Vanilla play calling what it really means.

[LVskinsfan]

We hear it all the time. But, most people don't know the real underline meaning.

They want you to think, We don't want to show our great plays that we are going to use in regular season.

Reality is - It's impossible, In preseason a good offensive game you will run about 50 plays, 60 would be great wow. That's about (if you never ran the same play twice) 2% of the playbook? Now, with 4 preseason games that means you give up about 8% from your playbook. That still leaves you 92% of your playbook they haven't seen. So. the only thing you can show is your weak points and your strong points. Myself, I don't think I want to show other teams my weak points. That's just me though.

[Mass_SkinsFan]

We hear it all the time. But, most people don't know the real underline meaning.

They want you to think, We don't want to show our great plays that we are going to use in regular season.

Reality is - It's impossible, In preseason a good offensive game you will run about 50 plays, 60 would be great wow. That's about (if you never ran the same play twice) 2% of the playbook? Now, with 4 preseason games that means you give up about 8% from your playbook. That still leaves you 92% of your playbook they haven't seen. So. the only thing you can show is your weak points and your strong points. Myself, I don't think I want to show other teams my weak points. That's just me though.

LV, you're absolutely correct on what the "vanilla offense" thing means.

Unfortunately my problem with such a concept is that running that vanilla offense in the only really useful training that happens in camp (preseason games) means that our offense will go into the first game of the season with NO useful experience running this offense. Oh yes, they'll have run the plays 150 times on the practice field, in shorts and maybe some pads. They'll have run it at half speed against a defense going half speed at some point during training camp. However, they will not have actually done it in the only set of circumstances that I believe means anything... live game play.

Somebody once said that the best plan in the world ceases being useful at the moment of first contact with the enemy. Someone else has said that the only true way to test the skill and toughness of a warrior is to force him to kill or die. I see sports the same way. I'm no fan of Allen Iverson, but he was right... they were talking about PRACTICE, with isn't worth what comes out the back end of my dog.

[ouvan59]

Vanilla offense doesn't necessarily mean that they aren't showing the playbook. A lot of times it does mean that you are not gameplanning to your strengths and/or your opponents weaknesses. The coaches have to determine what guys can do in certain situations and what they can't do.

[Mass_SkinsFan]

The coaches have to determine what guys can do in certain situations and what they can't do.

My problem with that is the fact that I've never believed that preseason games should be somewhere that a player can WIN a starting job. I believe they should be a place where a player can LOSE one, but not win one (the player who lucks into that position didn't win it, in my mind). If you don't have a pretty damn good idea what your 53 man roster is going to look like going into training camp, maybe you shouldn't be a head coach in the NFL. I really don't see why there need to be more than 60 guys in camp, and I never have.

[LVskinsfan]

Our coaches are getting paid $2,000,000.00 a year. I sure hope they could of figured that out before the first preseason game.

[jimster]

Vanilla offense doesn't necessarily mean that they aren't showing the playbook. A lot of times it does mean that you are not gameplanning to your strengths and/or your opponents weaknesses. The coaches have to determine what guys can do in certain situations and what they can't do.

Bingo.

The playcalling in a pre-season game is usually not as aggressive (or conservative) as it would be in the same situation in a regular season game, due to the fact that coaches are looking more at the players in situations then trying to win. - That's why you always hear coaches talking about winning pre-season games as being secondary.

[LVskinsfan]

only if their looking to have a bad year. I didn't hear the Colts say that last year and I remimber the 5 years we went to the superbowl. We played the preseason games as if they were playoff games. We through everything at them but the kitchen sink. and no we didn't play our starters the whole game. but we called the plays to be the best.

[DanDan]

I know I'm gonna get thrown uder the bus and I'm not a nay sayer. But last year in preason didn't we hear "we're only going to show so much offense". We got a thousand plays in the play book. Like we'll only show them so much. Folks there's only so many ways you can put and defend 11 men on the field. If you have the talent and power of years past (god I loved that) you just simply ran over people, then on defense we stuffed them. Someone on here said it best you can't teach big.

There's no magic plays and then all of a sudden we'll simply play like we are supposed to.

