(11-30-2023, 11:50 AM)Wyche Wrote: I've read he was involved in getting McNabb in Philly. I think he was also who wanted Alex Smith. Based on that, probably Mahommes too. There's no doubt the man has an eye for QB talent and is a very good coach. It's just that we put him on a pedestal, but he's been the beneficiary of good QB play. We trash other coaches who don't produce with lackluster QB play, including our own. 


Right, and got ran out of Philly when things went south. My memory isn't what it was, but wasn't McNabb injured a bit during his last days? Point is, even great offensive minds struggle with bad QB play. Even those guys were better than what Browning put out there Sunday. Hopefully he is able to correct his mistakes moving forward.

Right. People want to sing Reid's praises because he wins with Mahomes. But denounce Taylor saying he wins because of Burrow. Belicheat was the greatest coach in the football world when he won with Brady, but look at him now without Brady. It would be nice if Cincinnati's coaches got to go by the same rules everyone else's does. 

(11-30-2023, 12:45 PM)Wyche Wrote: That is covered nicely in the article I linked. 

That said, it isn't one of the worst offenses in the league when Joe is playing. That's because it is catered to him and what he wants. The article does a great job of explaining that as well.

I like Mike, and agree with most of what he says. But he also talks about how the offense doesn't create many easy options and it's a very difficult offense for everyone. Their scheme isn't fooling teams and creating easy options. So then it's just needlessly complicated. Burrow doesn't have to play hero ball, as Mike says, but he's is regularly having to make the perfect read, decision, and throw for the offense to work. Evidenced by all of the QBs who have failed in this system that's not a more or less fully healthy Burrow. 

(11-30-2023, 01:04 PM)Sled21 Wrote: Right. People want to sing Reid's praises because he wins with Mahomes. But denounce Taylor saying he wins because of Burrow. Belicheat was the greatest coach in the football world when he won with Brady, but look at him now without Brady. It would be nice if Cincinnati's coaches got to go by the same rules everyone else's does. 

No one says Belicheck is a great offensive coach. He's an amazing defense coach that has had a top 5 defense for 9 of the last 20 years. And then Brady on offense. They were a perfect tandem and that's why they're both considered GOATs.

Reid has had a ton of success with multiple teams and numerous QBs. Whe. Taylor does that then we can compared the two. 

(11-30-2023, 01:16 PM)TheFan Wrote: I like Mike, and agree with most of what he says. But he also talks about how the offense doesn't create many easy options and it's a very difficult offense for everyone. Their scheme isn't fooling teams and creating easy options. So then it's just needlessly complicated. Burrow doesn't have to play hero ball, as Mike says, but he's is regularly having to make the perfect read, decision, and throw for the offense to work. Evidenced by all of the QBs who have failed in this system that's not a more or less fully healthy Burrow. 

I thought it was a pretty fair assessment. He didn't just harp on the negatives, and he didn't just sing praises. The thing that really stood out to me is the shotgun and 11 personnel. People say the coaches should scheme to the players' strength. Well, that's EXACTLY what they are doing for their prize QB, and everyone shits on them for it. Whether some want to admit or not, they won't let Zac win. This is honestly AD 2.0....lol. 

(11-30-2023, 01:19 PM)TheFan Wrote: No one says Belicheck is a great offensive coach. He's an amazing defense coach that has had a top 5 defense for 9 of the last 20 years. And then Brady on offense. They were a perfect tandem and that's why they're both considered GOATs.

Reid has had a ton of success with multiple teams and numerous QBs. Whe. Taylor does that then we can compared the two. 

3 teams, and the QBs he's had success with are Brett Favre, Donovan McNabb, Alex Smith, and Patrick Mahommes. You're saying Zac would lose with those guys?

(11-30-2023, 01:26 PM)Wyche Wrote: I thought it was a pretty fair assessment. He didn't just harp on the negatives, and he didn't just sing praises. The thing that really stood out to me is the shotgun and 11 personnel. People say the coaches should scheme to the players' strength. Well, that's EXACTLY what they are doing for their prize QB, and everyone shits on them for it. Whether some want to admit or not, they won't let Zac win. This is honestly AD 2.0....lol. 

