FAREWELL to the NFL Dwayne Haskins QB Ohio State

[Voice_of_Reason]

2 hours ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

If Jay is that level lost and frankly would have to be really really stupid if just any random fan could see exactly how to tailor an offense to a rookie QB and he on the other hand is missing it -- then why isn't Dan firing him and why should we trust him not to hire another moron next?

Almost none of what I suggested is coming from me directly.  Cooley has spoken at length about these things, as have other football people who's opinions I mostly trust.  

 

I have no idea why Dan isn't firing him.  I can postulate 3 things:

 

1. He still hasn't lived down firing Norv in-season in 2000. He's totally gun-shy to make any move that would look like overt meddling.  He gets beat up for just about everything, and he's sensitive to the criticism he runs though coaches and fires them willy-nilly.  It's one of the few not-accurate criticisms of Dan currently.  He's been insanely patient with both Bruce and Jay.  I'd argue overly so.  It's why he let Zorn and Shanahan coach out their final years, even though both were train wreck seasons.  

 

2.  He honestly has no idea what to do.  Bruce has been telling him "we're close" for so long that he believed it.  Reality has set in, but he probably doesn't know what to do about it.  I am willing to bet that he doesn't think firing Jay is going to help anything.  He has no plan as to what's next, so he's just completely paralyzed and listening to Bruce.  Who probably is preaching bad luck and injuries again.  

 

3. If Dan has FINALLY decided he needs to do something bigger, he probably doesn't want to deal with the coach before he deals with Bruce and the FO situation.  I have no idea if he's come to that conclusion, but the one time he did make the conclusion was in 2009, and in that instance, he handled Vinny before dealing with Zorn.  

 

The complicating factor is that Jay probably doesn't want to try and develop Haskins at this point.  There's no point for him to even try if he knows he's not going to be here.  So if you're Dan, do you just basically allow Jay to play Colt and Case and ride out the season, and let the new guy start developing Haskins?

 

That's the one reason you make a change, put somebody in charge who at least has a chance of being around next year who's vested in developing Haskins.  

 

2 hours ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

You should quickly get off the O'Connell bandwagon then (I don't recall if you are on it or not) since he's the dude with the task of making it easier on him. He would have to be just as lost a puppy as Jay is in that case.  

I'm neither on nor off the O'Connell bandwagon.  I don't have anywhere near enough information to make a judgement either way.  The guy seems bright, Cooley likes him, but he hasn't even called plays before for any length of time.  He might be Bill Walsh, or he might not be.

 

Though I actually don't agree that he could be lost.  Because in order for what I outlined, and others have outlined, to work, this is an organizational level commitment.  It involves coming up with a plan, teaching the plan to the entire team, giving Dwanye all the practice reps, and sticking with it.  That's not a KO thing.  That's a Dan/Bruce/Jay thing.  

 

Asking KO to come up with some simple concepts for Dwayne to run to dumb down Jay's offense is like putting a band-aid on a gushing gunshot wound.  It's not going to work. It's like you're dipping your toe in the water so you can appear to be doing something without any real intention of doing it.  It's madly stupid.  

 

If you're going to develop Haskins, it needs to be a commitment from the top.  Dan, Bruce and Jay all needed to be bought into this.  And then you go out and do it.  Clearly that wasn't the case.  And I don't blame Jay for that.  He was told "go win, we're close." Because Bruce is a **** moron. Jay said, "ok, I need Colt."  They said "fine."   Colt got hurt. (Again.) So then they tried Case out of default.  

 

But there was never a commitment, like the Shanahan's had with Griffin, to do whatever was necessary to get Haskins ready to play, and put him in a situation where he could succeed.  They wanted to play Colt and Case, win 8-9 games, and deal with Haskins next year.  Given his druthers, Mike probably would never have selected Griffin.  He would have either targeted Kirk from the start, or as they have reported, Wilson.  But Mike got Griffin.  And he and Kyle figured out a way to adapt their offense to what Griffin could do and execute and be successful at immediately. They adapted to him.  That was pretty genius, even if everything came tumbling down the next year.  

