FAREWELL to the NFL Dwayne Haskins QB Ohio State

[mistertim]

23 hours ago, FireInHisBelly said:

I know it’s the off-season and a message board, but could we try to refrain from making decisions about who we think should start week 1 until training camp has started and, ideally, a couple of preseason games have happened? 🤔

 

Isn't that sort of speculation and discussion exactly what a football message board is here for?

[RonYoungEra]

1 hour ago, mistertim said:

 

Isn't that sort of speculation and discussion exactly what a football message board is here for?

 

 

Yes, of course. I was speaking more to the irrationality of making definitive statements about who should start week 1 without having seeing any training camp nor preseason. Again, I get it. I’m just bustin’ chops, more than anything. But you certainly won’t see me making any proclamations about week 1 starters in the next couple of weeks! 😆 I can totally see talking about who you want to win the job and why, but to say XX should definitely start week 1 over YY based on the evidence that we have thus far seems premature, at best.

[goskins10]

16 hours ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

When Doug was promoted, he promoted Kyle to run college scouting.  I give him credit for that and my guess is that was a game changer for college scouting.   Scott Campbell was in effect demoted and then left.  Campbell IMO has been likely a key part of our mostly mediocre drafts for a long time since he's been here for long and had titles overseeing college scouting.  I recall going back to the Cerrato days, hearing Vinny tout Campbell as being a key guy in their drafts.

 

Part of the reason why I'd guess Doug isn't anything special as a scout is its simply what the beat guys have mostly said from their own sources in the FO.  Even Chris Russell who really went to town for Doug years back to get promoted said he heard people in that building love the dude and think he's a great guy but don't think highly of him as a scout.  Who knows if this part is true but years back when someone allegedly run into Scot at a gas station and they got into a long conversation which was posted in multiple blogs -- he said the same thing to him about Doug from what I recall.  When I had my own conversation with Scot years ago, we talked player evaluation and the one dude he touted to me in that regard was Jay.  He didn't bring up Doug.   So I don't get the impression that Doug is a key scout-talent evaluator.  I could be wrong.  But I do like his promoting of Kyle and in turn it looks like they beefed up their scouting department some. 

 

Kyle on the other hand seems universally touted as a scout.  Even Shanny talked about seeing it himself when he was here.   There is a ton of smoke that Kyle is really good at scouting.  There is conversely some smoke that Doug isn't much of a scout -- but he's a good facilitator in that building because he's a nice-classy guy and some of that classiness might go a long way in a good sense in that building for obvious reasons. 😀 

 

 

Edit

 

Doug is not being paid to be a scout. He has scouts and he has a guy in charge of scouting. His job is to take that information and put it into a strategy with input from others and oversee the execution. His job is to manage those people and manage the process. And it's not like as an NFL QB he never looked at film and learned how to identify things. I am not saying he is a stud talent elevator. But I do not think he has to be.  But that does not mean he is completely incapable either. 

 

Not saying you, just using this as a jump off point - I see so many people totally dismiss Doug because of his Tampa connection where much of his previous experience comes from, and he doesn't sound like a polished speaker in front of a camera. A couple of things - when you re a HC in college you are pretty much everything including the GM and FO in NFL terms. He had two successful stints at Grambling - a college with a big reputation he had to uphold and he did a pretty good job. But people for some reason just dismiss that as - well it's not NFL experience. Ok maybe to a certain extent, but it's still football and yes maybe on a smaller scale, but the job is not completely different. It's not like college football is as different to the NFL as chemistry is to drama class. 

 

I would also argue that his lack of input may be more a function of the this so called group think model Bruce likes - BTW Bruce likes it because he can both take all credit while placing blame on others. Yes to the Bruce defenders, I just dumped on that POS again! It's an obsession with me. I have real problem with incompetence, the one thing Bruce is really good at displaying! 

 

I am not saying Doug is some super stud FO guy with mad evaluation skills. It appears we have that in Kyle Smith. What Doug does provide from what i see is a glue guy with adequate evaluation skills. He can get all the personalities to work and seems to be able to convince Bruce and Dan to listen to the football guys. He is doing what a good manager does - uses the talent around him to make the entire process better. You cannot underestimate that - especially is this kind of open house type of structure. 

