Don't expect offensive change

[dubbsco]

http://www.mlive.com/lions/index.ss...o.html#incart_most-commented_redwings_article

 

[grandy]

Have to wonder if they might draft a RB or OT high if they're focused on a low risk offense (which I assume involves an efficient rushing presence for clock control).

I don't have a problem with a low risk offense, just as long as they don't get too conservative with small leads.

 

[dubbsco]

I do have a slight problem with a low-risk offense. That's not how the NFL operates. It's beyond friendly for passers. You pay this guy for a reason. Not to be Alex Smith 2.0.

 

[zyxt9]

yeah, I completely disagree with this strategy. this offense is built to be high power. there are risks with the high power offense, obviously, but you do not take an offense built for high octane and make it conservative just like you don't take an offense designed to be conservative and make them high octane.

they are not play calling to the strengths of the guys on the field. that is the sign of very poor coaching, the inability to recognize what you have and maximizing its potential. I can understand wanting to mitigate risks, but they went too far last year and to not recognize that fact and say they will not change from last year...that's unacceptable.

they don't even have to do that much to improve it. extend 75% of the routes downfield by 2 yards for starters (might actually make a 1st down!). mix in more plays where the reads begin with the TE is fine too because Ds just didn't really have to worry about the TEs last year. get better run blocking so the D has to give it a little more respect. it really would not take that much to improve the O, but they are acting like they would rather dial it back more than last year. that isn't mitigating risk factors, that's just becoming too conservative and that will result in more losses.

but hey, history tells us this team will not win 10 games this year, so...

 

[LKP]

We were 11th in attempts with 604. 612 was 7th. Lions would have been higher if we didn't get sacked 45 times. We pass the ball plenty and we didn't have a good run game due to Oline and Bush injuries. I'd expect pass attempts to rise as well as rushes when our Oline gets healthy and a new LG plus Swanson. More first downs and longer drives on the way.

 

[dubbsco]

Exactly ZYXT. You don't draft Ebron to scale things back.

 

[grandy]

I guess I just don't what most fans expect when it comes to offensive philosophy. For a time it seemed like a lot of people didn't want to settle for anything less than chucking it downfield to Calvin every play.

Calvin isn't what he used to be and has trouble staying healthy... The offense will have to adjust to that reality, which will rely on a high YAC guy like Tate, a focus on TEs (or at least you'd think), and passes out of the backfield. Short, high percentage passes. Which, if done correctly, keeps the chains moving, keeps the clock moving, and gives receivers the ability to make plays. How awesome was it to see Tate making plays off short passes? I'd love to see more of that. If it's just 5 yard passes in traffic on 3rd and 7, I'll pass.

Maybe I just have a different view of risk on offense. What I don't want to see is Stafford chucking it 20 yards every play, we know that the success rate isn't high with that plan.

 

[Mitchrapp]

I do have a slight problem with a low-risk offense. That's not how the NFL operates. It's beyond friendly for passers. You pay this guy for a reason. Not to be Alex Smith 2.0.

At this point we can only hope he's Alex Smith 2.0.

 

[zyxt9]

We were 11th in attempts with 604. 612 was 7th. Lions would have been higher if we didn't get sacked 45 times. We pass the ball plenty and we didn't have a good run game due to Oline and Bush injuries. I'd expect pass attempts to rise as well as rushes when our Oline gets healthy and a new LG plus Swanson. More first downs and longer drives on the way.

attempts are a pretty general stat. can you break it down a little better? where did Lions rank in terms of passes thrown:

1. Behind LOS (RBs, screens, etc....), these are very conservative calls. Needed, yes, not denying that, but let's be honest they are thrown more frequently by conservative Os.

2. Behind 1st down markers on 3rd or 4th down, with the hopes that the receiver will get enough YAC for 1st down. Again, conservative and not the worst thing PROVIDED you have at least an 80% 1st down conversion rate implying it was the correct option. I don't expect perfection, but if the guy is covered close enough to not get the 1st, then I'd rather QB throw deeper toward a guy who has a chance to get the 1st.

