Daboll's Regular Season Offense

[Mr. WEO]

1 minute ago, 2018 Our Year For Sure said:

Another thought strikes me at this particular moment in time, Dr. WEO (may I call you Dr. WEO?). Clay's background was as a running back and as such, always a good runner with ball in hand. 

 

Croom on the other hand, former wide receiver. And LT is a big dude. I think they're both more natural high-pointers of the ball than Clay has ever been. 

It's another reason O'Leary is gone- what he did best is catch it and run with it, he was never a strong traditional in-line tight end. And with these other TEs around, maybe Clay can get back to some of that H-backy RAC stuff, always been the strength of his game. Making O'Leary totally expendable

 

O'Leary was a lumbering backup, not the athlete LT is.  I don't know what Dabol's experience is featuring TEs.  "Coaching" a generational TE like Gronk isn't the same as featuring a crew of 2nd or 3rd tier guys in a totally new offense.

[Kelly the Dog]

16 minutes ago, K-9 said:

I think he’s forced to use his offense in ways that minimize exposure of a poor O line. We know what that is for the most part; ball out quickly, misdirection, screens, etc., avoiding  long down and distance situations and using a lot of max protect when we can’t. I just hope we can run the ball against the stacked boxes I think we’re gonna see a lot of. It ain’t so much what opponents know you can do, it’s what they know you can’t do that they exploit. 

 

I also suspect Daboll is a fan of mixing up the tempo a lot. 

Do you think it's possible that Nate can get the ball to the sidelines quick enough and downfield enough to stop every team from stacking 8-9 in box, playing tight on WR and taking Shady out of the game?

 

I don't until I see it on a regular basis. Possible but unlikely IMO. 

[jimmy10]

4 hours ago, eball said:

Anyway, I'm looking forward to next Sunday.

 

[BuffaloBillyG]

I'm more concerned over how to pronounce his name correctly. Is it like "Day-boll" or "Dabble" or "Da-Bull"?

 

This fanbase cannot afford another Tyrod/Tuh-rod scandal.

[GoodHands15]

5 minutes ago, No Place To Hyde said:

I'm more concerned over how to pronounce his name correctly. Is it like "Day-boll" or "Dabble" or "Da-Bull"?

 

This fanbase cannot afford another Tyrod/Tuh-rod scandal.

 

Lulz.

 

+1

[AllenWillBust]

No scheme can overcome a crap OL.  They might make a few plays, win a few games, but in the long run it will be brutal. I don't think Daboll is going to end up being some kind of savoir. This could be the year Shady hits the wall, if that happens, it will only compound the brutality of watching games this season.

[eball]

2 hours ago, Mr. WEO said:

Not many teams have better RB than McCoy.  Chris Ivory and the rest?  Yeah, probably not special.

 

As for TE's, I don't think many D's would be worried about an Offense featuring  Clay/Croom/Lee/Thomas....

 

Ivory is as under rated as they come, and Murphy looks explosive.

 

Belichick game plans to take away Clay.  Croom, Lee, and Thomas are all versatile, athletic TEs who can block and catch.  Clay, Croom, and Thomas in particular have skill sets similar to RBs and WRs.

 

I think we'll see an offense with multiple, interchangeable parts that will keep defenses guessing.  I agree with what a few others have said in this thread that Daboll was likely told not to break out the "real" offense in preseason after game 1.

 

Anyway, I'd rather be looking forward to something than bitching about impending doom (not saying you're doing that but others are).

[K-9]

2 hours ago, Kelly the Dog said:

Do you think it's possible that Nate can get the ball to the sidelines quick enough and downfield enough to stop every team from stacking 8-9 in box, playing tight on WR and taking Shady out of the game?

 

I don't until I see it on a regular basis. Possible but unlikely IMO. 

That kind of goes to my point about defenses exploiting what they know you can’t or haven’t shown you can do. So no, I don’t see out patterns, especially of the longer variety, being a staple of this offense with Peterman at the helm. He can get the ball out qucickly on a variety of other, less risky patterns. I see lots of three step drops and the ball is out. Gonna be a crowded middle with the safeties cheating up a lot, so it’s gonna be a challenge for him to exploit short middle areas.

[Kelly the Dog]

3 minutes ago, K-9 said:

That kind of goes to my point about defenses exploiting what they know you can’t or haven’t shown you can do. So no, I don’t see out patterns, especially of the longer variety, being a staple of this offense with Peterman at the helm. He can get the ball out qucickly on a variety of other, less risky patterns. I see lots of three step drops and the ball is out. Gonna be a crowded middle with the safeties cheating up a lot, so it’s gonna be a challenge for him to exploit short middle areas.

He's also risky on quick slants. I think he's the most inaccurate on those of all the passes he throws, regardless of velocity. That's why I think he's a disaster waiting to happen against first teamers in real games.  

