Why we lost today
-
In the first half, there were 10 first and ten situations. We ran on 4 of those plays.
In the third quarter there were three, we ran twice (neither was "up the middle"). Colt was sacked on the pass play.
In the fourth quarter (before the hurry up) we had two first and tens and we ran once and tried to pass once resulting in a sack.
So, if you want to call that predictable then why was Colt sacked both times he tried to pass on first down in the second half? I think it just speaks to negative plays resulting from poor offensive line play. You can argue about predictability all you want. The Saints knew we were running as did the Pats and the Jets and we still managed to run effectively when we needed to.
Yes, there were three three-and-outs. The last would have been converted on third if Robiskie holds on.
-
In the first half, there were 10 first and ten situations. We ran on 4 of those plays.
In the third quarter there were three, we ran twice (neither was "up the middle"). Colt was sacked on the pass play.
In the fourth quarter (before the hurry up) we had two first and tens and we ran once and tried to pass once resulting in a sack.
So, if you want to call that predictable then why was Colt sacked both times he tried to pass on first down in the second half? I think it just speaks to negative plays resulting from poor offensive line play. You can argue about predictability all you want. The Saints knew we were running as did the Pats and the Jets and we still managed to run effectively when we needed to.
Yes, there were three three-and-outs. The last would have been converted on third if Robiskie holds on.
In the first half, there were 10 first and ten situations. We ran on 4 of those plays.
In the third quarter there were three, we ran twice (neither was "up the middle"). Colt was sacked on the pass play.
In the fourth quarter (before the hurry up) we had two first and tens and we ran once and tried to pass once resulting in a sack.
So, if you want to call that predictable then why was Colt sacked both times he tried to pass on first down in the second half? I think it just speaks to negative plays resulting from poor offensive line play. You can argue about predictability all you want. The Saints knew we were running as did the Pats and the Jets and we still managed to run effectively when we needed to.
Yes, there were three three-and-outs. The last would have been converted on third if Robiskie holds on.
Fair enough.
We also benefited from trick plays against the Saints and Pats. That made it hard for the defense to commit.
-
The Oline wasn't great, but as usual the receivers couldn't get open. And as said before... Run Run Pass sucks ass.
We need to throw the damn ball to Evan Moore. He's huge and will catch it even in coverage.
-
So, back to what I've been saying since day one.
Could we please find a new offensive coordinator? Run, Run, Pass is getting predictable. Daboll calls plays like people play Madden, he finds a handful that he likes and runs them 90 percent of the time.
So, back to what I've been saying since day one.
while still forcing the offense to prep for 160 potential plays. Daboll is in way over his head.Could we please find a new offensive coordinator? Run, Run, Pass is getting predictable. Daboll calls plays like people play Madden, he finds a handful that he likes and runs them 90 percent of the time.
Dawson gets a pass from me on the 51 yarder...which is actually 52 because pontbriand's laces are up at 8 yards instead of the 7 statiticians assume. it was close...but he should've made the other.
i hope those points aren't in order of importance, cuz if so Phil doesn't get #2. playcalling and OL can attribute to #s 1-5 by themselves, especially the right side.
-
In the first half, there were 10 first and ten situations. We ran on 4 of those plays.
In the third quarter there were three, we ran twice (neither was "up the middle"). Colt was sacked on the pass play.
In the fourth quarter (before the hurry up) we had two first and tens and we ran once and tried to pass once resulting in a sack.
So, if you want to call that predictable then why was Colt sacked both times he tried to pass on first down in the second half? I think it just speaks to negative plays resulting from poor offensive line play. You can argue about predictability all you want. The Saints knew we were running as did the Pats and the Jets and we still managed to run effectively when we needed to.
Yes, there were three three-and-outs. The last would have been converted on third if Robiskie holds on.
In the first half, there were 10 first and ten situations. We ran on 4 of those plays.
In the third quarter there were three, we ran twice (neither was "up the middle"). Colt was sacked on the pass play.
In the fourth quarter (before the hurry up) we had two first and tens and we ran once and tried to pass once resulting in a sack.
So, if you want to call that predictable then why was Colt sacked both times he tried to pass on first down in the second half? I think it just speaks to negative plays resulting from poor offensive line play. You can argue about predictability all you want. The Saints knew we were running as did the Pats and the Jets and we still managed to run effectively when we needed to.
Yes, there were three three-and-outs. The last would have been converted on third if Robiskie holds on.
Thank God for an objective analysis, instead of just crying for Daboll's head. The O Line was not very effective today and the absence of Cribbs really showed in our offensive execution.
-
I think the Jags had pretty good coverage and obviously good pressure. Regardless of the two sacks on 1st down we needed to throw the ball on 1st down more. One more first down on our field goal drive and the game is pretty much over.
-
its amazing.
win? praise daboll. lose? new offensive coordinator.
we simply got beat on offense today, we won't win if we can't run the ball or pass protect
its amazing.
win? praise daboll. lose? new offensive coordinator.
we simply got beat on offense today, we won't win if we can't run the ball or pass protect
I've been a Daboll hater like many here all along. I started to give him a chance when he started showing creative play calling and wasn't doing his usual run, run, pass. He appeared to be showing improvement and I praised him for it. Now he's showing that's he's regressed back to his old ways. Can't keep being predictable and playing not to lose.
-
The only reason we lost today was the fact that we couldn't capitalize on all those turnovers.
-
We can cry all we want about playcalling. This game was not lost because of the playcalling.
It was lost plain and simply on the offensive line. It didn't matter what play we called. Steinbach, Lauvao and St. Clair were eaten alive and Mack was a casualty of the inability of either guard to block. In the second half, we had to use the TE to block or chip.
