I agree.Holmgren has turned out to be exactly that. I believe that Lerners only goal was to bring in a big name to keep the fans passified until the very momment he could sell the team.I think Holmgren knew this, took the money to play owner and hire all of his buddies. The only good thing he did was bring in Heckert but I think we just got lucky that one of his pals just happened to be good at his job.I don't think Holmgren cared one way or another.
Quote: The reason Oregon coach Chip Kelly has become, if not the NFL’s hottest coaching candidate, then its most intriguing is as simple as the box score from the New England-San Francisco game a couple weeks back.
That night, the New England Patriots ran 92 offensive plays in a loss to San Francisco. It was an unusual game, with New England needing a huge second-half comeback, and thus Tom Brady to chuck it around just to make it a game, but still … 92 snaps is 92 snaps.
For three decades the average number of offensive plays per team in the NFL has hung around the low to mid 60s. This year it's 66.8. Yet here was New England, threatening 100 with a season-high 92, but also part of a season trend. The Patriots are averaging a league-high 74.4 snaps per game, up dramatically from 67.2 just a year ago.
In short, the Patriots are playing fast this year; really, really fast. Fast like one of those dynamic college offenses that blur your vision despite not having the kind of mobile quarterback or employing a zone-read running game such as the Washington Redskins or Seattle Seahawks.
Bill Belichick has embraced the speed spread that makes the no-huddle look outdated. Combine this high-octane approach with what Pete Carroll is doing with Russell Wilson or Mike Shanahan is doing with Robert Griffin III and on Black Monday the following also suddenly makes sense:
No matter his no comments about the NFL or his job security in Eugene, there’s been no better time for Kelly to leap to a league that is suddenly open-minded to a system that was long considered a college gimmick.
Kelly has not spent a minute in the NFL. Not as a player. Not as a low-level gopher. Certainly not as a coach.
His résumé is rich in low-level football spots: Columbia, Johns Hopkins and New Hampshire. He headed to Oregon in 2007 as the offensive coordinator and his talent was so obvious, his boss Mike Bellotti soon "retired" in part so the school wouldn’t lose Kelly to someone else. Kelly has been the head Duck for four seasons now, and he’s 45-7 heading into Thursday's Fiesta Bowl.
Whatever he lacks in NFL pedigree can be overcome. This is a different era in the league, with new layers of complexity and execution gaining the upper hand on old-school, smash-mouth toughness and locker room pep talks. In essence, Kelly’s influence, among others, is already being felt. (Oregon is averaging 84.4 plays a game this season).
If he could convince NFL players that he knows what he’s doing and what he’s doing will work – and if there is one thing Kelly doesn’t lack it’s self-confidence – then they’ll respond.
It’s innovation, more than anything that moves the needle. Any coach standing pat is falling behind.
Belichick is 60 years old and has been in the NFL since 1975. He’s the old school of the old school, except he’s running the fastest offense in the league, once again ahead of a trend line. His players speak in awe not of his locker room speeches or their deep personal relationships, but his precision coaching in film rooms and strong game management.
Chip Kelly may not duplicate what he does at Oregon – the vast majority of college games are played against teams with inferior talent and depth. It’s unlikely he’d go for two points so frequently in the NFL.
Yet he can apply the principles while using his own acumen to shape the offense around the talent he has. The man is smart, frighteningly smart. Smart enough to be flexible and work with what he has.
And that’s part of the NFL appeal. The reasons to leave the college game behind are obvious. No more recruiting – Kelly is already under NCAA investigation for that. No more boosters – some of them have complained he doesn’t play golf with them enough and video-conferences into a weekly luncheon rather than drive to Portland.
Mainly though, there are fewer restrictions on time. Unleashed, the 49-year-old bachelor can plot more, not less. And given a quarterback who never graduates, he could build and adapt, the way Belichick does knowing Tom Brady can keep up.
For the NFL, Kelly is no less a risk than anyone else. There is no proven blue print for success in coaching prospects – Belichick himself was fired once and his assistants have a shaky track record. Black Monday saw Super Bowl coaches Lovie Smith and Andy Reid fired. So, sure you'd prefer he had some level of NFL experience, but his upside is far too tantalizing to pass on.