[K-9]

1 minute ago, Kelly the Dog said:

He's also risky on quick slants. I think he's the most inaccurate on those of all the passes he throws, regardless of velocity. That's why I think he's a disaster waiting to happen against first teamers in real games.  

Which is why I won’t be surprised if we see Allen from the get go.

[Kelly the Dog]

Just now, K-9 said:

Which is why I won’t be surprised if we see Allen from the get go.

Me too. Always did. 

[eball]

4 minutes ago, K-9 said:

Which is why I won’t be surprised if we see Allen from the get go.

 

1 minute ago, Kelly the Dog said:

Me too. Always did. 

 

Me three.  Said it after week one of preseason.  I hope we're all right.

[Kelly the Dog]

9 minutes ago, eball said:

 

 

Me three.  Said it after week one of preseason.  I hope we're all right.

I always thought so but I am biased against Peterman until I see he can make the throws he needs to. The real unknown is what does Daboll really think of both Josh and Nate at this point in time.

 

I imagine, if he's smart, he will know that NP can't make those throws. 

[eball]

1 minute ago, Kelly the Dog said:

I always thought so but I am biased against Peterman until I see he can make the throws he needs to. The real unknown is what does Daboll really think of both Josh and Nate at this point in time.

 

I imagine, if he's smart, he will know that NP can't make those throws. 

 

He has to, right?  It just sounds too simple.

[Kelly the Dog]

3 minutes ago, eball said:

 

He has to, right?  It just sounds too simple.

Not sure McD does. But I'm not sure he is all that smart about offense as a whole. Love his defensive mind. You'd think it would transfer to offense too but it often doesn't.

 

Most everyone regressed last year on offense. I know it's not all his fault but he has say in coaches. And scheme. And a big but not final say on roster. 

[#34fan]

I'd be happy with Allen making it past week 3 with this O-line...

[eball]

21 minutes ago, Kelly the Dog said:

Not sure McD does. But I'm not sure he is all that smart about offense as a whole. Love his defensive mind. You'd think it would transfer to offense too but it often doesn't.

 

Most everyone regressed last year on offense. I know it's not all his fault but he has say in coaches. And scheme. And a big but not final say on roster. 

 

That’s mind blowing to me. And I really meant Daboll anyway. I think Daboll is a smart guy and I’m confident that if he really believes Nate is the right call at this time he also knows what plays not to call. 

[Kelly the Dog]

1 minute ago, eball said:

 

That’s mind blowing to me. And I really meant Daboll anyway. I think Daboll is a smart guy and I’m confident that if he really believes Nate is the right call at this time he also knows what plays not to call. 

Oh I know you meant Daboll. I was just saying that the only guy above him may not. There is a long history of good coaches not seeing that a guy cannot play in the NFL. Matt Leinart had no chance of ever being good in the NFL (because he was criminally slow in every

thing he did and he had a rag arm) and he was a #1 pick.

 

Matt Barkley has zero chance. He's exactly like Peterman. Smart, quick release, very accurate, good attitude, good football IQ, he just can't throw the ball hard enough. And yet teams keep signing him (now he's hurt and no he's only thought to be a backup). Kellen Moore. Colt McCoy (although his arm is a wee bit stronger than those guys). It's incredible to me these guys don't see as you said what is right in front of your eyes.

 

It's Trent Edwards Syndrome and he had a much stronger arm than those guys. 

 

We hope Daboll sees that. But we don't know. Even if they start Nate the first couple games we won't know for sure. There are a lot of factors involved. 

[VW82]

Has anyone followed his career closely enough to get an idea of what type of offense he likes to run? He was OC for some pretty brutal offenses in Cleveland and Miami but he's also moved around some since. I have no feel for what to expect from him which is kind of exciting but also a little scary. 

[eball]

2 minutes ago, Kelly the Dog said:

Oh I know you meant Daboll. I was just saying that the only guy above him may not. There is a long history of good coaches not seeing that a guy cannot play in the NFL. Matt Leinart had no chance of ever being good in the NFL (because he was criminally slow in every

thing he did and he had a rag arm) and he was a #1 pick.

 

Matt Barkley has zero chance. He's exactly like Peterman. Smart, quick release, very accurate, good attitude, good football IQ, he just can't throw the ball hard enough. And yet teams keep signing him (now he's hurt and no he's only thought to be a backup). Kellen Moore. Colt McCoy (although his arm is a wee bit stronger than those guys). It's incredible to me these guys don't see as you said what is right in front of your eyes.

 

It's Trent Edwards Syndrome and he had a much stronger arm than those guys. 

 

We hope Daboll sees that. But we don't know. Even if they start Nate the first couple games we won't know for sure. There are a lot of factors involved. 

 

I guess in those situations, though, teams were reaching for “the guy” whereas here they drafted Allen so clearly there is no incentive to make Peterman out to be better than he is. 

 

At least that’s what I’m hoping.