Gus Malzahn on WFNZ this morning...5/5/11

[teeray]

I'm curious how many plays a game a NFL offense usually runs. Even if Auburn wins, Gus Malzahn doesn't feel like he's called a successful game unless the offense runs 80 plays. That is his goal every game.

I would bet close to half. The game is slower and the clock stops less. I'm just guessing but I would say around 50 plays

[HsvPantherFan]

I would bet close to half. The game is slower and the clock stops less. I'm just guessing but I would say around 50 plays

I always felt like the speed of the game was a problem for Jason Campbell coming out of Auburn, but maybe the fast pace Cam ran under Malzahn will help him in adjusting to the NFL game.

[MaineManPanther]

Sacks Given Up by Houston

2004- 49 - coach 1

2005 -68 - coach 1

2006 -41 - new coach but Carr still going down

-----------post Carr

2007-29 - Scuab and Sage combined....funny how the sacks taken DRAMATICALLY changed when you remove Carr from the equation.

David Carr effect. Put Jimmy Clausen on any team in the NFCS last season and you could complain abot the OL. David Carr effect.

The offensive line was horrid back then. Im sure Carr contributed to quite a few. But if you watched them back then and talk to Houston fans you'd agree that the line was atrocious.

Then Kubiack came in and made it a priotity to fix the line and offense as a whole. A 15-30 sack difference is not soley because of a qb change.

[Mr. Scot]

I understand the logic in thinking this. I just don't see any real tangible evidence that it is true.

In recent years there has been seemingly no correlation between playing in a pro-style offense and being successful sooner in the NFL. Nor has there been any real correlation in coming from a spread offense and needing more time to develop.

It makes sense to think that but every year I see Brady Quinn never get it, Matt Leinart never get it, possibly Jimmy Clausen never getting it, Mark Sanchez is playing solidly but still struggles, etc.

Meanwhile, guys like Sam Bradford, Ben Roethlisberger, Josh Freeman etc. make the transition very quickly.

I honestly believe that (although counter intuitive) that playing in a pro offense isn't as much of a head start as people think. That is why I think players coming from pro offenses are given way too much extra credit by draftniks and spread QB's are penalized way too much.

You're looking at the final result. I'm talking about the process.

It is a tougher process to go from a style of offense you know to one that you don't, no matter who you are. Some guys can do it. Other guys can't.

Some quarterbacks make the transition well despite having the additional task of learning a new style of offense. Others come in without having that particular worry, but still fail.

Said it before. Some guys can run up a mountain and still have energy to burn. Others get tired walking up a hill. That doesn't make the hill higher than the mountain, but it does tell you the difference between the men.

The Panthers took Newton because they believe he's the first guy. Hope they're right.

TBH I dont think it really matters all that much. Handling the pressure and being smart have weight than what system you come from.

I really dont know how Cam is going to turn out but I would not feel any better with Luck. The fact is you really dont know how someone is going to handle all the money and pressure.

There are more than a hundred ways to fail the transition from college to the pros. Not being able to transition to a new style offense is one. Avoiding that one doesn't protect you from the others.

[rayzor]

TBH I dont think it really matters all that much. Handling the pressure and being smart have weight than what system you come from.

I really dont know how Cam is going to turn out but I would not feel any better with Luck. The fact is you really dont know how someone is going to handle all the money and pressure.

looking down the road it is going to be less and less a factor.

pro style offense is ust some name someone gave offenses that resemble what they are doing in the pros, but that is changing all the time and from the looks of it the pro game is going to be looking more like the college game, at least from the perspective of using the spread and taking snaps out of the shotgun. both the spread and the pro style offense are very broad based and the distinguishing marks of either are becoming less and less apparent as they begin to run into each other.

of course people are going to vehemently disagree with that, but it doesn't matter. it's happening and it's bound to with the league turning into more of a pass happy league and the majority of players coming from spread offenses. those coaches/coordinators that fight against it instead of riding the wave are only going to become irrelevant in a few years.

[teeray]

You're looking at the final result. I'm talking about the process.

It is a tougher process to go from a style of offense you know to one that you don't, no matter who you are. Some guys can do it. Other guys can't.

Some quarterbacks make the transition well despite having the additional task of learning a new style of offense. Others come in without having that particular worry, but still fail.

Said it before. Some guys can run up a mountain and still have energy to burn. Others get tired walking up a hill. That doesn't make the hill higher than the mountain, but it does tell you the difference between the men.

The Panthers took Newton because they believe he's the first guy. Hope they're right.

I used to think the exact same thing Scot but recent history just doesn't back it up.

I now think your college offense is the single most overrated factor in the entire evaluation process. There just isn't anything to back up the claim.

Don't get me wrong, I know why people say it and think it. Like I said, I thought and said the same thing. But my opinion on it over the last 4 years has done a complete 180.

