Shanahan is Stealing the Money

[fansince62]

For me, that's a given. Cousins came from a conventional system as a drop back QB, and had the entire off season to work with the starters with little to no option plays on his plate. It's the game he's been playing for many years. Griffin came from a option system, and had no time to acclimate to a style of play he has little to no playing time in.

from what I have read, the system RG worked with in college didn't require him to read defenses. he has the smarts and will grow into this IMO. but coming into his second season...he never stood a chance. he never improved his core skill set. and much of the blame lies with him and his urgency to return to the leadership role. noble in one respect, but not much foresight in others.

 

[Elephant]

because RG played his cards that way, Shanahan was compromised in the "it's your fault" story-line, and the media played up the valiant warrior theme. recall all the Petersen comparisons? the story was hyped from day 1 when it should have been kept behind closed doors with all parties following their roles.

Rhetorical question...

 

[Boone]

my problem, allied to what you're posting, is that there doesn't appear to be any vision/strategy in place. folks are missing the real point here: progress has been achieved. the issue is where do you go from this point forward? cleaning the closet may be emotionally satisfying, but absent a strategy it's just more samo, samo that will have predictable results. I can think of reasons for letting Shanahan go - most especially that his offensive theories viz ZBS and run game are no longer germane to how the NFL is set up. but I don't see anyone posting some thoughtful analysis on what direction philosophically and schematically we should head in. I doubt Snyder has an f-ing clue in that regard.

"blow it up" isn't a strategy.

I agree with you Al. But the problem I have is that I have watched Shanahan totally mismanage and mishandle nearly every facet of this season of drama. He's looked stubborn, petty, and incompetent from the moment the season went south. He has done such a poor job of keeping this team together, of managing Griffin, of just interacting with the media, that I think he is fatally damaged. I don't believe he has earned the respect of his players or staff, and whatever respect he had previously earned he managed to totally undermine this year.

It's okay to have a 'step back' season like the one we just experienced - particularly given we decided to let Griffin start and stuck with him despite it being obvious that he was not ready to be back under center yet. Having made that call, and looking at a first place schedule, we all should've expected that this would not be another miracle season. We should have seen it coming from a mile away. So losing badly this year may have been 'okay', forgivable, and survivable for Shanahan. But Shanahan has allowed a losing season to become a catalyst for a chain reaction of events that has nearly totally undone this team. There is no confidence, not amongst staff, players, or fans that Shanahan has any clue where this team needs to go and how to get there.

And that's why he must and will go.

 

[Miles Monroe]

Which begs the question, why did we bring him back to start the season then?

If I could answer that, I'd be in line for a coaching position with the team.

 

[Lanky Livingston]

Fletcher respects Shanahan and wants him to stay, but then again any reasonable coach would have benched him at the beginning of the season...

Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk

 

[Rymanofthenorth]

RY: those defenses SUCKED! let's not reconstruct history as part of the 3-4/4-3 debate. those clowns were decent at stopping the run....but I recall...year after year...an inability to prevent teams from marching up and down the field. they were all 19-24 points a game "good". but they didn't stop anyone. we all griped about the lack of pass rush and barely adequate pass defense. it's one thing to argue the current manpower doesn't fit the 3-4 scheme. it's quite another to manufacture "good" defense where it never existed. the stats were fools gold - those defenses were average at best when it counted. when it mattered...they sucked. recall the Pats game when we thought we had a "good" defense?

none...NONE...of those 4-3 defenses were dependable hold em to 10-14 point defenses against good offenses. they simply could not impose their will. ever.

I am not the one revising history, as a matter of fact, those defences with any sort of offence would have worked well, the entire point of those defences was to avoid giving up the big play. where those defences sucked was their inability to provide pressure. people forget, Blache was a williams tree guy, but he wasnt as aggressive, where Gregg would dial up crazy exotic blitzes to get pressure without going unsound, Blache would simply depend on his front 4. Blach also changed some of williams base principles and the role of both DT's in blaches system was to eat blockers, where williams uses more of a 1 and 3 tech.

The offence we had was struggling to score 20 points against decent to average teams, the defence kept us in a lot of games, they just didnt make any big plays. Rogers was by far our best cover guy since champ, he just didnt get picks, and so people screamed for him to go, which was stupid. Hall gets picks but cant cover anyone , who would you rather have on someone elses number 1?

Blaches system with 2 simple tweaks would have been far superior to what we have had for 4 years this is indisputable. yes AH was a fat lump but when he played he was superior to anything we have now all you gotta do with guys like that is motivate them. Shannahan has failed at that miserably. against the bears in the first year of this debacle we ran almost all 4-3 looks with ah just getting up field, and not only did we catch a glimps of what could have been we saw what SHOULD have been, a defence that ran to the ball on the OPPONENTS side of the LOS, that got pressure with simple blitzes and stayed sound, we won easily.

then a week or two later we played Indy and lost, why? because it was obvious shanny didnt like the number of 4-3 looks so suddenly we ran some abortion of an "amoeba" defence with only 1 and sometimes 2 down linemen, nobody would get set and Indy (who ended up being one of the worst teams in the league that year) just stomped us.

right that that showed us, shanny doesnt care about this team, if he did we would have immediately gone back to more 4 fronts, instead we saw way more 3 and 5 fronts.

so while you are absolutely correct that the 4-3 needed tweaking to be more effective, it was worlds better than forcing a 3-4 and then watching for 4 years while we didnt find any 3-4 players other than carriker .