 

What Dan and Bruce should have said to Jay, in a room, over really expensive scotch, (maybe even on Dan's yacht) is "Dwayne is the future. Your job is to get him in a position to succeed.  Do you want that job?  If not, we respect that, but we need to find somebody who wants the same thing. He needs to be ready to go very early in the season.  That's the goal.  The goal is to develop Haskins."  And then you go all-in on Dwayne.  Which means somewhat of an overhaul of the offensive mentality. Changing the practice routines.  I would completely respect Jay if he didn't want to be all-in on that.  But that's what they should have done.  That's on Bruce and Dan for being stupid.  

 

What NOBODY (at least me) saw coming is the complete and total collapse of the defense.  Which really has set things back.  Without the defense, the "manage the game" offense with Colt and Case game plan just goes out the window.  

[Voice_of_Reason]

2 hours ago, volsmet said:

 

It’s hardly a surprise that those brilliant minds think Rudolph is a rookie.

 

Sorry, I think I put "rookie" in their mouths.  Rudolf is in his second year, had his first start against the 49ers and looked awful, and then they adapted the offense a ton, and he looked much, much better. I think that was the point.

 

The Steelers adapted, they ran some old wildcat stuff, they did a bunch of different things to be successful.  

 

We don't adapt.  

[volsmet]

Just now, Voice_of_Reason said:

Sorry, I think I put "rookie" in their mouths.  Rudolf is in his second year, had his first start against the 49ers and looked awful, and then they adapted the offense a ton, and he looked much, much better. I think that was the point.

 

The Steelers adapted, they ran some old wildcat stuff, they did a bunch of different things to be successful.  

 

We don't adapt.  

 

Rudolph looked like crap, imo. They ran the Delaware wing T with Samuel half the game & eventually took a shot deep after running through a worn out Cinci defense that was on the field the entire game.

 

[Voice_of_Reason]

2 hours ago, MartinC said:

 

Do you know what an offensive coordinator does?

 

Play calling is the end of a process. There is a crap load of work in the process that leads up to a call sheet in the hands of a play caller.

But do we have any real evidence that KO does any of this?  I'm not saying we don't.  I'm sure he works hard, studies film, and gives input.  But this is Jay's offense. 

 

The one thing which has been pointed out which has gotten better this year is that the run and pass game seem to complement each other a bit better.  Which doesn't help that much if you can't actually run the ball because you only call running plays on first down.    But I digress.

2 minutes ago, volsmet said:

 

Rudolph looked like crap, imo. They ran the Delaware wing T with Samuel half the game & eventually took a shot deep after running through a worn out Cinci defense that was on the field the entire game.

 

Well, I only watched part of the game. So I can't say for sure.  

 

But he ended up 24/28 for 229 and 2 TDs and no INTs.  If that's looking like crap, can we please have that over here?  

[volsmet]

Pittsburgh Receiving

	REC	YDS	TD	LONG	TGTS
J. Conner	8	83	1	21	8
D. Johnson	6	77	1	43	6
J. Samuels	8	57	0	14	8
N. Vannett	2	28	0	17	2
J. Smith-Schuster	3	15	0	9	4
B. Snell Jr.	0	0	0	0	1
TEAM	27	260	2	43	29

 

 

 

 

24 completions for Rudolph & 18 we’re dump offs to his two RBs & the TE...then 3 more for a grand total of 18 yards to Schuster. 21 completions around the los, I believe his average target was .8 yards down field before they got an easy one to Johnson over the top. That luxury is provided by the defense — Pitt can’t run that nonsense when trailing or playing a decent football team. They were atrocious offensively until the Bengals wore out ... that’s entirely about the Pitt defense.

 

We could put Thompson at QB for 10 plays, but it’s not easy to run that crap when you’re down 14-0 5 minutes into the game.

 

 

[Skinsinparadise]

24 minutes ago, Voice_of_Reason said:

Almost none of what I suggested is coming from me directly.  Cooley has spoken at length about these things, as have other football people who's opinions I mostly trust.  