If they have the plays in the playbook they'll run'em. When you stink you stink.

I honestly think this year Campbell is going to be okay. I'm going to think positive I do believe the offense will get better every week. No doubt timing is critical and the practice field just isn't like playing againest another team. In practice they aren't trying to kill ya for real.

God I hope we don't die a slow death again this year.

[fansince62]

We hear it all the time. But, most people don't know the real underline meaning.

They want you to think, We don't want to show our great plays that we are going to use in regular season.

Reality is - It's impossible, In preseason a good offensive game you will run about 50 plays, 60 would be great wow. That's about (if you never ran the same play twice) 2% of the playbook? Now, with 4 preseason games that means you give up about 8% from your playbook. That still leaves you 92% of your playbook they haven't seen. So. the only thing you can show is your weak points and your strong points. Myself, I don't think I want to show other teams my weak points. That's just me though.

I would say that is not a complete assessment. In any given game, the O strategy is set up to exploit a defense's weaknesses. But sequences of plays are also run to set up an exploitable moment. You don't usually get that in preseason games....in shrt, much more limited gameplan, it's not just the plays...it's how they are strung together.

[LVskinsfan]

I would say that is not a complete assessment. In any given game, the O strategy is set up to exploit a defense's weaknesses. But sequences of plays are also run to set up an exploitable moment. You don't usually get that in preseason games....in shrt, much more limited gameplan, it's not just the plays...it's how they are strung together.

Now your getting into a touchy subject on this site. The preseason is to be utilized by the players to run play at full speed with full contact. But, preseason is also for the coaches. They need to get up to game speed i.e. making game plans and executing them before regular season starts.

[mistertim]

If you don't have a pretty damn good idea what your 53 man roster is going to look like going into training camp, maybe you shouldn't be a head coach in the NFL. I really don't see why there need to be more than 60 guys in camp, and I never have.

While I understand your point, I think of each part of the offseason leading up to the end of preseason as a series of "filters" for rookies or players who are trying to get a spot. Each one is different, gets harder, and forces them to show more. First you have undrafted rookies come out and they pick out a few guys who they think can pass on to the next level. Then you have rookie minicamp where those guys will be joined by draft picks and have tougher competition; more players will lose out. Then you have OTAs and minicamp, when the vets get in on it and all of the rookies...drafted and undrafted, are tested even more against guys who are already NFL players.

Of course, all of that was sans pads and with little to no contact. There are plenty of guys who are great athletes and flash serious ability in shorts, but once you get them in pads and they are getting hit, etc...they just disappear. You can also have the opposite. A guy who might not be a super standout in shorts doing drills, but once you get pads on him he becomes an animal. So training camp is the next to last level; where you can see if the guys who made it this far in shorts can hack it once they are in pads and there is contact. After that, the preseason, where you get to see how they react to another team's D or O. That is obviously much different than just going against your own guys all the time.

So while I think coaches have general ideas a lot of times about who will make it and who won't, they don't know for sure and they probably don't want to jump to conclusions and count someone out who got all the way to the training camp and preseason stages without giving them a shot to show what they can do (or not do). You also have situations with injuries where a guy can step up and surprise, like Heyer has so far. If Samuels hadn't sprained his knee, Heyer may very well have end up cut. Or if they decided to only have 60 or so guys in training camp, he probably wouldn't have even been there. That means they would have missed out on a potentially solid backup for Samuels at LT. You never know what is going to happen, so I don't see any reason for them to not keep a good number of guys around at training camp and the preseason just in case. They don't really have much to lose by it.

:2cents:

[StepyagameuP]

You are totally correct. However, our Offense was munching up Rocky Road even though it should have been Vanilla. Eventually to me, thats what sucks and doesnt matter what kind of play calling it is.

[ouvan59]

I would say that is not a complete assessment. In any given game, the O strategy is set up to exploit a defense's weaknesses. But sequences of plays are also run to set up an exploitable moment. You don't usually get that in preseason games....in shrt, much more limited gameplan, it's not just the plays...it's how they are strung together.

