why I hope it's not Stefansky....
-
I’ll admit I didn’t read each line here carefully, so pardon. But I’m just absolutely out of my mind baffled people continue like OP continue to assume rushing minded offense isn’t the answer. The top four regular season rush offenses are in the divisional round. Outside of KC, all are top half of the league.
It’s really common sense, holding the ball and scoring on the ground leads to success. This has been true season after season in a so called “passing league”.
-
-
You're too obsessed with PFF. You sound like one of their data scientists I had a conversation with. I get what you and they are saying, I just disagree with it from a personnel, game planning and schematic stand point. Consider that passing might be more "efficient", but that is entirely dependent on having the QB to properly execute that on any given down. Some of the teams I mentioned don't necessarily have that unless the run is established in game.
Also not taking into account how the offense is structured in an attempt to produce a higher YPA completion when they do pass. Seattle might be bottom half in total passing, but kept check their YP Completion dating back to 2012. Play action works when the defense respects it.. Period. You either have to be known as a team that can efficiently and effectively run the ball or you have to establish it in that game.
If you walk into a game dead last in rushing and I'm a coordinator, I sure as shit am telling my safeties not to go until they know. I'd be curious as to the pressure rates vs play action against teams that are bottom 1/3 in rushing. I'm sure there is some correlation to be found there. You're also viewing the run in a vacuum. Either between play efficiency and/or setting up play action. Not understanding or properly measuring the toll it takes on a defensive front, limiting opposing offenses time with the ball, slowing down the opposing pass rush for when you do drop back and throw, setting up the screen game and, in many cases, inviting additional pressure for favorable passing matchups.
I'm a proponent of using analytics. But I'm also not a proponent of pushing dogma. Those are the two categories you're really highlighting The "numbers" guys and the "football" guys. I've preached on this before... It's dogma in a great sense. Those who take their analytic models and make it their God are every bit suffering from the same delusion and cult like narrow mindedness as those who don't bother to analyze their data AND their own early game tendencies. Sometimes you break them, sometimes you don't.
It's a fundamental disagreement. One, from a personnel standpoint, I'm highly skeptical of when the tape doesn't back it up.
edit: New England was a team that salvaged the tail end of their previous season by reducing their passing attempts. Tennessee has resurrected the career of Tannehill by putting him in an offense that protects him from volume throws. Seattle COULD* throw the ball a lot more, but we both know their offensive line struggles on the edges. The last thing you want to do is continually ask a QB to save your team when pressured. It's not a pragmatic approach to the game of football. THAT is what cost them last year vs Dallas. And while you bring up that game as an example, who was it that controlled the game with the more effective rushing attack and setup their #1 receivers with favorable matchups off that running game? Oh, that would be Dallas. Did you also want me to list the pressure rates that game?
Like I said, PFF serves it's purpose. In a vacuum with individual grades I tend to side with things they settle. But, much like their collective Oline ratings, I tend to disagree with a great deal else.
who said anything about PFF? I am interested in looking at the data in a way as to determine what is more efficient. A few points:
1) You use the word 'establish' the run, but as I pointed out that's a myth. We have data that suggests play action pass is effective *independent* of whether the run has been 'established'. We all grew up listening to talking heads ramble on about how they are running the ball so that play action will be more effective. turns out it doesn't work that way. You say later than play action works when the defense respects it. This is not true. Play action...just works. Even if the other team hasn't been running the ball or hasn't run it effectively.
2) I really wouldn't say New England salvaged much of anything. They were consistently poor on offense the entire second half of the year. Sony Michelle was terrible all year, and the passing game for NE was bad as well.
