Jump to content

BC Fan

Forum Members
  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by BC Fan

  1. So predictable that Shanny abandoned the No Huddle right after it worked.
  2. I'm not relying on DLed. And you're missing the point. You said Ryan only couldn't audible on 20% of the total plays (the half of the runs that Shanahan says he can't.) I said that's not actually correct because presumably Ryan also can't audible on some unknown percentage of the pass plays as well. We just don't know what percentage (of the 60% of pass plays) that is. So, for example, if Ryan was generously allowed an audible on 75% of the pass plays, that would still mean he couldn't audible on 25%. 25% of 60% is 15%. Which would mean Ryan could not audible on 35% of the total plays, run or pass.
  3. That's correct. You said Ryan couldn't audible for only 20% of the plays, which I take to mean total plays (50% of the 40%). If that was true, he then would have to be able to audible on any pass play (the remaining 60% of the plays). As you said, we don't know what Shanahan's policy on that is. Consequently, we don't know exactly what percentage of plays above 20% (the runs) that Ryan can audible. Since Shanahan already limits 50% of the run plays, I think it's a solid educated guess that a 50% limit on pass plays is in the ballpark.
  4. This is also untrue. It presumes Ryan could audible on all the pass plays. Presumably, if Shanahan also limits audibling on pass plays as well, we just don't know how much. Some have thought it was reasonable inference that the same 50% ratio on run plays carries over to pass. Others have said this is an unreasonable inference.
  5. I don't think it's that unreasonable an inference that Shanahan uses roughly the same ratio of pass plays that Ryan can't change at the line. But as I said, we don't actually know, and we'll just have to wait for more clarity on that. Somehow, I think we'll be getting it this season.
  6. What he says in the quote is we ran No Huddle in 3 games. The article is from the bye week of that season, which means 3 times in 9 games. And as the writer points out, all three times were in "traditional hurry up situations." So basically he only ran it when everyone in the league runs it -- in clock situations. Anyway, I think it's fair to say a guy who runs No Huddle 3 times in 9 games is not a fan of No Huddle, and that No Huddle is only a minor component of the offense at best. By contrast, I would guess under Koetter we never went a single game when we didn't run it at least once, and usually more than a few series a game. With Mularkey, of course, we ran it a ton. So there's been a huge change on the team with respect to No Huddle. I wish there were actual stats to compare how much we run No Huddle with the rest of the league. My guess would be around 25th.
  7. As to the No Huddle, I think Shanahan's own words are a little telling: Q: Can you run more no huddle? Do y’all want to run more no-huddle? A: That’s something that we think about every week. That’s something that we think about every quarter. Every time in the game. It’s part of our offense. We’ve run it this year. I don’t know if people have noticed. We’ve done it in probably three of the games. We think if it gives us an advantage, we’ll do it. But we don’t just say hey, let’s go no-huddle because we hear you guys telling us too. I don’t hear you, but my wife hears you. (The Falcons have only run no-huddle in traditional hurry-up situations.) So he says they do it when they have an advantage, but in reality they only did it in traditional hurry up situations. In other words, we use the No Huddle as little as people are complaining about because he obviously doesn't like it.
  8. In the video, Shanahan is only talking specifically about run plays. About which Ryan can audible half the time. Shanahan makes no statement whatsoever about pass plays. So it's a little disingenuous to assume Ryan has full autonomy to check out of a pass into a run 100% of the time. My inference is that Ryan would have about the same 50% latitude to check pass to run based on the same logic -- Sometimes Shanahan wants a pass for strategic reasons and Ryan can't check into a run on those plays. Since the reporter didn't press the issue, we'll never completely know. But I find it hard to believe Shanahan's philosophy is "Check into a run whenever you want, but only check to a pass when I've specifically given you one of the plays from that half the playbook." Personally, I'd rather have Ryan over-checking into good pass situations than strategically checking into bad runs, but I suppose that's a whole other discussion.
