Tell Me Why I'm Wrong

[Sooner04]

NFL thread on a slow Tuesday morning of the off week.

As most of you know, I spend a lot of time on the road because of my job. Sometimes, when I'm driving through the sprawling metropolises of Mead, Overbrook, Velma or Ravia, my mind will begin to wander through the world of sports.

Since the ladies chose not to interact with yours truly during my adolescence, I immersed myself in useless factoids, arcane strategies and incompetent decision making. I find that I've become something of an expert on various sporting matters by now, and when my mind begins to wander through the sporting world on the lonely highways of Oklahoma I invariably come to a theory that grinds me to a halt.

If Robert F. Kennedy could see things that never were and ask why not, then I suppose I see success that never came and wonder why it wasn't attained. It may seem noble, but it isn't. Reason being my comically short strain of patience eventually causes me stop asking questions and derails my whole train of thought and eventually forces me into a volcanic moment of rage with my Tundra swerving between the shoulder and the center line because I figured out an answer and can't figure out why in the world people making gobs more money than me have yet to implement a strategy that seems so simple.

This is what floored me today. I've discussed this with a couple of you, but I'm looking for a few more viewpoints. This is it in a nutshell.

The Detroit Lions. The lowly, horrendous, god-awful Detroit Lions. They lost more games in 2008 than any team who ever suited up and called themselves an NFL franchise. 0-16. They were, on average, two touchdowns worse than their opponent. They gave up 404 yards a game while only accumulating 268 for themselves. They were McGovern in '72 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_presidential_election,_1972). They were Mondale in '84 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_presidential_election,_1984). They were so bad you were almost afraid to mention them by name for fear that they might appear next to you.

I don't know who's coaching them now, and I don't care. Whoever he is, his offensive strategy will be based on two key points: he is going to try to establish the run OR he is going to take what the defense gives them. HOGWASH!

Look, you went 0-16 last year. It can get no worse. There is nowhere to go but up. You don't need to blow up the operation, you need to Tsar Bomba (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tsar_bomba) the operation. These are facts: you're woefully inept at all facets of "winning" football at the professional level and you're festooned with inferior talent across the board. So, instead of going back to the same, arcane method of trying to win at the pro game, why not think outside the box?

Let's try something different. Every year the collegiate game produces a score of QBs who do nothing but throw for 4,000 yards and score kajillions of points. Yet every year they go undrafted because they're 6'1'' instead of 6'5'' or they don't have the rocket arm of can't miss QBs like Ryan Leaf or Akili Smith. Why not bring in some of these gun slingers and stick them behind a small, undersized line that can move? Bring in those smallish centers and undersized guards. Bring in that tackle who can move but isn't big enough to block the big DE.

Now, listen carefully. Forget establishing the run. Forget it. Screw it. Don't worry about it. 1st and 10? We're throwing the football. 2nd and 2? We're throwing the damn football? Third and a nanometer? We're throwing the son-of-a-bitchin' football! We're zinging the damn pigskin all over the map! To hell with the repercussions! We went 0-16 last year, how could it be any worse? Find five wideouts and a TE who can catch and get them the ball. Don't worry about measureables. Can they catch? They're on the team! We're not taking the 17-step Johnny Unitas drop here, sports fans. We're snapping the ball, looking around and heaving it all over creation.

Ah, but 04, you're defense will be gassed by the end of the first quarter. HOGWASH! Every mini-camp, every voluntary workout, every weekend mixer your defense will be going through hell trying to keep up with your offense. They'll be in such phenomenal shape by the time the first game comes around that playing against a normal NFL offense will be a piece of cake. The Draft will be your safe haven because the guys you're picking up on offense are also-rans to NFL GMs who are eaten up by the measureables bug. You draft defense, DEFENSE, DEFENSE.

Now, explain this to me: why won't it work? I've racked my brain and I can't see any way the Detroit Lions don't improve. Every close game I watch in the NFL I see teams abandon the run at the end, go to the 2-minute drill, and score at will. It happens every week, and defenses are powerless to stop it. Why not do it full time? I'm not saying you'll win a championship this way, but you'll buy yourself some time through improvement. You won't be sauteed by the endless three-year cycle of coaching turnover. You can finally build because 6-10 looks like heaven on earth compared to 0-16. Why won't it work?

Thank you for your time. Help me.

