Sgt Schultz

Our offensive play design and then the play selection is awful.

I was watching how the Saints defense worked on each play.  It didn't matter how many receivers we had in the pattern, the patterns were designed as if there was a moat filled with alligators and piranhas about 12 yards from the LOS.  That allowed the entire Saints defense to pack in within 10-15 yards of the LOS, which resulted in it looking like they had 15 guys out there.  It also makes it much hard for anybody to get open.

I've seen offenses that never threw deep, either because of fear of turnovers or the QB's arm was basically shot and he couldn't.  But I've not seen one that as consistently showed that it would not throw deep.  Even if the offense never actually does it, one receiver breaking on a fly route or deep post is going to take a defender with him and force the safeties to drop back beyond the moat we believe exists.  Hell, Ginn may have had a catch rate of 50% on balls that hit him in the hands, but let him break deep and somebody was going with him.

Note to coaches: there is no moat there.  It is your imagination.

As for the actually play calling, it has been predictable and unimaginative. I don't know what else to say about it. 

The receivers are not free of guilt, either.  The third down play prior to our third FG had Young roll out to the right to avoid pressure.  It looked by design, but maybe not.  Only one receiver was running to the right, everybody else fully content to continue to the left toward the far sideline.  They have to have enough awareness to know that if the QB starts rolling or scrambling to the right, they have to break off their routes and head to the right, as well.  It is not unusual for coverages to start to break down in those situations, and somebody might even break right and deep......if they can get over that moat.

I can't assess Young right now because the playcalling and design is so limited it is compressing everybody into a small area.  The only way that can ever work is with the traditional west coast quick hitters that allow receivers to get the ball in stride and run like crazy.  But we aren't calling those, either.

Our success or failure was going to depend a lot on how our WR group performed.  It is not exactly Rice and John Taylor.  Not only have they not exactly shined, they are not even being put in a position to show anything.  It is conservative, but at the same time stingy about running the ball. 

5 minutes ago, jb2288 said:

What the hell is this. What “experts” claimed that

I was about to ask what experts.  I don't think anybody has demonstrated enough accuracy in their assessments of what college QBs will and will not work out at the NFL level to be qualified as an expert. 

1 hour ago, joemac said:

Hasn't this always been the thing about Baker Mayfield?  He will shine for a few games, and look like a world beater, then come back down to Earth and take his place as one of the worst QBs in the league?  Seems to have been his M.O. most years of his career.

Pretty much.  That's the problem with QBs who make bad decisions: they can clean it up for a few games while they are thinking about it, but at some point they revert to making bad decisions.  Darnold looked pretty decent for us his first few games, too, but then he fell back into the same trap.

People are jumping to all sorts of conclusions based on almost two weekends of games.  History tells us not to get too attached to things until October comes into focus.  Every year there is a lot of pyrite in September.

We've been flailing around trying to assemble a WR corps for what, a decade?  Sometimes it looks like we get close, then it turns out to be an illusion.  WR being a position of need at some level is a constant for this team.

3 minutes ago, tiger7_88 said:

Indeed. Atlanta’s Big Benz Anus can open when needed.

Ah, yes.  Welcome to Sphincter Stadium.

On 9/13/2023 at 8:33 AM, Jon Snow said:

I know, reason and logic have been replaced by knee jerk emotions.  I know better, but I still hope there's intelligence out there somewhere....right?

Probably not.

I am now convinced that B of A must be built on some sort of ancient burial ground.  Even though this actually happened in Atlanta (which may also be built on some ancient burial ground), we just seem to have a curse that transcends owners, coaches, GM's, and players. Sometimes, the evil spirits let their guards down or toy with us and we are allowed to get a taste of glory, but then they arise and slap us down.

Just now, TLGPanthersFan said:

2017 was the last. 

I was just about to say that.  I think it was a typo, because the number of consecutive losing seasons is 6.

17 hours ago, Mr. Scot said:

Other Jets options...

 

This may have been discussed somewhere and I am too lazy to look, but I keep seeing Brady's name mentioned.  Brady, as in minority owner of the Las Vegas Raiders, Brady.  I don't think that is even a possibility unless he divests his interest in the Raiders or the league grants him some sort of exemption, which is a slippery slope I doubt they want to go down.

Domes that weren't built for the sliding trays realistically would have to be grandfathered in.  Structurally, removing essentially one entire side of support is not something that would be easy, and the cost would probably make replacing the whole building a better deal.  Most efforts at trying to get grass to grow and be a viable surface in fixed-roof domes have not yielded great results.

There is a difference between installing grass and keeping it alive for a few weeks vs. keeping it in good shape for an entire football season.

We are really talking about Minnesota, Detroit, Los Angeles (doh), and New Orleans that are fixed-roof domes.  If it got to the point that 27 teams were playing on grass surfaces and only 5 on turf, that would be a huge improvement.

