Jump to content
Washington Football Team Logo
Extremeskins

New OC Thread (And All Things Offensive - Accepting Any Qualified Applicants)


samy316
 Share

Recommended Posts

I heard that Norvs offense didn't have audibles. That every play called could beat any defense presented or some other fantasy. I thought I saw an audible in week 5 but it may have been a player not lined up correctly corrected by our Wodnerlicker Carson. I want an offense that allows QB the freedom to not run a play into a brickwall the OC failed to know was coming.

 

If Turners offense is truly very complicated that doesn't bode well to seeing our prized rookie at all this year. Prepare for it and maybe even Ron bringing a vet backup this week. I want some Butts! Fumble.

 

How many years do we think it will be before we see our beloved team run QB sneaks the way Philly now does.  Judging by how we hated hurry up for 2 decades probably never.

Edited by RandyHolt
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Kurd Cudins said:

Complicated doesn't always mean intelligent. It's quite possible Turner's system is illogical and stupid, but complex. I would argue he has the least creative run game in the NFL. By a large margin.

The best systems are simple for your own players, and difficult for the opposition.

  • Like 3
  • Super Duper Ain't No Party Pooper Two Thumbs Up 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, method man said:


This. I’ve pointed this out a few times but now two highly intelligent QBs (Fitz last year) have had challenges picking up Turner’s system. Obvious that it is unnecessarily complicated when the end playcalling is basic and predictable 

I haven’t been a fan of some aspects of Turner’s offense, though I’ll admit there’s so, so much I don’t know.  With that said, I do believe that it’s far more difficult for qbs coming from a West coast offense into this system, rather than to another West coast system.  Languages are often used as a comparison, and my sense is that instead of French to Spanish, this is more like French to Japanese.

1 hour ago, Kurd Cudins said:

Complicated doesn't always mean intelligent. It's quite possible Turner's system is illogical and stupid, but complex. I would argue he has the least creative run game in the NFL. By a large margin.

Too true on your first 2 sentences.  

 

No opinion on the run game side of thing (I’m too ignorant to have one, lol)

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The other thing about a supposed complicated offense is it isn't just the QB who might be confused or need time to figure things out.  How many times have we seen these weird jumbo packages or route combinations where it seems like a TE & WR or two WRs end up occupying very close space to each other or damn near run into each other when they come out of their breaks?   Is that scheme related? Is one of them running their route incorrectly maybe at the wrong depth or what.....

 

The issues with this scheme go beyond the QB.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Balance is good. And balance doesn't mean the number of runs vs. the number of passes. It's the type of pass and run plays called, and when. Turner is so predictable and downright putrid at situational play-calling that I want to bang my head against the wall. He is TERRIBLE. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, RandyHolt said:

I want an offense that allows QB the freedom to not run a play into a brickwall the OC failed to know was coming.

 

 

This says it all to me. I'm often screaming at the TV as even I can see the lined-up play isn't going to work. And as you rightly point out, they never change the play, so the lined-up play is the one they're going to run. And fail.

  • Like 2
  • Thumb up 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Kurd Cudins said:

Complicated doesn't always mean intelligent. It's quite possible Turner's system is illogical and stupid, but complex. I would argue he has the least creative run game in the NFL. By a large margin.

 

Sometimes I think these OC's are too clever for their own good. I remember when the Steelers' OC was Joe Walton, with his 400-page playbook. The Steelers offense at the time SUCKED, partly because the offense was too complicated for guys like Bubby Brister to run. They only did better when they got rid of about 300 pages.

 

But players shouldn't need to have an advanced degree in rocket science to understand the plays...it's a GAME, after all.

 

IIRC, Gibbs 1.0 only had four running plays in his playbook. He could run them out of 9 formations, so it looked like 36 plays. Why can't more coaches have offenses designed like this? When players have to think too much they're not reacting.

