Reading the tea leaves re: WR recruiting

[Millhouse]

One word play calls and a handful of plays in the game plan per week. They looked like the Colts under Manning against Uconn they ran it so perfectly. The fact that Nassib could handle that is why he is a potential draft pick.

my memory is hazy but there was some gruden interview of cam newton where gruden barked f delta sixty niner bufu shift dickhole at Newton and Newton had no idea what he was talking about and responded that their plays were one word. of course all the concussed nfl meathead talking heads put their hands on their gigantic guts and laughed at Newton. meanwhile people with brains think, wouldn't simpler calls be better?

marrone deserves credit for evolving. i hope it continues as much as i'm not happy about the bills hiring him

 

[SmilinBob]

my memory is hazy but there was some gruden interview of cam newton where gruden barked f delta sixty niner bufu shift dickhole at Newton and Newton had no idea what he was talking about and responded that their plays were one word. of course all the concussed nfl meathead talking heads put their hands on their gigantic guts and laughed at Newton. meanwhile people with brains think, wouldn't simpler calls be better?

marrone deserves credit for evolving. i hope it continues as much as i'm not happy about the bills hiring him

Just make things as complicated as they have to be, it does seem to be just that simple I agree.

 

[PhatOrange]

my memory is hazy but there was some gruden interview of cam newton where gruden barked f delta sixty niner bufu shift dickhole at Newton and Newton had no idea what he was talking about and responded that their plays were one word. of course all the concussed nfl meathead talking heads put their hands on their gigantic guts and laughed at Newton. meanwhile people with brains think, wouldn't simpler calls be better?

marrone deserves credit for evolving. i hope it continues as much as i'm not happy about the bills hiring him

just shows how over thought football has become. keep it simple stupid works just fine.

 

[RMH44]

just shows how over thought football has become. keep it simple stupid works just fine.

Shafer has been quoted as saying that X's and O's are over rated. Simple is always better.

 

[GoSU96]

my memory is hazy but there was some gruden interview of cam newton where gruden barked f delta sixty niner bufu shift dickhole at Newton and Newton had no idea what he was talking about and responded that their plays were one word. of course all the concussed nfl meathead talking heads put their hands on their gigantic guts and laughed at Newton. meanwhile people with brains think, wouldn't simpler calls be better?

marrone deserves credit for evolving. i hope it continues as much as i'm not happy about the bills hiring him

The Chip Kelly approach is spreading.

 

[Finwad32]

my memory is hazy but there was some gruden interview of cam newton where gruden barked f delta sixty niner bufu shift dickhole at Newton and Newton had no idea what he was talking about and responded that their plays were one word. of course all the concussed nfl meathead talking heads put their hands on their gigantic guts and laughed at Newton. meanwhile people with brains think, wouldn't simpler calls be better?

marrone deserves credit for evolving. i hope it continues as much as i'm not happy about the bills hiring him

Speaking of Gruden, think Nassib gets some air time in his QB camp this year? I would think so.

 

[JeremyCuse]

Honestly I dont think it surprising the OC brought in several WR recruits, people were looking at roster #'s more then actual production. West is the only true returning player with experience and he has had bouts of the dropsies, Clark is a Juco SR who is a role player at best, Foster and Hale will both be redshirt sophmores with zero catches between them and 2 season ending injuries, Kobena is another role guy, Flemming hasnt caught a pass here in 3 years, and Lewis/Cornelius are unknown red shirt freshman. Adding a couple playmakers to go along with Funderburke is not only smart is necessary, I never liked the idea of not bringing in any WR unless we were moving Brolyd there full time. You shoud always have at least one WR a class.

 

[billsin01]

I think it's as simple as coaches having prior relationships and figuring these players' talents, regardless of position, were too good to pass up.

This and I think the factor everyone is forgetting is time. I mean, if you're MCD and you're a coordinator at a BCS school for the first time and you are hired on at some point in mind-Jan you aren't going to have a ton of time to sit and watch film and probably aren't really even going to get to know the players you've got until after Feb. 6. So the safe bet is to go out and try to land guys you know have good talent and more or less fit the system you're running.

If six months later you realize you have a glut of WRs or RBs or OL or something, maybe you consider a few position changes and then you try to rectify that in future classes.

But, either way, I would think time is a huge issue.

 

[billsin01]

One word play calls and a handful of plays in the game plan per week. They looked like the Colts under Manning against Uconn they ran it so perfectly. The fact that Nassib could handle that is why he is a potential draft pick.

But isn't that basically the exact opposite of what DM was trying to do during the whole "multiple" era with 9,000,000 formations and a ton of different styles, etc.? Not trying to derail this thread nor am I trying to be a pr!ck, but this was always my point -- for whatever that's worth -- on offensive systems: figure out what works and get really good at it. A 38,000 page playbook is often doing as much harm as good.

 

[billsin01]

my memory is hazy but there was some gruden interview of cam newton where gruden barked f delta sixty niner bufu shift dickhole at Newton and Newton had no idea what he was talking about and responded that their plays were one word.

I remember at one point being bummed out that ND swung and missed on Gruden. The more I hear him, the more I'm thrilled they never hired him. He may be a nice guy and motivate/relate well to players, but he comes off as one of those guys who can only speak in football cliches and appears to have primarily made a career out of looking like a good football coach.

 

[dollarbill44]

I remember at one point being bummed out that ND swung and missed on Gruden. The more I hear him, the more I'm thrilled they never hired him. He may be a nice guy and motivate/relate well to players, but he comes off as one of those guys who can only speak in football cliches and appears to have primarily made a career out of looking like a good football coach.