For Kelly, there is hardly a downside. He has a terrific situation in Eugene (even with NCAA sanctions coming) but it’s not the only good job out there. Even if Kelly was a spectacular failure in the NFL or found he didn’t like professional football and wanted a return to campus, he could all but name the school. If anything, a bit of NFL experience would only make him more appealing.
And unlike a year ago when he nearly accepted the Tampa Bay job, the league is even better positioned for, and more welcoming to his frenetic, pressure style. It's happened that fast.
Mike is a coward. He was the best coach we had, he didn't have the guts to be our coach, because he knew it was an enormous challenge at the time, and didn't want to tarnish his legacy. He should've hired Shurmur as offensive coordinator, and had him take over in a few yrs, once he got the ball rolling. No, he was more worried about the money, and hired a guy that wasn't qualified for the head coaching position. Lerner deserves a large portion of the blame as well. he didn't care one bit.
I think theres a major inherent flaw in the concept of MY OFFENSE.
Sure it can work if you get every guy on the same page and well ingrained in the system n such...
but, its not easy to make that work so quickly. Have your system thats fine...but every system be able to adapt to the players you have and the strengths that they possess. Without it, you cant succeed as much as youd like...as evidenced by what we saw this year.
"It has to start somewhere It has to start somehow What better place than here? What better time than now?"
Quote: Banner (for better or worse) is now in charge of the draft and for the most part stocking the 80+ players for the coach to pick from.
You say this as fact, when everything that has been published specifically has Banner stating that the HC will have that power. He even said that a GM wasn't completely out of the question.
I love the way agendas appear on this board and are stated as fact. I wish everyone would wait until they at least make one hiring, before the jumping of conclusions continues.
Read their presser. its all in there. Everything they said they will do has failed here. Everything they said they are about Ive heard before. We want to win we are motivated we will get this done even if it takes 2-3 years. We wont go out signing FA's for a fast fix. Ive read it all before.
Like it or not Banner is our GM, we may hire one in title only but he is the final say on FA draft picks and providing the coach 83 guys to pick from to create his roster.
Once again I dont care who we hire as the Head Coach if he doesnt make the playoffs next year I will be suprised because our talent level is that good. Its what this team looks like 3-4 years down the road that I will be interested in.
No doom and gloom, hire a good coach, have good drafts, finish the 5 year plan that is now about to enter year 4. The coach should be plug and play at this point, if they are any good what so ever.
If they hire a coach that totally fails and 2-3 years from now we have had horrid drafts I will tear into them (Haslam and Banner) like there is no tomorrow.
For now my pitchfork is safely in the garage and I hope it stays there for decades to come.
If you need 3 years to be a winner you got here 2 years to early. Get it done Browns.
Quote: Everything they said they will do has failed here.
We have tried everything. GM first then coach. Coach first then GM. Omnipotent leader hires everyone. Head coach with all the power. Experienced NFL as front office president.
So by your logic we have no options and should just flip a coin (done that too!)
Quote: Uptempo, packaging plays, less verbiage, sight adjustments based on defenders' looks, no-huddle is the way the NFL is going. We can't be left behind.
Time of possession means nothing now. It's about running as many plays as possible.
I get your point but running 3 and out 3 or 4 times in a row using up 1 minute on the clock is much different then marching down the field using up 7-8 minutes and scoring a TD. TOP is telling because a team that controls it normally is wearing an opposing defense down. Thats why as much as I love a KO TD return if my team's defense just was on the field for a long period of time they are right back out there after such a run I sweat a bit more then if we had just had a great return.
If you need 3 years to be a winner you got here 2 years to early. Get it done Browns.
Quote: Everything they said they will do has failed here.
We have tried everything. GM first then coach. Coach first then GM. Omnipotent leader hires everyone. Head coach with all the power. Experienced NFL as front office president.
So by your logic we have no options and should just flip a coin (done that too!)
If you want to pull out 9 words and not read the body of the text and not use it in context with the whole post, I would suggest you go back and read it again.
You will find your answer. I thought I explained it well enough and feel no need to re-type it.
If you need 3 years to be a winner you got here 2 years to early. Get it done Browns.