[sooneron]

I have always wondered the same. I was a big fan of the Oiler O back in the late 80's early 90's

Moon, Givens, Hill, Jeffries, White, Pinkett...
Their downfall as with many pass only or first teams was short yardage near the goal. No TE and no room for the WRs to run.

edit: I forgot about C Duncan/Spencer Tillman in 92...

LOVED those teams.

[OUDoc]

Probably because inferior coaches don't like to be bold, original or creative, which is probably why they are inferior coaches.

[My Opinion Matters]

The NFL is a lot of things, but it's never been fertile ground for adapting innovative styles of play. The bottom line it's never been proven it can work, so no one has tried it yet. The Wildcat offense is the perfect example of this. There's nothing innovative about it. It's a high school offense, nothing more than a glorified single-wing. But because the Miami Dolphins had success with it for one season half the league is now trying to imitate them.

[Collier11]

Short answer is while their Defense has often been horrible, they rarely if ever even have a QB who can manage the game let alone throw it around. Therefore even if they had a Defense who could dominate ala Baltimore or Tampa Bay earlier this decade, their QB would have undoubtedly ruined it for them anyway.

[My Opinion Matters]

Probably because inferior coaches don't like to be bold, original or creative, which is probably why they are inferior coaches.

It seems like every coach/organization in the league aspires to be a Parcells/Belichick clone. Those guys have proven their blueprint works, so instead of attempting to concoct an effective counter-scheme, everyone in the league just makes futile attempts to copy them.

[sooneron]

Short answer is while their Defense has often been horrible, they rarely if ever even have a QB who can manage the game let alone throw it around. Therefore even if they had a Defense who could dominate ala Baltimore or Tampa Bay earlier this decade, their QB would have undoubtedly ruined it for them anyway.

I think that's the point he's making. Instead of going for the prototypical nfl qb (which is all that they have drafted) go for a Harrell type or similar qb.

[My Opinion Matters]

Interestingly enough, former Sooner offensive coordinator Mike Leach is also the perfect example. The spread offense wasn't new when he brought it to Norman in '99. But because it was succesful now every team in the conference runs some variation of the spread.

[badger]

I've watched the Detroit Lions for years as a side effect of watching the Packers, much like I'm sure you've seen them for awhile just by following the Vikings.

What the Lions have going, in college terms, is bad recruiting. You've already gone through ways that they could improve via the draft - look at stats instead of measurables, look to improve defense instead of drafting a flashy Fake Roy Williams or Mike Williams.

I think the problems with the franchise stem from the fact that losing begets more losing. Top players will demand trades if they aren't having fun and losing is not fun. Free agents will bail as quickly as they can. Coaches have no time to get a system in place, because this is the NFL and losing coaches get fired quickly.

[Collier11]

Maybe the Lions need to hire Leach or a coach like him who isnt going to follow the NFL prototype

[Sooner04]

I think that's the point he's making. Instead of going for the prototypical nfl qb (which is all that they have drafted) go for a Harrell type or similar qb.
Bingo. You don't draft a QB UNLESS he's perfect for your system. You bring in three or four undrafted FAs every year who threw for 4000 yards in their previous college season and let them duke it out for the starting job.

If you go 4-12, you trade that high pick for two threes. You build on the defense and bring in the undersized all-stars for your lightning quick offense.

[NormanPride]

04, what happens when Idaho State plays us? What happens when the Pure Spread meets a real defense with 10x the talent as the O? Disaster.

The reason the 2 minute offense works is that defenses are playing soft to prevent big plays. You say every time the 2 minute offense works, but how many times have you seen an interception that ends the game? How many times have you seen the QB hold on to the ball too long and get sacked? How many times has the WR been dragged down in bounds and the clock expired?

As for the "inferior" talent, it's inferior because it's not versatile. If you're not versatile in the NFL, then defenses will figure out a way to stop it. Look at Spurrier. He tried winning with the Fun 'n Gun in the NFL and got smoked.

[stoopified]

NFL thread on a slow Tuesday morning of the off week.

As most of you know, I spend a lot of time on the road because of my job. Sometimes, when I'm driving through the sprawling metropolises of Mead, Overbrook, Velma or Ravia, my mind will begin to wander through the world of sports.

Since the ladies chose not to interact with yours truly during my adolescence, I immersed myself in useless factoids, arcane strategies and incompetent decision making. I find that I've become something of an expert on various sporting matters by now, and when my mind begins to wander through the sporting world on the lonely highways of Oklahoma I invariably come to a theory that grinds me to a halt.

