Re: A New Look Offense or the Same but Better?
 

[quote=Dirtbag59;904473]Either it was the way the question was asked or Kubiak identifies more with the Elder Shanahan as a fellow head coach and colleague.

Or secret option C he resents Kyle :D[/quote]Kubiak isn't the only one to mention Mike when refering to the offense.
But when people mention Mike as opposed to Kyle it creates a false assumption about the offense.
The assumption is that because Mike like to run the ball that the Redskins are a [I][B]run[/B][/I] oriented offense when in reality the opposite is true.
Under Kyle the Redskins have been a [I][B]passing[/B][/I] team.

Re: A New Look Offense or the Same but Better?
 

[quote=GTripp0012;904476]On the topic of this thread, I'm going to choose option C: our current offense already fits RG3 pretty well.

So I don't think Kyle will do anything with his offense that he wouldn't have done under normal circumstances unrelated to the new quarterback, but I think he's justified in keeping things similar.[/quote]Here's a question I asked Dbag earlier in the thread:

Do you think Cam would have been as productive in a traditional pro-style offense?

I should have lettered or numbered the options but I think you're leaning more towards option A because option C involves a shift in the playcalling tendency towards more running or a return towards balance.

Option A is basically status quo.

An overlooked question from the OP: Do you think Griffin they'll feature Griffin specific RZ packages?

Re: A New Look Offense or the Same but Better?
 

Hopefully, RGIII get the chance to work with Mike and Kyle. If its Luck then what? We may need to discuss the possibilities of Luck being the #2.

Re: A New Look Offense or the Same but Better?
 

[quote=30gut;904479]Here's a question I asked Dbag earlier in the thread:

Do you think Cam would have been as productive in a traditional pro-style offense?

I should have lettered or numbered the options but I think you're leaning more towards option A because option C involves a shift in the playcalling tendency towards more running or a return towards balance.

Option A is basically status quo.

An overlooked question from the OP: Do you think Griffin they'll feature Griffin specific RZ packages?[/quote]I don't think basic passing principles really play to the strengths of Cam Newton. He didn't play well in the 2010 BCS National Championship game against a defense that had the speed to challenge him, didn't play well in the NFL Preseason, looked lost in the Pro Bowl.

But in the context of what Carolina was doing with him, he showed off critical downfield accuracy and pocket awareness you wouldn't have known he had watching college tape.

Cam Newton is a pretty huge conundrum. I think if you took him out of the Carolina offense and made him play in Jacksonville, he would be a huge projection at this point. I think if Carolina took the Jags approach to making it "easy" for Cam Newton, Newton would look lost and even when he completed passes the Jags wouldn't really be using their passing game productively. But with Carolina, every passing play has a chance to go for 20+ yards, and Newton basically was out there showing defenses that the only guy who can stop Cam is Cam.

To answer your question, I think Cam could have been just as productive at the start of the 2011 season playing in traditional pro-style sets and plays, so long as the focus of the attack remained downfield at the safety level. You can challenge a defense out of base personnel, obviously. But I think defenses would have caught up to him in the second half like they did with Dalton, because I think every challenge that can be raised by a pro style scheme has been answered at some point in history by a pro defensive coordinator.

I don't doubt that spread plays will eventually be answered by defensive guys, and that Cam will have some tougher days in his future, but I think the Panthers successfully put off to tomorrow that learning experience by not giving opponents a book to go to in order to shut down Weapon 'Cam."

Re: A New Look Offense or the Same but Better?
 

[quote=GTripp0012;904494] he showed off critical downfield accuracy and pocket awareness you wouldn't have known he had watching college tape.[/quote]Or that [I]some[/I] didn't see.
I thought Cam's skillset including downfield accuracy and pocket awareness was clearly evident in college.
But, that's besides the point.

[quote]I think if you took him out of the Carolina offense and made him play in Jacksonville, he would be a huge projection at this point.[/quote]I agree that Cam would have struggled in Jacksonville, in many ways they're a bad example.
I watched a number of Jags games and I thought their offense was mind numbingly static and predictable.
It would be one thing to have a static offense if your WRs could consistently 'win' on the outside, but their WRs didn't/couldn't.
Playing in that type of offense, would be difficult for any QB let alone a rookie QB forced to play early.
I bet dollars to doughnuts that Mike Mularkey will improve the Jags offense and help change the current perception of Blaine Gabbert as a QB.