We gave up six sacks, numerous pressures and ran for a lousy average. That's the offensive line not getting it done. No OL play= few first downs = fewer points off of those turnovers.
It was lost plain and simply on the offensive line. It didn't matter what play we called.
I don't buy that. He was taking 5 step drops and wasn't given any quick hitting slants, circle routes, shallow crosses or even enough 4 wide sets to spread them out. It was pathetic strategy, IMO. Once you have a team blowing up the OL with stunts there needs to be an adjustment. That adjustment never took place, and if it did it was the wrong one.
You can't keep letting the OC off the hook because of the players (and lack of talent) every loss. The job of these coaches is to get the win, not wait until they have enough players to execute the offense.
When is the last time we threw slants and quick hitters?
6 turnovers and the offense gave 3 lousy points back. 3 stinking points (the D had to score the other 7.)
Something is wrong with Daboll -- he needs some more seasoning or something. How do you expect to rebuild a team with an OC in his 2nd season?
-
We can cry all we want about playcalling. This game was not lost because of the playcalling.
It was lost plain and simply on the offensive line. It didn't matter what play we called. Steinbach, Lauvao and St. Clair were eaten alive and Mack was a casualty of the inability of either guard to block. In the second half, we had to use the TE to block or chip.
We gave up six sacks, numerous pressures and ran for a lousy average. That's the offensive line not getting it done. No OL play= few first downs = fewer points off of those turnovers.
We can cry all we want about playcalling. This game was not lost because of the playcalling.
It was lost plain and simply on the offensive line. It didn't matter what play we called. Steinbach, Lauvao and St. Clair were eaten alive and Mack was a casualty of the inability of either guard to block. In the second half, we had to use the TE to block or chip.
We gave up six sacks, numerous pressures and ran for a lousy average. That's the offensive line not getting it done. No OL play= few first downs = fewer points off of those turnovers.
This post says it all.....play calling is ovarrated. If you execute the play well, it works. The only real reason we lost that game was that the offensive line sucked.....really sucked. Hillis didn't decide not to play well in the game. There was no blocking....he couldn't get going, with the Jacksonville defensive line hanging on him almost before the ball was snapped. I would cut St Clair and Robiskie today. There has to be some old washed up 40 year old guys out there who are available. Anything would be an improvement.
-
Offensive line was horrible... You need time to throw the ball.
However, I will say, that if you watch a team like the pats, or the colts, when the Blitz is seen, there is always a reciever(s) they can go to for a quick release. I don't see that.. Colt was holding on to the ball way to long with no one to throw to. That's either the playcalling, or the WR's. IMO, it looks a little bit of both.
Even last week, I thought the offensive game plan was weak and did not have the look of the previous two when we beat the Saints and the Pats.
But as a whole, yesterday, we lost as a team, you can't really blame just one person(s).
We just need to see the passing game open up more... that's going to help keep the Defense honest. We've seen some decent passes made and caught, part of me thinks we are not making the WR's a bigger part of the game plan.
-
We can cry all we want about playcalling. This game was not lost because of the playcalling.
It was lost plain and simply on the offensive line. It didn't matter what play we called. Steinbach, Lauvao and St. Clair were eaten alive and Mack was a casualty of the inability of either guard to block. In the second half, we had to use the TE to block or chip.
We gave up six sacks, numerous pressures and ran for a lousy average. That's the offensive line not getting it done. No OL play= few first downs = fewer points off of those turnovers.
This post says it all.....play calling is ovarrated. If you execute the play well, it works. The only real reason we lost that game was that the offensive line sucked.....really sucked. Hillis didn't decide not to play well in the game. There was no blocking....he couldn't get going, with the Jacksonville defensive line hanging on him almost before the ball was snapped. I would cut St Clair and Robiskie today. There has to be some old washed up 40 year old guys out there who are available. Anything would be an improvement.
This post says it all.....play calling is ovarrated. If you execute the play well, it works. The only real reason we lost that game was that the offensive line sucked.....really sucked. Hillis didn't decide not to play well in the game. There was no blocking....he couldn't get going, with the Jacksonville defensive line hanging on him almost before the ball was snapped. I would cut St Clair and Robiskie today. There has to be some old washed up 40 year old guys out there who are available. Anything would be an improvement.
Play calling is overrated? What are you smoking? When the play calling is run, run, pass it gets predictable and makes it easier for the defense.
In the games we won against good teams we had creative and unpredictable play calling. Why? Because they have better players and we needed trickery/creative plays to win. I'm not saying we need trick plays every game or all the time. But if we as fans know its gonna be run run pass, you can sure as hell bet the opposing d coordinator knows too.
From where I was sitting I didn't see many short routes or anything trying to target the tight ends. The play calling sucked. It was playing not to lose which has lost us all our close games this year. Look at how many games we have lost when leading in the fourth. Look at how we can drive the ball with the 2 minute drill when we open up the passing game.
-
went to the game, and yes our playcalling was real bad, even jags fans next to me knew what we were doing...Run,Run, Sack....
The reason why we were so successful the last month is that our playcalling changed and defenses could not key on what we were doing....
6 turnovers and we still cant win come on really
-
St. Clair was getting dominated all game. Not all the sacks were his fault, but he mad a bunch of average/good Jags defenders look like all pros.
Our run game couldn't get moving. Losing Cribbs really allowed the Jags to focus 100% on Hillis since we have no other threats.
How about Robiskie dropping the easiest slant pass he'll ever see in the NFL?
Hello! It looks like you're interested in this conversation, but you don't have an account yet.
Getting fed up of having to scroll through the same posts each visit? When you register for an account, you'll always come back to exactly where you were before, and choose to be notified of new replies (either via email, or push notification). You'll also be able to save bookmarks and upvote posts to show your appreciation to other community members.
With your input, this post could be even better 💗
Register Login