So much for the revolution

[RF2044]

I guess once teams got film on the Iggs, the offense wasn't so easy to defend after all.

 

[OrangePA]

I guess once teams got film on the Iggs, the offense wasn't so easy to defend after all.

Talent > scheme.

 

[RF2044]

Talent > scheme.

And yet, KC had the #1 pick in the draft last year, implying that they were the worst team in the league.

Interesting.

 

[skurey]

Thursday night NFL games mean nothing. They are always the worst form of football played.

 

[boulderorange]

And yet, KC had the #1 pick in the draft last year, implying that they were the worst team in the league.

Interesting.

Also had the most pro-bowlers last season...

 

[orange79]

I said this to my wife, watching the flavor-of-the-month beat-down of Washington in Week 1. She asked how anyone was going to beat them this year. I told her by the middle of the season, the league will have figured out how to stop it. Happened a bit faster than I thought it would.

 

[IthacaBarrel]

The 6 turnovers don't help either. In addition, Andy Reid with a decent defense equals playoffs just about every year.

Was happy for Reid, great coach

 

[HOFCeluck]

I'm amazed that reid and mcnabb reviews the vtriol they did in philadelphia on a yearly basis. They were HORRIBLE before they arrived.

If Eagles fans should be posed at anyone is there FO.

 

[SmilinBob]

The turnovers were faster than the offense.

I have a hard time telling the difference between the pundits and the stereotypical teenage girl. They change their stories with the slightest of wind changes. Amazing offense...they play like sooo fast. Oh my god, this is terrible, there is no way this type of scheme will work in the NFL...worst system ever.

 

[DeGrozz]

Not only a terrible scheme by the Iggles, but the slow down offenses run by the opposing teams are like B1G hoops. Just terrible to watch.

I'd hate to be a Philly D-lineman. You keep facing these drawn out lengthy offensive drives only to have your team run 3 plays in 65 seconds, then punt and repeat.

 

[A Clockwork Orange]

Yep RF, you win. The 461 total yards of offense that ranks third in the league was definitely the issue last night. The pace and style was most definitely the issue.

NO! Don't try to talk me out of it, it's definitely the offensive style, and not the defense that for a second straight year can't keep an offense off the field, and it's definitely NOT the five turnovers that the Eagles made. Nope, it wasn't any of those things. I mean, that awful offense only averaged 7 yards per play last night, and gained 431 yards total. But you're right, this new style surely isn't working at all.

All sarcasm aside, coaches can institute a scheme (one that does work based on how quickly and effectively they can move the ball) but players are still going to make mistakes. Especially a player like Michael Vick who, ya know has a history of this. The scheme still works, sometimes players make mistakes. But you're right, boring ball is much better, and no team that plays boring ball EVER makes mistakes. Thank goodness for the board geniuses.

 

[Scooch]

Talent > scheme.

In the NFL it tends to be almost the exact opposite, actually.

And you're not suggesting the Chiefs are significantly more talented than the Eagles, are you?

The talent level between even the best and worst teams is relatively slim. Scheme, game plan, preparation, and of course execution, tends to be what separates winners from losers.

The Eagles turned the ball over FIVE times. That's why they lost. Not talent vs. scheme.

 

[RF2044]

Yep RF, you win. The 461 total yards of offense that ranks third in the league was definitely the issue last night. The pace and style was most definitely the issue.

NO! Don't try to talk me out of it, it's definitely the offensive style, and not the defense that for a second straight year can't keep an offense off the field, and it's definitely NOT the five turnovers that the Eagles made. Nope, it wasn't any of those things. I mean, that awful offense only averaged 7 yards per play last night, and gained 431 yards total. But you're right, this new style surely isn't working at all.

All sarcasm aside, coaches can institute a scheme (one that does work based on how quickly and effectively they can move the ball) but players are still going to make mistakes. Especially a player like Michael Vick who, ya know has a history of this. The scheme still works, sometimes players make mistakes. But you're right, boring ball is much better, and no team that plays boring ball EVER makes mistakes. Thank goodness for the board geniuses.

You, amongst others, implied that this system was going to revolutionize how NFL offense would be played and catapult the Iggs into the upper echelon. Others suggested that what we witnessed on opening weekend was a combination of a lousy Washington team being unprepared for what they were facing. And right now, the revolution is 1-2. Viva the revolution!!!

