jdawg4876

thoughts on dirk and the offense as a whole

112 posts in this topic

Just now, JDaveG said:

Remember also -- Koetter is not as precious about the football as Shanahan was.  He doesn't mind 50/50 balls.  He'll encourage the QB to take some shots and trust his WRs, especially when his WRs are Sanu, Ridley and Julio.  So you'll see us throw some balls that looks like the WR is covered instead of waiting for him to clear into open space.  But he schemes guys open all the time.  It's happened with us already and we're only 2 games in.

I told friends this same basic thing last night. I actually expect Matt to end up with higher int's by his standards playing in this offense. It is built on taking shots and stretching defenses. the goal being to win most of those deep throw battles with excellent receiver play. 

JDaveG, Ergo Proxy, vel and 1 other like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, thanat0s said:

I told friends this same basic thing last night. I actually expect Matt to end up with higher int's by his standards playing in this offense. It is built on taking shots and stretching defenses. the goal being to win most of those deep throw battles with excellent receiver play. 

Absolutely.  I don't think we're going to see 5 INTs every 2 games, but I sure do think we'll see his INT totals go above 7, which is what he had last season.

I prefer the other way, but it's just different ways to skin a cat.  I like Koetter's philosophy in the main, but honestly, if SF ever fires Shanahan, we ought to consider making him the head coach just to get him working with the offense again. He's that good.

ShadyRef, Ergo Proxy, vel and 1 other like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, JDaveG said:

Absolutely.  I don't think we're going to see 5 INTs every 2 games, but I sure do think we'll see his INT totals go above 7, which is what he had last season.

I prefer the other way, but it's just different ways to skin a cat.  I like Koetter's philosophy in the main, but honestly, if SF ever fires Shanahan, we ought to consider making him the head coach just to get him working with the offense again. He's that good.

Okay, you've bugged my house, haven't you? I told them that yesterday, too. If SF tanks and Shanny gets the boot, I agree we should bring him back immediately. I actually won't be surprised if Dirk gets another HC job, assuming we have a big year in offensive production, wins and playoff success. 

JDaveG and falconsd56 like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, thanat0s said:

Okay, you've bugged my house, haven't you? I told them that yesterday, too. If SF tanks and Shanny gets the boot, I agree we should bring him back immediately. I actually won't be surprised if Dirk gets another HC job, assuming we have a big year in offensive production, wins and playoff success. 

They’re 2-0 and play the Steelers without Roethlisberger next week.  And this is his first real time with a healthy, full-time Jimmy G at QB.  They blew out the Bengals yesterday so I think it’s safe to say he’s getting his HC feet under him.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, KRUNKuno said:

They’re 2-0 and play the Steelers without Roethlisberger next week.  And this is his first real time with a healthy, full-time Jimmy G at QB.  They blew out the Bengals yesterday so I think it’s safe to say he’s getting his HC feet under him.

Yeah, they waited too long to fire him.  He's got it rolling now, apparently.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'll hold judgement. My biggest fear was that we'd be pass happy and that he'd put Ryan and the OL in tough situations waiting for his route concepts to develop. 2 games in and I'm a little worried in that regard.  

KRUNKuno likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, KRUNKuno said:

The one thing about Boy Wonder that I hated but grew to love was that when a run was called we were going to run that play regardless of what the offense was doing.  Why?  Because there was a bigger picture at play in his gameplan and play calling.  Chess instead of checkers.  Slow play in poker instead of bidding based off of what others around the table have done.

We gave up on the run way too early for a team that was ahead for most of the game.  At this point it seems like we’re passing the ball heavily because of the weapons we have instead of setting things up to effectively use our weapons.  Many more passing opportunities would’ve been opened in the eagles defense if they had play action to account for as well.  But they weren’t worried about that because even when we were up we weren’t trying to run.  

I posted that Koetter was calling run plays that had RPOs tagged on them. If Matt chooses to pass it, that's Matt's option. I pointed out two plays for example. 

Can't advocate for Matt having more latitude to make plays at the LOS and he chooses to pass more than run. 

Ergo Proxy, Ovie_Lover and JDaveG like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, vel said:

Dirk showed why he's better than Sark. He was calling attacking plays. If not for Matt having 3 more brain farts, this is a blow out. That bomb to Julio that Darby picked was wide open. Right play call to attack the weakness. Another red zone turnover took points off the board. The screen (Yep, and yall hate them right?) to win the game was perfect. TE screens, middle screens. They were sending pressure all game and Koetter called it right all night. 

