09-09-2016, 09:32 AM
I found this incredibly interesting, both from an X's and O's perspective and the idea that Kelly is too stuck in his ways to succeed: https://theringer.com/chip-kelly-san-fra....3tf5ee12x
OT: What went wrong with Chip Kelly's Offense?
I found this incredibly interesting, both from an X's and O's perspective and the idea that Kelly is too stuck in his ways to succeed: https://theringer.com/chip-kelly-san-fra....3tf5ee12x
09-09-2016, 10:00 AM
Fascinating. I certainly won't get my hope up for the 49ers this year. But I wonder how much of this can be used against Chip's successor at Oregon--whether our defense can predict the Oregon offense or whether Helfrich will be able to insert enough new wrinkles to keep it fresh.Â
Fascinating. I certainly won't get my hope up for the 49ers this year. But I wonder how much of this can be used against Chip's successor at Oregon--whether our defense can predict the Oregon offense or whether Helfrich will be able to insert enough new wrinkles to keep it fresh.Â
09-09-2016, 10:41 AM
It was a very interesting article.
I thought after 2012 and 2013 that perhaps we had figured out how to stop the Duck offense. However, the last two years convinced me that we really haven't. We'll see how things go this year.
I thought after 2012 and 2013 that perhaps we had figured out how to stop the Duck offense. However, the last two years convinced me that we really haven't. We'll see how things go this year.
It was a very interesting article.
I thought after 2012 and 2013 that perhaps we had figured out how to stop the Duck offense. However, the last two years convinced me that we really haven't. We'll see how things go this year.
I thought after 2012 and 2013 that perhaps we had figured out how to stop the Duck offense. However, the last two years convinced me that we really haven't. We'll see how things go this year.
09-09-2016, 10:57 AM
We might have figured it out, but we might not have had enough healthy, talented personnel on the field to do it.
09-09-2016, 11:04 AM
I agree with the author's first recommendation that Kelly needs to diversify what plays can be run out of what formation. NFL defenders are just too fast and talented to have a hope of success if they have an idea of what is coming. While he identifies another key problem, namely that removing the running QB threat due to NFL economics renders the math of the spread offense unfavorable, he doesn't go so far as to suggest the obvious solution. This would be turning the QB position into one that is fungible, like many now view the RB spot to be.
In a salary capped league, you win by (1) having more talent then the other team from a combo of good-drafting, smart free agency, and luck (2) good coaching/execution. A big part of number 1 is identifying market inefficiencies, namely what type of players are relatively undervalued.
One major type of player that hasn't found a true home in the NFL level is the talented college spread option QB. Unless you are an elite passer that happens to play in a spread a la Cam Newton, most spread QBs aren't being drafted highly. And for every highly drafted spread QB, there are 10 Dak Prescotts, Tyrod Taylors, Denart Robinsons, Terell Pryors, etc. who are decent throwers and good runners, and most importantly, would be very cheap in terms of salary and draft capital.
While none of those quarterbacks are likely to be 'good" running a typical NFL offense, compared to the bottom half of starting QBs in the league I'd argue that having 3-4, serviceable, fungible, spread QBs that aren't afraid to run the ball would be much better for Kelly's offense then having 1-2 expensive, mediocre, immobile quarterbacks like Gabbert, Sanchez, Bradford, etc.Â
In a salary capped league, you win by (1) having more talent then the other team from a combo of good-drafting, smart free agency, and luck (2) good coaching/execution. A big part of number 1 is identifying market inefficiencies, namely what type of players are relatively undervalued.
One major type of player that hasn't found a true home in the NFL level is the talented college spread option QB. Unless you are an elite passer that happens to play in a spread a la Cam Newton, most spread QBs aren't being drafted highly. And for every highly drafted spread QB, there are 10 Dak Prescotts, Tyrod Taylors, Denart Robinsons, Terell Pryors, etc. who are decent throwers and good runners, and most importantly, would be very cheap in terms of salary and draft capital.
While none of those quarterbacks are likely to be 'good" running a typical NFL offense, compared to the bottom half of starting QBs in the league I'd argue that having 3-4, serviceable, fungible, spread QBs that aren't afraid to run the ball would be much better for Kelly's offense then having 1-2 expensive, mediocre, immobile quarterbacks like Gabbert, Sanchez, Bradford, etc.Â
I agree with the author's first recommendation that Kelly needs to diversify what plays can be run out of what formation. NFL defenders are just too fast and talented to have a hope of success if they have an idea of what is coming. While he identifies another key problem, namely that removing the running QB threat due to NFL economics renders the math of the spread offense unfavorable, he doesn't go so far as to suggest the obvious solution. This would be turning the QB position into one that is fungible, like many now view the RB spot to be.