 

I really think Doug is the right person for this job in this organisation at this time. Bring in a competent GM and my thoughts could easily change. But even then I could see a huge value in having Doug in the building, especially with Dan still owning the team. 

[Burgold]

I don't know if that's true, Goskins, but it makes a lot of sense.

[goskins10]

7 hours ago, FireInHisBelly said:

 

 

Yes, of course. I was speaking more to the irrationality of making definitive statements about who should start week 1 without having seeing any training camp nor preseason. Again, I get it. I’m just bustin’ chops, more than anything. But you certainly won’t see me making any proclamations about week 1 starters in the next couple of weeks! 😆 I can totally see talking about who you want to win the job and why, but to say XX should definitely start week 1 over YY based on the evidence that we have thus far seems premature, at best.

 

So I took a kidding stab at this earlier but I was also a little serious. I think you may be missing the whole point of having a board like this. A place like this is exactly were to voice your opinions and/or hopes for what the team will look like in September and that can be any September and any time of year with little to sometimes no practical information. Some of it is as simple as seeing if you were right. There is a complete thread on next years draft (at least I think it's been started, if not it will be soon), and we have no idea where we will be picking! And some are prognosticating what the team may look like in 2020 already, making all kinds of educated guesses, hopes and pipe dreams and sometimes, yes just good old wild ass guesses. 

 

I do not see anything wrong with throwing out there who you like/want/think to be on the team. Now going to Vegas with those ideas and placing wagers? Yea, not so much.... 😱

 

It's totally fair to say that whatever ideas we have now could be completely blown out of the water between now and then. And that there is very little to support said ideas. But that's the fun of it. I say join the fun! Make all kinds of crazy guesses, projections you want. Many are sure to be wrong. But when you get a big one right it's pretty rewarding. I think you may be keeping yourself from one of the main drivers of entertainment here - yours when you get it right - ours when you get it wrong!!  

 

OK, back to your regularly scheduled programming!!  

 

 

[HTTRDynasty]

 

[Skinsinparadise]

10 hours ago, goskins10 said:

 

Doug is not being paid to be a scout. He has scouts and he has a guy in charge of scouting. His job is to take that information and put it into a strategy with input from others and oversee the execution.

 

I have no way to know one way or another so all I can do is trust or not trust the people who cover the team who have given it their best shot based on what they heard and even they admit the process in that FO is mysterious to a degree.  I get the impression though for those who attempted to explain the mysterious FO structure that Doug isn't really overseeing execution and strategy as for player selection but he indeed does it in the context of making sure the trains run on time and the FO works smoothly with each other.  

 

 I like Doug.  I am cool with him in that position.  My point really isn't so much about him but what I value the most in the FO.  And I'll grant that maybe i am overcompensating on that front because to me i am like a dude without water in the desert for so long that i am mega thirsty for that water.  So I clamor for the Kyle Smith's in a big way and want more dudes like that in the FO.  Some of the FO media observer types like Breer and Schrager gush over some FOs like Philly as having a load of talent evaluators studs.  So while I like having Doug there -- I clamor even more for adding more Kyle types.  

 

10 hours ago, goskins10 said:

 

Not saying you, just using this as a jump off point - I see so many people totally dismiss Doug because of his Tampa connection where much of his previous experience comes from, and he doesn't sound like a polished speaker in front of a camera. A couple of things - when you re a HC in college you are pretty much everything including the GM and FO in NFL terms. He had two successful stints at Grambling - a college with a big reputation he had to uphold and he did a pretty good job. But people for some reason just dismiss that as - well it's not NFL experience. Ok maybe to a certain extent, but it's still football and yes maybe on a smaller scale, but the job is not completely different. It's not like college football is as different to the NFL as chemistry is to drama class. 