If Robert F. Kennedy could see things that never were and ask why not, then I suppose I see success that never came and wonder why it wasn't attained. It may seem noble, but it isn't. Reason being my comically short strain of patience eventually causes me stop asking questions and derails my whole train of thought and eventually forces me into a volcanic moment of rage with my Tundra swerving between the shoulder and the center line because I figured out an answer and can't figure out why in the world people making gobs more money than me have yet to implement a strategy that seems so simple.

This is what floored me today. I've discussed this with a couple of you, but I'm looking for a few more viewpoints. This is it in a nutshell.

The Detroit Lions. The lowly, horrendous, god-awful Detroit Lions. They lost more games in 2008 than any team who ever suited up and called themselves an NFL franchise. 0-16. They were, on average, two touchdowns worse than their opponent. They gave up 404 yards a game while only accumulating 268 for themselves. They were McGovern in '72 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_presidential_election,_1972). They were Mondale in '84 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_presidential_election,_1984). They were so bad you were almost afraid to mention them by name for fear that they might appear next to you.

I don't know who's coaching them now, and I don't care. Whoever he is, his offensive strategy will be based on two key points: he is going to try to establish the run OR he is going to take what the defense gives them. HOGWASH!

Look, you went 0-16 last year. It can get no worse. There is nowhere to go but up. You don't need to blow up the operation, you need to Tsar Bomba (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tsar_bomba) the operation. These are facts: you're woefully inept at all facets of "winning" football at the professional level and you're festooned with inferior talent across the board. So, instead of going back to the same, arcane method of trying to win at the pro game, why not think outside the box?

Let's try something different. Every year the collegiate game produces a score of QBs who do nothing but throw for 4,000 yards and score kajillions of points. Yet every year they go undrafted because they're 6'1'' instead of 6'5'' or they don't have the rocket arm of can't miss QBs like Ryan Leaf or Akili Smith. Why not bring in some of these gun slingers and stick them behind a small, undersized line that can move? Bring in those smallish centers and undersized guards. Bring in that tackle who can move but isn't big enough to block the big DE.

Now, listen carefully. Forget establishing the run. Forget it. Screw it. Don't worry about it. 1st and 10? We're throwing the football. 2nd and 2? We're throwing the damn football? Third and a nanometer? We're throwing the son-of-a-bitchin' football! We're zinging the damn pigskin all over the map! To hell with the repercussions! We went 0-16 last year, how could it be any worse? Find five wideouts and a TE who can catch and get them the ball. Don't worry about measureables. Can they catch? They're on the team! We're not taking the 17-step Johnny Unitas drop here, sports fans. We're snapping the ball, looking around and heaving it all over creation.

Ah, but 04, you're defense will be gassed by the end of the first quarter. HOGWASH! Every mini-camp, every voluntary workout, every weekend mixer your defense will be going through hell trying to keep up with your offense. They'll be in such phenomenal shape by the time the first game comes around that playing against a normal NFL offense will be a piece of cake. The Draft will be your safe haven because the guys you're picking up on offense are also-rans to NFL GMs who are eaten up by the measureables bug. You draft defense, DEFENSE, DEFENSE.

Now, explain this to me: why won't it work? I've racked my brain and I can't see any way the Detroit Lions don't improve. Every close game I watch in the NFL I see teams abandon the run at the end, go to the 2-minute drill, and score at will. It happens every week, and defenses are powerless to stop it. Why not do it full time? I'm not saying you'll win a championship this way, but you'll buy yourself some time through improvement. You won't be sauteed by the endless three-year cycle of coaching turnover. You can finally build because 6-10 looks like heaven on earth compared to 0-16. Why won't it work?

Thank you for your time. Help me.The reason 2 minute offenses gain yards and even score points is largely because they are working against prevent defenses.The team that is on D has the lead and the clock on their side and they are gambling you cannot score fast enough or often enough to affect the outcome of the game.

The 2 minute style offense is run out of the spread,usually from the shotgun and as such is too one-dimensional to be sucessful in anything beyond the short-term.College teams can get away with this because of superior talent or a running qb who gives balance to the offense or in some cases a combination of both talent and qb.The problem in the NFL is that nonbody has that type of talent advantage.In addition NFL teams,even those with running qbs know you can't have your key player getting beat up running too regularlyJust my two cents.

[Sooner04]

The 2 minute style offense is run out of the spread,usually from the shotgun and as such is too one-dimensional to be sucessful in anything beyond the short-term. College teams can get away with this because of superior talent or a running qb who gives balance to the offense or in some cases a combination of both talent and qb.
I disagree here. If you're spreading everybody out you're essentially putting the defense in a constant prevent. They can't bring too much pressure because everybody has to be covered.