:applause:

[Mass_SkinsFan]

tim, that lack of pads in the off season workouts is something I've never agreed with. I don't care what you can run in shorts and an a-shirt. What I need to know is what you can do in pads, under pressure, when it really means something. Obviously, there are restrictions on contact during the off season, but I'm not sure what the restrictions on wearing pads are.

My personal beliefs on the off season and training camp are that they're where you take the guys who already have a good solid set of basic skills and teach them the system you expect them to use to WIN games. Kind of like advanced training in the military... you're expected to already know the basics when you get there because nobody is going to waste the time to teach them to you once you're there. By the end of training camp the team should be a well-oiled machine ready to rip people's heads off and **** down their throats. At least that's the way I see it.

[LVskinsfan]

While I understand your point, I think of each part of the offseason leading up to the end of preseason as a series of "filters" for rookies or players who are trying to get a spot. Each one is different, gets harder, and forces them to show more. First you have undrafted rookies come out and they pick out a few guys who they think can pass on to the next level. Then you have rookie minicamp where those guys will be joined by draft picks and have tougher competition; more players will lose out. Then you have OTAs and minicamp, when the vets get in on it and all of the rookies...drafted and undrafted, are tested even more against guys who are already NFL players.

Of course, all of that was sans pads and with little to no contact. There are plenty of guys who are great athletes and flash serious ability in shorts, but once you get them in pads and they are getting hit, etc...they just disappear. You can also have the opposite. A guy who might not be a super standout in shorts doing drills, but once you get pads on him he becomes an animal. So training camp is the next to last level; where you can see if the guys who made it this far in shorts can hack it once they are in pads and there is contact. After that, the preseason, where you get to see how they react to another team's D or O. That is obviously much different than just going against your own guys all the time.

So while I think coaches have general ideas a lot of times about who will make it and who won't, they don't know for sure and they probably don't want to jump to conclusions and count someone out who got all the way to the training camp and preseason stages without giving them a shot to show what they can do (or not do). You also have situations with injuries where a guy can step up and surprise, like Heyer has so far. If Samuels hadn't sprained his knee, Heyer may very well have end up cut. Or if they decided to only have 60 or so guys in training camp, he probably wouldn't have even been there. That means they would have missed out on a potentially solid backup for Samuels at LT. You never know what is going to happen, so I don't see any reason for them to not keep a good number of guys around at training camp and the preseason just in case. They don't really have much to lose by it.

:2cents:

I agree with some of what you said. I'm sure the coaches would love to keep about 150 players for the whole season LOL. That was not a good example with Heyer. Heyer already made the roster before the Raven's scrimmage. He was even posted on depth chart as the number 2. Like I said on an earlier post these coaches make $2,000,000.00 a year. They know who's going to make the team before the first preseason game. Just like the players they need to practice (i.e.play calling) and have their game ready before regular season

[ouvan59]

My problem with that is the fact that I've never believed that preseason games should be somewhere that a player can WIN a starting job. I believe they should be a place where a player can LOSE one, but not win one (the player who lucks into that position didn't win it, in my mind). If you don't have a pretty damn good idea what your 53 man roster is going to look like going into training camp, maybe you shouldn't be a head coach in the NFL. I really don't see why there need to be more than 60 guys in camp, and I never have.

It isn't just about who is going to start or make the roster. Some of what they do is designed to see what players can do and how it will affect the gameplanning down the road. I guarantee that if this were a regular season game that Heyer wouldn't have been left with as little help as he got. And do you really think that Ade Jimoh will ever be left in single coverage in the regular season?

[Mass_SkinsFan]

It isn't just about who is going to start or make the roster. Some of what they do is designed to see what players can do and how it will affect the gameplanning down the road. I guarantee that if this were a regular season game that Heyer wouldn't have been left with as little help as he got. And do you really think that Ade Jimoh will ever be left in single coverage in the regular season?

Again this comes down to the different way that I see training camp and the roster. So far as I'm concerned the preseason games (of which I think there should only be TWO) should be where the starters and second string guys get used to playing alongside each other and built the "chemistry" with each other. I'm not concerned about the third string guys because so far as I'm concerned the only time they're going to see the field is when the #1 & #2 guys are already DEAD, at which point the season is probably already shot to hell.