3) speaking of the dallas-seattle game, you talk about their offensive line struggling on the edges but when Wilson did drop back to pass that game GOOD THINGS HAPPENED. So it didn't look like it was struggling to protect Wilson that game, as evident by his ypa and how effective he was. Moreover as I pointed out in 1 and the data indicates, seattle couldnt run the ball at all and yet play action was still very effective for seattle. What killed them was all the first and second down running which went nowhere. You can talk about pressure rates and such all you want...but that doesn't change the data or what actually happened.
this issue has been settled some time ago. Will teams continue to run the ball too much early in the game and on 1st down? Maybe...but its definitely improved from several years ago. Teams also do dumb non-analytically oriented things like punt too much. The smart teams are catching on. Smart coaches/teams knew this truth decades ago- remember what BB said to Lawrence Taylor and the rest of the giants defense(he was DC then) before the giants/bills sb. He said "if Thurman Thomas runs for over 100 yards we will probably win this game". BB recognizes that letting Thurman 'get his' was a great strategy. And TT did. But his carries are still a hell of a lot less effective than the real danger- Kelly getting the ball down the field to Reed and Lofton and using the short passing game as well. So BB baited the Bills into pounding Thomas and the Bills offense was held in check. Almost 30 years later we see BB do the same thing with the titans and it almost cost them the titans a game they should have won.
Watch tonight's Baltimore-Tennessee game. I bet Tennessee comes out and tries to run henry a ton on first down, and I bet that goes nowhere and puts them in a ton of 2nd and 3rd and long. Meanwhile Baltimore isn't going to do that early- they are going to run Lamar a lot, and throw with Lamar, and then mix in a *little* traditional runs. Now the final rushing stats for ingram and the Baltimore backs may be respectable, but how many of those will come in the second half after the ravens get a big lead?
If Tennessee was smart, they would come out and do nothing but spread things out and throw. Throw 14/15 plays to open the game. Instead they are going to play right into the ravens hand and try to ground and pound, and it's going to turn out poorly for them. On offense at least.
Watch tonight's Baltimore-Tennessee game. I bet Tennessee comes out and tries to run henry a ton on first down, and I bet that goes nowhere and puts them in a ton of 2nd and 3rd and long. Meanwhile Baltimore isn't going to do that early- they are going to run Lamar a lot, and throw with Lamar, and then mix in a *little* traditional runs. Now the final rushing stats for ingram and the Baltimore backs may be respectable, but how many of those will come in the second half after the ravens get a big lead?
If Tennessee was smart, they would come out and do nothing but spread things out and throw. Throw 14/15 plays to open the game. Instead they are going to play right into the ravens hand and try to ground and pound, and it's going to turn out poorly for them. On offense at least.
How can one post be so wrong?
"When you have a shared vision it is a lot easier to make unpopular decisions." - Paul DePodesta "When you win, say nothing. When you lose, say less." - Paul Brown Complete 2017 Browns Board Mock: http://thebrownsboard.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=46196 -
Watch tonight's Baltimore-Tennessee game. I bet Tennessee comes out and tries to run henry a ton on first down, and I bet that goes nowhere and puts them in a ton of 2nd and 3rd and long. Meanwhile Baltimore isn't going to do that early- they are going to run Lamar a lot, and throw with Lamar, and then mix in a *little* traditional runs. Now the final rushing stats for ingram and the Baltimore backs may be respectable, but how many of those will come in the second half after the ravens get a big lead?
If Tennessee was smart, they would come out and do nothing but spread things out and throw. Throw 14/15 plays to open the game. Instead they are going to play right into the ravens hand and try to ground and pound, and it's going to turn out poorly for them. On offense at least.
How can one post be so wrong?
How can one post be so wrong?
Well as I heard one of the CBS commentators say last night in post-game commentary, "Derrick Henry is the modern day Jim Brown!" I think Taco may have been behind the door the last year and a half since Vrabel turned him loose to run over people and play keepaway with that run\PA pass kind of offense. As my son watched that jump pass TD by Henry his only question was, "When are they gonna let him punt?" ?
BTW I loved that one play late where Tanny faked the handoff to Henry running left and took the bootleg for an 8 yard gain around the right side. Most people don't know that Tanny played his first two years at A&M as the #1 WR. He has excellent speed and hands. Look for Vrabel to have Henry throw to him on a HB option to the opposite side before these playoffs are finished.