I'm not saying Zac a dumb/bad coach, I just don't think he's a good play caller. I hope he proves me wrong and we look like a competent offense for the rest of our days. Like with most things, I'm sure the truth is probably somewhere between how little myself or others think of him and how highly you or others think. 

(11-30-2023, 04:59 PM)TheFan Wrote: I'm not saying Zac a dumb/bad coach, I just don't think he's a good play caller. I hope he proves me wrong and we look like a competent offense for the rest of our days. Like with most things, I'm sure the truth is probably somewhere between how little myself or others think of him and how highly you or others think. 

Probably. Look, I'm not a fan of everything the man does by any stretch of the imagination. I don't like not playing oline starters in preseason. One of the main things I liked about him early on was his aggression. He seems to have gotten more conservative lately, I don't like that. I wish he'd stick with the run sometimes, and sometimes I understand why he doesn't. It's not all unicorns and rainbow farts with me either. That said, I like to present the other side of the coin and make people think a little. This stuff about winning in spite of him is bullshit in my opinion. I've seen plenty of talented teams flounder because of bad coaches. We have talent now, and we haven't floundered until Joe went down. The first four weeks were rough, but after that the team was starting to hit a bit of a stride. Just a little devil's advocate without the uber contrarian schtick is good for conversation.

(11-30-2023, 05:15 PM)Wyche Wrote: Probably. Look, I'm not a fan of everything the man does by any stretch of the imagination. I don't like not playing oline starters in preseason. One of the main things I liked about him early on was his aggression. He seems to have gotten more conservative lately, I don't like that. I wish he'd stick with the run sometimes, and sometimes I understand why he doesn't. It's not all unicorns and rainbow farts with me either. That said, I like to present the other side of the coin and make people think a little. This stuff about winning in spite of him is bullshit in my opinion. I've seen plenty of talented teams flounder because of bad coaches. We have talent now, and we haven't floundered until Joe went down. The first four weeks were rough, but after that the team was starting to hit a bit of a stride. Just a little devil's advocate without the uber contrarian schtick is good for conversation.

I'm sure I am too hard on Zach (and the other offensive play callers) but I feel like they aren't an overt strength of the team. I agree with all the beginning stuff you said about how he's changed since his first year or two. I don't think we've won in spite of him, especially in the regular season. I think there's definitely some argument that our offense was carried by the defense through our SB run and the Baltimore win. I think Zacs decisions and scheme deserves some of the blame for how bad the Oline looks and for how bad the run game is. 

The first for 4 weeks were rough, as well as any time without a mostly full healthy Burrow. No one should think our offense should continue to produce the same with a back up. But I think it's fair to not think it should become one of the worst in the league, if Zac is as good at leading the offense like some want to say.

Better today with a backup QB and Chase injured they scored 3 straight TD’s on the Vikings defense that had not given up a TD for 2 straight games

Who called Jake to scramble around to avoid the rush and throw to Tee?

(12-16-2023, 06:51 PM)Soonerpeace Wrote: Better today with a backup QB and Chase injured they scored 3 straight TD’s on the Vikings defense that had not given up a TD for 2 straight games

I think there are some valid complaints today. Early on, I would've really liked to see Zac leaning on the running game a bit more. Even if it was only getting three yards on first down, just something to give Browning a little breathing room. He was struggling with handling the pressure and getting knocked out of his rhythm which was putting them behind the sticks. Also, the plays with Sample in the backfield on third and short are frustrating because the defense knows he isn't going to get the ball. 

Today would have been a day where I thought was a good opportunity to keep Browning involved in the RPO game and let him run off of playaction often. Third and short, let him run bootlegs and get him on the edge without clogged throwing lanes so he can make a quick decision of dishing it or scrambling. This isn't said from a place of "Zac is just awful" but just some general complaints that I had where I think it could have made the game a bit smoother. 