 

I

 

OK, maybe I misread your post.  Sounded like you were giving your thoughts about how to run the offense without citing Cooley.   And I am not saying you aren't entitled to your own play calling thoughts relating to Haskins but I'd trust Jay or name that play caller who has said Qb in house over any random fan's thoughts about play calling for said QB.   That goes double in a case like this where you are developing a rookie QB and see in practice everyday what they are comfortable running or not.  We can only guess.  

 

I think I know the podcast you are referring to which is the Monday one he did with Portis.  I listen to almost every Cooley podcast.  And yeah every Monday just about he has new suggestions.  Love Cooley but don't think he has the answers to everything.  By and large he thinks very highly of Jay's ability to design an offense, he's talked about it plenty, he's also been critical too.  He also doesn't think much of Haskins.  He's backtracked some.  He thought he would be a bust.  Sheehan jokes with him about it from time to time as to Cooley backing off a little to avoid taking heat for it. Cooley is now more forthcoming on Sheehan's podcasts on that front.  Actually Cooley's points on Haskins were dissected on this very thread months back.   

 

If you gave Cooley truth serum I doubt he would say find the right plays for Haskins right now and just watch him soar.  He has some serious reservations about him.  Where he's really battled Jay is he thinks any young QB would do better from playing.  He doesn't care if he sucks when he plays or not.  He goes take your lumps.  He doesn't believe you can learn much from sitting.  His pal Portis disagrees with him on that.

 

 

24 minutes ago, Voice_of_Reason said:

 

Asking KO to come up with some simple concepts for Dwayne to run to dumb down Jay's offense is like putting a band-aid on a gushing gunshot wound.  It's not going to work. It's like you're dipping your toe in the water so you can appear to be doing something without any real intention of doing it.  It's madly stupid.  

 

 

The way I understood it -- its not about dumbing down Jay's offense but incorporating plays he's run in Ohio State and or has proven thus far to be comfortable running here.  I doubt there is anything "madly stupid" about whatever O'Connell and Jay are cooking up for Haskins.  They both are ex-QBs.  They might fail at what they are trying to do but I doubt "madly stupid" ideas are driving the process. 

 

[dballer]

4 minutes ago, volsmet said:

 

Rudolph looked like crap, imo. They ran the Delaware wing T with Samuel half the game & eventually took a shot deep after running through a worn out Cinci defense that was on the field the entire game.

 

 

Side Note...my man Jaylen Samuels (Go Pack)...finally got the ball enough last week. They need to get him 20 touches a game, from all over the field. 

[volsmet]

4 minutes ago, Voice_of_Reason said:

 

But he ended up 24/28 for 229 and 2 TDs and no INTs.  If that's looking like crap, can we please have that over here?  

 

 

I know now that you know far too much about the game to think stats tell us the story. I don’t care if Rudolph was brilliant or awful, it just so happens that he held the ball & looked dreadful which resulted in Pitt snapping the ball directly to Samuel to get the offense going. That’s reality, no opinion about it from me. 

1 minute ago, dballer said:

 

Side Note...my man Jaylen Samuels (Go Pack)...finally got the ball enough last week. They need to get him 20 touches a game, from all over the field. 

 

Love that guy, I thought he was going to win me the night in dfs, but I played JuJu over Johnson with my savings on Samuel. 2.1% ownership on a 1 game slate, it gets no better.

*

How many of Pitts offensive lineman have made a pro bowl, 4? That’s not where we are. 

[Skinsinparadise]

2 hours ago, NickyJ said:

I am neither jazzed about a new coach nor about Jay Gruden. When a building is on fire and there's flames covering the entire room, I don't feel much like sitting down on a chair and saying "well, that's life" and waxing philosophical about how the building permits weren't up to code on fire escapes. If anyone wants to do that, be my guest, but I'm trying the doors. Maybe there's fire behind them, maybe not. But I can't honestly say I'm "jazzed" about basic attempts at survival.

 

 

I am totally aware that the building is on fire (I've been accused many times from some past defenders of the status quo so to speak that am too negative) and I got specific thoughts as to why.  Among them for me isn't that Jay is flailing or sabotaging on Haskins.  That's not on my list of issues.  I am not saying am right or wrong -- got no idea.  It's just my opinion. 😀  I think there are plenty of fish to fry, but that's not one of them.  At least not yet. 

