Originally posted by brodiebluebanaszak:
Originally posted by NCommand:
Good post but you again are focusing on surface level details here...the ISSUE isn't that CK is a one-read only QB. It's that THAT is how our offense is built to be...now under two QB's. Again, go back to any game, even the most recent game and watch every passing play...an analyst just confirmed it...a defensive player who just played us confirmed it...I confirmed it in this thread. CK is doing exactly what this offense is designed to do (not dimissing his misses, trust, mechanical issues, ball security, RZ panics, etc.). Carlos was referring to CK being a one-read QB not b/c he is a poor, novice QB but b/c THAT is our ofense. If you can expose and pre-determine who the annointed receiver is, you can jam/blow up the play and CK is off and scrambling/running...usually with his eyes downfield. This is how he is coached (and to slide and throw the ball away) within our offense. And guess what? Alex Smith was coached the same way. You will rarely see a progression read b/c those are not built in to this offense. If you see one it's rare and typically means it's an ad lib play turned successful or another receiver opened up (outside the target WR) in the area and he has to choose one. It is what it is and we can talk about all the surface level stuff until we're blue in the face but how much more evidence do we need?
OK. Our scheme sucks. Now what? -- NC have you changed you're tune on this in the last few days? I posted problems with our scheme sunday and you were saying how every thing was hunky dory -- look at all the short passes/checkdowns in the Arizona game, we're going legit with small yard/medium yard playcalling, and so on. Now it sounds like you characterized our college hack Bo schembecler offense as a run heavy blocking extravaganza with some deep balls thrown in.
Which way are you going with this?
How do we get a pro offense running that will keep the DC's honest and not able to blow up our strategy by keying on a couple of players?
I apologize if I came off as "this offense sucks!" Obviously that is not the case on any level. We just beat the Cardinals and they fully were aware of our type of offense. Like our running game, you know it's coming but we are so talented, even if you stack 10 in the box, Gore could still break one for a TD once in a while. If Roman continues to "scheme" correctly, VD and Boldin will continue to be open on underneath crossing routes, wheel routes, quick sideline comebacks, corner EZ routes. They are just better and huge mismatches on 75% of the DB's they will face...often times even in press and jam-coverage. I'm very happy we are getting BACK to the Bo Schembechler basics b/c it suits our strength along the OL and RB positions and takes some heat off of CK. We are very creative and dynamic in the run game (minus those slow developing stretch runs that net us -5 yards every time - LOL).
Now, here is where I'm concerned: 1) The passing game (schemed/pre-determined) 2) First down production 3) RZ woes and 4) Opposition adjustments
1) The pre-determined, one-read, "schemed" passing plays (under 3 seconds) - as long as Roman can stay ahead of the DC's, attack weaknesses, etc. this can still work (as we saw with AZ). The issue I'm concerned about is the lack of built in outlets (i.e. RB's flaring out, TE's finding soft zones, the rest of the non-targeted WR's doing a better job of ad libbing and being on the same page as CK and check-outs pre-snap. I don't know if Roman's offense has ANY of this built in or if he needs another year+ to install that next level. Also, I'm seeing many times with 10 guys creeping up to the LOS, we run right up the gut into a wall. Where is the check-out to single coverage? The "hot reads?" Attacking the vacated blitzing area?
2) Horrendous...it's been an issue for 3 straight years. If this team doesn't get 4+ yards on first down, we're in big trouble and play right into the DC's even more. Why we can't "scheme" better production from this down, I have yet to figure out. It's a simple formula...when we do, we win.
3) Pre-Roman, we were the best RZ in the game...3 years later, we're perpetually a poor team here. Compartmentalized game plan issues here?
4) Last year our offense was unknown to the NFL and we took full advantage of it under CK...it was more "dynamic" and "explosive." We'd run teams to death with Gore or we'd pass for 300+ yards or we'd even beat a great playoff team by running our QB all over them. Teams had NO clue, like the Bears noted, how to even START to defend us. Now, the read-option has already been thrown out, CK is getting hit from the Q-formation and DC's are figuring out how to stuff us...jam the primary target and spy CK with a LB or DB.
Solutions? I'm looking to you guys
who have watched more college football to review some old film and tell me if our offense is not fundamentally sound for the NFL today or if we have another layer or two that has yet to be installed (like the WCO that takes 3-4 years) that is apparent among NFL offenses in today's game...3,5,7-step drops, scripted plays, spread formations with multiple receiving options, multiple pre-snap options/audibles, hot reads, 3-layer route trees, short outlets built in, etc. B/c right now, Carlos is right...one-read and if thwarted, CK is off scrambling (running, looking to pass). It's that simple.
[ Edited by NCommand on Oct 17, 2013 at 11:18 AM ]