 

 

I get your point.   And I agree experience has value.  But it's not the operative thing for me.  Shanny is arguably a hall of fame coach, has been the defacto GM for Denver for years -- really bright dude to say the least.  But I want a stud personnel guy running personnel.   I don't see Shanny as that.  Doug isn't from what I hear running personnel either.  So I got no issue with him in his position.    I think the Shanny and Doug types are easier to come by than the Kyle Smith types albeit they all have value. 

 

If lets say we replaced Kyle Smith with Scott Campbell again -- do I think we'd likely have crappy to mediocre drafts again even though Doug or Shanny would still in the building -- yes.  And that's not a condemnation of either one.  It's just based on my thought that the great talent evaluators are harder to come by and more essential to acquire talent.   

10 hours ago, goskins10 said:

 

I am not saying Doug is some super stud FO guy with mad evaluation skills. It appears we have that in Kyle Smith. What Doug does provide from what i see is a glue guy with adequate evaluation skills. He can get all the personalities to work and seems to be able to convince Bruce and Dan to listen to the football guys. He is doing what a good manager does - uses the talent around him to make the entire process better. You cannot underestimate that - especially is this kind of open house type of structure. 

 

I really think Doug is the right person for this job in this organisation at this time. Bring in a competent GM and my thoughts could easily change. But even then I could see a huge value in having Doug in the building, especially with Dan still owning the team. 

 

I agree with this.  It has value.  Again, i am glad Doug is here and I agree he fills a key role.  I just don't think he's the most essential guy in the group we got in that FO.  I think its Kyle Smith and its not even close.  I think our pro personnel department is one of the worst in the NFL.  I think as for trades made during both Bruce and Vinny's era I can't think of a team who does trades worse than this team.  But the college personnel department has been really good.  I know some in the FO thread think its overrated and is far from great.  I'd agree that its far from great.  But to me its consistently good and that's an improvement over the past.  I give Doug credit for pushing to elevate Kyle Smith and his role in all of that.  But I do think if you remove Kyle from this operation -- the FO comes off to me as a bit of a house of cards because there is plenty that they don't do well outside of college scouting.   I don't blame Doug for that.  i am just saying Kyle to me is the key part of the glue.  

 

Am not saying you are on the opposite side of any of these points.  I am just explaining why I am not enamored with any of the more administrative based positions in the FO.  They all have value.  And Doug is more than just an administrator but nothing I've heard leads me to believe he's a key evaluator in that building. So I live and die more with the Kyle Smith types than the Doug-Shanny types.   

[Thinking Skins]

11 hours ago, goskins10 said:

I really think Doug is the right person for this job in this organisation at this time. Bring in a competent GM and my thoughts could easily change. But even then I could see a huge value in having Doug in the building, especially with Dan still owning the team. 

I agree with this and I'll just say that before Doug, none of us even knew who Kyle Smith was. And sure Kyle has built some nice drafts but it's interesting that a few teams have names GMs this off season and i haven't heard his name mentioned. Maybe this is a case where we're overvaluing our own talent. 

 

My problem with Scott and Scot wasn't necessarily their individual talent but their setups and how I'd imagine meetings went. We never heard stories about any scouts other than Scott or Scot in their respective times in "leadership" positions. This made me believe that we possibly had either good scouts with opinions being ignored or that they were just bad scouts. I mean the job of covering an entire college football system including all the smaller schools vs backup players at bigger schools vs injured guys etc is difficult. For the first time under Snyder were setting not just success in the draft but we're building up the scouting department. 

 

The key question I have for a guy like Kyle is can be run the ship. I know he can put together a draft board but what happens in a meeting when Jay wants a WR who we think will go later vs a OT that we think could be a starter with some development. Or when he has to deal with Dan saying, "i watched a college ball game on my Yacht and this guy win the game. We should trade up and get him". How does he manage these personalities without burning bridges and still get a good draft grade? 

 

Honestly I don't think Doug is that hot of a commodity but he has experience rebuilding programs - he rebuilt Grambling twice. And listening to all sides at the table and i think that goes a long way. And in front of our eyes he's proving he can help this front office do better than it's every done under Snyder. 