 

 

[NickyJ]

5 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

 

I am totally aware that the building is on fire (I've been accused many times from some past defenders of the status quo so to speak that am too negative) and I got specific thoughts as to why.  Among them for me isn't that Jay is flailing or sabotaging on Haskins.  That's not on my list of issues.  I am not saying am right or wrong -- got no idea.  It's just my opinion. 😀  I think there are plenty of fish to fry, but that's not one of them.  At least not yet. 

 

 

if this were an isolated case, I'd give Jay the benefit of the doubt too. But it isn't isolated: We have a DC who has clearly been underpeforming for a year and a half and needs to be fired (iirc, even you agree that Manusky isn't getting it done); we have his player-crushes that hang onto the roster for too long like Perine, Grant, and now the always injured McCoy; we have the mismanagement of assets already on the team (Adrian Peterson = North-South. It's not that hard, Jay); we have the same playcalling that has been used for years, the playcalling that guarantees 2nd and 8.

 

With all those different things that he is failing at, it doesn't seem outlandish to me that he is failing to adjust his offense to something that Haskins can perform in.

[Skinsinparadise]

 

 

 

[Skinsinparadise]

14 minutes ago, NickyJ said:

if this were an isolated case, I'd give Jay the benefit of the doubt too. But it isn't isolated: We have a DC who has clearly been underpeforming for a year and a half and needs to be fired (iirc, even you agree that Manusky isn't getting it done); we have his player-crushes that hang onto the roster for too long like Perine, Grant, and now the always injured McCoy; we have the mismanagement of assets already on the team (Adrian Peterson = North-South. It's not that hard, Jay); we have the same playcalling that has been used for years, the playcalling that guarantees 2nd and 8.

 

With all those different things that he is failing at, it doesn't seem outlandish to me that he is failing to adjust his offense to something that Haskins can perform in.

 

I am trying to look at each variable by itself.  And as for Haskins I just don't see Jay failing him at least not yet.  My position might be stubborn on that front -- watching 5 practices of Haskins in camp -- the idea that he'd struggle some is what I would expect.  That's just my opinion and for that matter others who were at camp tended to share that same view.   I even told my wife who is a Giants fan before the game that I hope they don't bring in Haskins because if they did it will likely look ugly. 

 

I think the kid has a chance so that's not me slamming him.  I just think the dude is genuinely talented but raw.  And I've seen enough that indicates that to me that on a scale of 0-10 -- Jay and O'Connell are at a 10 as for understanding they need to come up with a package for him that he's comfortable with.  It's been flat out said they got a package for him.  And they've talked extensively to Haskins' Ohio State coach among other things. 

 

They might be missing the boat on some fronts and I won't argue that but being lost about catering a playbook to Haskins doesn't seem to be one of them.  As for that playbook being good -- you got me -- but they have one.  And when I rewatched the game (and posted clips on this thread) it looked like Haskins had plenty of guys open -- and I saw some standard rookie play calling stuff like having easy check downs available, reading just one side of the field at times, etc. 

 

If people want to kill Jay, I get it.  But I don't think the dude is just flailing around the building and doing everything wrong.    

[skinny21]

Forgetting whether Gruden is ready to be done with this team, developing Haskins would be a nice bullet point on his resume.  

[Skinsinparadise]

1 hour ago, skinny21 said:

Forgetting whether Gruden is ready to be done with this team, developing Haskins would be a nice bullet point on his resume.  

 

Agree.  I see Jay would have nothing to gain from Haskins failing.    Cooley in his podcast today talked about how ridiculous it was the accusation that Jay is sabotaging Haskins.

 

My point here (and no offense intended if I made my point too hard) is at the very least its clear that Jay-O'Connell are aware and trying to modify the offense to Haskins.  Have they been good at doing it?  Don't know but I think it would be hard for us to tell.   

 

As for Haskins himself, I think he has a lot of talent.  I saw in camp him making some beauty throws.  And beat guys have suggested that the coaching staff has liked what they've seen too but they know he needs more time and isn't ready, yet. 

 

[TSO]

3 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said:

My point here (and no offense intended if I made my point too hard) is at the very least its clear that Jay-O'Connell are aware and trying to modify the offense to Haskins.  Have they been good at doing it?  Don't know but I think it would be hard for us to tell.   

