(02-15-2018 07:55 PM)Chipdip2 Wrote: (02-15-2018 06:30 PM)brovol Wrote: I don't put as much value on "coordinator experience ", as I do philosophy. I suspect JM has plenty enough experience to do well as a coordinator, but I am very curious how much influence he has on our offensive philosophy last season. If he had significant influence, I have serious concerns.
There are some distinctive drawbacks to a coach hiring a dear friend as an assistant. Most are obvious, so I won't get into them. However, there are also some advantages, one of which is that a close friend can speak frankly, without concern for offending.
I reserve judgement on JM, and look forward to seeing what he does as OC. TL needs to change his philosophies, in my judgement, or we will have serious issues this season, regardless of our players and assistants. Hope he does. But good luck to Jake.
Hello, McFly!!!
Bellamy, Bogan, Watson, Wassink, season ending injuries.
Freshmen QB, all new WR’s
PHILOSOPHY?????
When your entire offense is in traction you work with what you have. Frankly, I’m surprised they won 6 with what they had left. Offensive philosophy......
Yes, philosophy.
Situation: new QB and receivers, solid line and backs.
Objective: move the ball, score points, while avoiding situations where QB is under excessive pressure, or too often compelled to make difficult decisions while under pressure.
Master Class Coaches Key: never allow your opponents defense to consistently predict what you are about to do.
Philosophical Choice "A" (AKA
Dip/Lester plan): telegraph offensive strategy each week by doing the obvious, and exactly what you have done each and every game before; run on first and second downs (preferably interior runs), because you have a good line and backs, even as defenses load the box to stop the run, then let young QB and receivers deal with third and long when defenses know you will be throwing the ball, and blitz or simply plan for a pass play, which will come, and expect your QB to be "successful", even when that strategy has never worked in the history of football, despite the fact that the Matt Millens of the world keep saying that this is "good football, and the Bill Belichicks of the world laugh at that and do just the opposite; or,
Philosophical Choice "B": Throw on first down at least as often as you run, thus allowing your young QB and receivers to pitch and catch when there is single coverage and defenses are playing for the run, less likely to have a "pass rush", AND, therefore, keeping defenses "honest" and without the ability to count on a run, which conversely will provide a better opportunity to be successful when we do run on early downs (this same philosophy works well on third and long downs, but in reverse--run the ball when the defense is committing to a pass).
****IMPORTANT**** Philosophy "B" is even more necessary when your team suffers key injuries, as it becomes more critical to "keep defenses off balance" when you are undermanned!!
Now this concept may seem simple and commonsensicall, but that is just because it is, so if you are scratching your head you can stop. And I am sorry if you are upset that I insulted Matt Millen, because I know those of you who liked WMU's offensive strategy last season are likely fans of how Matt Millen thinks, but I needed a good example to illustrate perspective.
So there you have it; the basics on distinctions in offensive philosophy. For those who wish to sign up for the advanced class, please continue to follow this forum for notices and updates.