Quote: For Kelly, there is hardly a downside. He has a terrific situation in Eugene (even with NCAA sanctions coming) but it’s not the only good job out there. Even if Kelly was a spectacular failure in the NFL or found he didn’t like professional football and wanted a return to campus, he could all but name the school. If anything, a bit of NFL experience would only make him more appealing.
I agree. That's the biggest negative to hiring Kelly. If he doesn't like the NFL game or the way the team is shaping up he could bounce at any point and go to whatever college he wants.
I would make sure there is language in the contract not allowing him to do so.
Quote: Another question. So if Kelly is picked as the head coach who's going to be his OC? Him? Who else knows his three card monty O well enough to call plays in it? I know his ego is massive (well documented around these parts) who's he going to bring in? Belotti? A current underling of his at Oregon? (Great, another coaching staff with no NFL experience.) Or will he also be the OC?
I asked the above question on the last page and have yet to hear what people think? It got one response saying we still have Chilly. My response is he and the WCO are gone if Kelly gets hired. Everyone knows by now I'm not for Kelly but I'm still legitimately interested in what others here might think would happen. Thoughts?
I had no problem with Lerner. I took an issue to Mike Holmgren blowing up a solid base of what Mangini was starting to build. How quick everyone forgets we pulled off tough wins against the Saints and the Patriots with D level talent.
Now I have the same feelings based off of what Haslam and Banner have done with Shurmur. We honestly were a QB away from being a wildcard team this year. Pat made questionable calls at times but it wasn't his fault that his "strong armed, tall, old and savy" 29 year old rookie QB couldn't put more points on the board.
Bah, I don't have a good feeling with this ownership team. Prove me wrong but I see Uncle Al and Crazy Jerry being reincarnated before our very eyes.
Quote: Another question. So if Kelly is picked as the head coach who's going to be his OC? Him? Who else knows his three card monty O well enough to call plays in it? I know his ego is massive (well documented around these parts) who's he going to bring in? Belotti? A current underling of his at Oregon? (Great, another coaching staff with no NFL experience.) Or will he also be the OC?
What about that guy from Nevada? Didn't he just resign?
Am I perfect? No Am I trying to be a better person? Also no
Quote: I'm still legitimately interested in what others here might think would happen. Thoughts?
I think that anything to do with the WCO is gone. That includes Brad Childress and the playbook that looks like legislation coming out of Washington.
I agree. I'm all for change as long as the change can legitimately utilize the skills of our roster and not require a complete reboot.
"The guy from Nevada" was given as a response. Sorry if I'm uncomfortable with a new NFL rookie head coach and a no name "guy from Nevada" running my team.
I threw Chris Ault out there because he is one of the few guys out there who know that offense as well as chip kelly. Not advocating for him. Don't want kelly. Just answering the question about who might know that O as well as kelly.
Am I perfect? No Am I trying to be a better person? Also no
Since Chip Kelly's name is being bantered around here alot, I thought I'd post this youtube clip of him and Urban doing a brief breakdown of some simple plays from Kelly's offense.
Things I liked from this were:
1) He said that he was not married to a certain exact system. 2) He spoke about tailoring an offense to the best of his player's abilities. 3) Being balanced on offense seems to be a concept which he stresses. This is good IMO, because I always thought Shurmur was obsessed with passing.
I don't know if this kind of offensive system can work in the NFL, or whether you need super fast sprinters at every position, but at least from the video I liked what I heard.
I just want to make a general comment to some stuff I read about Holmgren and others ...........
It is not possible, in today's "results now" NFL, to defiantly stick to a single offensive system and demand that players bend to the system. The system must bend to the players. The coach must adapt his system to what his players do best, because if he has a couple of 3-5 win years, he's likely to be out on his ass if he doesn't start that 3rd year strong. (if he even gets a 3rd year)
I look at the teams that turned things around this year, and they all tailored their offenses to their QBs. (as did the 49'ers last year, and the Bucs this year with Freeman .... and so on)
The Steelers, on the other hand, actually moved away from what their QB prefers. They wound up going from 12th in total offense to 21st.
The Chargers refused to go get players that would help their QB. He seems to need a certain type of receiver, and they moved in a completely different direction. No wonder the front office and coaching staff are history.
Many other teams legitimately had QB issues, but most probably had coaching issues.
