Jump to content
  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

What will Chud's offense look like?


Lumps

Recommended Posts

1st and 2nd downs:

Moore

Smith

Shockey

Gettis

DWill/Stew

LaFell/Fia/Rosario

IF we ever get to a third down (6+) again:

Moore

Smith

Shockey

Gettis

LaFell

Goodson/AE (Not Likely)

3rd and short:

Moore

Smith

Shockey

Rosario

Fia

Stew

Edit:

If we draft Green, replace LaFell with Green and replace AE with LaFell

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1st and 2nd downs:

Moore

Smith

Shockey

Gettis

DWill/Stew

LaFell/Fia/Rosario

IF we ever get to a third down (6+) again:

Moore

Smith

Shockey

Gettis

LaFell

Goodson/AE (Not Likely)

3rd and short:

Moore

Smith

Shockey

Rosario

Fia

Stew

Edit:

If we draft Green, replace LaFell with Green and replace AE with LaFell

I actually agree I think Moore will end up winning the job if we have TC. If we draft a guy like Newton (who I think is perfect for this O) he probably will only see the field if he gets injured or sucks it up again. I see no way Clausen is starting unless something unforeseen happens.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But without Philip Rivers too...

Chud's offense will probably remind people around here a lot of Dan Henning's first half work. I say that because once we got ahead or within a field goal in the second half our offense always went super-conservative.

We will also use the Tight End more as a receiving option, that's something Chud did a lot in Cleveland, and it's also a big part of the Turner variant to the Coryell offense.

That means a lot of power running and short, controlled passes to the middle, coupled with a few heaves downfield every game to see if Smitty or one of the other receivers can make a play. There will be a lot of outs to the tight end, and instead of the backs being the final check-down option, we will have many more plays where they're supposed to catch the ball and get yards after the catch.

Picture our 2003-2005 offense with our current personnel. Instead of Davis, Foster and Goings running we now have Williams, Stewart, and Goodson. Instead of Moose, Smitty, Colbert, and Proehl we'll have Gettis, LaFell, Smitty, and Edwards. Instead of Mangum and whoever the other forgettable Tight Ends were, we will have Shockey, King, Rosario, and potentially Barnidge. The offensive line will be a ton better, it's young and not 'roided up.

The only trouble spot is QB. I personally believe Clausen will look worlds better than he did last year. And I also won't be surprised to see us take a QB in the draft, but if we do that guy won't be ready for a while.

I see us looking like a completely different, and like a much, much better unit.

That is a pretty good assessment with a few changes. Henning was a feed the stud kind of guy and didn't use very many mutiple receiver sets instead often using 2 TEs. He was also know for snapping always on the first count, being less than imaginitive, and would run the same plays whether they worked or not.

Chud by contrast will use the TE more but also use 4 wideout sets, put people in motion and try and spread the field more both horizontally and vertically.

I suspect we will see alot more 10-15 yard stick routes as well actually using the TE as a primary receiver. As you noted we should do more screens, designed dumpoffs to backs in the flats and over the middle.

Of course this all will be determined by whether or not the line holds up this year and whether our quarterbacks can execute the offense.

I suspect we will see more plays designed to get Smith open assuming he is still here and will utilize Williams and Goodson in the passing game. Obviously we will run quite a bit but hopefully in a less predictable fashion than either davidson or Henning.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As far as I'm concerned I really never saw a difference last season between Clausen and Moore, even with the difference in games they played.

I like him better in this O because he has the better deep ball. Not to mention he actually seems to be a pretty decent leader. I think last year was such a cluster f. that you really can't condemn anybody on this O (except maybe Otah WTF is wrong with this guy). I just didn't see any glimmer of hope from Clausen but I don't see any reason to cut him or anything just don't get your hopes up.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I like him better in this O because he has the better deep ball. Not to mention he actually seems to be a pretty decent leader. I think last year was such a cluster f. that you really can't condemn anybody on this O (except maybe Otah WTF is wrong with this guy). I just didn't see any glimmer of hope from Clausen but I don't see any reason to cut him or anything just don't get your hopes up.