-
Watch tonight's Baltimore-Tennessee game. I bet Tennessee comes out and tries to run henry a ton on first down, and I bet that goes nowhere and puts them in a ton of 2nd and 3rd and long. Meanwhile Baltimore isn't going to do that early- they are going to run Lamar a lot, and throw with Lamar, and then mix in a *little* traditional runs. Now the final rushing stats for ingram and the Baltimore backs may be respectable, but how many of those will come in the second half after the ravens get a big lead?
If Tennessee was smart, they would come out and do nothing but spread things out and throw. Throw 14/15 plays to open the game. Instead they are going to play right into the ravens hand and try to ground and pound, and it's going to turn out poorly for them. On offense at least.
How can one post be so wrong?
-
You're too obsessed with PFF. You sound like one of their data scientists I had a conversation with. I get what you and they are saying, I just disagree with it from a personnel, game planning and schematic stand point. Consider that passing might be more "efficient", but that is entirely dependent on having the QB to properly execute that on any given down. Some of the teams I mentioned don't necessarily have that unless the run is established in game.
Also not taking into account how the offense is structured in an attempt to produce a higher YPA completion when they do pass. Seattle might be bottom half in total passing, but kept check their YP Completion dating back to 2012. Play action works when the defense respects it.. Period. You either have to be known as a team that can efficiently and effectively run the ball or you have to establish it in that game.
If you walk into a game dead last in rushing and I'm a coordinator, I sure as shit am telling my safeties not to go until they know. I'd be curious as to the pressure rates vs play action against teams that are bottom 1/3 in rushing. I'm sure there is some correlation to be found there. You're also viewing the run in a vacuum. Either between play efficiency and/or setting up play action. Not understanding or properly measuring the toll it takes on a defensive front, limiting opposing offenses time with the ball, slowing down the opposing pass rush for when you do drop back and throw, setting up the screen game and, in many cases, inviting additional pressure for favorable passing matchups.
I'm a proponent of using analytics. But I'm also not a proponent of pushing dogma. Those are the two categories you're really highlighting The "numbers" guys and the "football" guys. I've preached on this before... It's dogma in a great sense. Those who take their analytic models and make it their God are every bit suffering from the same delusion and cult like narrow mindedness as those who don't bother to analyze their data AND their own early game tendencies. Sometimes you break them, sometimes you don't.
It's a fundamental disagreement. One, from a personnel standpoint, I'm highly skeptical of when the tape doesn't back it up.
edit: New England was a team that salvaged the tail end of their previous season by reducing their passing attempts. Tennessee has resurrected the career of Tannehill by putting him in an offense that protects him from volume throws. Seattle COULD* throw the ball a lot more, but we both know their offensive line struggles on the edges. The last thing you want to do is continually ask a QB to save your team when pressured. It's not a pragmatic approach to the game of football. THAT is what cost them last year vs Dallas. And while you bring up that game as an example, who was it that controlled the game with the more effective rushing attack and setup their #1 receivers with favorable matchups off that running game? Oh, that would be Dallas. Did you also want me to list the pressure rates that game?
Like I said, PFF serves it's purpose. In a vacuum with individual grades I tend to side with things they settle. But, much like their collective Oline ratings, I tend to disagree with a great deal else.
who said anything about PFF? I am interested in looking at the data in a way as to determine what is more efficient. A few points:
1) You use the word 'establish' the run, but as I pointed out that's a myth. We have data that suggests play action pass is effective *independent* of whether the run has been 'established'. We all grew up listening to talking heads ramble on about how they are running the ball so that play action will be more effective. turns out it doesn't work that way. You say later than play action works when the defense respects it. This is not true. Play action...just works. Even if the other team hasn't been running the ball or hasn't run it effectively.
2) I really wouldn't say New England salvaged much of anything. They were consistently poor on offense the entire second half of the year. Sony Michelle was terrible all year, and the passing game for NE was bad as well.