This is also where running conservative routes is an issue. Run the route 2 yards past the sticks, and if the receiver has to come back toward the ball there is a good chance they can get the 1st down mark for forward progress. Refs will more often give a favorable spot to WR who went past and had to come back. If it is close to 1st, they usually give it and if the D wants to challenge spot, so be it and good luck (and most coaches won't waste a challenge on a spot, that's a pretty big gamble for a challenge). Routes shy of 1st down and the guy lunging for the marker does not usually result in refs giving a favorable spot (not to mention high probability of knee or elbow touching well before ball reaches marker), so a few yards equates to a few inches which equate to getting a 1st down or not.

The dinks and dunks have a time and place, obviously. No one is saying throw every pass 20+yards long, but they need better routes, better QB accuracy, fewer drops, and more situational aggressiveness. They were too conservative and not aggressive in trying to get 1st downs to sustain drives. It doesn't take much to be just aggressive enough instead of too conservative which results in settling for a FG at best. And maybe they don't get a TD, but more ToP is rarely a bad thing so even if they just had another series of downs to get a closer FG attempt, that is better than being 1 yard or less short of a 1st down so many times that it makes you wonder WTF these coaches are doing.

 

[LKP]

We didn't have the protection to run longer routes.

Stafford was 11th in pass attempts 20 or more yards though (63 this year, 77 (4th in league) last year). So about one less a game then under Linehan. That is not that conservative. Especially with Calvin out 3 and dinged up 2. Fuller wasn't a reliable deep threat either.

 

[LKP]

7 of his 19 picks were over 20 yards in 2013.
6 of his 12 were over 20 yards in 2014.

 

[coel73]

I don't necessarily have a problem with the philosophy not changing. Stafford took his share of downfield shots, but things didn't exactly gel for the offense this past year either. If Ebron was to bump up his production, we have a serviceable running game, and the general consistency for what the offense was doing was improved it should result in a pretty big jump in production.

 

[dubbsco]

Not really. His yards/attempt were 7.07, putting him at 19 in the NFL. Not a ton of deep passes. It was more about Tate taking a short 10 yard pass and getting massive YAC.

I just hate seeing the words serviceable, conservative, game management, etc... when this offense has been built for the last 5 years to be a pure octane show on turf.

Stafford, Calvin, Broyles, Young, Best, Ebron. I'm sure I'm missing more, but that's a lot of high-draft picks that were built towards making things hum.

 

[LKP]

Not really. His yards/attempt were 7.07, putting him at 19 in the NFL. Not a ton of deep passes. It was more about Tate taking a short 10 yard pass and getting massive YAC.

I just hate seeing the words serviceable, conservative, game management, etc... when this offense has been built for the last 5 years to be a pure octane show on turf.

Stafford, Calvin, Broyles, Young, Best, Ebron. I'm sure I'm missing more, but that's a lot of high-draft picks that were built towards making things hum.

He was 11th in passes over 20 yards. He's not a game manager at all. He takes his shots. Just one less than last year. Or maybe with Calvin out some, there was less times to go deep. Tate is an underneath and YAC guy but he can get deep too. He's more of a weapon used short. Our protection due to Oline injuries and Fuller's inability to break the press is why we didn't go deep one more time a game.

 

[zyxt9]

We didn't have the protection to run longer routes.

Stafford was 11th in pass attempts 20 or more yards though (63 this year, 77 (4th in league) last year). So about one less a game then under Linehan. That is not that conservative. Especially with Calvin out 3 and dinged up 2. Fuller wasn't a reliable deep threat either.

