Glass half full...from a normally glass half empty guy... future outlook

[Soonerpeace]

(01-03-2024, 06:54 PM)NUGDUKWE Wrote: Well I would assume the coaches are always trying to win. But when you appear to tweek the offense by giving Browning more half field reads and increase play action appear to schemes pass routes for single players and then not only does Browning respond well but the whole team does I just don't understand going back to counting on him to read the whole field again as Burrow would do. I get different teams different matchups but we struggled against the Steelers the 1st go round did we think the same plan would work with Browning having more experience? I mean we had the tape of Minnesota and he still appeared to be really struggling to read the safeties as he was against Pitt the 1st game so you could see he hadn't improved much at all. 
Then against KC yes we did score some and more the ball. But the offense>defense for the reason we lost the game and not all that great when the defense didn't play all that well. But when we don't score at all in the 2nd half and we start taking sacks and it appears no one is open you would tend to tip your hat to the defense. But then when you watch the breakdown and they say that we are running the same passing concepts that we did in the AFCCG that failed and we lost with Burrow. What do you think it is running those same concepts now with Browning? It's either you don't want to tip your hand or it's idiotic? I mean it's that simple you can't ask Browning to do something that wasn't working with Burrow and realistically expect it to succeed can you? Just to be clear I do not blame Burrow for any of our problems. 

You are going to have to elaborate more?