[Skinsinparadise]

On 6/30/2019 at 1:47 PM, Thinking Skins said:

I agree with this and I'll just say that before Doug, none of us even knew who Kyle Smith was. And sure Kyle has built some nice drafts but it's interesting that a few teams have names GMs this off season and i haven't heard his name mentioned. Maybe this is a case where we're overvaluing our own talent. 

 

 

I get the point.  But this isn't true.  Plenty knew who Kyle was at that point.  I know I did and I wasn't alone.  But I get what you are getting at.   But I'd say most did after the 2017 draft with the whole SEC talk relating to Allen and Anderson.  Shanny talked about how Kyle was a rising star back when he was in the building.   As to your point about overvaluing him, that's maybe so.   I think for me i am enjoying having good drafts.  I get those who say our drafts are overrated.  I can see that.  We still thus far aren't finding superstars in drafts for the most part.  That's been the case really for Dan's whole tenure.  But the drafts have been good IMO.  To your point, Kyle's name rarely gets mentioned nationally and it sounds like some of the teams who recently looked to hire a GM didn't have his name in their top 5, etc candidates considering who they interviewed. 

 

On 6/30/2019 at 1:47 PM, Thinking Skins said:

 

The key question I have for a guy like Kyle is can be run the ship. I know he can put together a draft board but what happens in a meeting when Jay wants a WR who we think will go later vs a OT that we think could be a starter with some development. Or when he has to deal with Dan saying, "i watched a college ball game on my Yacht and this guy win the game. We should trade up and get him". How does he manage these personalities without burning bridges and still get a good draft grade? 

 

Dan I think is the wildcard.  I got no idea if he can handle him.  Cooley ironically enough has hinted multiple times about that he believes the head FO guy needs to be good with Dan and Dan needs to like working with the GM -- whatever that means.  IMO Kyle does such a good job with college scouting and conversely Santos is so "meh' at pro scouting or for whatever reason IMO the pro department is lacking -- that I'd take my chances because you got nothing to lose.  I presume someone who is competent at evaluating college talent can do it for the pros, too.   Supposedly Jay and Kyle get along like two peas in a pod so I think that part would work out fine.

 

On 6/30/2019 at 1:47 PM, Thinking Skins said:

 

Honestly I don't think Doug is that hot of a commodity but he has experience rebuilding programs - he rebuilt Grambling twice. And listening to all sides at the table and i think that goes a long way. And in front of our eyes he's proving he can help this front office do better than it's every done under Snyder. 

 

Joe Gibbs supposedly could handle Dan very well and there was some good camaraderie in the FO.  Doug clearly can do the same.  But my question is would the results be the same without the hot shot evaluator in the building?  I am not saying the results record wise has been hot but at least there is an aspect of the FO that is lauded for a change.   I think Gibbs would have looked like a much smarter executive if he had Kyle run college scouting as opposed to Scott Campbell -- ditto Shanny.  I think Scott Campbell and Santos might be underrated aspects of some of the weaknesses from the past and present as to the FO.  In both of their cases they are low key people that in turn don't get a lot of focus but if they truly had-have final say or a strong say as to their department over the years -- then both IMO were-are underwhelming. 

 

And again i like Doug.  i think he's done a good job.  But I am more fixated on stud talent evaluators because I simply don't think you can build a good team without them.  i think they are even more important than the coaches.   I think that's been the missing ingredient in Dan's FO more than anything during most of his tenure.  But we can also use more classy guys with good people skills and who can handle Dan -- I get the impression that's Doug's niche.

[Skinsinparadise]

 

 

 

[Always A Commander Never A Captain]

Tyree Jackson's QB rating is going to be like 99 Throwing Power inflating his overall score.  But Jones below Grier seems odd.

[Skinsinparadise]

I just got Warren Sharp's 2019 season preview yesterday, started going through it.  I'll preface this by saying on the aggregate I like Jay.   I got no problem though with losing him as collateral damage if losing him comes with Bruce Allen going, too.  But if Bruce stays, I'd put money that the coach they get isn't as good.  I don't think Dan is attracting top candidates with Bruce running the team.    Unless, O'Connell is the guy -- he's a wildcard and I wonder if he has enough experience to run a team.  McVay is young too but he would have been a coordinator for longer than O'Connell if he took over in 2020. 

