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!

     

Shula, Zod, and SCP


SCP

Recommended Posts

That's not even remotely true. One of those 9 man fronts where we came out in a run formation was the goal-line pass play to Olsen, and it completely flummoxed Tampa's coverage as they were convinced we were going to run the ball, which is why it was a perfect time for the play fake. We had THREE players open on that play, with Hartsock and Nate Chandler sitting in the back of the end zone uncovered.

 

We flipped the script on that again in the second half when we spread the field with a three receiver set and actually ran Cam up the middle on a zone read. Again, we showed one thing formation-wise and did another.

 

And sometimes you're going to have to run the ball even if they show a heavy front; that Tolbert run for the first down on 4th and 1 was against a nine man box and it achieved exactly what it needed to do.

 

Playcalling looks elementary if you don't know what the hell you're looking at. Oftentimes an excellent play looks brain dead simple, because that's the beauty of them; they exploit a single matchup on the field and keep the chains moving. The best play we ran all night was that simple drag route to Ginn that used Olsen as a decoy down the seam to isolate Ted on Lavonte David. He had no chance to keep up with Ginn and a simple pitch from Cam turned into 35 yards. That's the opposite of poor playcalling.

 

You're using 3-4 examples of the 62 offensive plays run. Obviously, there is the occasional wrinkle, but you can't sit there and tell me you have no idea what the play call is when you see the formation.

 

I don't know, I've only been watching and attending games for 45 years or so, but I can tell you with pretty good certainty what play is coming and aside from the couple you mentioned, there's not much innovation there. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You're using 3-4 examples of the 62 offensive plays run. Obviously, there is the occasional wrinkle, but you can't sit there and tell me you have no idea what the play call is when you see the formation.

 

I don't know, I've only been watching and attending games for 45 years or so, but I can tell you with pretty good certainty what play is coming and aside from the couple you mentioned, there's not much innovation there. 

 

Then apparently you should be a defensive coordinator somewhere in this league, since we put up 30+ points in our last 3 games against coaches who get paid 6-7 figure salaries to try and stop us

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You're using 3-4 examples of the 62 offensive plays run. Obviously, there is the occasional wrinkle, but you can't sit there and tell me you have no idea what the play call is when you see the formation.

 

I don't know, I've only been watching and attending games for 45 years or so, but I can tell you with pretty good certainty what play is coming and aside from the couple you mentioned, there's not much innovation there. 

 

That's just a silly criticism. There's a reason certain formations most often run similar plays: because that's the play most effective with that formation. How many jumbo formations are going to involve a 40 yard pass? Why do fans instinctively recoil when they see a four man receiver set and the ball goes to the back on a draw? You run the formations that are most conducive to the play at hand, and that is what sets up things like play action, because you establish a particular play with a certain formation, until surprising the defense when they sell out to stop that play.

 

And the variety of calls within the formations has been very good of late as well. Another nifty play we ran against Tampa was Tolbert's touchdown catch: we showed a lead power run with Tolbert blocking for DeAngelo, but instead of blocking Tolbert "whiffed" on his block and sprinted out to the flat, while Cam faked the handoff to DeAngelo before flipping the ball to Tolbert for the TD. So, while the play itself resembled a simple lead run for DeAngelo with Tolbert acting as the lead blocker, it was actually DeAngelo who was "blocking" for Tolbert as he held off the defender long enough for Cam to make the throw.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Then apparently you should be a defensive coordinator somewhere in this league, since we put up 30+ points in our last 3 games against coaches who get paid 6-7 figure salaries to try and stop us

 

 

That's just a silly criticism. There's a reason certain formations most often run similar plays: because that's the play most effective with that formation. How many jumbo formations are going to involve a 40 yard pass? Why do fans instinctively recoil when they see a four man receiver set and the ball goes to the back on a draw? You run the formations that are most conducive to the play at hand, and that is what sets up things like play action, because you establish a particular play with a certain formation, until surprising the defense when they sell out to stop that play.

 

And the variety of calls within the formations has been very good of late as well. Another nifty play we ran against Tampa was Tolbert's touchdown catch: we showed a lead power run with Tolbert blocking for DeAngelo, but instead of blocking Tolbert "whiffed" on his block and sprinted out to the flat, while Cam faked the handoff to DeAngelo before flipping the ball to Tolbert for the TD. So, while the play itself resembled a simple lead run for DeAngelo with Tolbert acting as the lead blocker, it was actually DeAngelo who was "blocking" for Tolbert as he held off the defender long enough for

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Forgive me for being so incredibly wrong.

Gee, you guys are absolute football geniuses. Why aren't you doing it for a living?

 

you must feel like such a genius on sundays between the hours of 1-4pm while you sit there on your couch with one hand down your pants and the other buried in a bag of doritos, and stare at your TV and say "Run Play."

 

While youre doing that, defensive coordinators around the league are sitting up in their coaching boxes with an endless stream of stats, information, player personnel combos and other things while they are trying to decipher if the offense is running a "53 blue speed 6 front over" or a "sprint rex 8-zac chicago", determining what to do based on the opponents previous situations, and what blitz packages to send with the current personnel the offense is using.all of this going on every 30 seconds, knowing each and every decision he makes has HUGE ramifications. 

 

But yes, continue to sit there and explain how you (random guy who spends his time on an internet forum) could do a much better job

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • if  ANYONE actually goes & looks at the FACTS on rookie Qb's after 2 full seasons as a starter in the NFL & they are still well below average do they rarely ever actually become top tier Qb's & instead most likely either do not recieve a second contract & or become life long backups...just saying 
    • So he became GM and decided not to address the weakness in the QB room following one of the worst rookie QB performances in NFL history?  There were options last season other than signing Dalton to a 2 year deal. Brissett and Jones by a wide margin, both of whom outplayed Bryce, Wilson, Winston, hell even Rivers off the couch was more exciting at the QB position. The time to address the failure in the QB room was last year but instead people on the Huddle cheered when we brought Dalton back then cheered when we were able to get anything for him after they finally realized he was washed up like a few of had been saying all along and got poo'd for even mentioning.  This year, the options were more limited obviously, especially since we lost Icky. It changed the dynamic of our draft. I think we were stuck this year keeping Bryce, but i still think giving him a 5th year option for what has amounted to replacement worthy performance was the wrong move. Why guarantee 25m if you're planning to replace him? You think he's going to want to be a bridge QB? Hell no. He's going to want out and we'll end up cutting him if he has another lackluster season because no one is trading for him with that price tag.  Were there better options as far as production available. A couple. Were there guys available with more physical tools than Bryce, Pickett or Grier, you damn well better believe there were. I've been saying all along, you always keep looking for your 1b. Bryce has yet to prove he can be a starter. Keep looking for someone who may. Put competition in camp. Let the best QB lead the team. Stop settling for less than mediocre. 
×
×
  • Create New...