DawgTalkers.net Forums DawgTalk Pure Football Forum Marc Trestman

I think we can keep certain parts because we still have the offensive line coaches. Zone blocking I would keep and Will Montgomery wouldnt be going anywhere with the work he does with running backs.

Now our passing attack is lacking and this is where I think you can decide on what type of system you want to run. Personally, I prefer the vertical game with 5 and 7 step drops and I do like using the shotgun but you have to be willing to run a lot of draw plays as well.

Mix Chud's vertical passing attack with Shannahan's zone

So your position is to find an OC with that philosophy or one willing to adopt that philosophy and not pursue any other candidates for the position?

I'm not really opposed to that idea but I'm not sure that's the direction I would pursue based on a one year stint by an OC. I like the ZBS, but I'm not sure I would remove anyone from my OC searched based on that alone.

When looking at the QB situation, I don't think Hoyer commands the arm strength to depend on a vertical passing game and I'm not sure Manziel has what it takes to be an NFL starter.

Two comments:

--Mourg, I think our passing game play design was excellent. Our route trees were very creative and we constantly had receivers running free. And many of them were wide open down the field. We just couldn't hit them in stride. Don't blame the play design on the weak arm of the qb.

--Knox makes a good point about bringing in an OC that will run an offense that fits Manziel's talents. I think the biggest reason Shanny is gone is because he was upset that Farmer and Haslam were demanding he play Manziel. Johnny Drunk is their boy. Thus, we might want to bring in Micky Mouse as our offensive coordinator.

Simpler isn't better. The reason we saw all those open receivers is because of the WCO. I do agree that the verbage is tough for a rookie to learn, but rookies aren't supposed to just jump right in and start in most cases either. How does greenbay run the wco? How does any team?

They stick with it, and when the majority of players on the offense know it, then they can help the 1-2 rooks that might get in the game. And the biggest key imo, is the qb has to not be one of the rooks.

What really defines the 'best' offensive coordinator? I would say the one that has success. You bring in someone who can continue installing the WCO and you have less players thinking on offense next year. They will know more plays, and have reps in them.

This means less mistakes, and more successfully plays. We need to build on what we started, not change it every year. So yeah, you find the best guy to run your scheme, and you go with it.

This thread has gone from a Trestman thread to a "next offensive coordinator thread."

Some pretty good stuff.

Just a dumb question. When we bring in a New OC, wouldn't that guy want some of his own folks as coaches.. Say for instance the Line coach or the receivers coach or RB coach?

Hey, hey, Vers, please do not mix in my bud Mickey. He is much more noteworthy than little johnny will EVER be.

If Haslam's running the show....I said if.......there will most likely be an agreement about who Haslam wants as the coaches and the new hire will accept it. Don't believe that is how it should work or would work best. But, yes, it would make the most sense to have cohesiveness but.....afterall....this is the Browns!

Often they will have a couple coaches attached. I think those that came with Shannahan either have been let go or will be shortly. the rest will likely stay as they have ties with Pettine and not Shannahan.

Why? He's not the Head Coach. The Head Coach usually puts the guys he wants in place not the OC. The OC is someone who fits what the HC wants to do not the other way around.

?
Why

(Although Rex hired Roman) Interested in what you don't like about the possibility of Trestman.

I don't want anyone who is going to force an old system down Manziel's throat. Trestman will most definitely do that. If Manziel is our QB, and as of right now it looks like he will be, then we need to make him as comfortable as possible.

(Note: I think old system's can work in the NFL. Look at Aaron Rodgers and Mike McCarthy in Green Bay (although even that West Coast offense has been modernized.))

I'm just saying, if I'm an offensive coach, I'm thinking I won't be comfortable.


I would also think that the HC would have a final say, but if I'm the new OC, I'm going to push for my guys.

I agree that it looks like we need to make sure we have an offensive system that aligns to Manziel's strengths.

What I don't agree with, and I'm not just responding to you, but with a number of guys, is that Trestman is who they say he is.

Its almost as if many of you are saying he hasn't learned. With over 30 years professional football coaching experience, he only knows one way of coaching offense.

One poster talks about his "finesse" philosophy. But, with the Bears and Cutler I didn't see that.

Another talks about his getting quarterbacks killed. With the Bears and Cutler I didn't see that. I did when Martz coached them but not Trestman. Besides, the Bears offensive line wasn't much to write home about.

Another talks about how if Trestman couldn't coach all the stars in Chicago's offense, how could he be successful with us? Well, Trestman's first year with the Bears I thought he did really well. I thought he was impressive. This year... not so much. But I also believe the players didn't play for him. They lost a few games and folded.

We need a guy who is smart, and in dealing with Mr. Football, doesn't have a ginormous ego. Trestman is a very mature, good guy. Unlike the guy he would be replacing.

I'm just worried because he apparently hasn't learned anything about coaching offensive football in the past 30 years.

Living in Chicago, I don't go out of my way to pay attention to the Bears but it's hard to miss. I think Trestman was a victim of the headcases in that locker room, especially Marshall and Cutler. I think the pressure of being the guy also wore him down. I don't see any reason why he can't succeed here...

[insert my obligatory slam on Manziel dooming whatever coach happens to be here]

well, if he cannot handle headcases, then that does not speak well to him being able to help correct Manziel.

or Gordon.

Nominated for dumbest post of the year.......and that takes some doing.

Congratulations.

That's pretty damn harsh. Olskool did a decent job of explaining his position in a non confrontational, non insulting manner. He didn't deserve that.

You are entitled to your opinion, but how in the heck are Trestman's teams not finesse teams? Who did they bully?

How are Trestman's teams good at pass blocking? Their QBs have received a ton of pressure.

He then says that a poster talks about how he didn't get the best from his players and then turns around and says What?

jc

this talk of marc trestman is.....no.

he's suppose to be offensive minded right? the guy treats the O line like norv turner did. more or less "eh, whatever".


those players in chicago are hungry to be in the playoffs. say what you want about marshall, but his passion for the game speaks for himself.

marshall, jeffery, forte, their TE and cutler.

he had an all pro cast and did nothing with them. the o line was good at run blocking because forte consistently puts up good numbers.

the guy failed. i don't know, maybe the HC gig was too much, but i wouldnt really trust him with our offense, when he had pro bowlers left and right in chicago and went no where.

I don't know what happened in Chicago. Was it the offensive side of the ball that imploded?? I thought it was the defense that gave up. They were handing out TD's like crazy. Then the team just quit.

That all being said- i'd rather we had someone other then Trestman.

It was both.

He's a disaster waiting to happen.

Question eo': Air Coryell is a vertical offense and would it not require a big-armed QB to run it? We can't run that system with Hoyer, could we?

I'd agree with you. I saw Cutler and that old, lazy defense burn Trestman, not his ability to run an offense.

Interesting and comprehensive analysis...and thanks, eo'.