[LVskinsfan]

Again this comes down to the different way that I see training camp and the roster. So far as I'm concerned the preseason games (of which I think there should only be TWO) should be where the starters and second string guys get used to playing alongside each other and built the "chemistry" with each other. I'm not concerned about the third string guys because so far as I'm concerned the only time they're going to see the field is when the #1 & #2 guys are already DEAD, at which point the season is probably already shot to hell.

LOL

Not to change the subject. I would agree 2 preseason games is enough. The reason is money. Remimber when there was only 14 games in the season. We had 6 preseason games. That way the owners would still get 10 home game for money. I think the best way they could still accomplish 10 home games and only 2 preseason games is

6 division games

12 conference games

2 preseason games

that way the owners still get their 10 home games

[Califan007 The Constipated]

Vanilla offense doesn't necessarily mean that they aren't showing the playbook. A lot of times it does mean that you are not gameplanning to your strengths and/or your opponents weaknesses. The coaches have to determine what guys can do in certain situations and what they can't do.

Exacty... :applause:

I would say that is not a complete assessment. In any given game, the O strategy is set up to exploit a defense's weaknesses. But sequences of plays are also run to set up an exploitable moment. You don't usually get that in preseason games....in shrt, much more limited gameplan, it's not just the plays...it's how they are strung together.

Exacty... :applause:

[LVskinsfan]

I don't get the philosophy that players are suppose to be working on their skills for regular season (through preseason) but, coaches don't need to practice their skills (needed in every game) before the season. I like that idea, wait until regular season to practice putting together game plans and making adjustments in the middle of a game. I'm sure that really works for getting a good start the first game of the season.

[LVskinsfan]

Yes, I do look at it from a different angle. whenever there is a interception or a fumble I start from the top. Has Dan done everything he could. Then I ask has Joe done everything he could. I work my way down from the top. I know a lot of people have pointed at players who played poor. But, as I worked my way down from the top. The first person I came to that needs the most work is Al Saunders. Just like players, they (coaches) need to practice. Players can not just show up for the first regular season game and be expected to be 100%. They need to practice and Al Saunders needs to practice putting together game plans and making adjustments in the middle of a game. Otherwise we can't expect him to turn on a switch and to be at 100% for the first game. Sure their are players that need to get it together before regular season. So, do the coaches. that way the players and the coaches are at a 100% for the first game.

[Califan007 The Constipated]

Yes, I do look at it from a different angle. whenever there is a interception or a fumble I start from the top. Has Dan done everything he could. Then I ask has Joe done everything he could. I work my way down from the top. I know a lot of people have pointed at players who played poor. But, as I worked my way down from the top. The first person I came to that needs the most work is Al Saunders. Just like players, they (coaches) need to practice. Players can not just show up for the first regular season game and be expected to be 100%.

LT can, and does. With his track record of fielding explosive offenses, Saunders is easily the "LT" of O-coordinators.

[PCS]

Just out of curiosity, how do we actually know that this is the real meaning of the vanilla defense? Certainly see some logical, seemingly, conclusions being drawn here, but is this evidenced by more than just theory and conjecture?

[LVskinsfan]

LT can, and does. With his track record of fielding explosive offenses, Saunders is easily the "LT" of O-coordinators.

To elaborate, I think Al Saunders is a great offensive coordinator. But, I think he needs the practice. and no LT can not just start and be at his 100%. If Al Saunders could turn a switch he still wouldn't be at his 100%. I think even at 80% his still better then most of the offensive coordinators in the league. But, his not at his 100% and that's where he need to be when we start the season against the Dolphins

[LVskinsfan]

Just out of curiosity, how do we actually know that this is the real meaning of the vanilla defense? Certainly see some logical, seemingly, conclusions being drawn here, but is this evidenced by more than just theory and conjecture?

I would have to say it wasn't. Both side had their fair share of Blitzes. You may remember both times Campbell was hit was from a safety blitz. I just don't think they were holding back when both teams blitz that many times.