"Boring" is of far less importance than scoring and W/L, except to board geniuses. Yards--awesome, they wracked up a lot of yards last night moving between the 30s. How many points did they score amassing all those yards? BFD.

Scooch's post above is right on the money, and highlights why schemes aren't nearly as big of a factor as some like to rationalize. The talent differential in the NFL, unlike college, is marginally slim. Schemes can afford a slight advantage. Coaching can get you a slight advantage. And personnel mismatches can similarly yield a slight competitive advantage.

But the notion of a scheme alone transforming a team's potential is a philosophy I don't subscribe to. College, on the other hand, I'm with you 100%--in large part because unlike the NFL, there can be significant talent differentials between teams. With the right scheme and personnel at the college level, teams are able to exploit mismatches to devastating effect. Not as big of a factor in the NFL.

 

[OrangePA]

In the NFL it tends to be almost the exact opposite, actually.

And you're not suggesting the Chiefs are significantly more talented than the Eagles, are you?

The talent level between even the best and worst teams is relatively slim. Scheme, game plan, preparation, and of course execution, tends to be what separates winners from losers.

The Eagles turned the ball over FIVE times. That's why they lost. Not talent vs. scheme.

Oh please.

You really believe that scheme is more important than talent? Why is that Chip is having about the same success that Andy Reid had last year with the Eagles? Because he has pretty much the same team. The scheme is interesting, but the players make the difference.

Are you suggesting that first round picks in the NFL draft don't mean anything - they aren't important??

So the Cleveland Browns traded a great RB because they were more interested in changing the scheme rather than getting a first round pick in the 2014 draft?

Obviously not - talent is pretty much everything - in every sport. The teams with the talent generally win and the teams without talent generally lose - regardless of scheme.

And, yes, the Chiefs have way more talent than the Eagles.

They have five Pro Bowlers for gosh sakes.

 

[OrangePA]

I said this to my wife, watching the flavor-of-the-month beat-down of Washington in Week 1. She asked how anyone was going to beat them this year. I told her by the middle of the season, the league will have figured out how to stop it. Happened a bit faster than I thought it would.

Other schemes seem to be having their way with the Redskins - that team is having a lot of problems.

 

[OrangePA]

And yet, KC had the #1 pick in the draft last year, implying that they were the worst team in the league.

Interesting.

They had a really bad season last year even though some expected them to win their division.

They had quality issues on offense, and an awful clubhouse situation - including a sucide by a player in the parking lot in front of the coach and staff.

Suicides by players in front of coaches tend to interfere with success on the field.

The Chiefs have more talent than the Eagles - the Eagles are just not all that good.

I was at the game last night - I talked with guys who know. The Chiefs have more talent.

 

[A Clockwork Orange]

You, amongst others, implied that this system was going to revolutionize how NFL offense would be played and catapult the Iggs into the upper echelon. Others suggested that what we witnessed on opening weekend was a combination of a lousy Washington team being unprepared for what they were facing. And right now, the revolution is 1-2. Viva the revolution!!!

"Boring" is of far less importance than scoring and W/L, except to board geniuses. Yards--awesome, they wracked up a lot of yards last night moving between the 30s. How many points did they score amassing all those yards? BFD.

Scooch's post above is right on the money, and highlights why schemes aren't nearly as big of a factor as some like to rationalize. The talent differential in the NFL, unlike college, is marginally slim. Schemes can afford a slight advantage. Coaching can get you a slight advantage. And personnel mismatches can similarly yield a slight competitive advantage.

But the notion of a scheme alone transforming a team's potential is a philosophy I don't subscribe to. College, on the other hand, I'm with you 100%--in large part because unlike the NFL, there can be significant talent differentials between teams. With the right scheme and personnel at the college level, teams are able to exploit mismatches to devastating effect. Not as big of a factor in the NFL.

RF, I like you. You're a great poster and I love reading what you have to say. We're not as polar opposite on this as you might think either. I agree, talent is more important than scheme. Always has been. But when you have the right kind of talent for a unique scheme, you can be great.

You're saying the same thing people said about the West Coast offense in the early '80s. "It's a fad, it will never last." Yet here we are 30 years later and the West Coast offense pervades every single aspect of the sport. People though Bill Walsh was nuts at first, until he started winning Super Bowls. Bill Walsh was 2-14 and 6-10 his first two years, until he got his personnel for his scheme. He didn't look back.

