Cole Beasley Podcast on Ravens game, Bills playbook

[Hapless Bills Fan]

Some of these have been shared before, didn't see this one.

They're kind of long and rambling, but I thought this one had some good personal feelings about the Ravens game and some interesting stuff about the Bills playcalling and playbook, so I tried to transcribe parts of it accurately.  Here goes:

 

17 Weeks - Uninterrupted hosted by Nate Burleson, with Le'veon Bell, Cole Beasley, and Jalen Ramsey.  Episode 14.

 

2:12 Cole Beasley describes how he felt after the Ravens game.  Said that "this one really hurt me more than any of them".  He doesn't know what it was, but he felt so...like wanted to throw up afterwards.  Maybe because the Ravens have been rolling so he really wanted to beat those guys.  The Defense really played their butts off, they really played a hell of a game, and we didn't do enough offensively to win this game.  They really threw a lot of different stuff at us, and we didn't respond very well, and that's just something that we're going to have to live with and go and look at and try to get better from. I already know (stops himself) I mean, I've been talking to Josh to find some answers, nobody's panicking, but ...it's frustrating when you go into a game and you don't put a showing that you want to put forward.  I was really upset and thought I could have done more to help us win [um Beasley...there was at least one ball could you maybe have caught?]

3:16 on the PI It was 4th down...we needed a play, and luckily he clipped my foot a little bit and I was going down, so I could make it a little bit more dramatic than what it was to try to get a call, man...it really wasn't that much contact, I was running and he clipped my foot a little bit and i was going down anyway so I sold it a little more than what it was, and I don't even know if I would have gotten it anyway.  I don't know...it was just a weird feeling, I've never felt like that after a game..it was like it was there for us.  It just felt like we let our team down.  That game hurt me a little bit.

[Micah Hyde, in an interview, was talking about how WR draw a DB in to get a PI penalty and do some acting, and how sometimes he would say something, "c'mon man".  Said if he'd been the DB on Beasley's DPI in that game he would have said something to him, but it doesn't matter because the flag's the flag]

[I'm wondering how Beasley will feel after Pittsburgh, where Bills won, but he had a terrible outing 1 catch on 6 targets.  One was an INT he got his hands on.  One was a bad throw.  At least one, it sure looked as though he should have caught]

20:00 ish they're talking about Tre' Day reading the Ravens play sheet.  Bell (I think) said he wouldn't have given it back, the refs would have had to fight him for it, anything that could help your team.  Ramsey said you can't install stuff or coach too much on game day, there wasn't anything too much helpful on there, Tre' was just being funny.  Cole said he didnt really know where the papers were coming from and didn't even know Tre picked them up until the next day.  Says Tre is a funny dude and he wants to get him in.  He was just being silly.  He could probably look at that paper and read for a long time and not know what any of it means, that's how some offenses are.  I don't know how their offense is, how they call plays, but I don't think there's anything he could have got from it that quick of a time. 

21:18 (the Bills) offense is WAY more difficult than the one in Dallas.  There's so much more bulk, there's so many more formations, and then there's variations of the formations.  The way we call plays...and then in the no-huddle, a lot of it is memorization and one word names for plays and we change the word every week, so we'll have the same name for a play, but it will be a different play.  So it's easy to get mixed up and be like "wait, what is it this week?"  So we're constantly studying every week to memorize our one word.  It's definitely a lot more time you have to spend on knowing what the plays are called, but at the same time it makes it easier to not have as much verbiage, the one word tells the line, the QB, and the receivers what to do.  [my question: if they call the same play multiple times in a game, does that cue in the defense then?  or do they change the word?]

 

I thought that last was particularly interesting in view of Foster's struggles to see the field and in view of Duke Williams....if a mature vet like Cole Beasley whom Allen describes as "a QB who can do incredible things as a WR"  with "a very high football IQ" finds it a challenge, does it really need to be that complex?  I dunno...obviously if you're memorizing words for plays every week, that's time you're not spending watching film, or visualizing your role in those plays, or catching extra balls, or even sleeping.

[StHustle]

1 hour ago, Hapless Bills Fan said:

I thought that last was particularly interesting in view of Foster's struggles to see the field and in view of Duke Williams....if a mature vet like Cole Beasley whom Allen describes as "a QB who can do incredible things as a WR"  with "a very high football IQ" finds it a challenge, does it really need to be that complex?  I dunno...obviously if you're memorizing words for plays every week, that's time you're not spending watching film, or visualizing your role in those plays, or catching extra balls, or even sleeping

 

Interesting point. Right now we have a very sub par offense that outputs bottom 10 productivity. Meanwhile, although the Cowboys suck, they are #1 in productivity with a much simpler offense. Not saying Doughball needs to simplify the actual offense but if the verbiage is a major challenge and costing us production then that needs to change,,,and fast!

