forums

12 coaches have produced consecutive seasons of 6 yards per

Advertisement
Didn't Golden basically sum this up for everyone in the post-season presser?

He said we had to put the offense in another gear to win ball games this year & as a result they knew it would hurt, an already young, defense.

His ultimate vision for this team is to rush 200 ypg and pass 250 ypg. I think he desires what we all want.
 
Bingo

Simply stated, Miami cannot get the tough yard. And it has been a long time since they could. And until they can, it ill be tough for them to win sheeit.


LuCane said:
Unless he transitions the way New England has tried to, you are the same people who will **** when we can't win big games because tough defenses keep us from converting red zone opportunities. It's nice to have great stats and fly the ball up and down the field between the 20s. That's going to get Andy Reid fired this year. That has led Scott Linehan's Lions to a 4-7 record despite extremely good talent.

No one is saying he isn't a talented play designer. Most people are saying he needs to evolve and focus so that his style is as effective in the tough games.

No one is going to question that the names on there have a common denominator? Just how many crucial games have been won overall?

Funny that someone like Al Borges is on there, as this is a description of him:

"Al Borges has spent the vast majority of this year running an offense that was never sure of what it was or what it had." http://www.freep.com/article/201211...rdinator-Al-Borges-dropped-ball-vs-Ohio-State

The bottom line is that Fisch is talented. Fisch needs to evolve because it's fun to put 52 points on Duke, but most of us prefer to see 31 points and effectiveness inside the 20 against FSU.

If we're going to have a discussion about this, please don't reduce this to a "you people think Fisch sucks" vs "Fisch is amazing" thread.
Click to expand...
 
This is an excellent thread, guys. But, don't over complicate it. It is still football.

Generally speaking, if we take the '12 offensive numbers and couple it with '01 defense, I don't think we would see much drop off defensively. The '01 defense was a dominant, front running unit built on stopping the pass. It had great defensive line depth as well as overall depth, and that's really the key component.

With an explosive, fast paced offense you need a defense built around pressure and a ballhawking secondary. And, it doesnt hurt to have a linebacking unit capable of providing air tight underneath coverage. Again, though, you need outstanding depth to really make it click.
 
Advertisement
Dynasty said:
This is an excellent thread, guys. But, don't over complicate it. It is still football.

Generally speaking, if we take the '12 offensive numbers and couple it with '01 defense, I don't think we would see much drop off defensively. The '01 defense was a dominant, front running unit built on stopping the pass. It had great defensive line depth as well as overall depth, and that's really the key component.

With an explosive, fast paced offense you need a defense built around pressure and a ballhawking secondary. And, it doesnt hurt to have a linebacking unit capable of providing air tight underneath coverage. Again, though, you need outstanding depth to really make it click.
Click to expand...

I don't think anyone is saying they'd be less talented or that their "peak" would be lower, but they'd be less effective at times by simple virtue of more exposure. That 2001 defense was great and absurdly talented, but there were still some early glimpses of the type of freelancing that later caught up to them at times in 2002. Really, what stands out to me is that Virginia Tech game to end the season. For as dominant as we were that year, we still only won that game 26-24 and Portis took a **** of a pounding (he had 34 carries) to make it stick. We straight up committed that game.
 
lol at people hating on Jedd Fisch. Probably the same people that were hating on Dorsett and Lamar miller.....
 
The premise though is based on forcing an offense to be one dimensional, playing catch up. Thus, by making a team abandon its groundgame, it plays to the strength of the '01 defense. That defensive line could straight bring it without having to worry about run keys and plays. It also would allow Reed and James to patrol the deep halves. Granted, there might have been a few letdowns due to being over exposed, but an opponent would be facing constant pressure on both sides of the ball.

The issue for a defensive unit like '01 is when its offense starts sputtering. The opposing offense can remain committed to the groundgame. The entire dynamics are changed. The defense can't just focus on one phase of the game.
 
Advertisement
LuCane said:
Unless he transitions the way New England has tried to, you are the same people who will ***** when we can't win big games because tough defenses keep us from converting red zone opportunities. It's nice to have great stats and fly the ball up and down the field between the 20s. That's going to get Andy Reid fired this year. That has led Scott Linehan's Lions to a 4-7 record despite extremely good talent.

No one is saying he isn't a talented play designer. Most people are saying he needs to evolve and focus so that his style is as effective in the tough games.

No one is going to question that the names on there have a common denominator? Just how many crucial games have been won overall?

Funny that someone like Al Borges is on there, as this is a description of him:

"Al Borges has spent the vast majority of this year running an offense that was never sure of what it was or what it had." http://www.freep.com/article/201211...rdinator-Al-Borges-dropped-ball-vs-Ohio-State

The bottom line is that Fisch is talented. Fisch needs to evolve because it's fun to put 52 points on Duke, but most of us prefer to see 31 points and effectiveness inside the 20 against FSU.

If we're going to have a discussion about this, please don't reduce this to a "you people think Fisch sucks" vs "Fisch is amazing" thread.
Click to expand...


