Cover1 - Brian Daboll’s offense

[MtlBillsFan]

https://www.cover1.net/inside-the-playbook-the-erhardt-perkins-play-structure-and-terminology/

[K-9]

GREAT stuff here. Especially the mention of the importance of tempo. NE*** kills teams with tempo changes once they get you in unfavorable sub packages. 

[US Egg]

"Daboll to incorporate some college concepts into his playbook,  those concepts are seeping into NFL playbooks".

 

Hope he succeeds, he's certainly not the 1st. OC out of college to do so.

 

At Alabama he didn't face the Vikings "D".

[Soda Popinski]

It's all about your mismatches.  Finding that weak spot and pressing on it hard.  Maximizing your players abilities and minimizing their weaknesses. 

 

Daboll understands this and I think our offense will bear that out. 

[MtlBillsFan]

The key is flexibility. You need a playbook to be like water. Adjust to everything and everyone.

[YoloinOhio]

21 minutes ago, Ifartalot said:

"Daboll to incorporate some college concepts into his playbook,  those concepts are seeping into NFL playbooks".

 

Hope he succeeds, he's certainly not the 1st. OC out of college to do so.

 

At Alabama he didn't face the Vikings "D".

The Vikings D got throttled by the Eagles offense which incorporated a backup QB and a good deal of college concepts. 

[US Egg]

9 minutes ago, YoloinOhio said:

The Vikings D got throttled by the Eagles offense which incorporated a backup QB and a good deal of college concepts. 

The 2018 Bills with any of their QB's are not on par with the 2017 Eagles with Foles under center....obviously.

 

In the late afternoon of Sept. 23rd I'll gladly discuss this further if you wish

[billsfan1959]

4 minutes ago, Ifartalot said:

The 2018 Bills with any of their QB's are not on par with the 2017 Eagles with Foles under center....obviously.

 

In the late afternoon of Sept. 23rd I'll gladly discuss this further if you wish

That wasn't his point

[US Egg]

His point was college play calling is becoming more present in the NFL offensive schemes and a factor why the Eagles beat the Vikings.

 

Frank Reich was the Eagles OC last year, and yeah he was a factor why they won it all. Daboll is hardly a pioneer in offensive thinking.

 

My point is great schemes without talent don't win football games. The Eagles 2017 talent is far superior to this years Bills, by far. 

[Shaw66]

Waiting for his further analysis.  EP is just a naming system.  It does afford the opportunity to run the offense faster, but that alone doesn't make an offense successful.  

 

What matters is scheming against the defense and execution.  That's where Belichick's offense excels.    I'm interested in how Daboll will do in those categories. 

8 minutes ago, Ifartalot said:

Daboll is hardly a pioneer in offensive thinking.

 

This is the important point, not talent on the roster.   Can he design an effective offense and can be adjust it week to week to take advantage of the defense he's facing?   

[Charlottebillsfan2]

It appears that with Daboll here Allen has a legit shot at earning the starting the job sooner then later.  

[YoloinOhio]

1 hour ago, Ifartalot said:

The 2018 Bills with any of their QB's are not on par with the 2017 Eagles with Foles under center....obviously.

 

In the late afternoon of Sept. 23rd I'll gladly discuss this further if you wish

I was referring to the concepts, as you were, in relation to the Vikings D. But Foles wasn’t considered good at all when he took over for Wentz. He ended up playing well. The Bills QBs are an unknown at this point.

Edited May 15, 2018 by YoloinOhio

[billsfan1959]

29 minutes ago, Ifartalot said:

His point was college play calling is becoming more present in the NFL offensive schemes and a factor why the Eagles beat the Vikings.

 

Frank Reich was the Eagles OC last year, and yeah he was a factor why they won it all. Daboll is hardly a pioneer in offensive thinking.

 

My point is great schemes without talent don't win football games. The Eagles 2017 talent is far superior to this years Bills, by far. 

His point was your first statement. It just felt like you were calling him out on something he didn't say - which is that the talent of the Bills was equal to that of the Vikings. But, I am sure Yolo can speak for himself.

[nuklz2594]

with allen having a cannon for an arm...will this offense be catered to him in the future?  will it be aj's style?  

[YoloinOhio]

39 minutes ago, Ifartalot said:

His point was college play calling is becoming more present in the NFL offensive schemes and a factor why the Eagles beat the Vikings.

 

Frank Reich was the Eagles OC last year, and yeah he was a factor why they won it all. Daboll is hardly a pioneer in offensive thinking.

 

My point is great schemes without talent don't win football games. The Eagles 2017 talent is far superior to this years Bills, by far. 

It was a factor in why they beat the Vikings. That’s all I said. The concepts were not so much Reich, but rather Pederson. Reich is one of the most conservative, boring play callers I’ve ever seen when he got the chance to do so in SD and then got fired. He’s a much better QB coach than OC, and may be a better HC than OC.

Edited May 15, 2018 by YoloinOhio

[US Egg]

25 minutes ago, billsfan1959 said:

It just felt like you were calling him out on something he didn't say - which is that the talent of the Bills was equal to that of the Vikings.

