OC - Scott Turner incoming

[Voice_of_Reason]

19 hours ago, Califan007 said:

 

You can tell how well they attack weaknesses in the opposing defenses, how well they do at masking the offense's weaknesses, how well they call a game, how well they make halftime adjustments...i guess i should have said it's possible to evaluate an OC without having top flight talent on the field more so than his scheme. If your OC can only do well when his offense is stocked with talent, that tells you something. Conversely, if an OC can make the offense look like it's stocked with talent even though it isn't, that tells you something as well.

 

 

This I ageee with.  
 

I had a business school professor who said it’s easy to grow a company at 5% is the economy is growing at 6%.  However it takes a hell of a lot of talent to keep a company steady if the economy is shrinking.  

[method man]

28 minutes ago, drowland said:

 

It'll be interesting to see what Ron does if Scott's not getting it done by the end of the season.  He'll probably at least give him another year because of the personnel.  He's loyal to the Turner family though.  Which going back to Marty I remember Dan hated that Marty hired his brother to be DC.  But then he allowed Gibbs to hire his soon (though not an important position).  And then he allowed Mike to hire Kyle as OC (which Kyle was good but it caused issues in the building) and now we got Ron hiring his best friend's son to an important post that he really didn't seem qualified for.   The nepotism never ends.

Nepotism in the NFL is unfortunately a leaguewide issue. It’s worse so here because it is incentives for coaches to come here. Lets not forget Ron’s daughter works for the team and Jack’s son is a QC. Oh yeah and Ron’a nephew is a QC too

 

It’s honestly why the Rooney Rule needs to be applied to more midlevel and junior jobs. Helps to break up the incestuous cesspool that is the NFL

Edited October 15, 2020 by method man

[Cooleyfan1993]

1 hour ago, method man said:

Nepotism in the NFL is unfortunately a leaguewide issue. It’s worse so here because it is incentives for coaches to come here. Lets not forget Ron’s daughter works for the team and Jack’s son is a QC. Oh yeah and Ron’a nephew is a QC too

 

It’s honestly why the Rooney Rule needs to be applied to more midlevel and junior jobs. Helps to break up the incestuous cesspool that is the NFL

Rons daughter just works as the social media person, right? I see no problem with that at all, because it’s not as important as a coaching staff position 

[megared]

Quote

Washington Football Team was Running on Empty

...

If you're keeping score at home, that's 23 called passing plays and five called runs from the time Smith entered at the two-minute mark of the first half. 

A lot of that was NOT score and situational dictated. Sorry. Some of it was. It's not illegal to run the ball inside of two minutes when you have all three of your timeouts left. 

It's absurd to not run the ball in a 20-10 game with a steady rain shower dumping down. 

When you're offensive line can't block a soul and when you are allowing a very good pass rush to pin their ears back and tee off, that's on you. 

 

https://www.si.com/nfl/washingtonfootball/fantasy-gambling/washington-football-team-was-running-on-empty

 

Agree fully with this take.  I'm not sure why/how Turner is escaping criticism for this?

Edited October 15, 2020 by megared

[KDawg]

Turner has certainly not helped himself or the team. 
 

It has seemed like Turner has called strange plays at times. The levels concept he ran on the 4th and goal WAS a really odd call. It doesn’t change my opinion on the quarterback’s handling of the call or the instruction given that he allegedly ignored... but the call was strange.

 

He seems to become allergic to running... which I could see someone arguing for in the sense that our line is horrible... but that argument gets decimated when you realize the line couldn’t pass block, either. And we had a QB who is tougher than nails but hasn’t played in 2 years. You’d think you’d want to at least make the Rams think you have a general desire to run.

 

Ive gone back and watched, without taking notes, the Carolina games the last four weeks last year. He had the same strange play calling tendencies there, too.

 

But there are moments where he calls and absolutely perfect play and the quarterback (pick one) misses the read.

 

Which then makes you wonder about the quarterbacks AND how they’re coached. 
 

No one has made this offense better. The QB, OC, receivers at times where I firmly believe they aren’t running the correct routes because if some of the spacing stuff is coached like that it’s even more scary... the OL coaching/schemes are weird... (why not gap hinge on the backside of a full slide?). 
 