I will agree with you on the arm strength and personality, but as far as watching their performances in the game:

Moore took more risks vs. Clausen was very conservative

- I don't fault ether, although Moore should know not to throw the ball into the endzone in triple coverage. Clausen on the other hand is very scared and immature, however I feel Clausen will impress at Training Camp.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That is a pretty good assessment with a few changes. Henning was a feed the stud kind of guy and didn't use very many mutiple receiver sets instead often using 2 TEs. He was also know for snapping always on the first count, being less than imaginitive, and would run the same plays whether they worked or not.

Chud by contrast will use the TE more but also use 4 wideout sets, put people in motion and try and spread the field more both horizontally and vertically.

.

Chud didn't run a lot of 4 WR sets and so forth in Clev. He basically threw to 2 guys when they weren't running. They ran the ball and some shorter stuff to set up the big plays downfield......he definately had a feed the stud mentality imo while in Clev.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I will agree with you on the arm strength and personality, but as far as watching their performances in the game:

Moore took more risks vs. Clausen was very conservative

- I don't fault ether, although Moore should know not to throw the ball into the endzone in triple coverage. Clausen on the other hand is very scared and immature, however I feel Clausen will impress at Training Camp.

As I said I really don't think last year was an accurate repensation of either but I always can't help but be excited when I think back to the end of 09 and Moore was outstanding. And personally I don't think this is the kind of offense you want a conservative QB. Its a vertical attacking O (or at least everything that Chud has done makes me think it will be who knows) and Clausen just never showed me anything that made me think he fits in one.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Chud didn't run a lot of 4 WR sets and so forth in Clev. He basically threw to 2 guys when they weren't running. They ran the ball and some shorter stuff to set up the big plays downfield......he definately had a feed the stud mentality imo while in Clev.

And I wouldn't exactly want him to do here what he did in Cleveland. I am hoping another 2 years in San Diego after being in Cleveland means he will run this offense more like San Diego which led the league in offense last year versus Cleveland. He had a good year in 2007 and really helped Anderson have a good year. But it was a one hit wonder and he was gone after 2008. Maybe I am being too optimistic and hoping he opens up the playbook and does what he says he is going to do which is attack.

The correlations between Brady Quinn and Clausen are painful to ponder so I won't even go there.

I don't think Chud was a unanimous choice so people will be watching over his shoulder and taking names. But what I hope was shared was that we want a more wide open offense which is less predictable and uses more misdirection. That Rivera wants the SD offense not the Cleveland 2008 offense which was worse than Davidson's.

But again it might be me, Chud could turn out to be a dud if he tries to make us Cleveland South and forgets that we need to score points in this division. On the other hand, San Diego was 10th and 1st in total yards the past 2 years. Either of those would beat the hell out of this year. Now we just need to get our version of Phillips Rivers.