And I contend that success with the spread is not based on talent. Kentucky's spread gave Stoops fits at Florida so that's why he hired Leach. I can't name one player from that Kentucky team other that Couch. Yes, Couch was an NFL bust, but was he running anything that remotely resembled a spread in Cleveland? Hardly.

[Knippz]

See November 22, 2008 - Oklahoma vs. Texas Tceh as to why it won't work. Also January 2, 2009 - Tceh vs Mississippi.

[Knippz]

Also see the 2009 Colts as to why it may work.

[Collier11]

I disagree here. If you're spreading everybody out you're essentially putting the defense in a constant prevent. They can't bring too much pressure because everybody has to be covered.

And I contend that success with the spread is not based on talent. Kentucky's spread gave Stoops fits at Florida so that's why he hired Leach. I can't name one player from that Kentucky team other that Couch. Yes, Couch was an NFL bust, but was he running anything that remotely resembled a spread in Cleveland? Hardly.

Did you see the other night when The Pats had to spread it out and throw it around, Ryan stayed away from the prevent, instead he blitzed on every play and they won

[soonermix]

it begins up front
you can't be expected to throw the ball around if you don't have time to do so.
i don't care if you have 10 guys going out for a pass it won't work if nobody can block.

[primetime43]

See November 22, 2008 - Oklahoma vs. Texas Tceh as to why it won't work. Also January 2, 2009 - Tceh vs Mississippi.

Also Tulsa vs Oklahoma September 18th, 2009.

[primetime43]

I can't name one player from that Kentucky team other that Couch. Yes, Couch was an NFL bust, but was he running anything that remotely resembled a spread in Cleveland? Hardly.

I remember they had a very good receiver named Craig Yeast.

[Jello Biafra]

you're wrong because wayne fontes already tried that. ;) it was called the run and shoot instead of the xxxxoffense.....its ownership dude. seriously.

i
hate
the
chicago
bears
ownership

and THAT is the only reason we lose. if your team is dedicated to win, the ownership HAS to be on board too. see the steelers...see the cowboys....see the fudgepackers...

[stoops the eternal pimp]

Here is another thing...

Most coaches are not given enough time that it would take to make such a system work...Your talking several drafts to make it happen and coaches don't have that kind of window.

Another thing...UDFA quarterbacks and winning 3 or 4 games doesn't put butts in seats...doesn't sell jerseys....

[Sooner04]

See November 22, 2008 - Oklahoma vs. Texas Tceh as to why it won't work. Also January 2, 2009 - Tceh vs Mississippi.
Or see October 23, 1999 - OU vs. eATMe as to why it would.

Look, this isn't the blueprint to winning a championship. It's a stop-gap that allows you to buy time to continue to plug the gaps and address the needs. You get the undersized, quick linemen and you'll get the one or two seconds you need to find the hot route. You get the Welkers of the world running around like their hair is on fire to find the area where the blitzer just came from.

You go from 0-16 to 5-11 and they throw you a parade. You go from 5-11 to 7-9 while quasi-contending for a playoff spot and management gives you more money. All the while you're drafting a monster defense to go along with your helter-skelter offense. Then you start winning games 24-17 instead of losing them 31-24.

All of a sudden........

[Sooner04]

Another thing...UDFA quarterbacks and winning 3 or 4 games doesn't put butts in seats...doesn't sell jerseys....
I contend it does when you go 0-16 the year before!

[badger]

http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/2009/09/05/sports/sandomir600.jpg
All 28 of the Detroit Lions fans in attendance demand changes! ;)

[stoops the eternal pimp]

I understand what your saying...But with the amount of time it would take to develop these players, its just not going to happen...

What does sell jerseys? drafting Calvin Johnson, Matt Stafford, etc....


Then you have to ask yourself(using the Lions as the example)? How did they get that bad in the first place? I mean they've changed coaches and systems quite a few times I would say, and what difference has it made?

The problems, in most losing franchises, is an upstairs problem....coaches change, players change, but the ownership stays the same, and herein lies the true problem

and why are they not selling their teams? because they are making money...their record, in most franchises case, don't mean anything

[Sooner04]

I understand what your saying...But with the amount of time it would take to develop these players, its just not going to happen...

What does sell jerseys? drafting Calvin Johnson, Matt Stafford, etc....


