Voice_of_Reason

Evaluating Jay Gruden in 2018

Recommended Posts

4 minutes ago, hailmary said:

Our average to go on 3rd down was about 13 yds do to penalties and negative plays. So for the folks wanting to run the ball more (AP 8 carries 8 yards)you can't  down by 2+scores! REMINDER.....Colt was 4-4 with 50 yards when he left the game folks. ALSO for these fans who cry about play calling......the ENTIRE WORLD new we were running the ball on the 90 yard run by AP, it's called EXECUTION, these are professional players!

 

 

We weren't down 2 scores til half way through the 4th quarter.  It was 14 - 13 at the end of the 3rd.  

 

Edit: Sorry, they went up by 9, 1 minute into the 4th.  9 point deficit with 14 min to go still doesn't warrant abandoning the run.  

Edited by OVCChairman

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, Burgold said:

Are you really arguing we shouldn't have attempted to run more often yesterday? The decision making was awful. If nothing else you need to protect your 3rd string QB and burn some clock.

 

We had 14 rushing attempts total. Why were we rushing with Chris Thompson just about as much as Peterson? That's just dumb. The entire gameplan was dumb.

 

I'm stating that sometimes it's a little deeper or more complex than saying "we needed to run more" and thinking that would have solved anything. Were there a handful of times we could have run more? I'm sure...

 

But can you really slam the ball into AP's chest on 2nd and 20? Over the past month we've proven that we aren't getting chunk yards in the running game. Also, I believe that using CT was a good idea. It didn't work, but we need some way to sustain drives. 

 

I'm surprised that when we average 2 yards per carry we have people believing that doing that 3-4 times would result in MORE first downs. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@BatteredFanSyndrome

 

Little of leg topic...

 

No way Mccvay gives a QB 15% of the cap. This isn’t an attempt to slight Kirk, just wonder if Mccvay will pay a QB a large sum of money, especially after the transformation of Goff. The current Rams team is built off the sum of its parts around a cheap QB. Why change the model. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, OVCChairman said:

 

Because it's not that we lost, it's how we lost.  Mark Sanchez is our QB behind a 3rd string O-line, yet Sanchez dropped back 21 times, while a HOF RB ran the ball 9 times.  

 

25 pass attempts

14 rb carries

 

2-1 pass to run ratio WITH MARK SANCHEZ AS OUR QB BEHIND A 3RD STRING O-LINE WITH ADRIAN PETERSON AS OUR STARTING RB

 

That's fair, but too "big picture" in my opinion...8 or 9 of his pass attempts came after we fell behind by two scores in the 4th quarter. That changes the ratio quite a bit in my opinion. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, wit33 said:

@BatteredFanSyndrome

 

Little of leg topic...

 

No way Mccvay gives a QB 15% of the cap. This isn’t an attempt to slight Kirk, just wonder if Mccvay will pay a QB a large sum of money, especially after the transformation of Goff. The current Rams team is built off the sum of its parts around a cheap QB. Why change the model. 

I don’t think McVay is stupid enough to believe that he can just make any QB great.  I’m sure he recognized Goff was talented and to his credit, figured out how to make him awesome.  Whether or not he’ll ever pay 15% of the cap is another issue altogether, one that I’m sure he trusts Snead with handing vs. Bruce.

Edited by BatteredFanSyndrome
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
43 minutes ago, TD_washingtonredskins said:

 

It's fair to criticize but you also have to factor in the times we had a holding call or negative play to put us in passing situations. Not to mention...we threw 25 times with some of those being down 2 scores in the 4th quarter. So, we just didn't have many plays to run. 

 

Adrian Petersen was on the field for 16 snaps. Even if your not going to give him the ball at least have the threat of him getting it!

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


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

 

 

We weren't down 2 scores til half way through the 4th quarter.  It was 14 - 13 at the end of the 3rd.  

