DawgTalkers.net Forums DawgTalk Pure Football Forum Offensive Scheme

J/C

Why are we getting to the line late?

Ya know, I never thought to pay attention to that. My guess is that the plays are slow coming in.


As an aside, what I would have liked to have seen is an interim scheme change. I think it would have been prudent to start the season with something that was more akin to what we ran last year and over the course of the season morph things into what they're wanting us to become. Start with what was known to work and let the guys grow into what they want to do.

If we had last year's offense last night, this would have been an utter blowout.

I agree. What's even more odd to me is how effective we are in hurry-up or no-huddle...then...when we take our time to decide what to do...we take too darned long. It doesn't make sense.

It's almost like...in an effort to out-smart the opponent, we ended up outsmarting ourselves...at least I hope not.

It feels like WE are still trying to figure out our offense.

Just let Baker play his way ...

When watching last night before falling asleep, I didn't notice a problem in the huddle. They didn't seem to take extra long to call the play and line up.

Freddie is calling plays. Maybe he doesn't understand the Monken O all that well at this point and has to mill over each play in his mind.

If we expect the QB to read the D and realign some people, or out and out change the call, we need to be up there with 10-12 seconds. As others have mentioned, we are getting there with 5 on the clock.

I wonder if it might be so the defense can’t react to US either? Don’t let them communicate much based on our formations

I missed the first quarter and a half due to a church obligation/meeting.

My wife knew, when I got home, she'd have to back up the dvr so I could watch from the beginning. She mentioned it to me on the first drive, so I paid attention to that the rest of the game.

My answer? The plays are coming in way too late. Exactly WHY that is, I don't know. Freddie not sure what to run? Freddie waiting to see who/what the d subs in? Freddie not certain who/if he wants to sub?

But, it seems most of the game, the ball wasn't snapped until less than 2-3 seconds on the play clock, and many times with just 1 second left.

I hope not. I don't think we are THAT team yet.

Agreed. I think that would be pie-in-the-sky level hopes of a reason.

You nailed it continuity is this teams greatest challenge, its really that simple.

Did Monkem do any Motion last year in Tampa?

I was going to pose this to Vers in a PM, but then decided to includse all.

I am not sure what O we are using. Is this the Monken O or is it some sort of blending with Freddie ideas?

Does Freddie even have a offense? I am not saying he doesn't understand O. He clearly does from playing at a high level and coaching on O for a long time.

Does he have what he would call his playbook? I assume Monken brought in a playbook he would call his own.

I am not sure we have had a meeting of the minds here.

I found this article to be interesting. It is from May. I know I didn't read it then, but maybe it has already been posted, but it is still good.

https://www.dawgsbynature.com/2019/5/10/18512991/what-to-expect-from-todd-monken-stats-overview

Here's what I guess happened.

1. Freddie hired Monken. They share the same philosophy to be explosive, but Monken's scheme is not what Freddie implemented last year.

2. They trade for Odell.

3. They start minicamps and training camps and begin installing Monken's offense. He is the offensive coordinator after all. Rumors that there was some head butting were probably true at some point but my guess is Freddie acquiesced to Monken. That's why he brought him here.

4. Throughout camp Baker most likely demonstrated he was ready for this and thereby validating Monken's system.. That's what practicing against the same team every day over and over will do. Probably led to some false positives.

5. So the wheels were in motion and between trading for Odell and getting rid of every blocking fullback and tight end there is almost no choice but to stick with what you implemented all camp.

6. They overestimated Baker and the team being ready for this. I think Freddie saw the writing on the wall in the third preseason game which is why he tried to turn Devalve into a fullback. That plan failed.

7. Once the real bullets started flying, it was obvious this is currently a bad fit. They dialed it back a bit in game 2 but I think there's only so much they can dial back at this point. Baker needs to grow in a hurry.

8. Baker and Freddie were very frustrated in their post game pressers after a WIN. I think they realize they're are going to be scrambling for answers.

9. In hindsight, Freddie should have pulled a McVay and been the offensive coordinator himself.

We could not have asked for a worse outcome if we wanted to legit compete this year. It's really almost too late to do anything other than 1) Freddie takes over the offense and/or fires Monken or 2) continue down this path. The problem with choosing option 1 is we no longer have the personnel for it.

Baker is going to have to grow up in a hurry. At this point he almost just needs to be a game manager with the occasional strike until he starts processing faster.

Great article!
It basically validates what we have been seeing on the field: increased turnovers, increased yards through the air, increased tight window throws...

I would say that this definitely appears to be the Monken influence.

I don't know if it is a matter of processing or not. He processed pretty well last year, even if some say it was a half field process....and it could have been. Not questioning opinions here.


I don't mind game managers. When you get down to it, that is a QB's job. All good QBs were good game managers. I don't see being a good game manager as a bad thing. Who wants a BAD game manager?

I do think it is Monken who has us trying to strike deep

Good....somebody read the article.
Thanks

j/c:

Some good thought in the last few to several posts. All our related to scheme. Getting the play in late is not related to scheme. LOL

For those of you discussing Monken and Freddie, and I think that is a very legit conversation in regards to our scheme, think about this question.

Do you remember Silver's report about things not going smoothly w/the new install of the offense? A lot of people blew that off for reasons I don't want to get into, but it made me go "hmmmmmmm" at the time, because Monken's offense didn't seem to mesh w/what Freddie did last year.

I am not a fan of that offense. Yes, they get a lot of big plays and it can be dynamic, However, it leads to a ton of sacks and turnovers. It also leads to more penalties and puts a ton of pressure on your D because it can put them in too many bad situations.