No, it was him citing the Eagles college influenced offense helped beat the Vikings and I countered with we'll see how Daboll's attempt at using his college experience as the Bills OC compares against the Vikings in their 3rd game this year. My implication is  it will be a much different result, solely because of Eagles superior talent.   

 

 

 

Edited May 15, 2018 by Ifartalot

[Shaw66]

21 minutes ago, nuklz2594 said:

with allen having a cannon for an arm...will this offense be catered to him in the future?  will it be aj's style?  

No, the offense won't be designed to suit what Allen does best.   It will be designed to defeat NFL defenses, and whether Allen makes it or not will depend on his ability to execute the offense as designed.  

 

The offensive will be designed to take advantage of deep throws when the defense is deployed in a way that make deep throws possible.   Same as always.   

[Drunken Pygmy Goat]

2 hours ago, Soda Popinski said:

It's all about your mismatches.  Finding that weak spot and pressing on it hard.  Maximizing your players abilities and minimizing their weaknesses. 

 

Daboll understands this and I think our offense will bear that out. 

 

Mismatches...That's why the ability to more efficiently run a no huddle/uptempo offense is so important in this offense. It allows you to take advantage of certain personell groupings that the defense trots out at times. Having simpler verbiage with play calls is the key. One or two word play calls make it possible. When the Bills went uptempo last year, it wasn't nearly as effective, because the play clock wasn't being properly utilized, partially due to the elongated play calls. Rather than snapping the ball with 20+ seconds on the play clock, it was usually within 10 seconds of expiring, which mitigates the main purposes of uptempo (taking advantage of defensive personell, and wearing them out).

 

I brought this up in a thread I started a few days ago, as well as the flexibility EP creates (not just on the field, but in roster decisions as well). IMO, EP should help the offense progress faster than it otherwise might, with either AJ or Allen at QB. It may take some time be a well oiled machine, but maybe not as long as we think.

Edited May 15, 2018 by Drunken Pygmy Goat

[billsfan1959]

3 minutes ago, Ifartalot said:

No, it was him citing the Eagles college influenced offense helped beat the Vikings and I countered with we'll see how Daboll's attempt at using his college experience as the Bills OC compares against the Vikings in their 3rd game this year. My implication is  it will be a much different result, solely because of Eagles superior talent.   

 

 

 

Gotcha. We certainly have a lot of unknowns going into the season and it should be interesting.

[Shaw66]

1 minute ago, Drunken Pygmy Goat said:

 

 

I brought this up in a thread I started a few days ago, as well as the flexibility EP creates (not just on the field, but in roster decisions as well). IMO, this offense should help the offense progress faster than it otherwise might, with either AJ or Allen at QB. It may take some time be a well oiled machine, but maybe not as long as we think.

What does EP have to do with roster decisions?   My understanding is that all NFL teams run more or less the same plays, regardless of nomenclature.   They run the same routes.   Receivers have same opportunity to get open or not.   What does EP have to do with it?

 

I've said this before:  If EP were so obviously better, why doesn't every team use it?   Until someone has explained it better, I don't see what the big deal is.   

[hondo in seattle]

51 minutes ago, Shaw66 said:

What does EP have to do with roster decisions?   My understanding is that all NFL teams run more or less the same plays, regardless of nomenclature.   They run the same routes.   Receivers have same opportunity to get open or not.   What does EP have to do with it?

 

I've said this before:  If EP were so obviously better, why doesn't every team use it?   Until someone has explained it better, I don't see what the big deal is.   

 

Because it's not obviously better.   This is from a Grantland article:

 

To an almost shocking extent, NFL offenses are homogeneous....    “Everyone’s running the same plays, and it’s a matter of some running one concept more than another team is.  It all boils down to the same thing.”  [Mike McCoy]...   There are essentially three main offensive systems in the NFL: West Coast, Coryell, and Erhardt-Perkins. Given that every NFL team runs basically the same plays, each of these NFL offensive families is differentiated mostly by how those plays are communicated.

 

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

 

I really like Cover1's stuff.  It's always informative.  But in this article he looks at Charlie Weis's playbook to get an insight into what Daboll will do.  In fact, we don't know what offense Daboll will run.  We can only speculate.  It might be EP.   It might be some hybrid of his own design.  

 

In the end the system doesn't matter as much as the players, team execution, preparation (film study, etc) and play-calling.  

Edited May 15, 2018 by hondo in seattle

[Drunken Pygmy Goat]

57 minutes ago, Shaw66 said:

What does EP have to do with roster decisions?   My understanding is that all NFL teams run more or less the same plays, regardless of nomenclature.   They run the same routes.   Receivers have same opportunity to get open or not.   What does EP have to do with it?

 

I've said this before:  If EP were so obviously better, why doesn't every team use it?   Until someone has explained it better, I don't see what the big deal is.   

