|
|
Post by rmcalhoun on Dec 12, 2022 20:45:11 GMT -6
This crazy off season of players coming and going might just be a blessing in disguise. It’s looking more and more like Kev is going to be forced into making changes.
|
|
|
|
Post by bsutony on Dec 12, 2022 21:17:34 GMT -6
I expect to see more of a zone read running game. With Kelly and now Cooper we have more speed from those positions.
|
|
|
|
Post by lmills72 on Dec 12, 2022 23:28:25 GMT -6
I guess he can make changes. Can he coach? Can he call plays?
|
|
|
|
Post by coastalcard on Dec 13, 2022 7:44:03 GMT -6
Personnel hasn't necessarily been holding him back
|
|
|
|
Post by bsu0 on Dec 16, 2022 10:06:53 GMT -6
I am not real big on zone read running plays most of the teams run these days. They hit to slow for my liking. IMHO I believe if those zone reads were done closer to the line of scrimmage and the back hit the holes faster they would be more effective.
|
|
|
|
Post by redfeather on Dec 16, 2022 10:14:34 GMT -6
I guess he can make changes. Can he coach? Can he call plays? What’s the evidence telling you? |
|
|
|
Post by cardfan on Dec 16, 2022 10:36:47 GMT -6
Lynch is a major problem with the offense. Steele is a beast but the more we relied on him and only him on first and second down it put us in tough spots on 3rd down when we HAD to throw. Basically everyone in the stadium, players coaches, fans knew what we were gonna run and when we were gonna run it. Doesn’t matter how good your running back is if the defense always knows he’s getting the ball, and it doesn’t matter how good your Qb is he’s always behind the sticks and only throws in obvious passing situations. When was Paddock at his best? When we were behind and running wasn’t really an option. The tempo was quicker and the ball came out faster and the offense was more aggressive. When lynch was content to just hand it off 3 out of every 4 plays or was trying to sit on a lead in the 4th we were stagnant as hell. And we all know all plays were going inside the tackles and all passes would be useless bubble screens and short throws in the flat. And we know that they’ll stick with personnel that are limited in ability to make plays because they are risk averse. We lost 4 out of our last 5 games mostly due to the offense, even with Steele and super TEs.
Bottom line, if Lynch/Neu can’t be more creative/ aggressive or use more variety, misdirection and surprise than what they’ve shown then 5 wins will always be our ceiling. That’s not good enough.
|
|
|
|
Post by 00hmh on Dec 16, 2022 12:30:39 GMT -6
And we know that they’ll stick with personnel that are limited in ability to make plays because they are risk averse. We lost 4 out of our last 5 games mostly due to the offense, even with Steele and super TEs. Bottom line, if Lynch/Neu can’t be more creative/ aggressive or use more variety, misdirection and surprise than what they’ve shown then 5 wins will always be our ceiling. That’s not good enough. Good point about risk aversion. Risk aversion in Finance or in the real world of game theory means by being rational but less risk averse we would have increased our AVERAGE EXPECTED offensive performance. However. While it increases the ceiling (true), increases the average expectation (true), it also lowers the floor all at the same time.
The coaches had to make a call on what their goal was. Obviously at some point with a team they knew had serious weaknesses, they were satisfied to take their best shot at 6 wins and avoid a disaster of 3 or 4 wins. I'd say our low risk ceiling was not 5 but maybe 7. Our expected return, 5 or 6.
This is a case of fans and coaches having different risk preference than fans. Easy to look back and see how we could have done better but that lower risk offense did get us within an eyelash of the 6 wins. A higher risk offense might have taken us out of games where we were close, including close wins we managed. Some games that were close, but winnable with the actual offense, would probably have been out of reach due to that risky offense.
|
|
