My issue with him is he remains so inconsistent in his situational play-calling
When you say "inconsistent", are you referring to success rate or the type of plays he runs during particular situations?
I believe as such in BOTH situations. My issue is with consistency all around.
Just this weekend, running Ford only (9) times is/was crazy. I know that Denver was gunning to stop the run from the start. But they are/were still a bad running-D team...did they suddenly and finally/only find success defending the run when playing us? Did they go from last in the league at running D to a running D that we 'felt' we couldn't succeed in running the ball against during the week? Did they not also 'commit' to stopping the run in their other games this year?
The Bryant sneak...not a bad idea or a bad play. BUT...we boned it up the first time...likely due to a silent count. Then we did it AGAIN. Did the stadium suddenly go quiet on the 2nd attempt?
When we are in a field position where we might go for it on a 4th down...is Ski thinking about that possibility on 3rd and 2 and calling plays accordingly? It sure doesn't seem like he IS doing that...consistently anyway.
When the running game is working, does he go away from it too soon/often. I think he does. I think he thinks he's smarter than the other guy. SO rather than playing a certain way until the other team demonstrates they can stop it...Ski is gonna get out in front of the situation and change things up and keep the other guy guessing.
On the trick play double reverse...not a bad play and not a bad idea...BUT...PJ had just come in the game and Strong had touched the ball from scrimmage like ONE time in the last two games.
It's too cute...it's oftentimes unnecessary...it can appear to be not very well thought out. THEN...there will be plays with excellent design and called well...even if the player doesn't execute. Or WRs reportedly running open and the QB not seeing it.
I don't want to blow this up and start over again...but I also don't think SKi is the guy to get us where we want to go.
Just this weekend, running Ford only (9) times is/was crazy.
I don't think it was necessarily about them focusing on stopping our run game, although I think it could have been a factor, but I think in large part it had to do with us being down 14 points early in the game. I, too, would have like to have seen more Ford. More specifically, I'd like to see more Ford carries than Hunt. 9:7 ratio between the two is not my cup of tea. But that's just me.
So I tend to like that he is inconsistent when it comes to play calling in various in-game situations. Because if he was too consistent, well, the DC would know what to call and when to do it. I think the Bryant 4th and short situations are a good example if it. I feel like people (not you) are quick to call out a play that doesn't work, but don't equally compliment him when something "cute" happens. Like the T formation on that 2nd touchdown last week and the play call on the dropped 2pt conversion. Those were brilliant and there have been countless other ones that have been super sharp calls by Stefanski.
I think Stefanski has dialed up more of those, shall we say, "unconventional "play calls than other coaches this year. I don't have anything to back that up, but I wouldn't be surprised if that is the case. But I can see why he is.....his QBs have been Walker and DTR and we all know the limitations of the QBs at this point in time. So, naturally, I think he is trying to be creative, keep the defense on their toes. and surprise them. I like that approach and it's allowed us, partly, to be 7-4.
Obviously, I'm a Stefanski fan. I think he is smart, innovative, and players buy into him. I think his approach aligns with the FO and that is something this team has lacked for a loooong time. I think he has done wonders with the situations that have been given to him and the QBs he has had to work with here in Cleveland. And to be 7-4 and possibly going on our 4th starting QB is rather remarkable.