 

I don't think its necessarily "better" than other offenses, but there are certain advantages to it that factor in. Its "simple" in comparison to other styles, making the learning curve, or transition to the pros easier. Given the current state of the roster (youth/inexperience at QB, lack of WRs), it probably makes more sense to run an EP style of offense instead of more complicated West Coast or Air Coryell offenses. 

 

When it comes to roster decisions, my understanding is that players are a bit more interchangeable in EP, WRs specifically. In Air Coryell, it's very route tree dependent in order to maximize its effectiveness, but not many WRs excel in running every route in the tree perfectly, therefore finding the perfect WRs for the scheme is more difficult, to some extent. And after that offense is completely built, an injury to one or two of those top WRs has a major impact on your playbook. Obviously the same can be said for all offenses, but I assume that the impact of a WR injury or two wouldn't cripple the effectiveness of an EP offense quite as much as would an offense that truly depends so much on total utiliazation of the route tree. EP is very much "take what the defense gives you", while AC (with a properly built roster) is more "we're going to take what we want, try to stop us". 

 

With a WC offense, you probably want more shifty, elusive WRs, as opposed to taller, "slower" guys.  

 

All teams do run the "same plays", but not totally. Certain teams will run certain plays more than other teams, based on talent and scheme. An EP offense that runs more "ghost/tosser" concepts probably isn't running as many "689"s as AC offenses will. One of the advantages you get with EP is that you can run generally the same plays (concepts/reads) out of multiple formations. Its a way of making things complicated for defenses, without getting too complicated yourself as an offense. Its just window dressing, really, that keeps defenses on their toes, and doing more thinking than reacting.

 

With all that said, this doesn't mean you can't make things work without the perfect personell at WR. I just think that, in order to fully maximize the potential of those schemes, you look for those types of players. Maybe that forces teams to reach just a bit in the draft at times???

 

Of course, there are so many other variables that come into play in football, and "success" isn't only dependent on scheme. 

 

I don't want it to sound like I think that's something more than it is, or that I'm thinking into it too much, just trying to explain myself with little time to do so.

 

When I read posts here, I appreciate the open minded, football knowledge mixed with logic and common sense posts, and that's what you provide. I try to do the same, and hope that I don't come off as condescending. Rick Dennison has forgotten more football knowledge than I'll ever learn... I just try to be a solid contributor here. If I'm wrong or off, it wouldn't be the first time...

Edited May 15, 2018 by Drunken Pygmy Goat

[H2o]

The OL chemistry with having at least two, if not possibly 4, new starters will be key to how things go on offense. If AJ, Josh, or Nate can't get 3 seconds back there and if they aren't opening holes up for Shady then it is going to be tough to watch this year. The defense will keep us in most games, but you have to execute, sustain drives, and put points on the board. 

[hondo in seattle]

21 minutes ago, H2o said:

The OL chemistry with having at least two, if not possibly 4, new starters will be key to how things go on offense. If AJ, Josh, or Nate can't get 3 seconds back there and if they aren't opening holes up for Shady then it is going to be tough to watch this year. The defense will keep us in most games, but you have to execute, sustain drives, and put points on the board. 

 

The OL concerns me almost as much as the QB position.  I'm not convinced the OL will be bad but there are not a lot of compelling reasons to believe it will be good.  

 

But again, it'll be interesting to see what Daboll can do.  Chan - for all his flaws - was able to manufacture offensive production with a weak OL and a comparatively talent-poor roster in general.  

[Buffalo716]

EP is just the system used for terminology...realistically it doesn’t have to do with pushing the pace or doing this or that...

 

that is all on the weekly game plan...

 

I hope Daboll has improved a lot since his last stints because we need some innovation and play to our strengths 

2 hours ago, Shaw66 said:

What does EP have to do with roster decisions?   My understanding is that all NFL teams run more or less the same plays, regardless of nomenclature.   They run the same routes.   Receivers have same opportunity to get open or not.   What does EP have to do with it?

 

I've said this before:  If EP were so obviously better, why doesn't every team use it?   Until someone has explained it better, I don't see what the big deal is.   

 

You are correct and we had this talk before ...

 

football is 100 years old everybody runs the same stuff generally.

 

its all about terminology and making it easier on players

[Drunken Pygmy Goat]

3 hours ago, hondo in seattle said:

 

The OL concerns me almost as much as the QB position.  I'm not convinced the OL will be bad but there are not a lot of compelling reasons to believe it will be good.  

 

But again, it'll be interesting to see what Daboll can do.  Chan - for all his flaws - was able to manufacture offensive production with a weak OL and a comparatively talent-poor roster in general.  

 

We lost a couple of good linemen, so its easy to assume they won't be as good as a unit. I guess we'll have to wait and see how their replacements do before coming to conclusions there, but I think what will be more of an issue early on will be the lack of chemistry between a lineman and the man next to him. Offensive lines always take a few games to gel, but Richie and Wood played many games next to each other. Dawkins is still young, but he'll have someone new next to him as well. There's been a few moving parts on the line from 2016 to 2017, and they did alright, so maybe that continues and improves over time, but losing those two guys will probably be evident for a while.