If they don't throw those 3 INTs, you probably see them grind the game out late but it was too close and not enough ground was being covered to afford being behind the chains like that. 

This this this.

Apparently, Ryan's arm was hit on the RZ throw but it was a force ANYWAY given he didn't see the WLB reading the play.

We don't need to force it passing inside the 5 yard line.

THIS is EXACTLY why we wanted to see Hill or Ollison active for those situations. We got McGary hopefully moving forward and Brown instead of Lindstrom. That should be a STRONG run option in situational football inside the 5 or closer OR when trying to close the game by leaning on the ground game.

They were selling out with Cover-0 blitz not just because their secondary was getting exposed but also because we were not making them respect run fits and our run game. This made it pointless to read play action.

That said, we had the right idea and Matt could've helped us bury them.

The good news is, people will still sleep on us because "Philly coulda, shoulda won" but ya easily a blowout.

I think a better run game moving forward and less mistakes; maybe better short options vs their blitzing, can lead to some blowout wins.

JDaveG, vel and athell like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
51 minutes ago, vel said:

I posted that Koetter was calling run plays that had RPOs tagged on them. If Matt chooses to pass it, that's Matt's option. I pointed out two plays for example. 

Can't advocate for Matt having more latitude to make plays at the LOS and he chooses to pass more than run. 

That's one reason Shanahan always limited audibles.  He'd give them on certain plays, but sometimes it was just "we're going to run the ball."  It allowed him to maintain balance.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Ergo Proxy said:

This this this.

Apparently, Ryan's arm was hit on the RZ throw but it was a force ANYWAY given he didn't see the WLB reading the play.

We don't need to force it passing inside the 5 yard line.

THIS is EXACTLY why we wanted to see Hill or Ollison active for those situations. We got McGary hopefully moving forward and Brown instead of Lindstrom. That should be a STRONG run option in situational football inside the 5 or closer OR when trying to close the game by leaning on the ground game.

They were selling out with Cover-0 blitz not just because their secondary was getting exposed but also because we were not making them respect run fits and our run game. This made it pointless to read play action.

That said, we had the right idea and Matt could've helped us bury them.

The good news is, people will still sleep on us because "Philly coulda, shoulda won" but ya easily a blowout.

I think a better run game moving forward and less mistakes; maybe better short options vs their blitzing, can lead to some blowout wins.

Yep. We could have blown them out. Matt makes some better decisions and it happens. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, JDaveG said:

Absolutely.  I don't think we're going to see 5 INTs every 2 games, but I sure do think we'll see his INT totals go above 7, which is what he had last season.

I prefer the other way, but it's just different ways to skin a cat.  I like Koetter's philosophy in the main, but honestly, if SF ever fires Shanahan, we ought to consider making him the head coach just to get him working with the offense again. He's that good.

SF may win that division.  With a healthy Jimmy G they are s very tough unit.  2-0 and all on the road.

JDaveG likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, JDaveG said:

That's one reason Shanahan always limited audibles.  He'd give them on certain plays, but sometimes it was just "we're going to run the ball."  It allowed him to maintain balance.

True. 

I just think it's a damed if you do, damed if you don't think with fans. They wanted Matt to have more control of the offense, but then complain about the OC's lack of balance while ignoring Matt has the control and exercised it last night to aid in the lopsided play selection. Runs were called. But when your QB has an out, those runs suddenly become passes on the stat sheet but were called runs on the play sheet. 

JDaveG, Ergo Proxy and Ovie_Lover like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, vel said:

True. 

I just think it's a damed if you do, damed if you don't think with fans. They wanted Matt to have more control of the offense, but then complain about the OC's lack of balance while ignoring Matt has the control and exercised it last night to aid in the lopsided play selection. Runs were called. But when your QB has an out, those runs suddenly become passes on the stat sheet but were called runs on the play sheet. 

Yep.  It works out either way.  There isn't one way to do it.

I know which one I prefer, but I'm a broken record on that.  I hate we only had Shanahan for 2 seasons.

vel, Ergo Proxy, Ovie_Lover and 1 other like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, JDaveG said:

Yep.  It works out either way.  There isn't one way to do it.

I know which one I prefer, but I'm a broken record on that.  I hate we only had Shanahan for 2 seasons.

I agree on missing Kyle. But I don't think this offense can't rival it. If the OL can settle in and we find a running game, Matt settles down, they can be lethal. They could have put up 40 points last night if Matt played cleaner. Very realistically. Kyle struggled to break 15 in 2016 vs PHI. 