3) speaking of the dallas-seattle game, you talk about their offensive line struggling on the edges but when Wilson did drop back to pass that game GOOD THINGS HAPPENED. So it didn't look like it was struggling to protect Wilson that game, as evident by his ypa and how effective he was. Moreover as I pointed out in 1 and the data indicates, seattle couldnt run the ball at all and yet play action was still very effective for seattle. What killed them was all the first and second down running which went nowhere. You can talk about pressure rates and such all you want...but that doesn't change the data or what actually happened.
this issue has been settled some time ago. Will teams continue to run the ball too much early in the game and on 1st down? Maybe...but its definitely improved from several years ago. Teams also do dumb non-analytically oriented things like punt too much. The smart teams are catching on. Smart coaches/teams knew this truth decades ago- remember what BB said to Lawrence Taylor and the rest of the giants defense(he was DC then) before the giants/bills sb. He said "if Thurman Thomas runs for over 100 yards we will probably win this game". BB recognizes that letting Thurman 'get his' was a great strategy. And TT did. But his carries are still a hell of a lot less effective than the real danger- Kelly getting the ball down the field to Reed and Lofton and using the short passing game as well. So BB baited the Bills into pounding Thomas and the Bills offense was held in check. Almost 30 years later we see BB do the same thing with the titans and it almost cost them the titans a game they should have won.
Watch tonight's Baltimore-Tennessee game. I bet Tennessee comes out and tries to run henry a ton on first down, and I bet that goes nowhere and puts them in a ton of 2nd and 3rd and long. Meanwhile Baltimore isn't going to do that early- they are going to run Lamar a lot, and throw with Lamar, and then mix in a *little* traditional runs. Now the final rushing stats for ingram and the Baltimore backs may be respectable, but how many of those will come in the second half after the ravens get a big lead?
If Tennessee was smart, they would come out and do nothing but spread things out and throw. Throw 14/15 plays to open the game. Instead they are going to play right into the ravens hand and try to ground and pound, and it's going to turn out poorly for them. On offense at least.
who said anything about PFF? I am interested in looking at the data in a way as to determine what is more efficient. A few points:
1) You use the word 'establish' the run, but as I pointed out that's a myth. We have data that suggests play action pass is effective *independent* of whether the run has been 'established'. We all grew up listening to talking heads ramble on about how they are running the ball so that play action will be more effective. turns out it doesn't work that way. You say later than play action works when the defense respects it. This is not true. Play action...just works. Even if the other team hasn't been running the ball or hasn't run it effectively.
2) I really wouldn't say New England salvaged much of anything. They were consistently poor on offense the entire second half of the year. Sony Michelle was terrible all year, and the passing game for NE was bad as well.
3) speaking of the dallas-seattle game, you talk about their offensive line struggling on the edges but when Wilson did drop back to pass that game GOOD THINGS HAPPENED. So it didn't look like it was struggling to protect Wilson that game, as evident by his ypa and how effective he was. Moreover as I pointed out in 1 and the data indicates, seattle couldnt run the ball at all and yet play action was still very effective for seattle. What killed them was all the first and second down running which went nowhere. You can talk about pressure rates and such all you want...but that doesn't change the data or what actually happened.
this issue has been settled some time ago. Will teams continue to run the ball too much early in the game and on 1st down? Maybe...but its definitely improved from several years ago. Teams also do dumb non-analytically oriented things like punt too much. The smart teams are catching on. Smart coaches/teams knew this truth decades ago- remember what BB said to Lawrence Taylor and the rest of the giants defense(he was DC then) before the giants/bills sb. He said "if Thurman Thomas runs for over 100 yards we will probably win this game". BB recognizes that letting Thurman 'get his' was a great strategy. And TT did. But his carries are still a hell of a lot less effective than the real danger- Kelly getting the ball down the field to Reed and Lofton and using the short passing game as well. So BB baited the Bills into pounding Thomas and the Bills offense was held in check. Almost 30 years later we see BB do the same thing with the titans and it almost cost them the titans a game they should have won.