 

The start of 3rd Q we ran for 3, ran for -4 yds now 3rd and 11 you want to run?  Next drive 7 yard pass 3 yard run, negative 5 yard run FALSE START, 2nd and 20 threw 7 yard pass, 3rd in 13 you want to RUN? Next Drive 9 yard pass, 3 yard rush, FALSE START, PICK! Next drive NEGATIVE 4 yard rush, incomplete pass, 3rd and 14 you want to RUN? NOW DOWN BY 15 WITH 5 MINUTES LEFT .....YOU STILL WANT TO RUN? 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

 

I'm stating that sometimes it's a little deeper or more complex than saying "we needed to run more" and thinking that would have solved anything. Were there a handful of times we could have run more? I'm sure...

 

But can you really slam the ball into AP's chest on 2nd and 20? Over the past month we've proven that we aren't getting chunk yards in the running game. Also, I believe that using CT was a good idea. It didn't work, but we need some way to sustain drives. 

 

I'm surprised that when we average 2 yards per carry we have people believing that doing that 3-4 times would result in MORE first downs. 



And look where it got us... losing the football game.  The problem is that this was even an option.  We should have come into this game with the idea that we were going to ride AP's coat tails and do whatever it took to get him the ball.  Did some of the passing plays work?  Absolutely, but to believe that we can put the ball in Sanchez's hands TWICE as often as you put it Petersons while the game is still very much within reach is not something good HCs do... i'm sorry.   I'm not even going to sit here and say that AP having 15 to 18 carries would have won the game, but I can tell you right now, i'd be a heck of a lot more confident with him having 18 carries than him having 9... regardless of how things played out.  We weren't feeding him... we weren't using him as a weapon either.  HE broke a 90 yarder that no 33 year old RB has any place being able to do... that was INSANE.  

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


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

 

Adrian Petersen was on the field for 16 snaps. Even if your not going to give him the ball at least have the threat of him getting it!

 

It's tough to completely defend something that resulted in a 15-point loss. But, at the same time, I don't think gaining 1 or -2 or 0 yards per pop was necessarily the answer either. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


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

 

The start of 3rd Q we ran for 3, ran for -4 yds now 3rd and 11 you want to run?  Next drive 7 yard pass 3 yard run, negative 5 yard run FALSE START, 2nd and 20 threw 7 yard pass, 3rd in 13 you want to RUN? Next Drive 9 yard pass, 3 yard rush, FALSE START, PICK! Next drive NEGATIVE 4 yard rush, incomplete pass, 3rd and 14 you want to RUN? NOW DOWN BY 15 WITH 5 MINUTES LEFT .....YOU STILL WANT TO RUN? 

 

 

 

I'm not saying every play has to be a run... in fact... half the runs we did attempt were TERRIBLE.  That's my point.  It all goes hand in hand.  2nd and 7, we're already behind the chains.  Where's the screens to soften the defense in these longer situations.. and i'm not talking about WR screens either.   

 

1st and 10 in the 3rd and we run a double reverse to Crowder on a bad ankle.  Why isn't AP carrying the ball there?  We're running a terrible O-line and we run a double reverse?  Come on.... Jay has as much to do with being unable to get AP more carries as the rest of the team does.  His game plan did not set up well to sustain the run... which is necessary given our circumstances.  

Edited by OVCChairman

Share this post


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

 

It's tough to completely defend something that resulted in a 15-point loss. But, at the same time, I don't think gaining 1 or -2 or 0 yards per pop was necessarily the answer either. 

I agree completely.  The lack of carries on paper is alarming.  But the way the game played out, I wasn’t screaming at my TV to run the ball more.  

  • Like 2

Share this post


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

 

1st and 10 in the 3rd and we run a double reverse to Crowder on a bad ankle.  Why isn't AP carrying the ball there?  We're running a terrible O-line and we run a double reverse?  Come on.... Jay has as much to do with being unable to get AP more carries as the rest of the team does.  His game plan did not set up well to sustain the run... which is necessary given our circumstances.  

 

First of all, I agree that the double-reverse was asinine. But, I would have replaced it with a screen or normal pass play. But let's take that one example and its most likely outcome. AP gains 2 yards or less. I'm sure that's better but it's not exactly going to change the game. 