 

I'll make the point hard and I don't care who gets offended since it doesn't seem like they give a crap what they spew, so long as it induces rage towards the wrong people. 

 

I'm reading these posts here and all I'm seeing is posters only prove just how little they know about actual football. It's just fan cliches they repeat thinking it means anything. 

 

What did Haskins run in college? What concepts? 

 

I promise these people have no idea. Know why? Because those concepts were what was called for Haskins in the Giants' game. Mesh, Y-Cross, Arrow or Spot, Spacing concepts, etc... 

 

I didn't even realize they ran the Philly concept, which is another one Haskins ran well in college, until you posted it above. So add that to the list.  

 

You know what Haskins didn't really run in college? Option routes, which is a favorite of Gruden's. I might be wrong because it's hard to tell at times what is an option route versus not, but I didn't see a single one of those called against the Giants. I can say for sure that he wasn't looking at any player waiting for him to make a decision on his option route.  

 

So they are actually calling what Haskins did well in college and they are actually giving him a smaller package of plays. Anyone who knows just even a little bit of what they're looking at could see it. 

 

The difference for Haskins is the speed of the NFL and the way defenses disguise their coverages and/or change them post play. It's going to take time for him to adjust to that. They can call whatever he's good at, go uptempo or no huddle, whatever, and it won't matter. He's going to get tricked. 

 

[BatteredFanSyndrome]

*Anxiously awaiting responses*

[RandyHolt]

So, Jay ran pro style plays. 

It's then no surprise Haskins failed.  I have a theory. Haskins and ALL raw QBs need things simplified more than running a pro style offense.  We have all seen young QBs used in the run game, quite heavily, over the past decade of young QBs succeeding from day 1.  Everyone knows all the names. Cam. Kap. Wilson. 3. There are more. That is the clearest most obvious way we have seen young QBs used to their strengths. There are other ways to simplify, that is just easiest for keyboard warriors to see.

 

So while it was nice to call those pro style plays for him, they are still difficult plays for a guy with 13 college games and one half day of first team reps under his belt. And its all horribly magnified, with absolutely no run game whatsoever, playing from behind. Missing our 3 top playmakers on offense, and 3 best OL, was just the icing on the cake sealing his fate.

 

I will add a well prepared DC saw Case in a boot coming off of 5 turnovers. There was chatter all week for Haskins getting time.  Dick Dimes vs Dwayne. If they were prepared for Haskins at all, wouldn't they expect the pro style stuff he ran in college? IIWADC, that's what I would game plan for. It's literally the only thing to reasonably expect.  Jay should know they'd know what he will call.

 

But Jay don't do curveballs, and it hurts sometimes. Go Nats.

[TSO]

So at first it’s “give Haskins what he’s comfortable with and minimize the playbook”. 
 

When explained that that’s actually exactly what they did...
 

Now it’s “do the opposite of what Haskins did in college and throw a curve ball at the NFL”. 
 

I promise if they do that we’d hear complaints like “why aren’t they doing what he did well in college!” 
 

By the same fans. Saying it all at the same time. Ignoring the inherent contradictions with every statement they make, even within hours of each other. 
 

My God, it’s impossible. This is why I just don’t post much anymore.  *cries*
 

Ohio State changed the college style run option offense, which is what they had normally run for years, to adjust to Haskins because his game was more pro style. 
 

THAT IS WHAT HE’S GOOD AT. That is what they called. That is why they wanted to be patient with him, because what he’s good at requires a mastery of NFL defenses and that only comes with time. He’s not going to be making many plays with his legs or improvising like the other QBs you listed. That was NEVER his game. 
 

Anyway, sorry for the interruption. Back to wasting time bashing the wrong people about stuff we know nothing about. 

[CowboyKillerz]

Except improvising with his legs was something he did WELL on Sunday... And the line folding didnt help the "easy outs" that were there. Zero run game. And being behind 14 is an issue. He should have been the starter from last monday when Case was in a boot. Gruden may be an xs and os genius- but far from it as the HC. You watch tbe tape and see quick drops short passes and screen plays ala Mr Dimes and the Rudolph?