Watch tonight's Baltimore-Tennessee game. I bet Tennessee comes out and tries to run henry a ton on first down, and I bet that goes nowhere and puts them in a ton of 2nd and 3rd and long. Meanwhile Baltimore isn't going to do that early- they are going to run Lamar a lot, and throw with Lamar, and then mix in a *little* traditional runs. Now the final rushing stats for ingram and the Baltimore backs may be respectable, but how many of those will come in the second half after the ravens get a big lead?
If Tennessee was smart, they would come out and do nothing but spread things out and throw. Throw 14/15 plays to open the game. Instead they are going to play right into the ravens hand and try to ground and pound, and it's going to turn out poorly for them. On offense at least.
What RB led the NFL in rushing? Is his team still in the playoffs today?
I'll give you a hint: he also set a record with 377 yards rushing in 2 consecutive playoff games as the primary reason they beat NE and Baltimore. THAT is what sets up play-action passing for a guy like Ryan Tannehill who hasn't had a very happy NFL journey in life before handing off to Henry. In fact, it even set up a play-action TD pass from Henry. While it's not very Taco friendly - there's teams in NE and Baltimore that "Remember the Titans."
-
1st and ten to open the game: run for short game
2nd and long: run for short game
Far far too much running on 1st and 2nd down. He's had a pretty decent qb and this 'ground and pound' approach is anti-analytics and a losing strategy. Running Dalvin cook like 36 times for not even 3 yards per carry almost cost them the saints game.
If a guy cannot understand that running the ball on 1st and 2nd down in the nfl early in games(blowouts are different) is not a good strategy relative to passing.....well, that's a problem.
And don't cite what Baltimore is doing. A large portion of those aren't traditional runs but ultra efficient qb runs, and another large portion of them are after the game is already a blowout. They actually run the ball with traditional running plays in the first half less than most teams, which is a key to maximizing their success.
Chubb is a fine back, but in the current NFL(and probably the former nfl, teams were just dumb) you don't win by running the ball. Teams that run a ton in a game have a good record, but that has nothing to do with causative factor. I don't know that stefansky fully understands this
1st and ten to open the game: run for short game
2nd and long: run for short game
So your extensive NFL background which consists of collecting football cards - you would have put everything on Kirk Cousins instad of the RB (Dalvin Cook) that carried that team?
The main concerns I have about Stefanski is the team that employed him rarely trusted him enough for total empowerment. I posted his background in Minnesota which showed how many years he worked as an Assistant QB Coach. This year, they had to bring in Gary Kubiak to bail him out of the chaos that took place early on this season. I'm having difficulty seeing how this equates to Stefanski being the leader of men for all 3 phases of the game in Cleveland.
None of that matters if Dee Haslam thinks the guy is gorgeous!
-
1st and ten to open the game: run for short game
2nd and long: run for short game
So your extensive NFL background which consists of collecting football cards - you would have put everything on Kirk Cousins instad of the RB (Dalvin Cook) that carried that team?
The main concerns I have about Stefanski is the team that employed him rarely trusted him enough for total empowerment. I posted his background in Minnesota which showed how many years he worked as an Assistant QB Coach. This year, they had to bring in Gary Kubiak to bail him out of the chaos that took place early on this season. I'm having difficulty seeing how this equates to Stefanski being the leader of men for all 3 phases of the game in Cleveland.
None of that matters if Dee Haslam thinks the guy is gorgeous!
So your extensive NFL background which consists of collecting football cards - you would have put everything on Kirk Cousins instad of the RB (Dalvin Cook) that carried that team?
The main concerns I have about Stefanski is the team that employed him rarely trusted him enough for total empowerment. I posted his background in Minnesota which showed how many years he worked as an Assistant QB Coach. This year, they had to bring in Gary Kubiak to bail him out of the chaos that took place early on this season. I'm having difficulty seeing how this equates to Stefanski being the leader of men for all 3 phases of the game in Cleveland.
None of that matters if Dee Haslam thinks the guy is gorgeous!
Dee and Jimmy could fuck up a wet dream without trying all that hard lol
-
So...
-
-
So your saying they will be taking a 2nd look at Stefanski?