 

But, you are also taking the most glaring example...overall, I don't think there were THAT many more opportunities to run the ball. Like I said...up until the Eagles went up 9, the play-calling was nearly 50/50.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, TD_washingtonredskins said:

 

It's tough to completely defend something that resulted in a 15-point loss. But, at the same time, I don't think gaining 1 or -2 or 0 yards per pop was necessarily the answer either. 

 

 

I don't want to gain minimal either... but the gameplan SHOULD have been set up to do more than that.  Screens, tosses, pitches.  Rub routes then releases to the flat.  Curl routes, anything to get the ball in his hands on high percentage plays.  When was the last TRUE screen we've seen go to AP?  The 60 yarder vs GB?  Why was he only on the field for 16 snaps?  There are ways to get him touches when he's getting stopped at the LOS... including shifting your formation from Shotgun to single back... and it turned into his CAREER LONG td.  Why do we have to be at our own 10 yard line to see that change in formation?  I actually saw Jeremy Sprinkle line up at FB yesterday... where the hell has that been all season?  All of Jay's time coaching here!? 

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

 

 

I'm not saying every play has to be a run... in fact... half the runs we did attempt were TERRIBLE.  That's my point.  It all goes hand in hand.  2nd and 7, we're already behind the chains.  Where's the screens to soften the defense in these longer situations.. and i'm not talking about WR screens either.   

 

1st and 10 in the 3rd and we run a double reverse to Crowder on a bad ankle.  Why isn't AP carrying the ball there?  We're running a terrible O-line and we run a double reverse?  Come on.... Jay has as much to do with behing unable to get AP more carries as the rest of the team does. 

 

You want to run more with AP behind an Online that just lost both 2nd string guards among other injuries, if Gruden gets AP hurt last nite running into that gaining a yard at a time like he was... YOU are screaming today how he shouldn't have done that!!  Once again its about execution the 90 yard run proves it as the entire world new  we were running the ball ! Reverse plays are run almost every game now and they either work well or nothing AT this point in our game we needed a spark, they just didn't execute once again. I believe Crowder came into motion to late which disrupted the play!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

All this complaining about not running enough, yet yesterday during the game how many times did I see people saying "Jay better not RUN, RUN, PASS, PUNT."

The calls for Jay to commit to and use the quick slants and 7 yard drags were numerous and often.  In the heat of the moment during the game you call for stuff, then second guess, re-frame, and change what you wanted, because what did happen wasn't successful.

Jay can't call a run on 1st without everyone bashing him as being predictable.  That leaves PASSING on 1st.

2nd is the open play, except we seem to lose yards on 1st due to penalties or the plays getting blown up.

3rd and long, if Jay calls a run everyone would melt about how stupid it is.  (I am not saying his pass plays have been good, considering we regularly see receivers catching the ball 5 -10 yards short of 1st down consistently.)

 

I honestly don't have the answer, but it is funny to watch the contortions some of you are going through to look like you should be hired as the next coach.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


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

 

You want to run more with AP behind an Online that just lost both 2nd string guards among other injuries, if Gruden gets AP hurt last nite running into that gaining a yard at a time like he was... YOU are screaming today how he shouldn't have done that!!  Once again its about execution the 90 yard run proves it as the entire world new  we were running the ball ! Reverse plays are run almost every game now and they either work well or nothing AT this point in our game we needed a spark, they just didn't execute once again. I believe Crowder came into motion to late which disrupted the play!

 

 

I'd rather take my chances with the ball in APs hands, and not in Sanchez, or even McCoy's hands.  Play by play we had no choice, my problem was the game plan as a whole.  


And for the sake of it, the best thing you can do for a make shift O-line is to get them going down hill.  Moving forward.  that means you don't run out of shotgun, and you dont do 7 step drops.  You line up and get them moving forward.  

Edited by OVCChairman

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not against a more conservative game plan, but I think nitpicking given how things changed over the course of the game is a little unfair. 

 

Context is important here...we were going into the game planning to air it out against a bad secondary. Sure, things change and Sanchez doesn't know the offense like McCoy, but the guy actually made some very good intermediate throws. We had the one electric run...but generally teams have beaten the Eagles by hitting plays against the CBs. Their DL doesn't become magically susceptible to easy runs just because you are suddenly on QB3. 

