped together and described by a single word, and who does what is determined by where the players line up combined with the play call.  So it's easier to understand the similarities and to minimize the reads the QB has to memorize.

 

Right, which is the way I understood what I read, as well.

 

More QB friendly, Dabol just didn't have a QB who could actually pass the football competently until the 2nd half of the National Championship game.

[transplantbillsfan]

On 1/16/2018 at 4:28 AM, Mrbojanglezs said:

Getting rid of Dennison and hiring Daboll keeps it open ended at qb, we are no longer restricted at a type of QB to fit the west coast style

 

Yep. This system actually seems to be very adaptable to whatever QB is running the system. I guess that's the appeal.

[transplantbillsfan]

On 1/16/2018 at 7:39 AM, YoloinOhio said:

Daboll was able to adjust to Hurts out of necessity with the help of Locksley, but that’s not his system and not what he wants to do. Hurts never developed as a passer with that approach and it only works until you meet a good defense with on par athletes. 

 

Could Daboll get more out of TT than Denison did? Possibly, but they want more than what they got when they had Roman/ Lynn trying that. It’s time to rip the band aid off and move on. I highly doubt Daboll wants to work with TT, but, I’ve been wrong before and may be again.

 

I think Daboll is eager to work with whatever rookie QB we're inevitably going to draft in the 1st, but knows that for 2018, if necessary, Tyrod is a helluva lot better passer than the QB who just led Alabama up to the National Championship game.

 

 

 

PS: Tua for 2020!!!  

[transplantbillsfan]

On 1/17/2018 at 7:06 AM, Shaw66 said:

I just looked through the first page and a half of posts, and it seems most people except you are making more of this article than it is. 

 

As you say, the article is verbiage, nomenclature.    And as you say, regardless of nomenclature, most teams, including the Pats, run the same plays.   The interesting point to me was that this system tends to be more QB-centric, that is, it allows the QB to talk about plays in ways that help him think about what's happening.   Simply by using one word, he knows what all his receivers are doing on one half of the field.    It makes life easier for the QB, and it makes a life a little more complicated for the receivers, because they have to know which route to run depending on where he's lined up in the formation.   That is, it off loads some responsibility from the QB to other players.   Brady doesn't have to know which wideout is second from the outside and tell the wideout what to do.  All he has to know is whoever that wideout is, he's running a particular pattern.   And, playing for Belichick, if you're the wideout and you don't know your assignment, you're sitting.  

 

None of this says much about the offensive philosophy.   It doesn't say the offense will be run- or pass-oriented.   Remember, it's just about how the plays are communicated to the players, not about the nature of the plays.

 

It's also noteworthy that in one of the articles there was a suggestion that it was time for Daboll to leave Alabama because Saban wants to go to more of a spread-formation college-type offense.   In other words, more passing and less running.   So I wouldn't be quick to expect Daboll to be a pass-first guy.   I think McD is a run-first guy - he's a fundamental-football guy, and I don't think he called up Daboll and asked him how he'd like to run an offense that throws the ball 40 plays a game.   

 

One thing I think about this change is that it's another indication that McD isn't planning on Tyrod being the guy.  If he wanted to keep Tryrod around, he wouldn't be changing systems.   He'd want to keep Tyrod in the same system for a second season.   With a new system being installed, Tyrod has no advantage over anyone else competing for the job.  

 

I think we have to wait and see.  

 

Great overall post, but in reading both of these articles I'm seeing the likelihood of Tyrod being under center for one more year more likely rather than less likely.

 

You say yourself that this system "makes it easier for the QB."

 

I'm really not going to be surprised by anything this offseason, but I feel like those people talking Cousins or Smith as our QB in 2018 are talking very distant possibilities.

 

Smith is certainly much more possible than Cousins, who is just a pipe dream, IMO.

 

 

Regardless... draft a guy in the 1st!