SoFi's roof is unique and the sides of the stadium are open, so grass may be an option there without anything more than swapping out the field.  I think the only reason they didn't go with grass was because of the amount of use they expect the facility to get. If that became grass, then you are only talking about3 teams with indoor, fixed roof facilities and presumably artificial turf.

Nashville is talking about building a dome for the Titans, so now would be a good time to address the playing surface.  Their current plan is "state of the art" artificial turf.

5 minutes ago, Chaos said:

If it's confirmed an Achilles tear, does A Rod call it a career?

Geez, he should.  That is a rough injury to get over for anybody, not to mention a professional athlete.  Then add his age to the mix, and it is beyond an uphill battle, it is a rock climb up a cliff.

I've never gotten the impression Rodgers was one of those guys who could not give it up (ala Brady, Favre), but just one that was not quite ready to do so.  He has been a great QB.  Unfortunately he was usually surrounded by a marginal cast.

13 minutes ago, CRA said:

Yeah, this is just team Sanders manufacturing motivation out of nothing.  Matt Rhule was literally fanboying out all week about Sanders. 

I think the real mental gymnastics was over an old quote by Rhule.  About how a lot of coaches were looking forward to the portal window and he was just looking forward to coaching his guys.  Which is a nothing comment for a coach at a new school doing his best to keep whatever he has.  Unless you are an uber sensitive Deion. 

As much as I like to pile on The Process, I was scratching my head at the uproar. It sounded like one of those that if you tilt your head at a 35-degree angle and turn to the left at exactly the same angle while you read or listen to the quote, you can hear the disrespect.  Of course, you'll also hear aliens, CIA radio signals, and the ghosts of Titanic.

2 hours ago, Mr. Scot said:

I'll just try this in here because it's as good a place as any...

Week 1 always tends to have its fair share of illusions. Week 2 often exposes those for what they are.

Are the Cowboys really that good?

Are the Giants really that bad?

Is something wrong with the Steelers?

What about the Chiefs?

Are the Lions for real?

Are the Rams back to being winners?

Have the Bears improved at all?

As the soap opera narrator used to say, these and many more questions will be answered next week.

I'll definitely be watching closely to see where the corrections happen.

My expert insight:

No, no, maybe, they'll be fine, probably, no, yes but they aren't the Eagles or Chiefs.

Given my track record, history will probably say:

Yes, yes, no, they are done, nope (same old Lions), yes (Owl pending), not one bit.

25 minutes ago, Wundrbread33 said:

People need to define what “total rebuild” means to them. 
 

I bet that means a different thing to everyone. Is it a certain percentage of roster turnover? If so, that varies from person to person. 
 

Is it turnover at important positions?

 

Is it trading all the star players?

 

Is it old players retiring?

 

“Rebuild” to me is when a cluster of top vets/leaders retire/are traded/are released, and you have to develop the next leaders. 
 

So “rebuild” to me happened when Cam/Luke/Olsen/Kalil/Davis/CJ/Stewart, etc. were not on the roster anymore. 
 

Sometimes rebuilds don’t work,  and we will know this for sure if Bryce isn’t the answer within two years. Your rebuild has to coincide with establishing your starting quarterback, and the timeline of other key players needs to align with that QB. 

Agreeing on the terms is always a source of contention.

I don't think we are n a "total rebuild."  Total meaning the overall roster.

I think we are in a near-total rebuild on offense.  The OL is the exception.  But basically all the skill positions have or are turning over. 

But teams don't rebuild for the sake of rebuilding.  If they have young talent on the roster that fits what the brain trust wants to do, they take advantage of that.  I think that is what happened on defense. 

But on offense, our proven talent in the skill positions from 12 months ago is not here. 

32 minutes ago, Ricky Spanish said:

My thoughts exactly. First pick was more a great play by the safety than a bad read by Bryce.

Second one though was a bad throw/decision and like he didn't even see him.

Bryce went through full field reads the entire game, which is something not many rookies can do their first game. If receivers could actually get open I have faith he'll find them eventually. 

I noticed the lack of separation the receivers were getting most of the game.  They had a few plays in the first half that I thought the patterns were run well and receivers got open, but largely anything in the gaps they had would have been forced.  Maybe prime Marino, Kelly, or Favre would have blasted the ball in there, but they would have come with the associated picks.

Coming in I thought (as did many) that our receiver group was the most questionable/suspect unit on offense.  I did not see anything yesterday that refuted that judgement.  I saw a few flashes otherwise, but not nearly enough.

Young will learn and adapt, but we clearly need to get him some help.  Get him may involve getting a true field-stretching WR or scheming things so the TE is open, if nothing else.  Our TE's we open largely after the Falcons switched to a prevent, which coincidentally creates some of the same gaps that a field-stretching WR would.

