TheXlog: Will Vince Young be Mike Shanahan’s New Jake Plummer?

RichmondRedskin88 · July 21, 2011

The only issue I have is he's 28 and as result may be too old to change his ways. By time he changes his attitude and work ethic his talent wouldn't matter anymore. Depends if VY has a major change when he comes here. Who knows? A new team could change his outlook.

bowhunter · July 21, 2011

I agree Vyvern. My biggest fear/worst case scenario of all of this would be for him to earn the #1 job. Then do so well that we pass on drafting a QB, and then have a major meltdown. But as I said before, if we can get him to come in with the #2 mentality. It may allow for a little less pressure on him and allow for the Shannys to develop him slowly.

addicted · July 21, 2011

Um, the head coach is the one who said it....
SOURCE

Well color me informed, thanks I missed that

There are more reasons to get into the Vince Young camp then to stay out of it

Bring him in and may the best man win

darrelgreenie · July 21, 2011

I find myself in agreement with most of your opinions in this forum. But, I don't know how you could possibly have enough evidence to compare the playcalling styles of Mike and Kyle.

I understand that most may not see a difference between the Mike and Kyle and I'm not trying to convince anyone, but I think the differences are quite evident and are somewhat represented in the resulting pass/run ratios.

My 'evidence' comes from watching an entire seasons worth of Kyle playcalling along with more then a handful of Texans games over the years.

And comparing the elements of his gameplan/playcalling against those of Mike's from many years of watching and enjoying Mike Shanahan's Denver offenses.

This post goes more in depth the differences I see:

http://www.extremeskins.com/showthread.php?349052-ESPN-Starting-Beck-is-No-Tank-Job&p=8375098&viewfull=1#post8375098

And, Mike's personality alone makes to tough for me to imagine that he would [not?] accept losing football games as the price for letting Kyle go his own 'incompetent' way. After all, he can only help Kyle's career by making him a better coach and winning games

I'm not sure why you use the term incompetent to describe Kyle's way, because that is not how I feel about his playcalling.

Different? Yes.

But, Mike has always given his offensive coordinators freedom and I wouldn't expect him to be any different with his son, if anything I would expect more freedom.

Oldfan · July 21, 2011

I understand that most may not see a difference between the Mike and Kyle and I'm not trying to convince anyone, but I think the differences are quite evident and are somewhat represented in the resulting pass/run ratios.
My 'evidence' comes from watching an entire seasons worth of Kyle playcalling along with more then a handful of Texans games over the years..

Mike's pass/run ratios in Denver varied widely from year-to-year. Kyle had a good passing game and an ineffective running game to deal with in Texas. Here, McNabb gave him a deep threat, but that's about all he had to work with in strengths.

Mike feels he has solid reasons for his style of playcalling. If Mike's style and Kyle's are dramatically different, Mike would more than likely see his son's way as not just different but incompetent. That's why I used the word.

Let's remember that Mike Shanahan is the coach who reportedly had video cameras placed in the classrooms so that he could review and correct the instructions given by his assistants. This conflicts with your impression that he gave his OCs freedom.

Thiebear · July 21, 2011

So we want to take a bad QB with consistently bad ratings and make him a mediocre QB with sporadicly good and bad ratings?

Is there an option for a Good QB with Good ratings as we have a minimum floor to meet this year and no Captain for the Ship.

pjfootballer · July 21, 2011

Why are we even discussing this?
Young still belongs to Tennessee

Tennessee still needs a QB because Kerry Collins just retired

Young is under contract with Tennessee

The media are the ones who are saying Young will be cut, the teams said nothing

The media is wrong all the time

If Young was availible I'd think differently but he's not, not yet.

A little early imo

I agree. And it was runored that Fisher didn't want Young, but Adams does. With Fisher gone, does Munchak still want Young?

Edit: Oops. Didn't see where Munchak said it also.

darrelgreenie · July 21, 2011

Mike's pass/run ratios in Denver varied widely from year-to-year. .

I disagree that Mike's pass/ratio varied 'wildly'.

http://www.extremeskins.com/showthread.php?315837-Reconcilement-of-the-Shanahan-s-offenses-through-the-numbers-and-outcomes

Mike's pass/run ratio for his career is: 51.8% run vs 48.16% pass.

And actually that number is skewed because it wrongly includes the 2008 season where Jeremy Bates was the playcaller.

That season marked a clear depature from Mike's normal pass/run ratio with a 61.57% pass rate which was 4.12 percentage points higher then Mike's highest pass heavy season.

If you look at the link Mike's pass/run ratios are much closer to consistent then varying wildly.

(Kyle's 3 years, 1 here and w/ 2 with Houston, are north of 60/40 i'll edit with exact number later)

Kyle had a good passing game and an ineffective running game to deal with in Texas. Here, McNabb gave him a deep threat, but that's about all he had to work with in strengths.

This is really off topic for the points I'm making about the differences between Mike and Kyle as playcallers.

But, there is no way to know what role Kyle played in causing/not causing the inffectiveness in the running game.

The same pieces were on the roster now as then and now Houston has one of the better rushing attacks in the league.

Mike feels he has solid reasons for his style of playcalling. If Mike's style and Kyle's are dramatically different, Mike would more than likely see his son's way as not just different but incompetent. That's why I used the word.

That's your opinion which I don't share.

Jeremey Bates playcalling, which I mentioned above,

One reason Cutler likes Bates so much is Bates likes to air it out. He spreads the field, uses a lot of shotgun and plays multiple wide receivers. During his one season as the Broncos' play-caller in 2008, they threw the ball on 61 percent of the snaps.

was a clear departure from Mike' style and I'm quite certain Mike didn't think Bates was incompetent.