[Dr.Sack]

The K-Gun had 25 plays. It’s about pace, and execution. Look at the Ravens they have 30 plays max.

[Warcodered]

22 minutes ago, StHustle said:

 

Interesting point. Right now we have a very sub par offense that outputs bottom 10 productivity. Meanwhile, although the Cowboys suck, they are #1 in productivity with a much simpler offense. Not saying Doughball needs to simplify the actual offense but if the verbiage is a major challenge and costing us production then that needs to change,,,and fast!

It does seem a little crazy to have a very complicated offense when all but 2 of your starters are new.

[Hapless Bills Fan]

6 hours ago, StHustle said:

Interesting point. Right now we have a very sub par offense that outputs bottom 10 productivity. Meanwhile, although the Cowboys suck, they are #1 in productivity with a much simpler offense. Not saying Doughball needs to simplify the actual offense but if the verbiage is a major challenge and costing us production then that needs to change,,,and fast!

 

It seems to be a recurrent theme that when a new guy comes in and a unit starts performing better, the players often say "Coach X simplified it"

 

The NFL comes down to fractions of a second and feet.  If a throw is a fraction of a second late.  If a receiver thinks he should run one route variation and the QB expects another.  People used to complain about Fitzy being inaccurate and missing receivers by "feet" but at times the receiver would acknowledge he ran the wrong route.

 

So then you bring in Daboll's tendency to have different people executing a route from play to play, and Allen has to build rappore and timing and get reps with each of them so they're used to handling what he throws -  meanwhile the whole offense needs to memorize different plays and understand their role in different variations.  It just seems pretty cray cray for a new QB. 

 

Even Gailey started with a simpler version of his playbook and built it up over his 3 years. 

 

As far as the Cowboys, though, they have Zeke Elliot at RB and Amari Cooper.  So they do have better tools.

 

 

[thebandit27]

Remember that John Brown also called this offense the most complicated he's seen BY FAR. It's not lip service.

 

[DJB]

So it's complicated  and it's not executing well enough .  

 

Wonderful .  

 

More evidence Daboll  needs to go

[BigBuff423]

I could be wrong (probably am) but IMHO a complex Offensive system has one advantage: playoffs. If you use a relatively simple Offense by the time you've put a year on tape, a good DC and good players will be able to react appropriately and quickly to the Offense. When an Offense is that complex, yes it can take time to learn it and execute it as expected but it also means if you're good enough to get to the playoffs, it will be even more difficult for the opposing Defense to predict what happens next. 

 

This also signals the significant importance of consistency in an Offensive scheme. Imagine a 3rd year for Allen with the same Offense and knowing it cold, and being able to then "coach" or train his receivers and Offensive Line in its use and execution. It means he can anticipate on a secondary and tertiary level that marks the difference between good and elite. I also think the Offensive Line as a whole is young enough to re-sign most or all of them to keep them together. That alone would make a huge difference for another year as a unit in the same Offense. Add in the same receivers, and another Vet WR and Rookie RB, and now - you've got the beginnings of something potentially special. 

[Mr. WEO]

Did Beasley throw up after the Steelers game?

[GunnerBill]

There is no right answer to how complicated or otherwise an offense is. The person who said the Ravens have 30 plays.... I'd be massively surprised if that is true. Greg Roman is known for having a huge playbook. His run game has incredible variety. New England have a massive and complicated playbook too and they have consistently until this year been a top offense. What is true is that if a team is finding it difficult to execute effectively sometimes it is necessary to simplify to get that going.

[MJS]

On the complexity thing, I don't mind that much. In the long term it's going to help everybody develop. I like the one word thing because then you have more time to scan the field and read the defense pre snap, instead of spending 10 seconds just spouting out a ridiculously long play call.

 

As for the defense cueing on the word, I assume they only use that word in the huddle. They probably have a different system for checks at the line and audibles to ensure the defense doesn't understand.

[billsfan1959]

41 minutes ago, DJB said:

So it's complicated  and it's not executing well enough .  

 

Wonderful .  

 

More evidence Daboll  needs to go

 

9 new starters on offense. It takes time and continuity. They have gotten better throughout the year. I have a feeling it will really pay off as they move forward into next year - particularly for Allen.