 

[Rymanofthenorth]

Boone, re the step back

I said this in shannahans first year, he doesnt seem willing to take his lumps and build for the long term. all of his moves are " one big move and make a run" moves except for the d transition which a move that you expect teams rebuilding to do. the issue is that he wasted 2 seasons, hasnt shown he can find the gems other than morris who simply fits his system. alex gibbs has more to do with those teams excelling in zone blocking and its obvious whoever the oline guys are now dont have any input into the draft. he made a couple decent moves one or two solid ones and no excellent ones, for a team as talent defeicient as we weer, we are not that much better off than we were, but at least we are younger I suppose.

 

[tshile]

you know, I dont remember much "bunch formation" this year before Cousins came in. I know everyone keeps screaming how they are running the same plays, but looking at it I dont see the same formations at all.

if by everyone you mean the coaches, the players, and the beat reporters, then yes everyone is saying they're running the same offense.

the only people saying they're running something different are the fans.

 

[tshile]

t - if you are interested in reading what I was talking about then I posted an article.

but if you just want to make smart ass comments...you go right ahead and do that, too.

The coaches and players, the ones coming up with and executing the offensive system, say it's the same. They are in the games, in the practices, in the meeting rooms.*

The beat reporters that watch the games, watch some of the practices, talk to the coaches, and talk to the players say it's all the same.*

The fans that watch the game say it's different.

Is pointing that out really being a smart ass?

Followup - do you really want to plant your flag in the 3rd group of people? It seems like the least informed of the options.

You can lead a horse to water, and all that jazz.

* - The only difference being the 50-series (read option) plays that aren't in for Cousins. They account for about 10%, by all accounts, of the playbook when Griffin is in. The only other difference is the pistol formation, which is a formation, and has a grand total of 3 yards behind center as being the total difference between a pistol formation play and a non pistol formation play. Even the playcall is the same - except they say Pistol at the start of it.

PS - I did read your article.

 

[Bulldog]

Sorry guys, when I see a team with mediocre offensive and defensive lines, I don't see a solid base to be a contender.

Shanahan has missed on OL and DL in the draft and free agency and that has cost the organization.

The 3-4 front seven was never firmly established with core players at home in that scheme.

Our defense overall lacks speed and ironically the offense lacks strength.

We don't have interior linemen that can push the pile for one yard at the goal line.

And other than Garçon we have smurfs at WR with Moss and Robinson.

 

[fansince62]

I am not the one revising history, as a matter of fact, those defences with any sort of offence would have worked well, the entire point of those defences was to avoid giving up the big play. where those defences sucked was their inability to provide pressure. people forget, Blache was a williams tree guy, but he wasnt as aggressive, where Gregg would dial up crazy exotic blitzes to get pressure without going unsound, Blache would simply depend on his front 4. Blach also changed some of williams base principles and the role of both DT's in blaches system was to eat blockers, where williams uses more of a 1 and 3 tech.

The offence we had was struggling to score 20 points against decent to average teams, the defence kept us in a lot of games, they just didnt make any big plays. Rogers was by far our best cover guy since champ, he just didnt get picks, and so people screamed for him to go, which was stupid. Hall gets picks but cant cover anyone , who would you rather have on someone elses number 1?

Blaches system with 2 simple tweaks would have been far superior to what we have had for 4 years this is indisputable. yes AH was a fat lump but when he played he was superior to anything we have now all you gotta do with guys like that is motivate them. Shannahan has failed at that miserably. against the bears in the first year of this debacle we ran almost all 4-3 looks with ah just getting up field, and not only did we catch a glimps of what could have been we saw what SHOULD have been, a defence that ran to the ball on the OPPONENTS side of the LOS, that got pressure with simple blitzes and stayed sound, we won easily.

then a week or two later we played Indy and lost, why? because it was obvious shanny didnt like the number of 4-3 looks so suddenly we ran some abortion of an "amoeba" defence with only 1 and sometimes 2 down linemen, nobody would get set and Indy (who ended up being one of the worst teams in the league that year) just stomped us.

right that that showed us, shanny doesnt care about this team, if he did we would have immediately gone back to more 4 fronts, instead we saw way more 3 and 5 fronts.

so while you are absolutely correct that the 4-3 needed tweaking to be more effective, it was worlds better than forcing a 3-4 and then watching for 4 years while we didnt find any 3-4 players other than carriker .

not what I was arguing Ry. A sandwich that is rotten for 1 week is no different from a sandwich that is rotten for three weeks: they're both rotten. I remember watching those defenses. teams would march up and down the field on them. there was little to no pass rush. the lbs couldn't cover in space, we didn't get much in the way of turn-overs. the d-lines, while well coached against the run - at least the first season Williams was here - were unspectacular otherwise. I will concede any defense is better than the abortion we have seen this year. but that doesn't really narrow things down much.

 

[Lanky Livingston]

RE: Griffin and Cousins running the same offense:

http://m.washingtonpost.com/blogs/f...ns-and-robert-griffin-iii-run-the-same-plays/

Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk

 

[Bulldog]

Shanahan has not really had a credible defense since 2005.

It seems clear in terms of scheme and personnel he is challenged on that side of the ball.

You look at Seattle, San Francisco, Carolina - these teams have dynamic young qbs but they also have top quality defenses.

 

[Rymanofthenorth]

the concept of zone offence is that you run about 4 runs and 8 passes, but out of slightly different formations