Our talent and coaching are both stopping this offense from realizing its potential. And that potential isn’t a high ceiling, but it’s still at the floor of where it could be due to all of these factors.

 

I hope Turner is being evaluated as well. And maybe he gets it and he changes some things and gets things on the path. But maybe he doesn’t.

[Riggo#44]

14 minutes ago, megared said:

Turner is escaping criticism for this?

 

He's not. Cooley said his game plan was essentially dog****, and I agree. I'm letting it play out--but he's been less than impressive. I do find it funny how Turner is criticized so for not having a top offense, while Haskins is excused for "not having anyone to work with." I guess that's how agenda's work.

 

One thing Rivera said that sticks with me through this whole year: results are less important this year. The process, effort, work ethic, and improvement are paramount.

[megared]

38 minutes ago, Riggo#44 said:

 I do find it funny how Turner is criticized so for not having a top offense, while Haskins is excused for "not having anyone to work with." I guess that's how agenda's work.

 

One thing Rivera said that sticks with me through this whole year: results are less important this year. The process, effort, work ethic, and improvement are paramount.

 

Here's the problem:  Whether you consider this year 'evaluating the team' or trying to 'win the division' THIS offense doesn't put the team in a position to do either.  I'm not seeing very much professional stuff occurring on that side of the ball.  And it's not something that just started happening.  The o-line looked absolutely confused and baffled that some Balt defenders rushed, while others dropped.  Guys blocking air, or looking overwhelmed by stunts.

 

Putting Alex Smith back there to endure that punishment was coaching malpractice.  Especially with those weather conditions, which I'd imagine would impact most coach's gameplan.  

Edited October 15, 2020 by megared

[Riggo#44]

14 minutes ago, megared said:

 

Here's the problem:  Whether you consider this year 'evaluating the team' or trying to 'win the division' THIS offense doesn't put the team in a position to do either.  I'm not seeing very much professional stuff occurring on that side of the ball.  And it's not something that just started happening.  The o-line looked absolutely confused and baffled that some Balt defenders rushed, while others dropped.  Guys blocking air, or looking overwhelmed by stunts.

 

And this is the problem with this sort of analysis--is this on the coaching or on the players? Being confused by stunts could be either. Maybe we need smarter OL? I understand John Matsko is pretty highly regarded, so it could be a combination of both? The main problem I have with immediately blaming coaching staff is we have next to no information what they called, what the protection scheme set up is. Who has responsibility for what. We can make analysis or educated guesses, but for the most part we have little information. (However, it's clear when Wes Martin plays on roller skates or gives the ole block.) To be clear, I am not defending anyone--and the jury is WAY out on Turner--but I think people are getting to worked up about a myopic view. This year was ALWAYS about the long run--I never got to worked up, even over the season-opening win. I never thought they should even attempt to win the division, and chalked all that up to bull**** coach speak. It's more about the process, and I'll stick by that all year.

 

18 minutes ago, megared said:

Putting Alex Smith back there to endure that punishment was coaching malpractice.

 

So assume you have a medical background, have seen his x-rays, charts, all his medical information and can make an accurate diagnosis?

[Califan007 The Constipated]

14 hours ago, celticsalmon said:

Kevin O'Connell, Sean McVey, Kyle Shannahan...were in the house and they left because of Little big man- Snyder!  Our beloved franchise will always be losers as long as Danny owns the team.

 

 

How is KOC leaving Snyder's fault other than him not forcing Rivera to keep him on? What did I miss?

[megared]

15 minutes ago, Riggo#44 said:

 

And this is the problem with this sort of analysis--is this on the coaching or on the players? Being confused by stunts could be either. Maybe we need smarter OL? I understand John Matsko is pretty highly regarded, so it could be a combination of both? The main problem I have with immediately blaming coaching staff is we have next to no information what they called, what the protection scheme set up is. Who has responsibility for what. We can make analysis or educated guesses, but for the most part we have little information. (However, it's clear when Wes Martin plays on roller skates or gives the ole block.) To be clear, I am not defending anyone--and the jury is WAY out on Turner--but I think people are getting to worked up about a myopic view. This year was ALWAYS about the long run--I never got to worked up, even over the season-opening win. I never thought they should even attempt to win the division, and chalked all that up to bull**** coach speak. It's more about the process, and I'll stick by that all year.