Is Chip Kelly the next Bill Walsh? Time will tell. What I do know is that he has taken an Eagles offense that was less than pedestrian last year, and created an offense that is exciting to watch and moves the chains. They scored 33 and 30 points their first two games this season. They scored 16 last night because of turnovers. It wasn't the offense that was broken, it was the execution. It was also the defense, plain and simple.

Everyone is so quick to rule out new concepts because they think about the wildcat gimmicks, etc... This offense isn't a gimmick play, or even a gimmick set of plays. The scheme works, but if you don't have the players to fit it, it can look ugly. If and when he gets all of 'his' guys in this offense, it will be a scary thing to watch. To me, it still is pretty potent. I think it will be even more so if he's given the time to develop it fully.

With roughly the same players as last year this team is averaging roughly 50 yards more per game through the first three games. If you want to blame an offensive scheme for a poor defense and for execution errors, feel free. It's just not true though. Remember, a revolution doesn't happen in great big jumps, it happens in baby steps. We have to look no further than the West Coast offense to see that.

 

[jekelish]

I think people also drastically undervalue Alex Smith, as well. Peter King tweeted something last night I found pretty eye opening:

Peter King ‏@SI_PeterKing12h
Alex Smith's last 17 starts: 3 losses, 24 touchdowns, 5 interceptions.


Expand

That's pretty freaking good, yet he's still a complete afterthought, and considered by many to still be a bust and a joke. He simply does not turn the ball over, makes smart decisions, and is SUPER efficient. Not a lot of flash, but he gets the job done. Put him with a good defense and a smart coach, and add in a dynamic RB and you've got a recipe for at least an 8 or 9 win team, and a playoff contender.

 

[OrangeFoo]

A few points...

Philly had over 250 yards on the ground and KC kept the ball for almost 40 minutes... So last night might be more proof that the Eagle's D stinks more than anything else...

Really good article by Bill Barnwell on this topic... http://www.grantland.com/story/_/id/9696849/bill-barnwell-chief-eagles

Barnwell says KC's D is so good that most teams can't replica what they did to shutdown Philly.

 

[OrangePA]

I think people also drastically undervalue Alex Smith, as well. Peter King tweeted something last night I found pretty eye opening:

Peter King ‏@SI_PeterKing12h
Alex Smith's last 17 starts: 3 losses, 24 touchdowns, 5 interceptions.


Expand

That's pretty freaking good, yet he's still a complete afterthought, and considered by many to still be a bust and a joke. He simply does not turn the ball over, makes smart decisions, and is SUPER efficient. Not a lot of flash, but he gets the job done. Put him with a good defense and a smart coach, and add in a dynamic RB and you've got a recipe for at least an 8 or 9 win team, and a playoff contender.

In other words, the Chiefs have better talent this year than last year.

 

[AZOrange]

Oh please.



So the Cleveland Browns traded a great RB because they were more interested in changing the scheme rather than getting a first round pick in the 2014 draft?

All other things aside (and that it was a weird trade timing wise)...is Richardson really great?!

Also everyone covering that story noted how he didn't fit into the offensive scheme of the new staff.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - http://tapatalk.com/m?id=1

 

[longislandcuse]

Philly isnt even the most up-tempo offense in the NFL, Buffalo is. Second fastest is Denver.

 

[OrangePA]

All other things aside (and that it was a weird trade timing wise)...is Richardson really great?!

Also everyone covering that story noted how he didn't fit into the offensive scheme of the new staff.


-

They want a QB - they need draft picks - especially in the first round. They want Teddy B.

They say what they have to say to avoid the fans complaining that they have given up the season.

Richardson can play in any system - he caught 53 passes last year for gosh sakes.

It's about talent not scheme.

 

[OttoinGrotto]

It's about talent not scheme.

You will never be convinced otherwise. That's fine.

I'd rather have a coach that believes in scheme and is innovative with scheme than one that believes the story ends with talent.

 

[jekelish]

They want a QB - they need draft picks - especially in the first round. They want Teddy B.

They say what they have to say to avoid the fans complaining that they have given up the season.

Richardson can play in any system - he caught 53 passes last year for gosh sakes.

It's about talent not scheme.

It's funny down here in Texas, as soon as the trade went through, ESPN radio personalities down here were saying "The Johnny Football sweepstakes has officially begun!"

I just sat quietly in my car shaking my head. If Teddy Bridgewater isn't the top QB in the next draft I will be stunned. And Johnny Football will be a borderline first round pick this year, I'm betting.