Vikings vs Carolina - How Norv Turner Helped Tailor Their 31-13 victory

[Snake]

1 hour ago, Mr. Scot said:

Turner runs a Coryell. Shurmur runs a WCO.

West Coast systems are just about always more quarterback friendly.

I was going to add that but figured it would be implied. I've learned most of my knowledge about systems from you good Sir. 

[SixMileDrive]

5 minutes ago, Saca312 said:

No we definitely ran Erhardt-Perkins a bit. As was stated before, Shula never really understood Coryell terminology and never fully implemented it.

Rather, he utilized an interestingly unique system, incorporating a variety of college meta attacks in as well. He was great in his designs, but never remained consistent in situational playcalling, ultimately being his downfall.

I remember reading a stat saying we were one of the best offenses since Shula’s tenure during the first two drives, but bottom tier for the rest. Shula’s awful at adapting and going off script.

However, one thing most fans hated from Shula were the deep shot ISO routes that take a long time to develop. There’s no doubt there’s going to be a ton of those this year with Norv.

You won't find a single analyst that agrees with what you said here. The last time we ran EP as a base offense was with Fox and Jeff Davidson.

[Snake]

16 minutes ago, Mr. Scot said:

Shula did have some E-P in his background. He started throwing some concepts in there a few years ago when we had a couple of linemen go down. And of course there was the read-option stuff.

But yeah, the base attack always remained Coryell.

This year was way more EP than Coryell. 

[Mr. Scot]

12 minutes ago, SixMileDrive said:

Sure. Most coaches pull concepts from lots of systems, but as you said, as a base we've always been Air Coryell. The key wrinkle of our offense is that we've merged it with the inverted-vere and read option, which is pretty damn cool imo.

You like veer concepts at the pro level?

I'm skeptical but to be fair, I'm kind of old and grouchy.

[Jon Snow]

10 minutes ago, SixMileDrive said:

I really question the ability to complete coherent thoughts of anyone who thinks RR is the type of coach that favors veterans. His whole shtick has been hiring "teaching" coaches and making sure that rookies get playing time early. He's stuck to that philosophy and that's why we have players like Norwell as starters.

Maybe we should go back to the Fox days where out UDFAs would regularly go on to be pro-bowlers for other teams. Sounds like a good time to me.

You do realize that Norwell only got the starting job because of injury to a struggling starter right?  The struggling part played to part in the decision, as usual.  The only way you get benched under Ron is due no injury, discipline or not wearing a tie.  Most coaches tend to be that way however.

[SixMileDrive]

1 minute ago, Mr. Scot said:

You like veer concepts at the pro level?

I'm skeptical but to be fair, I'm kind of old and grouchy.

I mean it's been a core part of our offense since Cam was drafted....

[Jon Snow]

6 minutes ago, Saca312 said:

No we definitely ran Erhardt-Perkins a bit. As was stated before, Shula never really understood Coryell terminology and never fully implemented it.

Rather, he utilized an interestingly unique system, incorporating a variety of college meta attacks in as well. He was great in his designs, but never remained consistent in situational playcalling, ultimately being his downfall.

I remember reading a stat saying we were one of the best offenses since Shula’s tenure during the first two drives, but bottom tier for the rest. Shula’s awful at adapting and going off script.

However, one thing most fans hated from Shula were the deep shot ISO routes that take a long time to develop. There’s no doubt there’s going to be a ton of those this year with Norv.

He was never great in his designs.  That's a myth spouted by brain dead commentators.  Don't perpetuate it any further.

[Snake]

23 minutes ago, SixMileDrive said:

We've run Coryell since the day Rivera stepped foot in Carolina. The idea that we ever ran Erhardt-Perkins is absurd.

You show lack of knowledge if you think that is true. This year was mainly EP mixed with read option. We let go of most of the Coryell concepts in 2014.

[SixMileDrive]

Just now, Snake said:

You show lack of knowledge if you think that is true. This year was mainly EP mixed with read option. We let go of most of the Coryell concepts in 2014.

I mean can say that all you want but it isn't true. Go grab GamePass and watch the concepts we run. It isn't EP. It's a bunch of seven step drops with one or more deep routes on every play. Then we mix in Cam's college stuff with read option, triple option and inverted veer. I'm a giant football nerd and follow this stuff pretty closely. 

[Mr. Scot]

5 minutes ago, SixMileDrive said:

I mean it's been a core part of our offense since Cam was drafted....

Are you thinking primarily of the Philly formation stuff or something else?

Or is it the zone-read stuff? Mentally I kind of put that into a different category.

[SixMileDrive]

1 minute ago, Mr. Scot said:

Are you thinking primarily of the Philly formation stuff or something else?

Or is it the zone-read stuff? Mentally I kind of put that into a different category.

It's the offense that made Cam famous at Auburn. Also known as the QB power. It's very different from read option. If you aren't familiar with the concept and are a Panthers fan you owe it to yourself to do some digging. I've probably read 30-40 articles on the play. We use it numerous times every single game.

http://smartfootball.com/run-game/what-is-the-inverted-veer-dash-read#sthash.iQVRHveQ.dpbs

[Mr. Scot]

Just now, SixMileDrive said:

It's the offense that made Cam famous at Auburn. Also known as the QB power. It's very different from read option. If you aren't familiar with the concept and are a Panthers fan you owe it to yourself to do some digging. I've probably read 30-40 articles on the play. We use it numerous times every single game.

http://smartfootball.com/run-game/what-is-the-inverted-veer-dash-read#sthash.iQVRHveQ.dpbs

Familiar with the concepts, but I didn't watch as much college football when Cam was playing and I probably haven't seen a veer based offense in about thirty years (unless you count watching Remember the Titans).

Dang. This discussion has me feeling like pulling out my old coaching philosophies book again.

 

 

(I probably need therapy)

[Snake]

1 minute ago, SixMileDrive said:

I mean can say that all you want but it isn't true. Go grab GamePass and watch the concepts we run. It isn't EP. It's a bunch of seven step drops with one or more deep routes on every play. Then we mix in Cam's college stuff with read option, triple option and inverted veer. I'm a giant football nerd and follow this stuff pretty closely. 

You might be a nerd and watch a bunch of all 22 film but I can disprove your argument with two words. "Even Janitor" . 

[Snake]

It's also apparent because we run a bunch of motions and it makes it easier for the team to understand. Coryell uses a route tree and concept that tends to be longer. It's why players struggled with CHUDs pure Coryell.