Dirk does it a different way. Not to get back into that like you said, but I don't think fans will complain if the OL settles down. That's the last key to this offense. They can't run the varied rushing attack they want without it. 

JDaveG, Ergo Proxy and ShadyRef like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, vel said:

I agree on missing Kyle. But I don't think this offense can't rival it. If the OL can settle in and we find a running game, Matt settles down, they can be lethal. They could have put up 40 points last night if Matt played cleaner. Very realistically. Kyle struggled to break 15 in 2016 vs PHI. 

Dirk does it a different way. Not to get back into that like you said, but I don't think fans will complain if the OL settles down. That's the last key to this offense. They can't run the varied rushing attack they want without it. 

No doubt.  If Dirk ran his offense the way he likes to run it, it's a lot like Mike Martz's offense.  Both ways work for sure.

It's also a lot like what Peyton Manning always ran before he went to Denver and Kubiak came along.

Ergo Proxy, vel and ShadyRef like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, vel said:

True. 

I just think it's a damed if you do, damed if you don't think with fans. They wanted Matt to have more control of the offense, but then complain about the OC's lack of balance while ignoring Matt has the control and exercised it last night to aid in the lopsided play selection. Runs were called. But when your QB has an out, those runs suddenly become passes on the stat sheet but were called runs on the play sheet. 

 

4 minutes ago, JDaveG said:

Yep.  It works out either way.  There isn't one way to do it.

I know which one I prefer, but I'm a broken record on that.  I hate we only had Shanahan for 2 seasons.

I'm on the fence with this, though I tend to lean towards the limit the audibles approach.

The outside zone hand offs were working. I think we could have done more there to keep the defense honest and used play action off of that to open up big plays downfield.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, No.11 said:

 

I'm on the fence with this, though I tend to lean towards the limit the audibles approach.

The outside zone hand offs were working. I think we could have done more there to keep the defense honest and used play action off of that to open up big plays downfield.

I think we'd have been playing more into their strengths if we ran too much.

I would prefer "more" versus "no more" though.  I agree with you there.

No.11, Ergo Proxy and vel like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don’t mind pass happy. Especially on first down, pass while you’re “ahead of the sticks” or at least not behind them

too often we’re getting behind the chains losing yards running on first down. In turn we’re passing more, and in a more difficult passing situation behind the sticks 

we’re asking Ryan to pick up too many 2nd and 12+, 3rd and 10+

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, No.11 said:

 

I'm on the fence with this, though I tend to lean towards the limit the audibles approach.

The outside zone hand offs were working. I think we could have done more there to keep the defense honest and used play action off of that to open up big plays downfield.

 

2 minutes ago, JDaveG said:

I think we'd have been playing more into their strengths if we ran too much.

I would prefer "more" versus "no more" though.  I agree with you there.

But the counter is, if Matt hits either of those passes to Ridley or Hardy, and just doesn't throw that INT in the end zone, we're talking 10-14 points. A 34-20 or 38-20 victory brings much different comments. 

I don't think it was wrong. Like you said, more running would have played to their hand, given how atrocious their secondary was. 

athell, Ergo Proxy, No.11 and 2 others like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, vel said:

Lol all of this is so bad.

Run the ball when it was getting stopped consistently. To the tune of 3-5 yard losses. Getting behind the chains is not smart versus the Eagles. 

Route concepts are basic and long? Yet... Matt threw for 7 ypa and several passes short of the sticks to supplement for the lack of running game. Our issues the first time he was here was trotting out an NFL OL comprised of the likes of Sam Baker, Lamar Holmes, Peter Konz, and Jeremy Trueblood, to name a few. In 2012, yall had no complaints. 

We had no running game. Outside of Ito's 28 yard run, they averaged 1.8 yards per carry. If we were getting 4 yards per carry, by all means keep running it. But when you are picking up chunk yards at the clip the Falcons were, why waste a down on a potential 2 yard gain and most likely a loss of yardage? 

Matt audibling to the screen is a slight on Dirk? Lol ignore the TE screens and middle screen to Freeman right? Ignore Koetter giving Matt the built in check to the double screens, which yall bltched about the thought of screens coming back to Atlanta the moment Koetter was hired. 