 

The plays called werent good for the circumstances. Maybe out the gate with some reps during the week and not down by 14... Everyone is cherry picking facts to support what they think... But all things considered points to horrible mismanagement any way you slice it.

[Veryoldschool]

I think they might as well play Haskins for the balance of the season.  The defense stinks so I have lost hope of them having a respectable year they may as well use the season to develop Haskins.  Hopefully, he can blossom under Gruden's tutelage like Dalton and Cousins.  Haskins looked rough against the Giants but giving him the first-team reps and playing him makes sense to me.

 

There is nothing to be gain by firing Gruden midseason, he can demonstrate his coaching talent to prospective employers by developing Haskins.  Who knows we may even have some fun watching it if we see Haskins develop.

[TSO]

30 minutes ago, CowboyKillerz said:

Except improvising with his legs was something he did WELL on Sunday...

Sure, but it was far from a game changer. Again, that’s not his game. A few runs here and there when he didn’t find the open guy isn’t going to change that. It’s not going to change his body type, his speed, or his elusiveness. That is simply not the type of QB he is and there’s nothing wrong with that. 
 

I mean, why even point this out? What are you suggesting? We put him in an offense that relies on him running more? You really think that suits him? 
 

Here and there it’s fine and it’s nice to see him be effective when he runs, that’ll help. But you’re not going to base your offense on it. That’d be ludicrous. 
 

32 minutes ago, CowboyKillerz said:

You watch tbe tape and see quick drops short passes and screen plays ala Mr Dimes and the Rudolph?

I can’t keep up. What are we looking for? Everyone throws up something different. Just straight up flailing. Many plays called had short routes that were there. Haskins chose to go deep often on his own. 
 

36 minutes ago, CowboyKillerz said:

Everyone is cherry picking facts to support what they think... But all things considered points to horrible mismanagement any way you slice it.

Speak for yourself. I didn’t cherry pick anything to support what I think. It’s the reality. They called play concepts that he ran in college effectively. It wasn’t that many nor was it complicated. 
 

We have people complaining that they didn’t adjust their playcalls or are just throwing him out there without pandering to what he does best. Those are false statements. No cherry picking needed to prove it wrong. Look at the damn plays. 
 

Explain to me what he ran in college and tell me what was so different? 
 

I like how that’s just totally ignored. 
 

The situation was a tough one, but so what? Many QBs, rookies or otherwise, have come into situations like that and stank it up. Some went on to have great careers. It’s ok, he’ll survive. Horrible mismanagement? Lol... ok. 

[CowboyKillerz]

If you cant keep up why reply?

 

Who tf suggested we turn him into a run first qb? Thats ludicrous to even suggest some one thought it boss! 😁

 

If you watch Pitt and NYG and dont see a difference in how the young greenhorns are being used... What's the point? That a play had a similar name as at Ohio? Its vs an NFL defense! Big whoop

 

Most are in agreement that the preperation, or lack there of is a huge problem. No getting reps- and why not just start outright?? That lacked forsight after Case shat the bed- AND was in a boot. The injuries also dictates different plays. Sure, maybe with his boy McSoarin past the Safety some of those calls work- but we needed to account for the injuries up front on OL and at WR/TE/RB.

 

Ya, I for one agree that the play calling wasnt the best- not becuase it was some foreign language to Haskins, but that it asked to much at the time with all the variables considered. They had check downs in the play, but his clock was flyyying with the penetration. He was also handed a 14 pt deficit. So instead of having plays with check downs, we shouldve been running short drops w quick outs. 3 crossing routes at different levels. Sweeps. Bootlegs. Screens. Quick passes to gain confidence and let other players make some plays. Ya know.. Where the check down is the go to, not the plan d.

 

Pretty basic **** for a young qb getting his first start.

 

Never once thought this was the end of the world for DH... He will be fine. Just facts are that he wasn't given the best opportunity to succeed. Again, not due to an agenda, but most likely from ego and ineptitude.

If your qb is in a boot after like a dozen turnovers... AND you are facing a crap team in NYG- what competent HC isnt preparing the back up fully to take the first snap?? Opposite of competent is...