[TigerJ]

The part about Daboll changing the labeling of offensive plays weekly is fascinating.  I wonder if that is evidence of Daboll trying to mess up in advance what he expects to be a Patriot attempt at spying.  Since he's from the Belichick coaching tree, he certainly knows what the old weasel is capable of doing to try and get an edge.

[Bring it]

The main thing about a complex offensive scheme is can or will the entire offense learn it? Vets like Beasley and Brown need to know it. Especially to make it easier for young guys like Allen who has a host of other things to handle on any given play! Audibles, protections, down and distance situation..........etc! I think it speaks to how intelligent our Qb is considering the complexity of the offense! He’s play is improving steadily and the future looks bright!!

[PaattMaann]

12 minutes ago, TigerJ said:

The part about Daboll changing the labeling of offensive plays weekly is fascinating.  I wonder if that is evidence of Daboll trying to mess up in advance what he expects to be a Patriot attempt at spying.  Since he's from the Belichick coaching tree, he certainly knows what the old weasel is capable of doing to try and get an edge.

 

I think its just more to do with calling plays from a no-huddle perspective. If the play name is "Lion" you cant just keep calling it "Lion" all season, you have to change it weekly otherwise ANY defense will know what is coming. I dont think it has anything to do with the Patriots. 

[Max Fischer]

2 hours ago, DJB said:

So it's complicated  and it's not executing well enough .  

 

Wonderful .  

 

More evidence Daboll  needs to go

 

Can't tell if you're serious . . . ?

 

 

[DJB]

5 hours ago, billsfan1959 said:

 

9 new starters on offense. It takes time and continuity. They have gotten better throughout the year. I have a feeling it will really pay off as they move forward into next year - particularly for Allen.

 

We could have Tony Gonzalez and Jerry Rice  it doesn't change the play calling which has been subpar 

3 hours ago, Max Fischer said:

 

Can't tell if you're serious . . . ?

 

 

 

Serious. Daboll is a bad play caller. Too predictable and doesn't cater the offence to exploit the D well enough. 

 

The 3 plays in the red zone last week against Pittsburgh with Gore was horrendous 

[Hapless Bills Fan]

5 hours ago, GunnerBill said:

There is no right answer to how complicated or otherwise an offense is. The person who said the Ravens have 30 plays.... I'd be massively surprised if that is true. Greg Roman is known for having a huge playbook. His run game has incredible variety. New England have a massive and complicated playbook too and they have consistently until this year been a top offense. What is true is that if a team is finding it difficult to execute effectively sometimes it is necessary to simplify to get that going.

 

I too, would be surprised if it was true that the Ravens have 30 plays.  But I would not be surprised if Harbaugh had directed Roman to start with a core of plays and players, then add wrinkles gradually through the season.  It was claimed that one reason Roman was fired in B'lo was because he had a streamlined offense they were executing well in 2015, it burgeoned to the point the offense was struggling in 2016, and he wouldn't accept input or direction to simplify it. 

 

I assume he was hired by Harbaugh with a clear understanding of who's the Boss.

[Hapless Bills Fan]

5 hours ago, MJS said:

On the complexity thing, I don't mind that much. In the long term it's going to help everybody develop. I like the one word thing because then you have more time to scan the field and read the defense pre snap, instead of spending 10 seconds just spouting out a ridiculously long play call.

 

As for the defense cueing on the word, I assume they only use that word in the huddle. They probably have a different system for checks at the line and audibles to ensure the defense doesn't understand.

 

The single word IS their system for playcalling and for audibles at the line, when they are going WITHOUT the huddle.  It can be heard, sometimes just on TV.  For example, Erik Turner diagrammed a play vs Miami using a "spot concept", where you can hear Allen audibling  to it: "Two plays later, out of the no-huddle, Allen again notices the vanilla coverage. He gets to the line of scrimmage and audibles to the Spot concept, and this time fans can hear him yelling out “Dalmation,” which is a good title to use for the play, seeing as how it is a Spot concept."

[BuffaloHokie13]

5 hours ago, GunnerBill said:

There is no right answer to how complicated or otherwise an offense is. The person who said the Ravens have 30 plays.... I'd be massively surprised if that is true. Greg Roman is known for having a huge playbook. His run game has incredible variety. New England have a massive and complicated playbook too and they have consistently until this year been a top offense. What is true is that if a team is finding it difficult to execute effectively sometimes it is necessary to simplify to get that going.

Roman probably does have right around 30 plays. 'Problem' is you can run all 30 out of around 25 formations.