Edited by BringMetheHeadofBruceAllen
  • Like 3
  • Thumb up 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, BringMetheHeadofBruceAllen said:

IIRC, Gibbs 1.0 only had four running plays in his playbook. He could run them out of 9 formations, so it looked like 36 plays. Why can't more coaches have offenses designed like this? When players have to think too much they're not reacting.

I think Sean McVay's offense is similar to this philosophy.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I remember Parcells pregame long ago was asked about the number of plays he inserted into any given weeks game plan. JB or someone else threw out a number I think it was 75 and Parcells laughed at it saying something to the effect that was something less than half that. More like 30. 

 

I have a sneaking suspicion OCs assume their players are as smart as they are and never get overwhelmed nor confused.  Keep it stupid simple!

 

I wonder how many plays JDR expects his DBs to have down pat. A have yet another theory. All the modern day sub packages makes assignments far more complicated vs when the same 11 are on the field for most of the snaps. Constant subs creates constant chaos. Ok maybe only for us. Maybe we should target drafting top picks that will be all down players.

 

We often hear coaches talking about how they would have won if there weren't mental mistakes. Dare I think its never the coaches fault expecting too much from players.

Edited by RandyHolt
Link to comment
Share on other sites

This morning on the Kevin Sheehan radio show he talked about how he likes Scott Turner.  Today he asked Turner to come up with some better third down play options.

From the day they hired Turner I have not been one of his supporters at all.  He has good running backs and good receivers now and yet our offense continues to struggle.

The offensive line stinks now so I am having even less faith in Turner's ability to turn this offense around in a positive direction.  I shake my head on some of the things

Sheehan says on his shows.  Sometimes he will say something I can agree with him on but other times I laugh at some of his observations because he thinks he "knows" football.

I like it when one of his producers will take the opposite view from him so they can argue it out.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, RandyHolt said:

Kinda feel like it would be prudent to bring in a 3rd QB with Logan ailing?

We already fixed that one in another thread.

 

Heiny Hive vs Darnold’s Den.  
 

Knives and pitchforks ok, not eye gouges or sack shots.  Let’s keep it clean.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Scot Turner is not a good OC but I think he’s better than he seems right now. Wentz has hurt the whole team. He makes everyone else looks worse. With a different qb playing everyone will think he finally figured out how to call plays this season but in reality it’ll be because Wentz is on the sideline. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, AlwaysBeRedskins2Me said:

I think Ron would be too stubborn/lacks accountability too much, to bring him back. He thinks it'd be admitting that he was wrong about something. God forbid....

He let him go to Miami in his first offseason and brought him back in his second

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 10/17/2022 at 10:45 AM, BringMetheHeadofBruceAllen said:

 

Sometimes I think these OC's are too clever for their own good. I remember when the Steelers' OC was Joe Walton, with his 400-page playbook. The Steelers offense at the time SUCKED, partly because the offense was too complicated for guys like Bubby Brister to run. They only did better when they got rid of about 300 pages.

 

But players shouldn't need to have an advanced degree in rocket science to understand the plays...it's a GAME, after all.

 

IIRC, Gibbs 1.0 only had four running plays in his playbook. He could run them out of 9 formations, so it looked like 36 plays. Why can't more coaches have offenses designed like this? When players have to think too much they're not reacting.

 

 This is where Turner lacks creativeness.

After 3 or 4 possessions, defenses start figuring out whats coming by the formation lined up. If a defense suspects a screen they'll play back, not rushing, then snuff it as soon as Wentz threw the ball { which was held 2 seconds too long }.

 

The "Jumbo" pkgs run at the goal line cause me to pull my hair out. Its so damn frustrating that everyone but Turner KNOWS the o-line will have 11 defenders directly in front of them. Why Turner doesn't throw a 3-4 WR set on 1st & goal from the 3 yd line is beyond me. Defenses HAVE to honor the WRs, thus removing 4-5 defenders from stuffing the run. If they don't honor it, its a simple pitch-n-catch.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • samy316 changed the title to New OC Thread (And All Things Offensive - Accepting Any Qualified Applicants)

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...