[rayzor]

for many...other than learning how to read the advanced defenses in the NFL...is just learning how to take snaps from under center, but even that is becoming less and less of an issue since more pro QBs are taking 50+% of their snaps from the shotgun.

they'll still have to learn it, but it isn't the big deal people make it out to be.

the major things are coachability, ability to grasp what they are taught, leadership, decent mechanics and accuracy, good decision making skills, and an ability to handle pressure. the rest of it is on your coaching staff's ability to build an offense around the QBs strengths and weaknesses and grow from there.

if you have those factors then you should be able to succeed. the system you came from won't matter very much (unless you are going to something overly complicated like a WCO where it takes 4-5 years to learn).

[carolinarolls]

sounds good

[MadHatter]

I used to think the exact same thing Scot but recent history just doesn't back it up.

I now think your college offense is the single most overrated factor in the entire evaluation process. There just isn't anything to back up the claim.

Don't get me wrong, I know why people say it and think it. Like I said, I thought and said the same thing. But my opinion on it over the last 4 years has done a complete 180.

There IS more to learn if you are going from a spread offense to a traditional pro-style offense. The terminology and pace is MUCH different.

However, coming from a spread offense or a pro-style offense does seem to be less of an issue with the early success of QB's like Bradford, Freeman, Big Ben, etc.

Is it that the transition is less meaningful? Or, does it say something about the QB's listed above? Hard to tell.

From everything I have heard and read, Cam is a very, very hard worker. I hope all of these are true.

If he puts in the work and makes the transition....combine this with his physical skills and attributes....he definitely could be something special.

I am hoping that he does......he is my QB and I will support and cheer for him 100%.

[Mr. Scot]

for many...other than learning how to read the advanced defenses in the NFL...is just learning how to take snaps from under center, but even that is becoming less and less of an issue since more pro QBs are taking 50+% of their snaps from the shotgun.

they'll still have to learn it, but it isn't the big deal people make it out to be.

the major things are coachability, ability to grasp what they are taught, leadership, decent mechanics and accuracy, good decision making skills, and an ability to handle pressure. the rest of it is on your coaching staff's ability to build an offense around the QBs strengths and weaknesses and grow from there.

if you have those factors then you should be able to succeed. the system you came from won't matter very much (unless you are going to something overly complicated like a WCO where it takes 4-5 years to learn).

Only for Vick.

It depends on the guy. If the guy you're scouting is a football brainiac, then you probably needn't worry about the transition. If he's an idiot, and then you factor in that he also has to learn a new offense, then I'd think about it.

(of course, if he's an idiot, why are you thinking of drafting him at all?) :sosp:

There IS more to learn if you are going from a spread offense to a traditional pro-style offense. The terminology and pace is MUCH different.

However, coming from a spread offense or a pro-style offense does seem to be less of an issue with the early success of QB's like Bradford, Freeman, Big Ben, etc.

Is it that the transition is less meaningful? Or, does it say something about the QB's listed above? Hard to tell.

I'd go with B.

There are guys that have failed the college spread to pro style transition too. Would those guys have succeeded with a pro-style background. Probably not. It's an individual thing.

[rayzor]

Only for Vick.

It depends on the guy. If the guy you're scouting is a football brainiac, then you probably needn't worry about the transition. If he's an idiot, and then you factor in that he also has to learn a new offense, then I'd think about it.

(of course, if he's an idiot, why are you thinking of drafting him at all?) :sosp:

I'd go with B.

There are guys that have failed the college spread to pro style transition too. Would those guys have succeeded with a pro-style background. Probably not. It's an individual thing.

it's a combination of the individual and the coaches he has.

two failures that i would mention is alex smith and david carr. smith's failures could be due to the lack of continuity in his situations. a new OC and drastically different offensive system every single year of his career will hurt any player....even guys like peyton manning. tom brady wouldn't have succeeded if the system had changed much at all. it takes being in a system for a couple years for them to really get the hang of things.

david carr just came in lacking a lot. some say it was all about coming in too early and not getting the protection he needed, but i think it goes beyond that. i don't think he was capable of handling the pressure of the pro game and his weaknesses made the oline's issues even more of a problem.

clausen's going to have an uphill battle and a lot of it has to do with his lack of leadership ability and personality issues. there are some problems with his throwing motion as well, but the major issues for him are his intangibles. it's going to take a good few years before he gets to a point where he can have an offense depend on him.

newton, on the other hand, already comes with a huge set of transferable skills and intangibles. he's tough minded, coachable, does well under pressure (on and off the field), and he is someone that players really respond to. there's just a lot of things that will help him succeed and having the coaching staff willing to invest heavily in him and put together an offense that he can succeed with is going to go a long way.

[teeray]

It does have everything to do with the individual. That is why I believe it doesn't matter what offense you came from if you have the ability and the work ethic (and coaches that know how to play to that QBs strengths) you will be successful.

I just truly believe that draftniks penalize players way too much who come from a spread like offense and give way too much extra credit to players that come from pro style offenses.

I'm not saying it is completely irrrelevant, just grossly overrated.