I'm not sold on Gruden either. I think he's found his niche in the booth, because, damn does he like to talk. He never shuts up. He's the new Madden.

 

[JoeSU]

All WRs are not created equal. The X, Z and slot receivers require somewhat different skill sets, and during a game a team needs to be able to rotate at least 2 WRs at each position. Including the benefit of having a couple of incoming guys RS, and assuming 1 or more WRs misses time during the season due to an injury, having 10 WRs on the roster is not as crazy as it might appear.

The X receiver is generally the split end. He is the widest receiver away from the tight end, (weak side receiver) and in most formations, he's tethered to the line of scrimmage. He cannot go in motion, and is usually facing a CB who can jam him at the line. So the X receiver needs to have speed to get down the sideline, the quickness to get away from the corner, and the physicality to come off a jam at the LOS.

The Z receiver (the 'flanker'), who is often a team's featured WR, lines up on the strong side, opposite side of the split end in most formations, off the line of scrimmage a few yards. That enables the tight end to be eligible, because if the Z receiver were on the line, it would make the tight end ineligible. The Z receiver has to posess the speed and the acceleration to beat cornerbacks, but he can be put in motion because he's off the line of scrimmage, so you can get him down in the slot and run for passes over the middle.

The slot receiver is usually covered by a LB and/or S (in a zone), so he's got an entirely different challenge to beat those defenders, than he would when he's lined up as a wide receiver (X or Z).

 

[SmilinBob]

Also, is it possible that some of these wr's are more hurt then we are lead to believe? I'm sure it may be a combo of ideas or thoughts people have posted on this thread.

 

[Crusty]

Thanks Joe, nice post.

 

[Crusty]

Speaking of hurt, is there any news on Sugar Bear? Very concerned about that hip injury, er middle body injury.

 

[Millhouse]

The Chip Kelly approach is spreading.

http://www.grantland.com/story/_/id...-helped-maintain-dominance-tom-brady-patriots

 

[OttoinGrotto]

Take away Broyld and you forgot Clark.

You are absolutely correct. I'll edit the OP.

 

[OttoinGrotto]

Play fast and simple > play slow and multiple

 

[IthacaMatt]

Unbelievably so. If they had tried it from the huddle it would have gone nowhere imo. It basically can't get simpler. It was the tempo and the pass/run balance that kept foes on their heels.

Well, it was only "unbelievably simple" because Nassib could make hot reads quickly and got sufficient protection from his line.

 

[IthacaMatt]

All WRs are not created equal. The X, Z and slot receivers require somewhat different skill sets, and during a game a team needs to be able to rotate at least 2 WRs at each position. Including the benefit of having a couple of incoming guys RS, and assuming 1 or more WRs misses time during the season due to an injury, having 10 WRs on the roster is not as crazy as it might appear.

The X receiver is generally the split end. He is the widest receiver away from the tight end, (weak side receiver) and in most formations, he's tethered to the line of scrimmage. He cannot go in motion, and is usually facing a CB who can jam him at the line. So the X receiver needs to have speed to get down the sideline, the quickness to get away from the corner, and the physicality to come off a jam at the LOS.

The Z receiver (the 'flanker'), who is often a team's featured WR, lines up on the strong side, opposite side of the split end in most formations, off the line of scrimmage a few yards. That enables the tight end to be eligible, because if the Z receiver were on the line, it would make the tight end ineligible. The Z receiver has to posess the speed and the acceleration to beat cornerbacks, but he can be put in motion because he's off the line of scrimmage, so you can get him down in the slot and run for passes over the middle.

The slot receiver is usually covered by a LB and/or S (in a zone), so he's got an entirely different challenge to beat those defenders, than he would when he's lined up as a wide receiver (X or Z).

Small nit - if the Z (flanker) was also on the LOS on the strong side, he would be ineligible, not the tight end.

 

[GoSU96]

Play fast and simple > play slow and multiple

Need to have the players to be able to practice that tempo, and a defense that is deep enough to hold up being on the field more.

Also playing fast is a good way to run yourself out of the game if you don't have the players to pull it off.

 

[billsin01]

Need to have the players to be able to practice that tempo, and a defense that is deep enough to hold up being on the field more.

Also playing fast is a good way to run yourself out of the game if you don't have the players to pull it off.

Fine, I'll grant these. I'm not entirely certain I agree, but it's a fair argument. That said, it still would seem to run largely counter to the concept of "multiple" no?

 

[steve deberg]

Also playing fast is a good way to run yourself out of the game if you don't have the players to pull it off.

Not relevant at all but for some reason, this scene came to mind.

 

[OttoinGrotto]

Need to have the players to be able to practice that tempo, and a defense that is deep enough to hold up being on the field more.

Also playing fast is a good way to run yourself out of the game if you don't have the players to pull it off.

Fine, I'll grant these. I'm not entirely certain I agree, but it's a fair argument. That said, it still would seem to run largely counter to the concept of "multiple" no?

See, what's funny is that we actually had better TOP numbers this past season than the previous one.

Being worried about running yourself out of the game is something loser's worry about.

 

[GoSU96]

See, what's funny is that we actually had better TOP numbers this past season than the previous one.

Being worried about running yourself out of the game is something loser's worry about.

The players needed to run the same offense weren't on the team before.

Hay, Tiller on the OL, Bailey all by himself. Who's the third receiver last year?