Share this post


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

It's a shame this organization let McVay go.  Right now it is looking like when Dallas let Sean Payton go to New Orleans, thinking they could repeat that success with Jason Garrett (lol). 

 

I wish we had the chance to see if McVay would have had positive effect on the offense post-Kirk Cousins.  It really seemed like McVay knew how to maximize Gruden's offense and offer his own wrinkles. 

 

Instead he is the HC of the Rams where he turned Goff into a legit franchise QB within one season. 

 

As far as Gruden goes.  I think he is a solid X's & O's guy but he is a terrible play caller, and I don't see any intangibles from him that screams "Head Coach"

I'm not sure what they could have offered McVay without firing Gruden.  I'm not a huge Gruden fan, but even I have to admit he has brought stability to the team even though he's been stuck with some pretty bad rosters and some horrible coordinators.  Young OC's don't turn down HC jobs without some pretty good assurance that they'll be taking over.  Plus, for whatever faults the Rams may have had in the preceding 5 years, they were willing to stick with Fischer as HC.  McVay would have been on the hot seat from day 1.

 

When Payton left Dallas for NO, Garrett was finishing his first year as quarterbacks coach for Miami.  Payton was already the assistant HC, and he had turned down one head coaching job (Raiders) already in lieu of a big pay raise.  There was really nothing left to offer him in Dallas.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, dav87sc said:

All this complaining about not running enough, yet yesterday during the game how many times did I see people saying "Jay better not RUN, RUN, PASS, PUNT."

The calls for Jay to commit to and use the quick slants and 7 yard drags were numerous and often.  In the heat of the moment during the game you call for stuff, then second guess, re-frame, and change what you wanted, because what did happen wasn't successful.

Jay can't call a run on 1st without everyone bashing him as being predictable.  That leaves PASSING on 1st.

2nd is the open play, except we seem to lose yards on 1st due to penalties or the plays getting blown up.

3rd and long, if Jay calls a run everyone would melt about how stupid it is.  (I am not saying his pass plays have been good, considering we regularly see receivers catching the ball 5 -10 yards short of 1st down consistently.)

 

I honestly don't have the answer, but it is funny to watch the contortions some of you are going through to look like you should be hired as the next coach.

 

It's one thing when you have a back up that has been in the system for 4+ years and knows it, and has had some success in it.

 

It's entirely different when it's a 3rd string guy that hasn't been here 2 weeks. And you still have AP back there. Needed to run the ball more, but also run out of different formations. That has also been a real issue for Gruden, his predicates his play calls with his personnel groups.

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

 

 

I'd rather take my chances with the ball in APs hands, and not in Sanchez, or even McCoy's hands.  Play by play we had no choice, my problem was the game plan as a whole.  

Colt was 4-4 with 50 yards against a team with NO secondary ....That was the correct game plan! NO ONE GAME PLANED FOR OUR 2ND STRING QB BREAKING A LEG ! 

I posted a play by play for you and asked you where you would have ran it more with ANYONE....crickets!

 

Share this post


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

I'm not against a more conservative game plan, but I think nitpicking given how things changed over the course of the game is a little unfair. 

 

Context is important here...we were going into the game planning to air it out against a bad secondary. Sure, things change and Sanchez doesn't know the offense like McCoy, but the guy actually made some very good intermediate throws. We had the one electric run...but generally teams have beaten the Eagles by hitting plays against the CBs. Their DL doesn't become magically susceptible to easy runs just because you are suddenly on QB3. 

 

NO, but it makes throwing the ball a lot tougher.

Share this post


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

I'm not against a more conservative game plan, but I think nitpicking given how things changed over the course of the game is a little unfair. 

 

Context is important here...we were going into the game planning to air it out against a bad secondary. Sure, things change and Sanchez doesn't know the offense like McCoy, but the guy actually made some very good intermediate throws. We had the one electric run...but generally teams have beaten the Eagles by hitting plays against the CBs. Their DL doesn't become magically susceptible to easy runs just because you are suddenly on QB3. 