I think our red zone struggles have much more to do with personnel than with play calling. We lacked a solid power back (Mike James was great in general, but not as great a power back as his size/frame would suggest), and Morris can't utilize touch for ****, eliminating the end zone fade from the playbook (which was Jacory's bread and butter, say what you want about the kid, he had some beautiful looking end zone fades throughout his career, hence the touchdown record).
 
saints.

LuCane said:
jerzeycane said:
LuCane said:
Unless he transitions the way New England has tried to, you are the same people who will **** when we can't win big games because tough defenses keep us from converting red zone opportunities. It's nice to have great stats and fly the ball up and down the field between the 20s. That's going to get Andy Reid fired this year. That has led Scott Linehan's Lions to a 4-7 record despite extremely good talent.

No one is saying he isn't a talented play designer. Most people are saying he needs to evolve and focus so that his style is as effective in the tough games.

No one is going to question that the names on there have a common denominator? Just how many crucial games have been won overall?

Funny that someone like Al Borges is on there, as this is a description of him:

"Al Borges has spent the vast majority of this year running an offense that was never sure of what it was or what it had." http://www.freep.com/article/201211...rdinator-Al-Borges-dropped-ball-vs-Ohio-State

The bottom line is that Fisch is talented. Fisch needs to evolve because it's fun to put 52 points on Duke, but most of us prefer to see 31 points and effectiveness inside the 20 against FSU.

If we're going to have a discussion about this, please don't reduce this to a "you people think Fisch sucks" vs "Fisch is amazing" thread.
Click to expand...

The reasons for those teams losing has nothing to do with the offense and everything to do with defense.
Click to expand...

That's not how football works. Identity affects the entire football team. Here's a challenge: let's name wide open attacks (that reflect the names above) that also had outstanding defenses. Feel free to use the NFL also. Feel free to go back an entire decade.
Click to expand...
 
bg534 said:
LuCane said:
Unless he transitions the way New England has tried to, you are the same people who will **** when we can't win big games because tough defenses keep us from converting red zone opportunities. It's nice to have great stats and fly the ball up and down the field between the 20s. That's going to get Andy Reid fired this year. That has led Scott Linehan's Lions to a 4-7 record despite extremely good talent.

No one is saying he isn't a talented play designer. Most people are saying he needs to evolve and focus so that his style is as effective in the tough games.

No one is going to question that the names on there have a common denominator? Just how many crucial games have been won overall?

Funny that someone like Al Borges is on there, as this is a description of him:

"Al Borges has spent the vast majority of this year running an offense that was never sure of what it was or what it had." http://www.freep.com/article/201211...rdinator-Al-Borges-dropped-ball-vs-Ohio-State

The bottom line is that Fisch is talented. Fisch needs to evolve because it's fun to put 52 points on Duke, but most of us prefer to see 31 points and effectiveness inside the 20 against FSU.

If we're going to have a discussion about this, please don't reduce this to a "you people think Fisch sucks" vs "Fisch is amazing" thread.
Click to expand...


I think our red zone struggles have much more to do with personnel than with play calling. We lacked a solid power back (Mike James was great in general, but not as great a power back as his size/frame would suggest), and Morris can't utilize touch for ****, eliminating the end zone fade from the playbook (which was Jacory's bread and butter, say what you want about the kid, he had some beautiful looking end zone fades throughout his career, hence the touchdown record).
Click to expand...

Duke will be a beast in the redzone next year.
 
Advertisement
There's no debating that none of the teams mentioned in OP have won titles with those offenses.

None. Not one iota.

That said, what the **** are we debating? There's no crystal ball for scoring the most points.
 
bg534 said:
LuCane said:
Unless he transitions the way New England has tried to, you are the same people who will ***** when we can't win big games because tough defenses keep us from converting red zone opportunities. It's nice to have great stats and fly the ball up and down the field between the 20s. That's going to get Andy Reid fired this year. That has led Scott Linehan's Lions to a 4-7 record despite extremely good talent.

No one is saying he isn't a talented play designer. Most people are saying he needs to evolve and focus so that his style is as effective in the tough games.

No one is going to question that the names on there have a common denominator? Just how many crucial games have been won overall?

Funny that someone like Al Borges is on there, as this is a description of him:

"Al Borges has spent the vast majority of this year running an offense that was never sure of what it was or what it had." http://www.freep.com/article/201211...rdinator-Al-Borges-dropped-ball-vs-Ohio-State

The bottom line is that Fisch is talented. Fisch needs to evolve because it's fun to put 52 points on Duke, but most of us prefer to see 31 points and effectiveness inside the 20 against FSU.

If we're going to have a discussion about this, please don't reduce this to a "you people think Fisch sucks" vs "Fisch is amazing" thread.
Click to expand...


I think our red zone struggles have much more to do with personnel than with play calling. We lacked a solid power back (Mike James was great in general, but not as great a power back as his size/frame would suggest), and Morris can't utilize touch for ****, eliminating the end zone fade from the playbook (which was Jacory's bread and butter, say what you want about the kid, he had some beautiful looking end zone fades throughout his career, hence the touchdown record).
Click to expand...