In a salary capped league, you win by (1) having more talent then the other team from a combo of good-drafting, smart free agency, and luck (2) good coaching/execution. A big part of number 1 is identifying market inefficiencies, namely what type of players are relatively undervalued.
One major type of player that hasn't found a true home in the NFL level is the talented college spread option QB. Unless you are an elite passer that happens to play in a spread a la Cam Newton, most spread QBs aren't being drafted highly. And for every highly drafted spread QB, there are 10 Dak Prescotts, Tyrod Taylors, Denart Robinsons, Terell Pryors, etc. who are decent throwers and good runners, and most importantly, would be very cheap in terms of salary and draft capital.
While none of those quarterbacks are likely to be 'good" running a typical NFL offense, compared to the bottom half of starting QBs in the league I'd argue that having 3-4, serviceable, fungible, spread QBs that aren't afraid to run the ball would be much better for Kelly's offense then having 1-2 expensive, mediocre, immobile quarterbacks like Gabbert, Sanchez, Bradford, etc.Â
In a salary capped league, you win by (1) having more talent then the other team from a combo of good-drafting, smart free agency, and luck (2) good coaching/execution. A big part of number 1 is identifying market inefficiencies, namely what type of players are relatively undervalued.
One major type of player that hasn't found a true home in the NFL level is the talented college spread option QB. Unless you are an elite passer that happens to play in a spread a la Cam Newton, most spread QBs aren't being drafted highly. And for every highly drafted spread QB, there are 10 Dak Prescotts, Tyrod Taylors, Denart Robinsons, Terell Pryors, etc. who are decent throwers and good runners, and most importantly, would be very cheap in terms of salary and draft capital.
While none of those quarterbacks are likely to be 'good" running a typical NFL offense, compared to the bottom half of starting QBs in the league I'd argue that having 3-4, serviceable, fungible, spread QBs that aren't afraid to run the ball would be much better for Kelly's offense then having 1-2 expensive, mediocre, immobile quarterbacks like Gabbert, Sanchez, Bradford, etc.Â
09-09-2016, 11:31 AM
(09-09-2016, 11:04 AM)gocard14 link Wrote:I'd argue that having 3-4, serviceable, fungible, spread QBs that aren't afraid to run the ball would be much better for Kelly's offense then having 1-2 expensive, mediocre, immobile quarterbacks like Gabbert, Sanchez, Bradford, etc.
Gabbert is in fact a much better runner than Sanchez and Bradford. So too are Kaepernick and Christian Ponder. Jeff Driskell, who was cut, is also a very good runner. There did seem to be a lot of running from Niner QBs this preseason.
I wonder if Kelly's concepts have the potential to morph the NFL from a "franchise QB" league, to one where you can bring in the spread QBs who are run threats, don't read defenses well, but still allow offenses to be successful because though they aren't elite pro style QBs, the run threat they provide makes offenses they run effective. IOW, have a few such guys on the roster, don't pay them much, and put your resources into other positions, particularly on defense.
Kelly said he thought he could win in the NFL by having a QB-friendly system anyone can succeed in, and putting his resources into other positions, particularly defense. If his missing link is just a QB who can be a credible run threat, he might actually have that with the Niners now.
(09-09-2016, 11:04 AM)gocard14 link Wrote:I'd argue that having 3-4, serviceable, fungible, spread QBs that aren't afraid to run the ball would be much better for Kelly's offense then having 1-2 expensive, mediocre, immobile quarterbacks like Gabbert, Sanchez, Bradford, etc.
Gabbert is in fact a much better runner than Sanchez and Bradford. So too are Kaepernick and Christian Ponder. Jeff Driskell, who was cut, is also a very good runner. There did seem to be a lot of running from Niner QBs this preseason.
I wonder if Kelly's concepts have the potential to morph the NFL from a "franchise QB" league, to one where you can bring in the spread QBs who are run threats, don't read defenses well, but still allow offenses to be successful because though they aren't elite pro style QBs, the run threat they provide makes offenses they run effective. IOW, have a few such guys on the roster, don't pay them much, and put your resources into other positions, particularly on defense.
Kelly said he thought he could win in the NFL by having a QB-friendly system anyone can succeed in, and putting his resources into other positions, particularly defense. If his missing link is just a QB who can be a credible run threat, he might actually have that with the Niners now.
« Next Oldest | Next Newest »