Think about it. Let me know your thoughts. I think it is an interesting topic.

My thoughts are I agree, being late to the line isn't scheme, but it can hurt the scheme. The conversation turned that way so I made comment. Sorry to break the rules.



I do remember the article.. we will see where this goes.


I can live with 1-3 because if we meld, we can wins games late in the season.

You didn't break any rules. I was just trying to clarify things. And my post wasn't to you. I actually liked your comments about Monken. I did put "j/c" when I clicked on your post. At least I hope I did.

J/c

I just read that Kitchens said we were taking the playclock down by design, especially since we were up such a large amount ... not sure it’s believable, but thats his stance

Also, I think we need more presnap motion to reveal defensive assignments, JMO

Kitchens also said Baker is taking too many hits and he needs to get the ball out of his hands faster.

Basically he's going to start slowly pulling the offense away from Monken. So from my earlier post, he's choosing option 1.

We are beating the Rams. Team is going to come out loose, having fun, and executing much better.

If we all (mostly) agree that our issues are not personnel/talent and that we have enough of that to win on offense ... then I find it idiotic that we wouldn’t use WHAT WORKED so well last year as a base for this season ... of course we’d add to that, but the offense seems so different than last season.

In fact, one of the only plays that seems similar is the 90 yard touchdown to OBJ lol

I don't think it's a big mystery. They thought Baker was ready for more. He's not. But the whole off season was built around thinking he was. How do you undo an entire off season of work once you find out it's not working when the real bullets start flying?

No running game will make it harder for any QB... Baker is OK, just don't ask the impossible from him.

Improve the running game and use the screens to beat the blitz,and we should be good to go.

No screens and no running and Baker is going to end in IR...

j/c

Without regard to what the coaches say - NOT saying they are being untruthful - there is no doubt that the play on the field looks out-of-whack...maybe even forced (discombobulated per Milk Man is also good description).

Is there a disconnect with Monken prepping the gameplan during the week and then Freddie making the playcalls on gameday?

I would seriously doubt this. That speaks to incompetence, and I don't think these guys are anywhere close to incompetent.

I think it's much simpler. Too much, too soon. Intentions were good. You have a young, dynamic gun slinging QB who is accurate, likes to go downfield, and demonstrated these traits his rookie season. You then add playmakers. I don't think there was anything wrong with what they were trying to do. But it's like anything else in life, sometimes it works and sometimes it doesn't. It's what they do moving forward that matters now. How do they adjust?

I think we are going to see big time adjustments in the Rams game. Freddie and Baker looked distraught after the Jets game. After a win. These guys know it isn't working. I don't get the impression they will be stubborn about it.

You could be right about all of this. But, here is food for thought.

I posted Baker's league rankings awhile ago. Of course, there were the usual replies about me hating Baker, but the best argument was made by YTown and a couple of other dudes. That argument was that Baker's stats under Haley's direction were bad, but they were outstanding once Freddie took over. Someone then projected those stats over the course of the season and they were very impressive.

So here is what I am asking you to consider. Bake did not fare well under Haley in his offense that was more similar to what we are doing this year than what Freddie did once he took over. Thus, there is some history there.

I think we should also include the OL in this discussion. Under Haley, our line gave up a lot of sacks. Yet, under Freddie, I believe the OL gave up the fewest sacks in that span of games.

Btw---------I wish I would have put this thread in the Pure Football Forum because I think the topic is going to be an ongoing "thing" this season.

Vers, I think we are saying the same thing, no?

Pretty much. I was just saying that they did have some information on whether switching to so much 11 Personnel was a good idea given what happened w/Haley last year. I think it might have been wiser to add those packages in smaller doses.

BTW-----------Thanks to the ref who moved this thread to this forum. I really appreciate it.

Thank you very much!!!

As far as I know, Freddie has never been in a position to have an NFL "offense" of his own. Last year he inherited Todd Haley's offense, simplified it, and made it better to fit the personnel he had but it wasn't HIS offense. Then this offseason he hired Monken as OC but retained play calling.

I'm sure he has ideas and a philosophy but I don't think there is a "Freddie Kitchens Playbook"

Maybe they need to go back to that Todd Haley playbook and see what they can incorporate that was working so well.

Last year under Todd Haley (weeks one through eight) we were in 11 personnel 68% of the time, 12 personnel 15% of the time, 21 personnel 2% of the time, and 13 personnel 12% of the time (the rest were less than 1%).

This year week one we were in 11 personnel 94% of the time, 12 personnel 5% of the time, and we ran one play with 01 personnel (four receivers one tight end). Week two has not been updated to include our game yet.

Overall I think the sample is too small to make any conclusions. Maybe we are trying a matchup based offense? Maybe we are playing different personnel groupings because of depth issues? I think we just don't know yet.

Thanks for the percentages.

I agree that it's too early to draw summative conclusions, but I also think it is worthy of discussion and watching closely.

I also don't believe it based on match-ups. I do think that roster decisions are something to consider.

I don't think it's matchup based either. My point was that we don't know.

I think we are playing more 11 personnel for two reasons. 1) Our tight ends after Njoku stink 2) Monken's influence.

In the end I think kinks will get worked out and everything will be fine. Kitchens and Monken are both very smart offensive coaches, I would hope that if they identify a problem they will fix it instead of forcing something that isn't working.

I don't think its matchups either. Would you agree if it was based on matchups with Mosley out we would have ran more intermediate patterns over the middle instead of longer developing plays on the outside, if that was the case?