Let's remember that Mike Shanahan is the coach who reportedly had video cameras placed in the classrooms so that he could review and correct the instructions given by his assistants. This conflicts with your impression that he gave his OCs freedom

I don't see how his recording meetings precludes him from giving his coaches freedom.

This post doesn't address the points I mentioned that dealt with the specific difference I see between Mike and Kyle's playcalling styles at all really.

I think hashing out what may or may not be differences between the 2,in specifics, would make for a good discussion.

I spell out most of the differences I see below:

But a very simplified version of their differences is this: Mike is closer to smash mouth football and Kyle is closer to pass heavy.

Mike called a much more diverse running game.
Kyle's running game was very basic: inside zone/out side zone.

Mike's was more diverse of course the staple was zone runs but it also featured traps, draws, tosses.

I was saying earlier this thread that our run game playcalling under Kyle was very vanilla.
It basically consisted of inside zone, outside zone and stretch vs Mike's Denver WCO which was multidimensional not just inside-zone outside zone it had pulling, trapping, draws and the toss.

Below are some elements that were missing from Kyle's running game: Inside Trap/Draw

Another element missing: The Toss:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a3HtvBdam5A

His emphasis on the run creates favorable passing match-ups.

The emphasis on the run dictates coverages.

Mike also moved the pocket more not just play-action based rollouts and bootlegs but non-playaction dash outs and sprint outs.

The result was an offense that featured well defined and often half-field reads.

The result was an offense easy to execute for the QB.

Kyle's offense is pass first.(and there's nothing wrong with that I'm not saying that Kyle is a bad playcaller. I'm pointing out the difference is their playcalling as I see it.)

In Kyle short career his pass/run ratio is 60/40. (2010 it was actually less then 60/40)

Kyle's offense is more of a straight drop back 5 step passing game.

There is more onus on the QB dropping back and reading out full field progressions.

Its a more QB decision making intensive offense.

Those differences are the big ones that jump out to me.

Mike's offense was alo more multiple w/ formations and had more shifts.

HAILSKINSNYC · July 21, 2011

Five reasons why I'm 100% in favor of signing Vince...

1) He's still young

2) Has a very good record as a starter

3) His mobility can cover up flaws on the O-line

4) The threat of his mobility will improve the running game....the stretch play in particular

5) Would be great running the Shanny bootleg.

darrelgreenie · July 21, 2011

double post

Redskins4Life · July 21, 2011

I say - what do we have to lose, for bringing him in here? Not a heck of a lot, really. Its not a win some lose most situation, like with Beck/Grossman.

shuler74 · July 21, 2011

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2011/07/21/24-offensive-players-that-could-get-cut/

DeaconTheVillain · July 21, 2011

Would love to have Vince Young.

Don't think he is as much of a head case as everyone else seems to think either.

Going Commando · July 22, 2011

I think John Beck is a better fit for us as an organization than Vince Young for several reasons.

1.) He would know the offense much better

2.) He seems like a much more mature individual, better equipped to handle the ups and downs of being a QB period

3.) Is a classic drop back pocket passer with a live arm--seems more likely to operate within the confines of a purist 5 step passing offense like the one Kyle calls

4.) Doesn't come with a distracting reputation and set of heightened media expectations/scrutiny like Young would

5.) Has already begun the process of building a rapport and visibility with his teammates due to offseason player activities and a year in the locker room under his belt

6.) Has a full endorsement from Mike Shanahan--described as Mike's favorite QB from 2007; Oldfan rightfully pointed out that Jay Cutler was Mike's chosen QB from 2006 over VY

7.) Beck resembles Schaub and Cutler more than Young does. We don't need an Aaron Rodger, a Mike Vick, a Tom Brady, or even a Peyton Manning--we need a Matt Schaub.

8.) Young isn't much younger than Beck; little meaningful difference in their career ceilings--remember, NFL careers aren't linear; a 29-30 year old pocket passer with little wear on his body could easily play longer than a 28 year old scrambler with some history of injury.

9.) Consider Young's history of debilitating mental problems, his awkward and improvisational throwing motion/passing mechanics, his running mentality, his low wonderlic and legitimate concerns about his ability to digest a complicated passing offense like Kyle's: there is every chance in the world that Beck is both a better fit for our offense and a bigger talent with bigger upside in our system. Remember, Beck has plus arm strength and physical tools (measured near Flacco on the gun) and has the kind of maturity as a professional and player to come to work each day and operate our offense.

Worst case scenario with Beck is that he's lackluster and we stumble through a sub .500 year and have an opportunity to draft a quality QB prospect in the first round of the 2012 class (although I'm not at all convinced we would draft a 2012 rookie QB since I believe Shanahan and Allen don't wish to wait on the development of a rookie QB--a topic for another thread).

Best case scenario with Beck is that he thrives in the starting role this season and gives us a couple of quality seasons (maybe 3-5?) at QB, carrying us through the end of the Mike Shanahan tenure as HC.

Beck is far more likely to reach his best case scenario for us than Young is IMO. I think we should search for an older veteran backup (Todd Collins like) as insurance for Beck rather than a younger underachiever like Young who we would expect to push for the starting job.

I'm not gung ho about Beck as our QB per se. But I wholeheartedly believe that Beck is the best option at QB for us that's available going into the season. My biggest quibble with Beck is that he's going to be a 30 year old developmental QB. That in and of itself means he's got a low career ceiling--even if he works out he won't have a long career as a top level starter here no matter what. But that consideration is mostly irrelevant when considering only next season and our available options at QB this offseason.

The only veteran QB I'd consider over Beck if he were available is David Garrard. Garrard probably won't be available though and this is not a normal offseason, he wouldn't have time to prepare himself to be our starter even if we signed him tomorrow.