I think he is saying that in a one on one death match between those 2 in the game that happened today, Saleh put the sleeper hold on Stefanski. Until the mid 4th quarter when the game was decided, the Vikes did not even have 100 total yards.
I think he is saying that in a one on one death match between those 2 in the game that happened today, Saleh put the sleeper hold on Stefanski. Until the mid 4th quarter when the game was decided, the Vikes did not even have 100 total yards.
You can interpret it anyway you like i'm just telling you what i have seen. Do you hire the guy that went 5 and 3 and had the team play as good as it has in a long time or do you hire a nobody. Do you hire the guy that put the "sleeper" hold on or do you hire the guy that got put in the "sleeper" hold?
-
I think he is saying that in a one on one death match between those 2 in the game that happened today, Saleh put the sleeper hold on Stefanski. Until the mid 4th quarter when the game was decided, the Vikes did not even have 100 total yards.
You can interpret it anyway you like i'm just telling you what i have seen. Do you hire the guy that went 5 and 3 and had the team play as good as it has in a long time or do you hire a nobody. Do you hire the guy that put the "sleeper" hold on or do you hire the guy that got put in the "sleeper" hold?
You can interpret it anyway you like i'm just telling you what i have seen. Do you hire the guy that went 5 and 3 and had the team play as good as it has in a long time or do you hire a nobody. Do you hire the guy that put the "sleeper" hold on or do you hire the guy that got put in the "sleeper" hold?
Yea, I don't think I follow you. I would have thought that you would have chosen the python that swallowed the deer , instead of hiring the deer.
.
-
The only thing I like about the Stefanski hire is Taco posting this thread less tham 24h before it.
The only thing I like about the Stefanski hire is Taco posting this thread less tham 24h before it.
? Post of the thread Nero!
-
I just can't wrap my head around hiring a CO-offensive coordinator with one season experience as a head coach, right after the debacle of hiring an OC with little experience who completely bombed out.
Maybe that isn't fair, Stefanski is Stefanski and Kitchens is Kitchens, but man, that's a ballsy move if Haslam does it.
I just can't wrap my head around hiring a CO-offensive coordinator with one season experience as a head coach, right after the debacle of hiring an OC with little experience who completely bombed out.
Maybe that isn't fair, Stefanski is Stefanski and Kitchens is Kitchens, but man, that's a ballsy move if Haslam does it.
Nah it's more like if this coach flops, Jimmy can fire DePodesta for screwing up.
Of course you're not, that would require far more than just looking at a handful of numbers for yourself as to how the data arrives there. Like I said... DOGMA. This is how sites like PFF use their god to determine that Corey Coleman is the best WR in the 2016 draft. There is no room for reflection and additional input once a "conclusion" has been reached by their proprietary grading models.
This is what scares the crap out of me Tia if we go overboard on analytics. The numbers say this guy is gonna be the greatest.
-
I just can't wrap my head around hiring a CO-offensive coordinator with one season experience as a head coach, right after the debacle of hiring an OC with little experience who completely bombed out.
Maybe that isn't fair, Stefanski is Stefanski and Kitchens is Kitchens, but man, that's a ballsy move if Haslam does it.
Nah it's more like if this coach flops, Jimmy can fire DePodesta for screwing up.
Of course you're not, that would require far more than just looking at a handful of numbers for yourself as to how the data arrives there. Like I said... DOGMA. This is how sites like PFF use their god to determine that Corey Coleman is the best WR in the 2016 draft. There is no room for reflection and additional input once a "conclusion" has been reached by their proprietary grading models.
This is what scares the crap out of me Tia if we go overboard on analytics. The numbers say this guy is gonna be the greatest.
-
We should simply use AI in every single decision that needs to be made. It was good enough for Skynet.
-
We should simply use AI in every single decision that needs to be made. It was good enough for Skynet.
We should simply use AI in every single decision that needs to be made. It was good enough for Skynet.
All Inclusive? As in resorts.....where it is all you can eat and drink all week?
-
All Inclusive? As in resorts.....where it is all you can eat and drink all week?
Yes, all inclusive.... that's what AI stands for... yes.
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