[quote]To answer your question, I think Cam could have been just as productive at the start of the 2011 season playing in traditional pro-style sets and plays, so long as the focus of the attack remained downfield at the safety level.[/quote]I don't know.
I agree that Cam would have been productive in any downfield passing attack that featured play-action and 5-7 step drop Hi-Lo reads.
But, I think Cam's record setting season 4,000 yard season was only possible because of Chudzinski forethought and innovation.
Look at Cam's domination in the RZ, I don't think that is possible without featuring Cam's run-pass threat.
Which would be hard to produce with traditional pro-style plays.

Which leads me back to the RZ question from the OP that I asked in the previous post ;)
Do you think Griffin will/should change they're RZ gameplan and play concepts?



--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Using Kubiak's interview as a jump off:

What specifically (formation/play concepts) does Griffin do best from Baylor's offense?

Re: A New Look Offense or the Same but Better?
 

[QUOTE]I'm torn.
I love Mike's Denver WCO.
When I think of the Mike's DWCO (bootleg/bootswap) I wonder if Kyle can ever fully commit to the run focused football that style of offense requires.


Kyle playcalling pallet has always leaned towards the pass.
And I'm not saying the above as good/bad value judgement but as an observation.
As long as Kyle is the OC I think we'll always pass the ball more.
And if we're going to pass more then why not run more spread?
Kyle has already shown some spread looks, why not take the offense further in that direction like the Bills, Bengals, Patriots and Packers?
And if Kyle is gonna add spread components why not bring them in from Baylor's offense?
Particularly the 5 wide empty sets.

Question:
Do you think Cam would have been as productive and dynamic in a traditional pro-style offense? [/QUOTE]

IMO its almost NECESSARY to pass the ball more in the NFL so I like Kyle's tendency to throw more than run. But I'm guessing that he would prefer the defense to atleast respect our run game, hopefully even prepare to defend it, so it can open up the pass even more (vs. the defense [I]knowing[/I] we are going to throw.) I wonder how much of his tendency to throw more last year was due to the fact that we just could not move the ball on the ground at all sometimes?

I think it's definitely a good idea to run more spread with the addition of RG3 and the new WRs. Looking at how aggressively we were going after WRs early in free agency makes me think we are going to see more spread this year. And for the teams that show that they can't defend it, well they will see ALOT more spread. LOL.

As a personal preference, I like the matchup problems that Fred Davis and Helu present for LBs and safeties so I like them on the field. Also makes defenses respect the run to some degree. But we could see some 5 wide sets against teams that are not deep at DB or just cant stop it. I think what we see will depend on who we are playing and that team's personell/defensive weaknesses.

I would say no, Cam Newton would not have been AS successful in a pro-style offense because he wasn't running one in college and he would have had to learn a new system very fast. I think he would have still had some success because I think he is a good quaterback but not as much success compared to running the system he is familiar with. This is why I think it is a good idea for Kyle to install some offense that RG3 is comfortable running right now.

Re: A New Look Offense or the Same but Better?
 

[QUOTE]Which leads me back to the RZ question from the OP that I asked in the previous post
Do you think Griffin will/should change they're RZ gameplan and play concepts?
[/QUOTE]

I would be surprised and equally depressed if Kyle did not explore other options in the RZ this year given our poor RZ efficiency last year. I would certainly call RG3's number here although I tend to be a [I]little[/I] phobic about him running the ball alot. I expect to see many more bootlegs, some qb draws, and maybe some option in the RZ. Especially after seeing Cam's success. Hopefully this threat will open some things up in RZ for us this year.

Re: A New Look Offense or the Same but Better?
 

Same but better. We wont have a jelly donut rolling out of the pocket this year.

Re: A New Look Offense or the Same but Better?
 

great post thanks for sharing :)

Re: A New Look Offense or the Same but Better?
 