They had no running game. That's not a scheme issue. That's a Philadelphia defense doesn't allow running games issue. Same with Minnesota. Go check the stats. Those two defenses have consistently been in the top of the league in shutting down rushing attacks for the past few years. Complaining about "the lack of balance" is baseless. Matt throwing bone headed INTs is not on Koetter. The one in the end zone, he had Stocker wide open in his face and chose to throw it elsewhere. That's not on Dirk. Matt missed two TDs to Ridley and Hardy and back to back plays exploiting the Eagles secondary. Matt Bryant missed a FG. Those three plays right there account for 13 points at the least. 17 at most. That's a 37-41 point output. 

Miss me with complaints about Dirk last night. With his starting RG out, his starting RT going down. And for all of the talk of these long developing routes, Matt was only hit 6 times and sacked once. 

I was gonna reply to him but you saved me the trouble. Good **** man. Tired of this "long basic route" narrative. 

vel and Ergo Proxy like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, JDaveG said:

I think we'd have been playing more into their strengths if we ran too much.

I would prefer "more" versus "no more" though.  I agree with you there.

Yeah, just enough to get the D to bite on play action a little more, especially on the naked bootleg. I don't disagree with the heavy dose of passing to exploit a weak secondary, but I don't think Ryan necessarily needed to throw 40+ times. Granted, much of that was because of Ryan misfiring on what would have been scoring plays, but again, that may have been mitigated with a few more runs to take the pressure off of pass protection.

JDaveG and Ergo Proxy like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, vel said:

Dirk showed why he's better than Sark. He was calling attacking plays. If not for Matt having 3 more brain farts, this is a blow out. That bomb to Julio that Darby picked was wide open. Right play call to attack the weakness. Another red zone turnover took points off the board. The screen (Yep, and yall hate them right?) to win the game was perfect. TE screens, middle screens. They were sending pressure all game and Koetter called it right all night. 

If they don't throw those 3 INTs, you probably see them grind the game out late but it was too close and not enough ground was being covered to afford being behind the chains like that. 

He is clearly better than Sark. He isn't an offensive savant like Shanahan, but Dirk's solid, knows the league, knows the ins and outs of about any offensive scheme you have the players to run, knows Matt Ryan, meshes well with Mularkey, Raheem Morris, Knapp on the offensive side, etc., etc.

Whatever wrinkles Dirk adds to this scheme, no doubt this offensive unit can execute it. Just have to get cleaner with the execution and cut out a lot of the stupid penalties. After more reps, no reason this offense can't be averaging 30+ pp game.

Ergo Proxy and vel like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, jdawg4876 said:

For full disclosure I was a fan of bringing dirk back. I still am so far, but he has been way too pass happy so far, the first game I get it , we got down quick to the vikes, but this one not so much. ryan threw the ball 43 times and we only ran it 15 times. Those numbers have to get closer to each other. And if we are not going to run it, we need to get rbs more involved in the dump off game aka like an extended hand off, one of the best called and executed plays all night was the shovel pass to freeman. That is one reason I still have hope for freeman, he showed a second gear and split the defenders up the middle. The biggest issue I see that @ya_boi_j also pointed out is he stops his feet now when making jump cuts, that is not normal. I know it is a small sample size but I do believe ito has earned the right to some more attempts. He has ran the ball 10 times for 63 yds. so thats over  6yds a carry.

On the other plus side, dirk's offense put up more pts than kyle did in 2016, against a better defense in my opinion. and we left at least 10 to 13 pts on the field. 

The only time I see the O get sloppy is when a blitz is called against them. They also handled it better this week than week one, so that's encouraging  When Philly was in zone Matt was picking them apart for the most part- he missed a couple of throws when not under pressure. 

Ergo Proxy likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, vel said:

Solid? No. They should run the ball. But when you are averaging less than 2 ypc and the opponent's secondary can barely cover your WRs, why spend the snaps on running the ball for the sake of balance? Run the ball late to ice the clock. You are acting like the Eagles run defense is just decent. That's a top tier unit. With an OL that hasn't gelled and lost a guy mid game. 

I'm not saying just throw the ball every snap. I'm saying take advantaged of the weaknesses of your opponent. That was passing the ball. 

Guys wanna complain about attacking matchups but when we do we did it wrong

Why run when they can't stop a pass and we can't get more than 3 yds a carry.

Ergo Proxy and vel like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Ovie_Lover said:

Guys wanna complain about attacking matchups but when we do we did it wrong

Why run when they can't stop a pass and we can't get more than 3 yds a carry.

Yep. That's why Schwartz blitzed his heart out. That was the ONLY way to keep it close. Without blitzing, that secondary would have been eaten alive. Attack the match up. I'll never be against that. 

Ovie_Lover and Ergo Proxy like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now