2 yards further depth on routes does not require more protection. after the break, throw the ball a little less than 2 yards closer to the point of break in the route. with staffords velocity and accuracy, that means he is still throwing to the exact same spot he was before at the exact same point in time and the receivers are stretching out for the ball in almost the exact same way...with the exception that instead of passes that were thrown behind receivers previously will not be quite so far behind them and the ones that he led them too much will still be leading too much. the ones thrown in the turf will still be in the turf. the ones thrown over everyone's head will still be thrown over everyone's head.

seriously, there is zero that would have changed in terms of when Staff throws. the change would have been that the receivers get just a few more yards, which results in a few more 1st downs, which result in easier FGs or maybe even more TDs, more ToP too.

 

[tonyballs]

I do have a slight problem with a low-risk offense. That's not how the NFL operates. It's beyond friendly for passers. You pay this guy for a reason. Not to be Alex Smith 2.0.

But all you guys do is cry. You cry when he was throwing for 5,000 yds and a shitload of TDs and you cry when they`re trying to make him a little more conservative. It`s a lose-lose situation with you fkn guys...

 

[inkfreq]

We didn't have the protection to run longer routes.

Stafford was 11th in pass attempts 20 or more yards though (63 this year, 77 (4th in league) last year). So about one less a game then under Linehan. That is not that conservative. Especially with Calvin out 3 and dinged up 2. Fuller wasn't a reliable deep threat either.

You assholes are doing it again. How many times do I have to ask you guys not to make me agree with LKP on ANYTHING?!

But once again, nothing he said in this point was inaccurate. Protections dictate routes. With the sub-standard O-line last season, they couldn't protect Stafford enough to even call for longer routes, let alone execute them.

And his numbers are correct. I looked them up. They took an average of 1 few shot down field of 20 yards are more than they did under pass happy Linehan.

And that while trying to be a more balanced offense. Pass Pro was the breakdown on the offense last year, and anyone looking at it objectively should be able to see that easily.

Of course, I bitched about it all year, and still advocate drafting at least 2 more O-linemen, even with only 5 picks to work with.

 

[Mitchrapp]

You assholes are doing it again. How many times do I have to ask you guys not to make me agree with LKP on ANYTHING?!

But once again, nothing he said in this point was inaccurate. Protections dictate routes. With the sub-standard O-line last season, they couldn't protect Stafford enough to even call for longer routes, let alone execute them.

And his numbers are correct. I looked them up. They took an average of 1 few shot down field of 20 yards are more than they did under pass happy Linehan.

And that while trying to be a more balanced offense. Pass Pro was the breakdown on the offense last year, and anyone looking at it objectively should be able to see that easily.

Of course, I bitched about it all year, and still advocate drafting at least 2 more O-linemen, even with only 5 picks to work with.

I think you meant..wtf do I not know anything about lkp. Something wrong with you if you agree with anything he has to say, even if he says the sky is blue.

:nod:

 

[mhughes0021]

You assholes are doing it again. How many times do I have to ask you guys not to make me agree with LKP on ANYTHING?!

But once again, nothing he said in this point was inaccurate. Protections dictate routes. With the sub-standard O-line last season, they couldn't protect Stafford enough to even call for longer routes, let alone execute them.

And his numbers are correct. I looked them up. They took an average of 1 few shot down field of 20 yards are more than they did under pass happy Linehan.

And that while trying to be a more balanced offense. Pass Pro was the breakdown on the offense last year, and anyone looking at it objectively should be able to see that easily.

Of course, I bitched about it all year, and still advocate drafting at least 2 more O-linemen, even with only 5 picks to work with.

He doesnt throw the ball well we he has plenty of time. ...why prolong the inevitable. He is what he is....an inaccurate gunslinger that needs a million weapons, top 5 defense, great oline and great run game just to be sucessful.

If you look at the time it took to get the ball out i bet he was average last year. And as stated previous....we still threw it a ton. So he had plenty of opportunity to make plays....he just doesnt.

 

[LKP]

Stafford was 67.6 percent with time.

40 percent under pressure.

He is a stud with time.