 

 

Bud, I love ya, but Philly has been giving up 6.6 ypc over their last 5 games.  We're running a make shift O-line, with a back up QB, and his back up you just signed off the street.  To game plan to air anything out is irresponsible imho.  The Eagles have been giving up big plays in the run game all season long.  Their Dline has been susceptible....

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, OVCChairman said:

 

 

Bud, I love ya, but Philly has been giving up 6.6 ypc over their last 5 games.  We're running a make shift O-line, with a back up QB, and his back up you just signed off the street.  To game plan to air anything out is irresponsible imho.  The Eagles have been giving up big plays in the run game all season long.  Their Dline has been susceptible....

Eagles are playing with 3rd string corners, all their money is on Dline & LB look it up!

 

BTW they are 10 best against the run vs 26th against the pass..........so tell me again?

 

 

Edited by hailmary
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


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

 

NO, but it makes throwing the ball a lot tougher.

 

2 minutes ago, OVCChairman said:

 

 

Bud, I love ya, but Philly has been giving up 6.6 ypc over their last 5 games.  We're running a make shift O-line, with a back up QB, and his back up you just signed off the street.  To game plan to air anything out is irresponsible imho.  The Eagles have been giving up big plays in the run game all season long.  Their Dline has been susceptible....

 

Look fellas...I'm obviously going to have trouble winning this debate since "my" play-calling led to a 15-point loss. But, I just can't kill Gruden for coming into the game thinking we'd succeed through the air against the injured secondary. Then, as situations changed, it was even tougher to reset and start pounding the ball if that's not what you gamplanned. Also, when every single run but one went for 2 or fewer yards, how many times to try the same thing before you look to something else. Lastly, despite everything I just stated...they were basically 50/50 up until they fell behind by two scores. Nearly half of Sanchez's attempts came after we needed two scoring drives in the final quarter. 

 

So, no, I don't think anything from a play-calling perspective was egregious last night (other than that reverse play-call hahaha). Was it perfect? Hell no...but I think Gruden's play-calling was probably 8th on the list of things that cost us that game. But, I'll concede and say that you guys win. But it's a very tepid concession because I don't think 6-8 more AP runs changes that game at all (not that you're arguing that). 

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

Colt was 4-4 with 50 yards against a team with NO secondary ....That was the correct game plan! NO ONE GAME PLANED FOR OUR 2ND STRING QB BREAKING A LEG ! 

I posted a play by play for you and asked you where you would have ran it more with ANYONE....crickets!

 

 

 

easy bud, I said that within this game, we likely had very little 'plug and play' instances where running it clearly made more sense... the game plan from the start is where I have the issue.  Also the lack of adjustment when your starting QB did go down.  I did point out a few instances where I would have run it.. 2nd drive of the game... we ran a great play action on 1st down and hit doc for a chunk... the double reverse to Crowder should never have happened.. you mentioned getting a spark?  How about a 90 yard TD by your starting RB... we didnt run out of that formation a single time after that did we.... ?  No.  

 

WR screen to Doctson where Trent Williams is the lead blocker outside the hash marks... that makes more sense then a screen to Adrian Peterson who is averaging 11.1 yards per reception this season.  

 

I've said it a couple times now, you can do things within an offense to get more effective at running the ball, just because he has 5 carries for 5 yards, does that mean we shoudln't have handed him the ball on the 90yard TD?

1 minute ago, TD_washingtonredskins said:

So, no, I don't think anything from a play-calling perspective was egregious last night (other than that reverse play-call hahaha). Was it perfect? Hell no...but I think Gruden's play-calling was probably 8th on the list of things that cost us that game. But, I'll concede and say that you guys win. But it's a very tepid concession because I don't think 6-8 more AP runs changes that game at all (not that you're arguing that). 

 

That's fine, and we're allowed to have differing opinions, my standing on a chair screaming is because I care... not an attack at anyone.   Don't concede on my behalf, i'm just a donkey typing on a message board.   That's whats fun about this is there doesn't have to be a 'winner' in a conversation.  Please dont take it that way.  

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.