Micah 6:8; He has shown you, O mortal, what is good. And what does the Lord require of you? To act justly and to love mercy, and to walk humbly with your God.
John 14:19 Jesus said: Because I live, you also will live.
I still think that Weeden can be that guy. He's not a Luck, or an RG3, but I think that he can be a plus level QB in the right offense.
If I ran a WCO team, I would look at Lewis as a backup. He showed that he can be effective off the bench, even with limited reps. He appears well suited to backup duty. He did have the advantage of lowered expectations by the opposition .... and the letdown that accompanies those lowered expectations. He's not a starter, but looks like he could win a game here or there for the right team. .
I also do not believe that McCoy is a starter. I question whether or not he is a backup either. He tore up a soft zone. Once Denver saw that, they played man/pressure, and McCoy folded.
I look back to McCoy's rookie year, and he seemed like a QB on the rise. Then he hit the Steelers and Ravens games, and wound up with 6 TD and 9 INT. In those 2 games, he had 1 TD against 6 INT. It appears that they started to figure him out then, and the figuring out continued from that point forward. Play a soft zone against McCoy and he'll carve you up. Play pressure/man and he'll fold. Once teams get a book like that on a QB, he's done.
It is obvious that Weeden is in the wrong offense. He's not a throw short/WCO QB. I saw ups and downs with Weeden. He seemed to hold the ball way too long as the season progressed. Opposing defenses obviously confused him by doing things he wasn't prepared for. Players on other teams said that they knew what plays we were going to run based on the formation. I see some good in Weeden, and I do think that he can be effective in the right offense. I would give him one more year ...... largely because I don't see a franchise guy in the upcoming draft, and because I do believe that he can be an effective QB in the right offense. I was encouraged by some things, like how he began to see the TE more often later in the season. That's a real step forward for any spread QB. However, that's not enough, and he needs to progress a great deal more if he is to be a legitimate QB. I do think that he is the most talented of the QBs we have on the roster .... though some may consider that damning with faint praise.
In the end, I look at it like this:
I think that lewis can be an effective backup QB in a WCO offense.
I wonder what offense fits McCoy, given that he is at his best when facing soft zones and limited pressure.
I think that Weeden can be an effective NFL QB in the right offense. However, a timing offense with tons of short throws is probably not his best option.
I just hope that we get a head coach who figures out how to best utilize the talent we have to our best advantage.
Micah 6:8; He has shown you, O mortal, what is good. And what does the Lord require of you? To act justly and to love mercy, and to walk humbly with your God.
John 14:19 Jesus said: Because I live, you also will live.
And I think that's you clinging to a delusion that you've decided on.
Look - I know we fight a lot on these boards, but I do think you're a very bright guy.
However ... I think when you decide on an opinion, you look to mold things to form your opinion. I don't think I need to trot out obvious examples where you've been dead wrong...
Anyway ... let me ask you an honest, introspective, thoughtful question...
What separates Derek Anderson's breakout season from what you've seen from Weeden this year?
Think about that. Honestly.
And remember that, in hindsight, DA's fluke year - which was better than Weeden's rookie after - came at a younger age.
Bottom line - Weeden's possibility for success is probably 20% or less. IMO, you're just hanging around on the bandwagon because you don't want your opinion to be wrong.
To be fair, Weeden did better than I thought he would. But I thought he would bomb monumentally. He's thus far merely bombed on a Tim Couch level - enough for those who like the guy to argue that he can get better.
I'll give you this - you were right about RG3. I thought the guy would struggle. He didn't. He was what you pimped.
But Weeden isn't. Weeden's bust rate is very high.
If I had to rate Weeden in Hold Em terms, I'd say he's an all-in 9-10 unsuited before the flop.
I understand your responding to Ytown here... You say this..
Quote: And I think that's you clinging to a delusion that you've decided on.
I read the rest of your post .. I feel your doing the same thing... So who's opinion is right ? Yours because that's what you believe ?
I'll give Weeden another season before I make any judgement on him...And my reasons are simple and basic...
1, He`s a rookie. And he had young not so experienced players around him..
2' His head coach was fired.. Maybe, just maybe the right coach may bring his game up...
3, His HC played another rookie with 2 broken ribs. Imo a better or more experienced coach may have used the back ups.. or game planned differently.