[quote=whistler;904489]Hopefully, RGIII get the chance to work with Mike and Kyle. If its Luck then what? We may need to discuss the possibilities of Luck being the #2.[/quote]

Indianapolis has scheduled a visit for Luck and none for Griffin III. While there's still a possibility RG3 could get drafted ahead of Luck, it would be unlikely.

Re: A New Look Offense or the Same but Better?
 

it's not possible to schedule a visit with griffin in the next couple weeks

Re: A New Look Offense or the Same but Better?
 

[quote=imaskin4life;904500]I wonder how much of his tendency to throw more last year was due to the fact that we just could not move the ball on the ground at all sometimes?[/quote]I've kinda been tracking his playcalling but specifically his pass/run ratio.
And I think his tendency towards the pass has been manifest throughout his career as a playcaller.
And again, I don't mean that as a value judgement.
But specific to last year, and I believe the stats bear this out, the ground game suffered more from lack of attempts then lack of productivity.

[quote]As a personal preference, I like the matchup problems that Fred Davis and Helu present for LBs and safeties so I like them on the field. Also makes defenses respect the run to some degree. But we could see some 5 wide sets against teams that are not deep at DB or just cant stop it.[/quote]I like those match-ups as well.
Fred is one of our best receiver threats and you gotta figure he'll be a major part of the passing offense.
If they run more spread I don't see why Fred or Helu wouldn't be on the field.
[quote=imaskin4life;904502]I would be surprised and equally depressed if Kyle did not explore other options in the RZ this year given our poor RZ efficiency last year. I would certainly call RG3's number here although I tend to be a [I]little[/I] phobic about him running the ball alot. I expect to see many more bootlegs, some qb draws, and maybe some option in the RZ. Especially after seeing Cam's success. Hopefully this threat will open some things up in RZ for us this year.[/quote]Amen, bro.

Re: A New Look Offense or the Same but Better?
 

i see rg3 having a lesser career than stafford (this is being objectve). stafford obviously has the far superior arm and just overall looks like a sexy beast.

Re: A New Look Offense or the Same but Better?
 

[B]Rick Maese ‏ @RickMaese

McNabb says on ESPN RGIII is not a good fit for Redskins. Says ego will get in way. "Are you going to cater the offense around his talent?"[/B]

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Rick Maese ‏ @RickMaese

Skip Bayless asked McNabb if he simply has an ax to grind. "I do but I don't"

----------------------------------------------------------------------

[B]Rick Maese ‏ @RickMaese

McNabb says he was misused here and thinks Skins could similarly misuse RGIII: "You have to be in a system that caters to your ability"[/B]

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Rick Maese ‏ @RickMaese

It was weird when McNabb was going down list of post-Elway QBs who didnt thrive under Shanahan, he omitted his own name


----------------------------------------------------------------------


Why can't this assclown just go away? He's shitty, and nobody wants him and yet he's blaming everybody else for his lack of skill/effort he displayed in football the past few years. **** YOU MCNUGGET

Re: A New Look Offense or the Same but Better?
 

[quote=NC_Skins;905085][B]Rick Maese ‏ @RickMaese

McNabb says on ESPN RGIII is not a good fit for Redskins. Says ego will get in way. "Are you going to cater the offense around his talent?"[/B]

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Rick Maese ‏ @RickMaese

Skip Bayless asked McNabb if he simply has an ax to grind. "I do but I don't"

----------------------------------------------------------------------

[B]Rick Maese ‏ @RickMaese

McNabb says he was misused here and thinks Skins could similarly misuse RGIII: "You have to be in a system that caters to your ability"[/B]

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Rick Maese ‏ @RickMaese

It was weird when McNabb was going down list of post-Elway QBs who didnt thrive under Shanahan, he omitted his own name





Why can't this assclown just go away? He's shitty, and nobody wants him and yet he's blaming everybody else for his lack of skill/effort he displayed in football the past few years. **** YOU MCNUGGET[/quote]

[B]McNabb says he was misused here...
and there....and there.....
Apparently that was the case at a few other stops on the McBounce farewell tour..........
[/B]