I didn't see much to get excited about anywhere on offense yesterday, but I also didn't see much to jump off a cliff over, either.  The biggest weakness I saw was the one I expected.

Call me a skeptic, but somehow I don't think the '72 Dolphins alum are pacing the floors about the rest of the NFCS being undefeated.

2 minutes ago, Gerry Green said:

 

It's like just because there are no tweets coming out of practice. The time is just wasted, so of course we are going to sux.

 

Too many people still living in the past. They just know that history is going to repeat itself so why not be ready for it? 

 

I get it. For far too many. If they ain't happy, they don't want you to be happy either.

I get it, and it is easy to fall into "we've seen this before."  I fight that same temptation, before taking a breath and realizing we fooled ourselves into thinking "we were one player away" for several years while Hurney was out signing guys that were that one player.....three or four seasons before.

We saw good teams coached into mediocre or fair teams.  For the last two seasons (one and five games, actually) we saw a team that talent didn't matter, because we had a coach who would have made the '72 Dolphins or '89 49ers struggle to hit .500.

Then you realize that the architects of all those things are not around anymore.  I don't think the stadium is built on an ancient burial grounds and we are haunted and condemned to failure.

I'm not expecting great things.  In my ideal world, we get better and mature as the season goes on.  If we end 2023 looking forward to 2024, I'm happy.  The real saving grace I see is our division is not exactly a juggernaut, so almost anything is possible for anybody, except maybe Tampa.

Some of the critics have valid points.  I tend to agree with @CRA regarding how far along in the whole building process we are.  Like him, I am not bummed out about it.  Improvement has to start from some baseline.  We had a buffoon running the show for over two full seasons, there is a price to be paid for that.  I'm just along for the ride.

23 minutes ago, Gerry Green said:

 

I don't understand why folks are so up in arms over preseason. We were told they were going to put players in no win situations. None of us no what they wanted, or if they got what they were looking for. Evaluation.

I don't get it, either.  Preseason results have become more irrelevant as time has gone on.  They were never all that relevant to start with.  And in this case, we were told not to try and make any sense out of it, yet people do.

Then this nonsense about teams going 0-3 not having regular season success is completely refuted by the limited results we have seen.  Yet it keeps coming up.

I'm not even convinced we can draw a lot of conclusions by what teams do in the first three or four weeks of the regular season, let alone preseason.  Hell, the 49ers took almost half the season to pull themselves together last year.  Granted, that is the exception, but it happens.

We could stink.  We could be this year's Cinderella team.  Most likely the reality will be somewhere in between, but we have no idea right now and won't for a few weeks.

Yet, the narrative continues.  Some people just aren't happy unless they are not happy.

5 hours ago, CPcavedweller said:

0-3 teams in preseason generally don't go on to have good regular seasons.

Not this urban legend again.  There have been two preseasons where teams played three games followed by regular seasons.  Here are the fates of teams that went 0-3 vs. 3-0.

https://www.carolinahuddle.com/topic/189299-how-important-is-it-that-we-win-preseason-games/?page=3&tab=comments#comment-6202767

I am concerned about how the individual performances looked.  But in terms of putting any stock in a team going 0-3, read the above post.

8 minutes ago, jopie87 said:

Matt Rhule going to use that last drive as "look, we made progress"...if they can do that every drive, they'll win some games.

I have no doubt about that.  "We kept fighting, forced a big turnover, and fought back with a touchdown drive."  This, after throwing a player or three under the bus immediately before that.

What he won't say is that they were not prepared, because that would be on him.

3 minutes ago, CamWhoaaCam said:

Link me please!

 

I need a good laugh.

Here is the link the high school coach thread, if that helps:

https://nebraska.forums.rivals.com/threads/i-think-we-should-just-hire-high-school-coaches.344771/

2 minutes ago, Castavar said:

They already have a thread up "Matt Rhule sucks" lmao

There is one thread on another Husker fan board that says they should just hire high school coaches.  The results would be the same and it would be much cheaper.

The Process has an 8-year contract.  He may not last until November at this rate.  They look completely uncoached, which is consistent with what he did here.  His specialty is getting himself hired.

Auditioning for a Darwin Award, I think.

https://www.bbc.com/news/av/world-us-canada-66745802

In Kansas City for opening night.  I would normally say the Chiefs without much hesitation, and I think Detroit will be pretty good this year and could even with the NFCN. 

I would normally say that, but it is September and I have no idea who will look good, bad, or ugly for the first few weeks.

19 minutes ago, Mr. Scot said:

I saw something about that but it didn't come from a reliable source. Wanted to wait until there was something better...

This is worse, in my mind, than if he was gone.