 

For me Sharp's stats confirm that Jay can design up some good plays but I'd prefer someone else to sequence them -- and I am gathering that might happen this year with O'Connell as play caller.  My top thing for any HC isn't calling plays but their personality and people skills.  And i like Jay a lot on that front.  But if he is going to call plays, i am mixed about him on that front.  I think he knows how to orchestrate a passing offense with the best of them.  i also think he's a good teacher of QBs based on what I've heard-read. 

 

i think his weakness is he needs to be more of a nerdy-stats-analytics like supposedly the Patriots and Eagles and some other teams adopt a lot.  In other words, playing the odds and keeping defenses guessing as for runs-passes.  The irony is when they adapt some of the stuff that Sharp swears by then according to him it works very well.  I've heard O'Connell in an interview talk about the run-pass dynamic on first downs -- I forgot what he said but it gave me the impression that he's on to it being an issue and that might change this season.

 

Some of Sharp's points about the offense

 

Redskins were one of the most run heavy teams on first downs and one of the least successful ones doing it -- he thinks the two points go hand in hand

Redskins were one of the most successful offenses when they passed on first down albeit they didn't do it as much as most other teams  

He thinks that's Jay's biggest weakness as a play caller is the preponderance of running on first down. 

Jordan Reed wasn't effective (or used much) on third downs and red zone situations which he found surprising

He thinks they over relied too much on Peterson on short yardage red zone situations 

They weren't a good red zone team last year

Their runs were more successful on the right side than left side

His metrics rate both Alex Smith and Colt McCoy as poor performing QBs but I admit I haven't figured out yet how his numbers work on it.  He said Alex faced statistically speaking the easiest pass defenses in the NFL last year.

Alex's deep ball accuracy to both the right and left was bad.  But it was really good up the middle.  However, they threw more deep to the left and right -- especially to the left to Doctson

Their best completion rate on passes was oddly 13 sets -- 3 tight ends, 1 WR

They ran the best out of 11 personnel 

Passing to the right was the team's weakness.  They were best passing to the middle.

The curl route by a mile was the most used receiver route

The slant was the next most used route

The dig route was their most successful route (makes sense considering their success up the middle)

Peterson was almost a yard per attempt better running out of 11 personnel versus any other personnel group

I saw something similar to this on PFF awhile back -- Doctson is really good on short passes but is train wreck level bad going deep

 

 

He encourages them to throw more and run less next season in part to make the offense less predictable and in part because his metrics show they will face really good run defenses this year and conversely they will have the 9th easiest slate of passing defenses. 

 

 

 

 

[RandyHolt]

Galdi was talking OCKOC today, and apparently he has history with Haskins. From the Trent Dilfer school of how to win a super bowl as a 2nd rate QB or some ****.

 

Jay's 1st down run heavy tendencies were set aside for some reason, late in 2015.  We dominated passing from run looks and downs, and vice versa, and steam rolled into the playoffs with Kirk and especially Jordan Reed crushing defenses.  I am still bummed Jay only did that for 2 months in all his tenure here.

 

KOC to the rescue.

[JoggingGod]

2 hours ago, RandyHolt said:

Galdi was talking OCKOC today, and apparently he has history with Haskins.

 

That’s been known for months.

[mistertim]

7 hours ago, RandyHolt said:

Galdi was talking OCKOC today, and apparently he has history with Haskins. From the Trent Dilfer school of how to win a super bowl as a 2nd rate QB or some ****.

 

Jay's 1st down run heavy tendencies were set aside for some reason, late in 2015.  We dominated passing from run looks and downs, and vice versa, and steam rolled into the playoffs with Kirk and especially Jordan Reed crushing defenses.  I am still bummed Jay only did that for 2 months in all his tenure here.

 

KOC to the rescue.