[TSO]

4 minutes ago, CowboyKillerz said:

If you cant keep up why reply?

🙄 

 

4 minutes ago, CowboyKillerz said:

Wtf suggested we turn him into a run first qb? Thats ludicrous to even suggest some one tbought it boss.

So you were just trolling when I had said that’s not who he is, then you responded with “except improvising with his legs was something he did well”... what was your point? If it wasn’t that, then you’re agreeing with me. It isn’t who he is. So why mention it? Just to bother? 
 

7 minutes ago, CowboyKillerz said:

If you watch Pitt and NYG and dont see a difference in how the young greenhorns are being used... Whats the point? That a play had a similar name as at Ohio? Its vs an NFL defense! 

Most are in agreement that the preperation, or lack there of is a huge problem. No getting reps- and why not just start outright?? That lacked forsight after Case shat the bed- AND was in a boot. The injuries also dictates different plays. Sure, mayve with his boy McSoarin past the Safety some of those calls work- but we needed to account for the injuries up front and at WR/TE/RB.

While I for one agree that the play calling wasnt the best- not becuase it was some foreign language to Haskins, but that it asked to much. They had check downs, but his clock was flyyying with the penetration. He was also handed a 14 pt deficit. So instead of having plays with check downs, we shouldve been running short drop quick outs. 3 crossing routes at different levels. Sweeps. Bootlegs. Screens. Quick passes to gain co fidence and let other players make some plays. 

Almost everything you mention here has included within it the concepts they called for him. He literally missed on a quick out wide open for a TD to Vernon Davis. Want to know what the first passing play they called for Haskins was? A friggin bootleg. 
 

Just because you can’t recognize it doesn’t mean anything. You’re just flailing. That’s all. 

 

[volsmet]

3 hours ago, thesubmittedone said:

 

I'll make the point hard and I don't care who gets offended since it doesn't seem like they give a crap what they spew, so long as it induces rage towards the wrong people. 

 

I'm reading these posts here and all I'm seeing is posters only prove just how little they know about actual football. It's just fan cliches they repeat thinking it means anything. 

 

What did Haskins run in college? What concepts? 

 

I promise these people have no idea. Know why? Because those concepts were what was called for Haskins in the Giants' game. Mesh, Y-Cross, Arrow or Spot, Spacing concepts, etc... 

 

I didn't even realize they ran the Philly concept, which is another one Haskins ran well in college, until you posted it above. So add that to the list.  

 

You know what Haskins didn't really run in college? Option routes, which is a favorite of Gruden's. I might be wrong because it's hard to tell at times what is an option route versus not, but I didn't see a single one of those called against the Giants. I can say for sure that he wasn't looking at any player waiting for him to make a decision on his option route.  

 

So they are actually calling what Haskins did well in college and they are actually giving him a smaller package of plays. Anyone who knows just even a little bit of what they're looking at could see it. 

 

The difference for Haskins is the speed of the NFL and the way defenses disguise their coverages and/or change them post play. It's going to take time for him to adjust to that. They can call whatever he's good at, go uptempo or no huddle, whatever, and it won't matter. He's going to get tricked. 

 

 

 

1 hour ago, thesubmittedone said:

 

My God, it’s impossible. This is why I just don’t post much anymore.  *cries*
 

 

 

 

[CowboyKillerz]

"He’s not going to be making many plays with his legs or improvising like the other QBs you listed. That was NEVER his game"

 

Except for when he did? And did it well... Was the point. He moved well in the pocket, made stuff happen with his legs.. Never said lets run read option from here on out. 

 

Give me a break... The goal line? EVERYTHING IS QUICK! Its obvipusly a condensed field and easier to defend.. And timing (ya know the stuff you get when taking reps?) Is key. He nearly had the fade.. Not the best throw, or the right throw.. But if Sprinkle were anything like a good catching TE not named sprinkle its 6.

First play of the game (for him)? You mean the drive he moved the ball to the goal line? LOL and then? Easy completion to PRich.. 

 

Like I said.. If you watch the tape and conclude that the play designs were similar to NYG and Pitts... Then I do believe we having nothing more to talk about?