Who knows right, Guess this coming season will tell.. or not. A whole new system that may improve his play..or hurt it.. Nothing much more to do than wait..
As far as potential HC's... If we bring in a Collage level coach..Will people give him the patience to learn the Nfl rules, Not the same as collage , takes time to adapt.
Nfl.coordinators ... I'm not a real believer in the so called coming from ( insert name ) tree.. They work with HC's..but once they become one, it's their own beliefs and philosophies they use on the field...
Former HC's...We had what 4 on this team . It's the luck of getting the right one ...
So what I plan on doing is trying to forget the Lerner years and start fresh with the Haslam Ownership and see how the thoughts and philosophies of this organization evolve..
I think that Weeden has better accuracy than Anderson ever showed. DA was kind of a one trick pony ..... and he ran up his stats against some pretty bad teams. He had a great receiving corps, who all player at the top of their games that year.
This year we started with a rookie, another rookie, a second year guy, and injured pro, and a 2nd year slot guy at WR. After the 2nd year slot guy got hurt, we added a rookie slot guy.
Huge difference in experience at WR, and in teams played. Anderson really feasted on a weak schedule.
Weeden actually had what has traditionally been a rookie campaign. He's had ups and downs, and at the end, I think that he went through some serious dead arm. I think that he would be a better QB in a different offense that didn't try to force him into a role he's not comfortable in.
I don't believe that's seeing anything that isn't there. If Weeden can't improve, for whatever reason, then he's not our guy and we move on. I just don't see much of a chance that we wind up with our "new" franchise guy next year, so we'll probably see one of our current QBs under Center, and I believe that Weeden has more upside should that be the battle.
Micah 6:8; He has shown you, O mortal, what is good. And what does the Lord require of you? To act justly and to love mercy, and to walk humbly with your God.
John 14:19 Jesus said: Because I live, you also will live.
+1, I agree with pretty much everything you said. Read PDR's post about that earlier and felt the same way.
Anderson played an easier schedule and he had our two best receivers since we've come back in Winslow and Braylon.
We had an O-Line that was really rolling, with names that I remember being Ryan Tucker (RG), Seth McKinney (who played very well), Joe Thomas, and Kevin Schaffer (who had a good year as well). I don't remember our center though. Oh yeah, and at center fan favorite Hank Fraley. Awesome O-Line on the runblocking scene. And Jamal Lewis was doing tons of damage in his first year on the team (when he really wanted to prove to the Ravens that he should never have been let go).
Derek loved to throw that football and KW2 was IMO the best receiving TE in the league at that time. Pinnacle of his career. And Braylon brought the over the top, deep threat, as well as another target: period. Steve Heiden and Joe Jurevicious played well that year too.
Anderson was thrown into a QB dream situation with an offense that was tailored to his style by Chudzinsky. And then we ate up a bunch of garbage teams and garbage defenses.
We should have made the playoffs except for DA's melt down against Cincinnatti. But even after that season, I knew that Anderson was a guy with a strong arm that liked to hurl the ball.
I think talent wise, Weeden is definitely superior. Much more accurate. And he didn't have the same talent on his team as DA did that year. As well as an offense that was calling the right plays, balanced, and insynch. Winslow and Edwards pretty much caught everything thrown their way. Less Edwards than Winslow (because Braylon always dropped his share of easy tosses). But KW2 was a monster.
Following that season I didn't want DA again. I knew the guy was garbage. I can't say the same about Weeden, although I missed most of the games at the end of the season except that one against the Redskins, which was awfully upsetting. In that game it was the exact opposite Brandon Weeden I was used to earlier in the season (may be this dead arm thing is true, or he got terrified of making mistakes. Whatever it was, it was awful).
But the biggest factor we have to remember is that the guy was a rookie, and he needs to be evaluated as a rookie. Sure he's 29, but it was still his first season. Now if he's also bad next season, that's gonna be where you say "man, this guy's 30, second season, and i see little improvement". But, as I said, I didn't get a chance to watch the 2nd half of the season because of my work and I came to Europe to visit my g/f (and therefore I've been watching the other type of football)
too funny.
![[Linked Image]](http://www.dawgtalkers.net/uploads/PortlandDawg/banner.jpg)