 

Jay has an absolutely uncanny ability to find something that's working and then stop doing it. Seriously...it's ludicrous how often he does that. 

[Vanguard]

1 hour ago, mistertim said:

 

Jay has an absolutely uncanny ability to find something that's working and then stop doing it. 

 

😂

[wit33]

Great fantasy football info! 

[RandyHolt]

8 hours ago, JoggingGod said:

 

That’s been known for months.

 

Why do you think Galdi was talking about it today?

 

Perhaps it's still relevant information, or not everyone knew it.  I don't recall seeing it posted in this thread, and have read what seems like thousands of posts if not close to all of them.

[Skinsinparadise]

The O'Connell tie to Haskins from what I understood and its been mentioned here before is O'Connell worked with Day in SF.  So he has a good inside beat on Haskns.  Galdi also mentioned that he heard that the Redskins FO had a 2nd round grade on Haskins.  And that some of the FO liked Haskins but didn't love him yet they are intrigued by his talent.  Sheehan has said similar things but without from what I recall saying a 2nd round grade specifically.   Who knows.

 

One key thing I liked from Jay's comments about Haskins is he can see the whole field.  I recall not being good at that was one of the knocks on our previous first round QB. 

 

Digesting more of Warren Sharp's book, just about anyway you cut it if all they fix is one thing, granted its a key thing, I think it can go a long way.  That being stopping telegraphing the run versus pass dynamic.  When the team plays the odds well the play calling has been successful meaning that at least statistically speaking the offense can execute well if teams can't hone in on what they are doing.

 

They run more on first down than most teams

They run more out of center than most teams

they run and pass more out of obvious run and passing formations

 

when they break those tendencies they are pretty successful. So that to me delves into play design versus when to call what and of what formation. I thought it was ironic that Jay in the off season implied that he's like to add a TE (ultimately they never did) because which TEs are in the game tip off defenses too much.  Cooley really went to town on that point, studying every TE permutation and how really every guy with the exception of Vernon Davis telegraphs in a big way if its a run or pass.  

 

They run too much (according to his stats) on first down but run too little on 2nd and short.  His stats show 2nd and short is the best situation to get a first down on the ground.  The Redskins though pass more and run less than most teams on this down.  And when they pass on 2nd and short they are less successful than the average team and conversely when they run they are more successful than the average team. 

 

I am not saying Sharp has it all figured out.  His thing in short is statistically speaking teams are more successful if they adopt certain methods and he backs it with stats that show some of the most successful offenses do it this way.

 

He has a lot of stats that back the power of tendencies.  He says he's consulting now for some teams -- he was asked about it in an interview recently and said the Redskins aren't among the teams he consults with.  But the gist of it is run out of pass formations (11 personnel as an example) including even on the goal line.  Pass more out of run formations, like 12 (1 RB-two TEs).  Keep defenses off balance.  Don't throw to RBs so much on third down when that's what opponent's are expecting.  Instead, throw to RBs on first down.  That's when you have the most success.  Zig when others expect you to zag.    

[RandyHolt]

I wish a reporter would ask Jay to delve into his overall play calling, specifically what has been detailed above. He takes what I consider a very traditional approach - I call it his slow play offense.  He just doesn't pressure defenses, more than meticulously scheming up guys open, and getting everyone involved. It's a credit to him that his offenses with traditional play calling are as successful as they are, but he rarely to never takes that next step and adding what I will deem 'down and distance deception'.  

 

If a team has a dominant unstoppable offense, sure show go heavy jumbo and run it every time. Why bother with deception. But even the great Joe Gibbs, with a superior OL broke from conservative tendencies and would go PAP out of heavy jumbo and Don Warren and friends would be wide open. If he did it with the hogs, Jay should be doing it with our OL.

 

I wonder what Bellichek's tendencies show in traditional run pass looks down and distance.  Dare I think "obvious run down" for him, only lasts a series or 2 to bait defenses, and that he does the least traditional things possible. I remember one game maybe circa 2000, a monday night tilt, where he passed ~15 times in a row early in a game. It was a blowout by halftime.

