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!

     

Speaking of going for it on fourth down...not a bad write-up

Cape Fear Cat

By Cape Fear Cat,
in Carolina Panthers

Recommended Posts

Cape Fear Cat Newbie

Cape Fear Cat

Posted
Posted

I realize this is probably only marginally NFL related, but given the discord exhibited here over RR's failure to kick field goals, or to go for it on fourth down, etc., I found this to be an interesting read:

http://www.thepostgame.com/blog/men-action/201211/how-oregon-coach-chip-kelly-can-spark-moneyball-revolution-nfl

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Darth Biscuit Mentor

Darth Biscuit

Posted
Posted

I read this earlier today... I know that there are numbers and all behind what they're saying, but I'm not entirely convinced that those numbers translate to the NFL like they claim.

I do generally agree that NFL coaches tend to be much more conservative, and probably overly so, mainly because of the amount of money on the line for the owners, coaches and players.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
rayzor Grand Master

rayzor

Posted
Posted

if rivera doesn't stick around....i'm slowly moving towards the chip kelly bandwagon, as long as he can get a solid NFL-experienced coaching staff to work with him.

i love aggressiveness and i love creativity in playcalling.

said it many times before...chud's problem isn't that he was running a college offense instead of running a more "traditional" offense. it's that he got stuck in a rut that made his offense as predictable as jeff davidson's. chud's got a brilliant mind and quite a large playbook, but he's only been using a small portion of it.

the answer isn't running a "pro-style" offense. it's just in smart playcalling and taking advantage of the talent that you have and what the defense gives you. there's really not a whole lot of difference between "pro-style" and stuff that is used by most colleges (and a growing number of successful NFL offenses). the difference is in the size of the playbook and how much of it is used as well as how it's used.

any offense that sticks to just a few things will be easy to stop.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Darth Biscuit Mentor

Darth Biscuit

Posted
Posted

I now have a statistically induced headache (thanks Inmicus) but that article was very informative...

This is kinda what I was saying, but he stated it a lot better...

David Romer's explanation goes a step further. He suggests that coaches are thinking more about their job security than their team's chances of winning. Coaches know that if they follow age-old convention by kicking and lose, then the players get most of the blame. But if they defy convention and go for the 1st down and fail, even if it was the best decision, they'll take all the criticism.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
rayzor Grand Master

rayzor

Posted
Posted

I read this earlier today... I know that there are numbers and all behind what they're saying, but I'm not entirely convinced that those numbers translate to the NFL like they claim.

I do generally agree that NFL coaches tend to be much more conservative, and probably overly so, mainly because of the amount of money on the line for the owners, coaches and players.

teams htat have had the most successful offenses in recent years have moved away from "pro-style" to spread offenses. teams are starting to catch on to the trend. the ones that are resistant to it are likely going to be falling behind.

as far as those numbers translating to the NFL...i don't know why they wouldn't.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Darth Biscuit Mentor

Darth Biscuit

Posted
Posted

teams htat have had the most successful offenses in recent years have moved away from "pro-style" to spread offenses. teams are starting to catch on to the trend. the ones that are resistant to it are likely going to be falling behind.

as far as those numbers translating to the NFL...i don't know why they wouldn't.

I don't know that they wouldn't but what I'm referring to (in regards to the original article about Chip Kelly) is taking data from the college game and applying it to the pro game. The athleticism in the NFL is a huge factor.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
rayzor Grand Master

rayzor

Posted
Posted

I don't know that they wouldn't but what I'm referring to (in regards to the original article about Chip Kelly) is taking data from the college game and applying it to the pro game. The athleticism in the NFL is a huge factor.

not sure it would be any different. offenses and defenses are still playing at the same (equal) level, esp. athletically.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
jtnc Newbie

jtnc

Posted
Posted

I think we see now with Medlocks lack of leg strength why we didnt go for a FG in the Chi game.

Jonathan Jones said he was hitting from 50 during warm-ups that day and it was windy.....during that game so that is likely why we didn't kick it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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

Go to topic listing

  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • L-TownCat
      Report: Panthers great Luke Kuechly being eyed for big TV job

      By L-TownCat · Posted

      So the last guy who had the job got hired by his former team directly into a role he has no direct experience in?
    • Khyber53
      Report: Panthers great Luke Kuechly being eyed for big TV job

      By Khyber53 · Posted

      Hard to pass up millions for a couple of days work per week for a coaching gig in the NFL that is 60-80 hours each week during the season and a more relaxed 50 hours a week during the off season. Yeah, I'd love to see him as our DC but hard to see him giving up the cushy job there if he gets it. And he's going to be a great commentator for the network.
    • Khyber53
      2027: Sharing my thoughts on the cap without a lotta research

      By Khyber53 · Posted

      Really, I think that is where negotiations come in. If you've got a QB getting you to 10 wins but statistically he's not a great performer, then you say look you can take $22 million or you can try it on the market. Because let's face it, out there, any leadership skills that we're seeing aren't going to be on the table, it's just going to be performance and that lands him in the QB2 market, which is much, much less lucrative (although any of us would love that money).  No one is saying that Bryce will be a $50 million QB, barring something short of a miraculous jump. I'm just saying that if we are winning somehow with him at the helm, then it would be fuging stupid to dive back into the rookie pool all over again. Let's say we do hit the 10 win mark, heck, let's call it 11 and a second round in the playoffs. I think we can all say that would be a really uplifting result and one that should be doable if we have good play. What do we do then? Here's what I would offer if I were Morgan and Tepper. $25 million a year for 3 years, each year with up to $10 million in incentives for touchdowns, wins, playoff depth, being under 10 interceptions, completing a full season, passing yardage milestones, taking less than 15 sacks. Look, Bryce isn't a Ferrari, he isn't a Corvette, or a mid-level BMW. He's probably a new Toyota Sienna that will definitely get you somewhere and bring the whole team along with it, no fuss but not a lot of pizazz.  And really, it's about the destination, not about what drove you there.
×
×
  • Create New...