This to me has the two important points: drafting has been awful for almost 10 years, and it has been under three different regimes. People who completely dismiss the comparisons with the Cleveland Browns need to read that sentence again. Or maybe think about the Buffalo Bills, another team where making changes at GM and HC seems to make no difference at all. Having said that, I can see no reason for Bowles to be back - he exhibits no evidence of being anything other than completely over his head. He lost me for good when he didn't replace Fitzgarbage even temporarily in the KC game - that was to me a fireable offense.
4-12 last year and 8-8 3 times in the last 7 and 6-10 another time. I see an organization that got lucky this year with Prescott. Going 8-8 3 years running with Tony Romo at QB is worse than anything the Jets have done in a long time. The 4-12 was Romo hurt and no QB in house. The 6-10 was Romo hurt with no QB in house. The 8-8 seasons with Romo? They'd have had Jets tearing their hair out with both hands.
I think that with the way things are today, with all the spread offenses and smaller, faster defenses, and the salary cap the way it is, a smart GM could really take advantage of it all by going completely against the grain like that. Sign scrub WRs for veteran minimum. Sign a fast, athletic QB on the cheap. Forget a pass-catching TE. Use the saved cap space and draft picks to build a monster O-line. Use extra linemen as blocking TEs. Get the biggest, meanest, toughest FB you can find (it's not like anybody else is drafting the guy). Choose your backfield wisely-- you need a big mauler back to wear out the opponent's D, a whippet back who can take a toss or screen to the house from anywhere, and probably a guy who can fill in at either roll and still be competent. The team will still need a defense and special teams that can keep the games close, but that offense should be able to dominate time of possession and keep those units off the field for most of the game. It's going to be hard for any team to maintain a defense that can stop the rest of the league's spread offenses and stop an offense that is truly built to consistently pick up 3-4 yards per carry. It doesn't fit the modern NFL theory, but the first guy to buy in whole hog and just forego WRs and QB will have success. I suspect it won't be long-term success, and I suspect that teams that try to copy it will fail.
I think it's too easy to put 8 men in the box and stop the run when you need too. In order to really make this idea work you'd need a great breakaway threat as your primary back and you'd need a couple of other guys on the roster that could step in and run well if he went down.
I think you have to think about using a different kind of lineman. You need big hulking run blocking bulldozer linemen, like the guys from the late 80's and early 90's. Forget about pass blocking all together. Forget about these zone blocking quick linemen who are getting to the second level. I'm talking about a line that is designed to give you 3 yards against the steel curtain and serve no other purpose. Use a 6th linemen in the TE spot. Then you put that line up against a bunch of 3-4 defenses with pass rushing linebackers, or coverage linebackers, or teams that don't even have enough linebackers, because you have to carry 8 defensive backs these days. Then put a 245 pound FB and a 230 pound power runner behind that line. And one of these Mike Vick/RGIII type QBs who is much more dangerous with his legs.
Until we get a QB this is what we have to do. Really hoping they get Fournette to give that offense an instant playmaker. I know the OL needs help but if it isn't there at #5 please take the guy who can help the offense with no help.
What happens when you get behind by a couple of scores and that's your offensive plan with no real Plan B? The scheme you're talking about is like Rex's Ground and Pound or the Steelers Roethlisberger Rookie Bubble. It requires a great defense and that you not give up a couple of early scores or you're behind the 8-ball.
and I don't think any of it is that simple. For one thing, a RB by committee-type offense is too predictable. When the power back comes in, more than likely it's gonna be a run. When the scat back comes in, it's gonna be a pass or a run to the outside. For another, just having bulldozing OL who can't pass block, and having a running QB who can't throw, scrub WRs, and a TE who can't catch, makes the offense too one-dimensional. I don't think that would work at all. IMO one needs a RB akin to Forte, who can run and catch, but who is faster/more elusive, who can take it to the house from anywhere on the field. I don't know how good a receiver Fournette might really be, but with his combination of size, speed and power, if he has good hands, he could be a dynamite weapon in an offense like that. The D would never know what's coming, especially if the offense also had TEs who could catch, a speedy game-breaking WR or two, and excellent possession receivers. Add in a QB who can run when it's available, but who is a pass-first guy and can beat you with his arm (doesn't have to be an Aaron Rodgers), and with good play calling the D should always be off balance. I envision an offense where one week the RBs might average running the ball 30-40 times and have 5-10 receptions, but the QB also have a couple of hundred yards passing, just enough to keep the D guessing.
Then you lose. That's why I don't think this is a successful plan for long-term success. But If you did it right, you could go from awful to Super Bowl contender very quickly by taking advantage of players that are not in high demand and by no wasting salary cap on over-priced players. If nothing else, it's a way to build a cheap, effective, ball control offense while you build up your defense and special teams--and keep that D off the field as much as possible. Then, turn attention to QB, and get a solid play action passing threat going. Takes a lot of pressure off until you get a real franchise QB in place, too. But, yeah-- I don't think anybody should be looking to build that kind of running attack as their end product. It does sound like Rex's scheme, except Rex blew picks and salary all over the place with Sanchez, Edwards, Holmes, etc. Like so much else of Rex's, what he said sounded fine, what he did sucked.
I see where you're going, and I can get behind that-- but I'm not looking at this as an end-state mature offense. I'm looking at is as something you could realistically put together in 2 years basically from scratch, then transition away from.
Garoppolo was lighting teams up before he got hurt. If Belichick wants to, he could probably trade Brady to the Browns for three first rounders and win the SB with Garoppolo.
Whoever found the QB. Bill Parcells found Romo for Jones and then they lucked into Prescott. Whenever Romo hasn't been available and sometimes when he has been available the Cowboys have been mediocre. Remember the Cowboys went 5-11 3 years in a row with Jones as GM. Then they hired Parcells to bail the franchise out. After the Parcells talent base eroded they were a .500 team up until this year. Actually under .500 for the 6 seasons from 2010 to 2015.
If you were going to go with a run-heavy offense I'd go the other direction. Get a good TE, get a good H-back, get one WR the other team had to cover when he was split out wide and put them all on the field with a great tailback. Have a second TE who could block, have a slot receiver who was quick, have another outside WR who could catch the ball on passing downs. Then run off of that with a change-of-pace back on 3rd down, rotating the other pieces as necessary to keep the other team off balance. I'd have the TE and the H-Back and the good WR on the field with the great tailback all the time and rotate the outside WR, slot receiver and second TE depending on what I wanted to do. Create mismatches on the field and take advantage of it.
The Titans are a prime example, they have 2 really good RB's and Mariotta provides them a 3rd option as well. They also have a really good TE but only one quality WR. Rishard Matthews had a pretty good year for them but he's basically unknown. Honestly since we don't have one capable QB on the roster maybe we should focus on a blueprint similar to theirs Granted we still have no freaking TE but I guess you need a respected QB so teams don't stay the box. Just looking at what we have makes me depressed
Really nice Posts Seriously why don't members of the GG fax in the Offense we should run for each game to Jets HQ???? Methinks it will be instantaneous winner
