Players vs System

[HubKat]

Who can we pull from the Patriots staff?

[HubKat]

Or Packers staff.

[Paa Langfart]

Who can we pull from the Patriots staff?

 

 

No one I hope - bellicheats accolytes have a history of being busts.

 

I hope we go for a head college coach that has a long term history of success on that level and has whatg it takes to translate that to the NFL.

 

And at this point if our next hc/oc combo dont have a system that works well with a Cam type of qb,  we may as well trade him for what we can get.

[Lumps]

Then why didn't they keep him?

Smith is playing in Andy Reid's system now. Reid's offense could make me look like a good quarterback. That's why I laugh every time a team trades for a QB that looked good playing for Reid. I know it's only a matter of time before they're saying "This makes no sense! He looked so good before! What happened?"

They brought in a new coach who most likely wanted a younger QB with a fresh approach. Come on Scott, Alex Smith is a good QB and far from a bust lol. Kap is a very good QB too and with his youth it makes obvious sense to start building with him when a new college coach comes in. Kap is younger and has a higher ceiling and that's why he wasn't kept. It didn't take long for another team to want him and Reid's system will work much better with a vet QB.

[Lumps]

As far as the topic, the right people need to be put in place to establish a system and the last time that came close to happening was when Fox was hired, but half the puzzle was missing cause some idiot hired Hurney, and that idiot is JR. JR has to be putting the right people in place in order for a system to be created and he just can't do it, he simply doesn't know how, there's proof. It won't happen with him as an owner.

[Mr. Scot]

They brought in a new coach who most likely wanted a younger QB with a fresh approach. Come on Scott, Alex Smith is a good QB and far from a bust lol. Kap is a very good QB too and with his youth it makes obvious sense to start building with him when a new college coach comes in. Kap is younger and has a higher ceiling and that's why he wasn't kept. It didn't take long for another team to want him and Reid's system will work much better with a vet QB.

 

One sure thing I've learned: Never judge how good a QB is when they're playing for Andy Reid.

 

Ask the teams that traded for or signed Kevin Kolb, A J Feeley, Jeff Garcia and others.

[Mr. Scot]

As far as the topic, the right people need to be put in place to establish a system and the last time that came close to happening was when Fox was hired, but half the puzzle was missing cause some idiot hired Hurney, and that idiot is JR. JR has to be putting the right people in place in order for a system to be created and he just can't do it, he simply doesn't know how, there's proof. It won't happen with him as an owner.

 

It has to be in the front office as well as the coaches.  That's why I'll be very interested to see if we go for a new coach, and if so who it is.  It'd need to be somebody with whom gettleman can work to build something lasting (which he obviously wants to do).

 

[magnus]

I don't know if our current coaching staff thinks on a high enough level to even craft a system like we're discussing here.

 

well, I don't really think that's fair.  I don't think either of us would argue that the output has been great, but essentially, most of what's happening in the pros is 100% familiar to all involved.  Sure, teams added the pistol two years ago, because the year before the zone read worked well.  The last real 'innovation' before that had been years prior.   Even adding spread elements outside the veer option, minor changes that came from run and shoot.    No one invented the no-huddle recently, the one-gap 3-4, and so on.  

 

The Kubiak success running the ball with a one-cut back and Alex Gibbs' knowledge in the run game dates older than I am, before Griffin's two Heismans.   The scheme stuff is fun, interesting.  I love it.  But, essentially, nothing matters without execution.  If you and others are saying that it's all scheme, no, I disagree with that, and if you're saying that this thread can out-scheme any NFL coach or that the concepts are too innovative, well, I disagree.   Now and again somebody polishes off something and has some success with it that no one's thought about in a while, yeah, and that's kinda getting the drop on other coaches, but it's not as if there's just some magic fix. 

[Mr. Scot]

well, I don't really think that's fair.  I don't think either of us would argue that the output has been great, but essentially, most of what's happening in the pros is 100% familiar to all involved.  Sure, teams added the pistol two years ago, because the year before the zone read worked well.  The last real 'innovation' before that had been years prior.   Even adding spread elements outside the veer option, minor changes that came from run and shoot.    No one invented the no-huddle recently, the one-gap 3-4, and so on.  

 

The Kubiak success running the ball with a one-cut back and Alex Gibbs' knowledge in the run game dates older than I am, before Griffin's two Heismans.   The scheme stuff is fun, interesting.  I love it.  But, essentially, nothing matters without execution.  If you and others are saying that it's all scheme, no, I disagree with that, and if you're saying that this thread can out-scheme any NFL coach or that the concepts are too innovative, well, I disagree.   Now and again somebody polishes off something and has some success with it that no one's thought about in a while, yeah, and that's kinda getting the drop on other coaches, but it's not as if there's just some magic fix. 

 

It'd definitely a combination of things.

 

I see the most important elements being...

 

- a scheme that works, but is also adaptable

- coaches who know how to run it, and adjust

- players who buy in to what you're doing

- consistently good drafting

- at least moderate success in free agency

 

If you have those elements in place, I think you can run just about anything effectively.

[magnus]

oh, absolutely, but those are kinda vague, don't you think?  I doubt there's a franchise out there that sets out to find players who don't buy in, or coaches who are unaware of their own systems. 

[firstdayfan]

Mr. Scott do you think its a coaches scheme and the GM provides the pieces or can a GM help determine scheme?

Seems like DG may have to do the latter here in a few months.

[Ship]

i'd say we had products of our scheme get big contracts after last year and they went on to not be worthy of their contracts elsewhere. i think we have a system and it worked last year with decent spare parts that bought in; but hey, when you don't have the cash to stock it with decent filler players it doesn't work out so well. i also think the key is to get a certain type of guy to be filler... guys who are young and have something to prove are best. right now we have true old mercenaries like harper and decoud. they aren't gonna buy in the same way a young player or a guy who road the bench like mitchell and ginn would. all those system teams still have all-pro cogs that make it run in certain positions. imagine if we could have signed some road grader tackles last off season. our offense would look fine because we could run effectively. imagine if we had some money to buy even halfway decent secondary players or to keep mitchell.

 

also andy reid traded a 2nd round pick for alex smith. i don't think he'd give that up if he could just fill any vet in there because his system is so awesome. alex is a good qb in a friendly system but i think the difference is alex will sustain the system while i think a guy like kolb or sanchez this year will eventually be exposed within the system.

[Semaj]

Excellent post Mr Scot. I agree 100%. Not sure why more teams haven't figured this out. Without a doubt, belicheck and the Pats are the best example.

[pstall]

Been saying it here for years. This is why those teams never reach in the draft or fall for the lazy and dreaded BPA. They simply replace the guy they are letting go of with a younger version of him.