I think you're way off base. Way. Off. Base. Mike James is fine for a power back. And Morris threw the back shoulder route very well multiple times this year. Also, our OL is huge. Hagens is more than adequate at FB. Warlord is a decent TE. Stanford doesn't have our talent, but they do fine in the red zone.

It just doesn't make a **** bit of sense that our personnel is fine between the 20s, but ***** the bed in the red zone. That's hogwash.
 
Biscuits said:
bg534 said:
LuCane said:
Unless he transitions the way New England has tried to, you are the same people who will **** when we can't win big games because tough defenses keep us from converting red zone opportunities. It's nice to have great stats and fly the ball up and down the field between the 20s. That's going to get Andy Reid fired this year. That has led Scott Linehan's Lions to a 4-7 record despite extremely good talent.

No one is saying he isn't a talented play designer. Most people are saying he needs to evolve and focus so that his style is as effective in the tough games.

No one is going to question that the names on there have a common denominator? Just how many crucial games have been won overall?

Funny that someone like Al Borges is on there, as this is a description of him:

"Al Borges has spent the vast majority of this year running an offense that was never sure of what it was or what it had." http://www.freep.com/article/201211...rdinator-Al-Borges-dropped-ball-vs-Ohio-State

The bottom line is that Fisch is talented. Fisch needs to evolve because it's fun to put 52 points on Duke, but most of us prefer to see 31 points and effectiveness inside the 20 against FSU.

If we're going to have a discussion about this, please don't reduce this to a "you people think Fisch sucks" vs "Fisch is amazing" thread.
Click to expand...


I think our red zone struggles have much more to do with personnel than with play calling. We lacked a solid power back (Mike James was great in general, but not as great a power back as his size/frame would suggest), and Morris can't utilize touch for ****, eliminating the end zone fade from the playbook (which was Jacory's bread and butter, say what you want about the kid, he had some beautiful looking end zone fades throughout his career, hence the touchdown record).
Click to expand...

I think you're way off base. Way. Off. Base. Mike James is fine for a power back. And Morris threw the back shoulder route very well multiple times this year. Also, our OL is huge. Hagens is more than adequate at FB. Warlord is a decent TE. Stanford doesn't have our talent, but they do fine in the red zone.

It just doesn't make a **** bit of sense that our personnel is fine between the 20s, but ****s the bed in the red zone. That's hogwash.
Click to expand...

Mike James runs SOFT.
 
Advertisement
jerzeycane said:
Our issues in the redzone had more to do with execution...not playcalling. Morris went 4 for 22 in the redzone I believe, some of which should have been EASY completions.
Click to expand...

Did you us notice that we never threw the ball to the middle of the field in the redzone? The only time I remember us doing it was on that dump off to James against I forgot who which we scored on and dukes TD pass to Walford that was unexplicably called back.

I know everything is more condensed in the RZ, etc but **** man, can a man get a crooning route or two in the middle of the field?
 
when we "want" to run it in the redzone, specificaly when we're near the goal line... we can't, not consistently at least. for whatever reason, even with our huge Oline, we're not great when we need to run it up the gut and pick the tough yards.
 
jerzeycane said:
LuCane said:
bbcane said:
Larry said:
bbcane said:
LOL at scoring to fast. and being a problem.
Click to expand...

Football is a team game. Not a game of units.

You can't put an offense out there for 25m per game, drop 40 on a mediocre opponent and then cry poor mouth and foul when the defense lets up 41. What the offense does directly impacts defense and special teams. What the defense does directly impacts offense and special teams. What the special teams does directly impacts offense and defense.

You can score as fast as you want, but it does you no good when the defense comes back on the field 2 minutes later and the opposing offense drives on'em for another 4m for a score. Sooner or later, to use a chess analogy, you end up in a stalemate when you sacrifice a piece for a piece.
Click to expand...

DEFENSE. what was 2001 TOP . just curios or maybe not TOP but average TOP for scoring drives I bet under 2:30
Click to expand...

Are you guys really arguing that the 2001 team did not have multiple gears? The tougher the game, the more they downshifted. Against VTech to end the season, we ran the ball TWO times as much as we passed the ball. We ran the ball 41x that game. We held the ball for 34+ minutes or 57% of the game.

Sorry, it sounds like some of you were either too young or weren't playing close enough attention. That team does not fit in with the offensive styles listed in the original post.
Click to expand...

What happens against Florida State if we run the ball 45 times this year?
Click to expand...
We dont know, our offense was too busy going 3 and out passing it, meanwhile our RBs were averaging 3 and 3.6 ypc on only 16 TOTAL carries
 
And LMAO@ ANYONE thinking that the 2001 team couldnt run the ball


Portis WON us that game vs BC in 2001 when Dorsey was having an off day......SMH
 
Last edited:
Advertisement
Back
Top