 

I'm very much into empirical evidence...but how many guys are running free?  Who is exactly is operating in space?  Coaches scheme...if we witness performances like Sunday, questioning whether the team was adequately prepared is fair game.  Noticing dudes dancing with air or double teaming guys while someone else runs free doesn't take an understanding of the highest level of football.  It's amateurish to the naked eye.  

 

15 minutes ago, Riggo#44 said:

 

So assume you have a medical background, have seen his x-rays, charts, all his medical information and can make an accurate diagnosis?

 

Read the words again.  Putting Alex Smith back there, with the D's ears pinned back, and no running game made him a sitting duck.  You had to know he wasn't going to be able to protect himself.  And in a downpour, you're asking him to drop back and throw, over and over. 

 

Sounds like you'd rather make excuses for guys than talk football...please help me see the light of how it was a good coaching decision.  How it gave our team the best chance to compete/win?  That's what we're doing now, right?

[Riggo#44]

4 minutes ago, megared said:

I'm very much into empirical evidence...but how many guys are running free?  Who is exactly is operating in space?  Coaches scheme...if we witness performances like Sunday, questioning whether the team was adequately prepared is fair game.  Noticing dudes dancing with air or double teaming guys while someone else runs free doesn't take an understanding of the highest level of football.  It's amateurish to the naked eye.  

 

You're absolutely right--but it's also just fair to ask if our OL are dumb, untalented, or both.  I think it's a combination of mediocre skill level and inexperienced coaching.

 

17 minutes ago, megared said:

Sounds like you'd rather make excuses for guys than talk football...please help me see the light of how it was a good coaching decision.  How it gave our team the best chance to compete/win?  That's what we're doing now, right?

 

I haven't made an excuse for anyone, I try not to do that, sometimes I will. I also prefer to not overreact and scream **** like "coaching malpractice" over a player being put in a difficult situation.

[Califan007 The Constipated]

Let me ask...what was it that anyone saw in Scott Turner's career that made you feel optimistic about his being named OC for the Skins?

 

I didn't even know Norv had a son lol..nonetheless one that was coaching in the NFL. So my only optimism was that my ignorance of his coaching meant he could have been one of those "up and coming" coordinators that have been on GMs' radars. That, and he was Norv's son so maybe some of Norv's better coordinator qualities are entrenched in Scott as well. But that was it.

 

What were the things people liked about Scott Turner before he came here?

[megared]

1 hour ago, Riggo#44 said:

 

You're absolutely right--but it's also just fair to ask if our OL are dumb, untalented, or both.  I think it's a combination of mediocre skill level and inexperienced coaching.

 

 

I haven't made an excuse for anyone, I try not to do that, sometimes I will. I also prefer to not overreact and scream **** like "coaching malpractice" over a player being put in a difficult situation.

 

Asking Alex Smith to operate in that manner, on an idyllic fall day is stupid.  During a torrential downpour, with no protection is incomprehensible.  It means he ignored the game, the situation, the weather, the personnel.  And he ignored the fact that the line couldn't sustain a passing game of ANY kind.  

 

I can't see how anyone can look at what's unfolding and feel confident that it's ALL talent.  If it's your preference to hope these things will self-resolve, fine.  The other games had elements of the same mistakes, sprinkled throughout. 

 

Honestly, I don't see how he can become a successful coordinator with the volume of mistakes he's making.  There's no Christian McCaffrey here to make everything you call, look good.  

Edited October 15, 2020 by megared

[Riggo#44]

5 minutes ago, megared said:

 

Asking Alex Smith to operate in that manner, on an idyllic fall day is stupid.  During a torrential downpour, with no protection is incomprehensible.  It means he ignored the game, the situation, the weather, the personnel.  And he ignored the fact that the line couldn't sustain a passing game of ANY kind.  