[Skinsinparadise]

52 minutes ago, RandyHolt said:

 

I wonder what Bellichek's tendencies in run pass looks down and distance.  Dare I think "obvious run down" for him, only lasts a series or 2 to bait defenses.

 

I started going through the Patriots. Helps to have Tom Brady and Gronk.  Gronk in that their TE doesn't telegraph run-pass since he can do it all.  Brady since he's so darn good.

 

Seems like from what am looking at -- its not so much the Pats throw out of run formations and run out of pass formations that much.  But instead their presnap looks -- personnel grouping and shot gun versus not has more balance to them where that I suppose would make them difficult to hone in on.   

 

For example the Pats are in shotgun less than other teams.  Shotgun is one of the easiest ways these days to telegraph run-pass.   

They are in 11 personnel less than the average team and in 12 personnel more. 

They play some of the tendencies perfectly (at least according to Sharp) for example on 2nd and short they run more and pass less.   That plays the odds well.  Sharp says teams when they pass on first down and get an incompletion, 50% of those teams would then run versus pass again.  Statistically, speaking that doesn't work too well.  Yet, teams persist in doing it.  But not the Patriots who pass 70% of the time on 2nd and 10.    And he goes yeah Brady is really good but other teams with good QBs also tend to run on 2nd and 10 too much so he sees it as a tendency. 

 

But yeah to beat a dead horse, Belichick historically has the reputation of loving TEs and using them for mismatches.  The TE arguably more than any position on offense telegraphs run-pass and also are a great chess piece for mismatches and add to blocking.    We arguably have nothing at TE that helps obfuscate squat as for tendencies.   If Jordan Reed is in lets say 11 personnel then the odds that its a pass is very good.      If it's the same thing but Sprinkle is in just bout any formation -- then its likely a run.  Anything with Sprinkle is likely a run or even if it's a pass, he's unlikely going to get the ball so you don't have to shade coverage much his way.  On and on.  And none of the TE's using PFF metrics are good blockers including Sprinkle.   I talked about this in another thread but Cooley's man crush Matt Flanagan showed promise in limited snaps last year so maybe he's the surprise answer.   

 

I actually wrote the part above before reading Sharp's narrative about the Patriots, I was just looking at the numbers first but I just read the narrative and ironically pretty prominent in it was "Brady had a nearly 15  point higher QB rating with Gronk on the field...His presence benefitted the offense by dictating defenses...he was the third most targeted player from 11 personnel..his utility as a blocker helped the run game... 

 

https://www.nbcsports.com/washington/redskins/redskins-depth-chart-review-tight-end-problem-or-production-problem

Last year we tinkered around with two different two tight end sets, actually we had three. We had [Jeremy] Sprinkle and Vernon, Sprinkle and Jordan, and Vernon and Jordan. It's kind of a pain in the neck when you have all these plays," Gruden said. "If you're going to feature the running game it's probably going to be Sprinkle more so, then Jordan and Vernon are standing next to you and you're like 'hey, how you doing? Why don't you get out there, you guys are our best receivers.'"

The issue at hand is that Davis and Reed aren't great run blockers, and in turn, opposing defenses can key on the pass when they're on the field. That kills play action. 

When the Redskins drafted Jeremy Sprinkle three years ago, the hope was he could become a dominant run blocker to pair with Reed and/or Davis. He hasn't. 

As of now, the Skins look like they're approaching 2019 with the same problems that plagued them in 2018 at the tight position. The team did not draft any potential replacements. 

 

The two main things that IMO they missed about this off season is doing much about O line depth and also keeping it same old same old at TE.  The funny thing is the Redskins have the most expensive TE unit in the league, too.  

 

Jay has his weaknesses and strengths.  And he's no buffoon.  He gets the TE dilemma and has talked about it multiple times.  He's talked also in the past about how having Desean Jackson opens up the whole offense for everyone.  According to multiple beat guys he wanted to keep Desean (Desean himself alluded to it) but the FO disagreed.  it's another example why i am more into pointing things at the FO not Jay when it comes to the offense.  