(12-16-2023, 07:02 PM)KillerGoose Wrote: I think there are some valid complaints today. Early on, I would've really liked to see Zac leaning on the running game a bit more. Even if it was only getting three yards on first down, just something to give Browning a little breathing room. He was struggling with handling the pressure and getting knocked out of his rhythm which was putting them behind the sticks. Also, the plays with Sample in the backfield on third and short are frustrating because the defense knows he isn't going to get the ball. 

Today would have been a day where I thought was a good opportunity to keep Browning involved in the RPO game and let him run off of playaction often. Third and short, let him run bootlegs and get him on the edge without clogged throwing lanes so he can make a quick decision of dishing it or scrambling. This isn't said from a place of "Zac is just awful" but just some general complaints that I had where I think it could have made the game a bit smoother. 

They struggled the first half. But listening to Jake right now Sample must be very important in the backfield. I hated the Tanner Hudson third down pass but 21 straight points on that Vikings defense was impressive.

I thought Jake would've been under center more today but we won so all is well, I guess.

(12-16-2023, 07:05 PM)Soonerpeace Wrote: They struggled the first half. But listening to Jake right now Sample must be very important in the backfield. I hated the Tanner Hudson third down pass but 21 straight points on that Vikings defense was impressive.

Yeah, I do like Sample in the backfield on longer downs. I just wasn't a fan of bringing that look out in short yardage. The team really did wake up late in the game, though, and there are a handful of plays from this game that are very memorable. 

Called a great game. Aside from one bad call

(12-16-2023, 07:02 PM)KillerGoose Wrote: I think there are some valid complaints today. Early on, I would've really liked to see Zac leaning on the running game a bit more. Even if it was only getting three yards on first down, just something to give Browning a little breathing room. He was struggling with handling the pressure and getting knocked out of his rhythm which was putting them behind the sticks. Also, the plays with Sample in the backfield on third and short are frustrating because the defense knows he isn't going to get the ball. 

Today would have been a day where I thought was a good opportunity to keep Browning involved in the RPO game and let him run off of playaction often. Third and short, let him run bootlegs and get him on the edge without clogged throwing lanes so he can make a quick decision of dishing it or scrambling. This isn't said from a place of "Zac is just awful" but just some general complaints that I had where I think it could have made the game a bit smoother. 

I mentioned how the defense was playing Drew Sample as the 3rd down RB in short yardage in discord. I also want to point out the few times they lined the RB up at H-Back as a blocker pre-snap on 2nd down too. I wish they would have taken those opportunities to rush into the blitz on 2nd and medium instead of announcing hey rush my backup QB please pre-snap

(12-16-2023, 07:08 PM)KillerGoose Wrote: Yeah, I do like Sample in the backfield on longer downs. I just wasn't a fan of bringing that look out in short yardage. The team really did wake up late in the game, though, and there are a handful of plays from this game that are very memorable. 

Oh I agree I hate it on third and short it’s so limiting

(12-16-2023, 07:05 PM)Soonerpeace Wrote: They struggled the first half. But listening to Jake right now Sample must be very important in the backfield. I hated the Tanner Hudson third down pass but 21 straight points on that Vikings defense was impressive.

If Tanner would have thrown the ball back to Jake, he walks in and it would have been an awesome play...

(12-16-2023, 07:12 PM)sandwedge Wrote: If Tanner would have thrown the ball back to Jake, he walks in and it would have been an awesome play...

Third and 1 give it to Mixon. Stupid call for me. No bigger fan on here of Zac but that was stupid

(12-16-2023, 07:08 PM)KillerGoose Wrote: Yeah, I do like Sample in the backfield on longer downs. I just wasn't a fan of bringing that look out in short yardage. The team really did wake up late in the game, though, and there are a handful of plays from this game that are very memorable. 

Yeah I missed the 1st half so I will have to rewatch the game at some point. Yeah I certainly don't hate trying to incorporate play concepts from around the league. But yeah I was definitely not a fan of trying to copy the tush push. I knew right away and was screaming no don't push that tush. But yeah alot of very memorable plays.