 

I can't see how anyone can look at what's unfolding and feel confident that it's ALL talent.  If it's your preference to hope these things will self-resolve, fine.  The other games had elements of the same mistakes, sprinkled throughout. 

 

Honestly, I don't see how he can become a successful coordinator with the volume of mistakes he's making.  There's no Christian McCaffrey here to make everything you call, look good.  

 

People grow. We'll see.

54 minutes ago, Califan007 said:

What were the things people liked about Scott Turner before he came here?

 

As I recall, there were stories about him opening up the Carolina offense, getting the ball to playmakers quicker, since they weren't too adept at throwing deep--kinda like here.

[megared]

47 minutes ago, Califan007 said:

Let me ask...what was it that anyone saw in Scott Turner's career that made you feel optimistic about his being named OC for the Skins?

 

I didn't even know Norv had a son lol..nonetheless one that was coaching in the NFL. So my only optimism was that my ignorance of his coaching meant he could have been one of those "up and coming" coordinators that have been on GMs' radars. That, and he was Norv's son so maybe some of Norv's better coordinator qualities are entrenched in Scott as well. But that was it.

 

What were the things people liked about Scott Turner before he came here?

 

I was hoping he was an up & coming guy who had some of the offensive brilliance of his dad.  Norv wasn't a great leader of men, but he could scheme an offense.

 

Seems to me like Scott rose too fast.  He didn't spend much time being a QB coach in Carolina, before he was elevated to OC due to Ron's firing.  Probably wouldn't be nearly as much of an issue, if Norv was here as well.     

[Califan007 The Constipated]

From

@MarkBullockNFL

re: Scott Turner's play calling: "Think back to Gruden’s first year or two when McVay was OC. There were a ton of questionable calls and bad looking drives, which Gruden took heat for, but he was taking the heat to allow McVay time to develop..." (1/2)

 

(2/2) "...and learn how to find the rhythm of calling plays in the NFL. Maybe Turner doesn’t turn into anything, but let’s give him time to see what he has. In summary: you can't judge Turner yet b/c of bad game scripts and bad talent. Full article here:

 

Inside View: A closer look at offensive coordinator Scott Turner’s play calling

 

https://theathletic.com/2136253/2020/10/14/inside-view-a-closer-look-at-offensive-coordinator-scott-turners-play-calling/?source=dailyemail

[Renegade7]

On 10/15/2020 at 9:46 AM, Riggo#44 said:

 

He's not. Cooley said his game plan was essentially dog****, and I agree. I'm letting it play out--but he's been less than impressive. I do find it funny how Turner is criticized so for not having a top offense, while Haskins is excused for "not having anyone to work with." I guess that's how agenda's work.

 

One thing Rivera said that sticks with me through this whole year: results are less important this year. The process, effort, work ethic, and improvement are paramount.

 

So much has to change here that its understandable it won't get changed all at the same time.  

 

And on top of that, Rivera has to pick folks he's comfortable with first, he deserves that after remembering that Bingo dude that was brought here.  

 

I'm going to trust Rivera to do the right thing while putting this team together on who helps him do it, one because I don't feel like stressing about it yet, and too because he's been pretty net positive on this all things considered.

 

This is me being optimistic again, not impressed with Turner, but our oline is soooo bad, its hard to say if he's even calling what he wants to call right now.  Is he?

[Riggo#44]

57 minutes ago, Renegade7 said:

This is me being optimistic again, not impressed with Turner, but our oline is soooo bad, its hard to say if he's even calling what he wants to call right now.  Is he?

I've heard things I haven't liked, like single blocking Aaron Donald. But is that scheme, execution? I guarantee the personnel are hindering his playcalling. So, we'll see.

[Malapropismic Depository]

On 10/15/2020 at 12:52 PM, Riggo#44 said:

 

 

As I recall, there were stories about him opening up the Carolina offense, getting the ball to playmakers quicker, since they weren't too adept at throwing deep--kinda like here.