  9. http://www.albanyherald.com/sports/kyle-shanahan-believes-offense-will-thrive-with-cut-in-turnovers/article_fc09e7e8-7f94-51f5-820b-17e586c9a53a.html "He has an audible option — to check a run into a pass or vice versa at the line of scrimmage — on maybe 50 percent of the plays, according to Shanahan." http://www.thefalcoholic.com/2016/8/6/12389330/june-jones-admits-he-mismanaged-favre-but-can-shanahan-admit-it-with "The top reason is a problem with a number of coordinators: they are so dedicated to their game plan and scheme that they refuse to change anything. Shanahan seems to fit in this camp. He reportedly resisted the urge to use much no-huddle with the Washington Redskins, despite some success. It was successful with the Cleveland Browns, but the team decided against relying on it too often. He refused to make changes to that bad offense last season. What has Shanahan said so far this offseason?" It's pretty obvious that A) Ryan has far less power to audible; and B), that Shanahan does not like the No Huddle, nor has ever liked it in his coaching history. Why dispute this?
  10. According to Shanahan, Ryan cannot audible in at least half the plays. It is not disputed that Ryan has far less audible power than he did under the previous 2 OC's. Nor does Shanahan dispute that we basically don't run No Huddle. The argument is that Ryan is not the type of QB that you take audible powers away from, because it detracts from his strengths. And that he's better suited with a healthy portion of No Huddle, which we've all seen works very well with his skill set. You could convince me that taking audible power/No Huddle away from QB's like Schaub, RG3, etc. would be more beneficial to getting better performance out of them. Not with Ryan, though.
  11. I understand your opinion. I think Wor is going to surprise this year in his second season under Quinn and change conventional opinions of his supposed limitations (not that people on this board won't magnify his every mistake and cry for Jones every game even if it's completely unwarranted.) As I keep saying, we'll see what happens.
  12. Not a good argument. Every player has good games and bad games. Except Jones. He has no games.
  13. Ok. I think he'll start and stay the starter all year. We'll see what happens.
  14. Only games matter. But I'll wait until I see him on the field in real games before I proclaim he's more talented.
  15. " Quinn better stop d*ckin around then and play them at the positions they will play during the season. Plying Paul at WLB sent a message because Quinn no longer views him as the starter. doesn't." That's what you said. I said it doesn't make sense because early in the preseason he's experimenting, getting guys snaps, figuring out what he has. Yes, by Game 3 he'll start playing guys a lot more in their regular season roles exclusively. But not in game 1
  16. If you want the most talented players to play, then you should want to see who wins the job at MLB, not automatically start Jones because, after a single preseason game against backups, you've decided Jones is more talented.
  17. I'm not sure what any game against the Browns will mean, but we'll see.
  18. This makes no sense. Quinn has repeatedly said that he experiments with players at every position to see about their versatility. He's also said that all the rookies will get the bulk of the preseason snaps so he can figure out what he has.in them. Seems smart to me. He knows Paul and Spoon can jump into their positions on Day 1. He wants to get Jones and Campbell as many snaps in those same positions as he can. So get Paul and Spoon snaps in other positions -- Paul at WLB, or Spoon at MLB as you already pointed out -- to see how they play.
  19. Possibly. All I'm arguing is Jones won't start. If I was going to go a little further, I think Quinn will work Jones in situationally in nickel before he gets every nickel down. This is not a criticism. I think ANY rookie LB will have a heck of a learning curve against NFL offenses. Jones has only started a single year. In the SEC which isn't known as a passing league. If he adapts quickly, we'll know we have a star on our hands. I think it takes him a while which is just fine.
  20. Ok. I bet Worrilow start at MLB and Spoon will start at WLB. I also bet that Quinn keeps both rookies on nickel as long as he can in year 1 because he thinks that's the best way to develop them.
  21. I would argue you need to let go of the idea that Jones will start opening night. But I guess we'll see.
  22. My first bet is Wor plays so well that he doesn't give up the job the entire year (as a corollary, I believe that a second year in Quinn's system will make him "faster" than people think he is.) My second bet is despite playing well, Wor still gets blamed for every gain over 5 yards that can't obviously be blamed on the secondary.
  23. http://www.ajc.com/news/sports/football/worrilow-moved-to-weakside-in-nickel/nr7kb/ The ajc article says Paul is being moved to WLB in the nickel. The base MLB job is still wide open, and I'll bet Paul wins that. If anything, it sounds like DQ is trying to figure out ways to get him on the field more, not less.
  • Create New...