But what do I know. I was actually thought Davidson would do a good job at least from the way he talked when he first got here. Boy was I wrong on that one.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Let's say we have a LT for 2026, because we do.  After that, let's say Ickey could be back and we would have the option of extending Walker.  That too is truth.  Don't get me wrong--I LOVE drafting OL, but drafting a first-round OT now is either wasting the money we just paid for a free agent OR it is like paying top dollar for a new car and keeping it in your garage for a season.  A first rounder should give us 4-5 years of cap relief by playing from day 1. I shall elaborate here: Teams obviously get desperate for OTs and if they enter the draft without 2 solid tackles, they are almost obligated to reach for a first round OT.  This year, I see 1 OT who is probably worth first-round consideration, and I am not putting him in the top 10 players in the draft.  Lomu, Freeling, Miller, and Proctor, for example, probably and arguably have second-round value.  So why would you reach for an OT in round 1 when you already have starters at both T positions but you have other needs? We do need depth, however, and I think there is decent OT depth that needs development on day 3. They are no slouches, by the way.   Drew Shelton (could drop to round 4): Surrendered 1 sack as Penn State's LT in 2025. 33 3/8" arms.  Pass pro improved every year (4 years--experienced).  "For a team running a zone-heavy scheme that values lateral movement and reach-blocking ability over phone-booth mauling, Shelton has real appeal. He is not a plug-and-play starter, but the athletic tools and the clear year-over-year improvement suggest a player who can develop into a capable starter if a coaching staff invests in his strength base and cleans up his technique. The ceiling depends entirely on how much stronger he can get and whether his feet can stay alive after initial contact."   Austin Barber  (could drop to round 4): I see him as a RT at best and a probable kick inside to Guard where his strengths would switch from secondary to primary tools.  Considering Lewis and Hunt may be gone in a year or two, this would give the Panthers a chance to work him at RT and then move him inside if he is not effective, and there is confidence that G may be his best position. Jude Bowery (4th round projection) was LT on a Boston College OL that was effective in the run game.  Bowery is one of the most athletic OTs in the draft.  His arms are not ideal but not too short (33.75") to play LT.  He surrendered 2 sacks. He is raw, and needs some technical refinement with his hands.  I think he has the best upside and value for this offense.   Dametrious Crownover  TexAM (5th round projection; 35 3/8" arms) is one of the more fascinating developmental tackles in this class because the physical tools are legitimately rare. A strong run blocker who should be better in pass protection with his tools.  "You do not find many 6-7, 336-pound men with that foot speed and who have the athletic background of a converted tight end. When everything clicks, he looks like a starting right tackle in a gap-heavy run scheme, smothering defenders at the point of attack and using his length to erase speed off the edge. The 2024 tape, when he anchored one of the best rushing attacks in the SEC, is the version of Crownover that gets offensive line coaches excited."  THIS is the kind of player our coaches could develop until Moton is done. What made World intriguing coming out of Eugene was the untapped ceiling, a fifth-year transfer who arrived as the top-ranked offensive tackle in the portal and looked the part for stretches. The improvement he showed against Big Ten competition in his one Oregon season was real, and the physical foundation, length, athleticism, and improving technique in pass protection, is still there. The ACL tear suffered in the College Football Playoff semifinal against Indiana doesn't erase that, but it changes the conversation significantly. The injury clouds the immediate projection. Most ACL recoveries for offensive linemen run nine to twelve months, which means World is likely unavailable for meaningful action well into his rookie season at the earliest. The combine absence removes his chance to reset the narrative physically, and teams will be making decisions almost entirely off pre-injury film and medical evaluations. The contrast between his polished pass sets and his inconsistent run blocking was already a developmental concern, and now those technique issues get deferred further while he rehabs. Isaiah World  (Oregon, injured ACL in playoffs, 5th round projection--could slide to 6th).  World will not play much if at all in 2026, which is why he might fall.  For the Panthers' purposes, however, this would give the OL coaches time to work with him. "What made World intriguing coming out of Eugene was the untapped ceiling, a fifth-year transfer who arrived as the top-ranked offensive tackle in the portal and looked the part for stretches. The improvement he showed against Big Ten competition in his one Oregon season was real, and the physical foundation, length, athleticism, and improving technique in pass protection, is still there. The ACL tear suffered in the College Football Playoff semifinal against Indiana doesn't erase that, but it changes the conversation significantly." "That said, the investment argument isn't crazy for the right organization. This is still a tackle with first-round portal grades and the kind of athletic profile that doesn't just disappear. A team with patience and a strong offensive line room can afford to stash World on the roster, let him develop his lower-body power and pad-level consistency during the recovery process, and potentially unlock a starting-caliber right tackle somewhere in his second or third season. The path is longer now, but the destination hasn't changed for a scout willing to bet on the physical tools." You get the idea. If we do not need the OT immediately, draft one later and develop him as depth and for next season.  Most college players drafted in round 1 were not first rounders if they had entered the draft the year before,  so why not grab a player with upside?      
    • Its never the QBs fault, so if we get a new WR and he looks bad he must be a bust
    • Based on what? Its certainly not his in game coaching prowess. 
×
×
  • Create New...