 

I was actually just thinking, that we must be very last in the league, when it comes to "big plays" passing, like 20+ yards....and going back a very long time, maybe 10 years or more

[Gurgeh]

I don't think either side (the players and the coach) are helping the other, but I would say that if some of the calls look odd to us, then they will definitely look odd to the players. Now if the calls were working that wouldn't be a problem, but in general they aren't and that is going to make the players mistrust the calls. Doing something that you don't believe will work is never going to be a recipe for success.

 

[Voice_of_Reason]

Here are my thoughts on Scott Turner: (And please read to the end, we might not end up where we started...)

 

1. Just like the rest of the team (and all of humanity), he was screwed by COViD.  He didn't get a chance to work with the offense, install the system over the spring as normally would happen, and work directly with the QBs. Everything initially was over zoom, and then was rushed in training camp. 

2. He was screwed by the QB situation if you believe the reports on Haskins' work ethic issues.  Not only did he have to try and install a new system over zoom, he was doing so with a QB who wasn't doing all the things he was supposed to do to pick it up.  We heard they had to "simplify" things just about every week for Dwayne. So maybe he wanted to do more, but just couldn't.

3. He doesn't have a lot of tools to work with as far as weapons.  He's got Terry, and ... Terry?  Though Gibson is coming on, he doesn't have a ton to work with.  

4. The OL is "meh" at best, and he has to scheme around that.

5. He's a new play caller, and just like anything, it takes time to get good at a new responsibility.  

 

All that said, I don't think he's really helped his situation.  Sure, there are plenty of times where he's scheming guys open and the QB just isn't hitting them.  That is definitely a thing. 

 

But there are also times when the play calling is so conservative, so predictable, and so repetitive, it gives the defense queues.  I used to absolutely crush Jay for calling the same 2 run plays on first down 70% of the time for an average of something like 1.2 yards over 6 years.  Turner isn't that bad. But he's falling into the same issue of having patterns, which DCs can pick up.

 

There seems to be a real reluctance to take shots deep on early downs.  It's like Scott thinks he HAS to pick up 4 yards on first down every single time, because there's now way they can overcome a second and 10.  So, this makes first down very predictable, if not in the actual play, then the fact you're going to see some type of a screen or run.  But you rarely see them take a medium to deep shot on 1st down. 

 

Also, and I'm not a "run the damn ball, then run some more, and when you're done with that, run it some more" type of guy.  I am fine with a 65/35 pass to run ratio.  But you've got to run it a bit, and you've got to be successful doing it at times, just to keep the defense honest.

 

If you're going to have sustained offensive success, you've got to be able to run the ball a little bit, and also take some shots down field and stretch the defense.  If everything is at or behind the LOS, then the defense collapses, and it makes the short stuff harder to complete.

 

We're one dimensional on offense, and I think it could be better.  I think Scott can scheme it better, and call it better.  I also think the players are not executing the plays called.  That's also on coaching to an extent. I crushed Jay and his staff for players not knowing what they were doing, and being unprepared.  So fair is fair, the offense looks unprepared at times.  That's also on Scott and his staff.

 

Again, they were fighting an uphill battle, but I don't think they've done it really well so far.  

 

 

[CTskin]

We’re running a poor mans jay gruden offense and it’s getting old quick.

 

i can excuse the first few weeks because of the new offense/Covid offseason thing, but now we’re into the heart of the season and we’re seeing the same vanilla bull****. On top of it, we’re seeing so many mental errors and guys seeming like they don’t know the playbook. 
 

I don’t put any of this on Ron up to this point, but he had better make it clear to Scott that we need to change it up.

 

Crazy, innovative idea incoming- maybe one time we don’t run it up the gut on 1st down and we go play action. 

[profusion]

Patience is probably in order all around. This is effectively a 16-game preseason for this team.

 

The overall talent level is atrocious. No amount of coaching will overcome that. That said, the coordinators need to start identifying and honing in the on the few things that are actually working. Everything still looks jumbled to my non-expert eyes.

[Warhead36]

This is the same fan base that ran out Kyle Shanahan and was even critical of Sean McVay. I don't listen to anything anyone has to say about the playcalling.

[TradeTheBeal!]

I think yesterday was the first game where the players on the field were performing at a consistency that even allows us to evaluate the OC/playcalling.