 

I think Jay is really good at crafting the plays.  i'd like someone else to call what play and when.  But I still think the #1 issue on offense is the actual personnel.

 

[RandyHolt]

One of the most effective plays we have seen for decades. 3rd and long, and a team does the predictable 'white flag' draw.  That quite consistently, gets very close to first down yardage.

 

And ironically, defenses know its coming.

[Skinsinparadise]

33 minutes ago, RandyHolt said:

One of the most effective plays we have seen for decades. 3rd and long, and a team does the predictable 'white flag' draw.  That quite consistently, gets very close to first down yardage.

 

And ironically, defenses know its coming.

 

Playing off of that point a big part of the Sharp stats are this: 

 

A.  Your best shot at an explosive play with the passing game is first down

B.  The hardest play to convert is 3rd and long when defenses cue up on the pass

 

It's not that successful teams primarily run out of pass formations and vice versa.  But some break those tendencies more than others -- and statistically speaking they are more likely to be successful. 

 

Digesting all of this, i am sticking to Jay's main weakness is simply the first down runs.  If he breaks that tendency I think they'd be more successful because statistically speaking he does well when he passes on first down.   If I had to pick a 2nd thing, it would be pass less on 2nd and short.    For example the Steelers pass the most on first down, 65% of the time.  We pass the 4th least, 43%.  But when we pass we are just as successful as the Steelers.   And our runs out of first down are one of the least effective in the league.  Peterson seems to run much better (out of 11 personnel) when they don't see it coming.

 

The tricky thing about stats is the cause and effect part.  That is, does the fact that they run less than most teams out of 11 help Peterson's YPA because it adds even more to the element of surprise.  Maybe so.  So stats aren't perfect metrics to measure this all.  But I do think they give you a thumb nail sketch about tendencies.  And if you can see for example apples to oranges comparisons between teams you can make some deductions.  Granted even that isn't perfect because talent isn't a constant from team to team.  But I'll say disguise and subterfuge is an element in strategy in most things so it seems intuitive to me that if you zig when others expect you to zag  -- it will serve you well.

 

If you watch Jay on his coaches show he comes off to me as a wizard as to how to defeat coverages.  I think that's his strength.  I don't think its an accident that his offenses were much more prolific with Desean.  For a dude who is good at scheming up ways to get receivers open, someone like Desean I'd bet was magical for him because all the double and shaded coverages with help from the safeties opened things up to scheme Crowder and Reed.   I recall there was talk about that back then when Desean was here.  And I recall Jay talking about it in an interview once said that it doesn't matter if Desean even gets the ball because of how he opens the field up for everyone. 

 

[wit33]

@Skinsinparadise

 

I got the feeling Jay was amped to have Colt and was on verge of being ultra aggressive with him last year. It seemed the whole playbook was on verge of being opened. 

 

I do believe Jay is more of a traditionalist and numbers above speak to this. Appreciate the post and sharing. 

[Skinsinparadise]

21 hours ago, wit33 said:

 

I do believe Jay is more of a traditionalist and numbers above speak to this. Appreciate the post and sharing. 

 

IMO Jay gets the hard part right which is crafting good plays. I think he (and for that matter any HC) should have someone else call the plays on the sidelines considering all that he has on his plate.  In the old days a lot of HC's called plays but it's not as common these days. 

 

I think its easier for someone like O'Connell or whomever to tinker and improve on plays set by the HC.  In the same way that its easier to edit a piece of work than it is to create one.  So IMO I think its good to have some synergy between the HC and the offensive coordinator -- I presume Jay had that with McVay.   And I'd guess and hope it would be the same with O'Connell.

 

I started rewatching the GB game and found an early example of zigging when teams expect you to zag.    We got 3rd and 1.  We got Alex taking the ball from center.  Peterson is in position for the carry.  We got 3 receivers on the field but they are playing tight so it all has the feel of a run. Vernon Davis goes in motion and changes his position to a spot that reinforces the look of a run and then takes off again and ends up catching the ball in the flat.   It ends up a pass for a nice gain.  I think it's a well designed play.   Nice deception.