Then you have to ask yourself(using the Lions as the example)? How did they get that bad in the first place? I mean they've changed coaches and systems quite a few times I would say, and what difference has it made?

The problems, in most losing franchises, is an upstairs problem....coaches change, players change, but the ownership stays the same, and herein lies the true problem
I see your point. My contention is that drafting Calvin Johnson and Matt Stafford IS why they suck. Think of all the really solid defenders they could've drafted with those picks. I know the Fords are dopes and I KNOW that an aardvark could've produced as many wins as Millen.

But if the Bidwells can make it to a Super Bowl........ANYTHING is possible.

[jaux]

You may not be wrong but history shows crummy teams get good fast not via new offense but by creating a "lights out" defense that can suddenly control games. Steelers did it (by accident, I think) in the 70s. Giants in the late 80s. Baltimore of this decade. Or they do it by creating a strong running game like the Packers (late 50s to mid 60s). Lombardi scrapped the pass happy Packer offense for about 10 basic plays. I think the management and coaches have studied NFL history more than you or I and that is why they don't go for offensive gimmicks. You're more likely to get quick success thru the defense.

[the_ouskull]

Speed.

Speed is the reason that it wouldn't work.

In the NFL, there are times that linebackers are not only forced, but expected to, line up against slot receivers. Safeties cover wideouts. These things happen. The reason that they're able to happen is because defensive players have gotten almost as fast as the offensive players.

Now, bring in your "hands team" of receivers, many of which even Ray Lewis' old *ss could still cover, because if they were fast enough to make a difference at the professional level, they'd have been drafted. There are good teams; really good teams out there, with a lot of money to spend and desire to win, that can't even find three solid receivers for their roster, (Dallas) and you're hedging your entire offense on your ability to find five or more?

...and a tight end?

I just don't see it happening. The college-to-professional football talent disparity is just too great. Think about all of the failed Heisman trophy winners. Think about all of the Naismith POY players who couldn't consistently crack an NBA lineup. At times, even the BEST college players can't keep up with professional players. That's why they weren't drafted, or "highly regarded" or whatever. There's always something. For many of the receivers that you're talking about, they've either got size, or speed. Or maybe they have both, but no hands. Whatever. It's rare that anybody, regardless of the size of the package,

http://ratconference.com/ratsass/beavis-butthead.jpg

has enough speed/quickness, or good enough hands/concentration to play at the professional level. Size is just another consideration.

There are exceptions, surely. Every rule has one. (Except, of course, the rule that there is an exception to every rule.) Marino's Dolphins may be about as close as we've seen to date, I think. How many receivers did they play? Come to think of it, how many championships did they win?

Don't get me wrong, though. I LOVE the idea of bringing in whoever Tech's QB was, whoever Oklahoma State's QB was, maybe Washington's, or USC's, maybe Florida's, maybe OU's, if they didn't get drafted that season, and be like, "Okay, this is our offensive philosophy, this is what we expect from our QB's. Who among you is making this football team? Go!" H*ll, I'd love to see the practice videos.

But, applying that philosophy to entire football team is often a failure at the professional level. Why did option football go the way of the dinosaur...? Safeties who can come up and play run support without sacrificing anything in their pass defense. Defensive ends who can, single-handedly, string plays towards the sidelines instead of downfield. Linebackers who can run with tailbacks, step-for-step, and turn the corner, or make the play. Defensive tackles who can take up two, sometimes three, gaps on the offensive line, and still drop back into short/mid coverage. That's the NFL. (That's also the same reason that I love the NBA...) Those are the same players that keep a "hyper-spread" or whatever, off of the field too.

Corners who are faster than the undrafted receivers and absolutely blanket them in man-to-man coverage, or who sit back in a zone and wait for the spread-offense-knowing, but-no-rocket-arm-having QB to try to throw a 5-15 yard out route. Linebackers fast enough to run with a receiver, at least long enough to receive pick-up help from a safety, who can play pass support because there's not even a running back in the backfield. Defensive linemen who can just (cliche alert) pin their ears back and rush because they know it's a pass every down, going against undersized offensive linemen known for their ability "to move." It would be a bloodbath.

But the QB thing would be fun.

the_ouskull

[Sonner magic923]

It wont work for one simple reason, if an nfl team is one dimensional they are doomed from the word go. If u tell dwight freeny hey don't worry bout the run just pin ur ears back and rash the passer hes going to make a hightlight reel on u. And thats about any d end in league.

[Sooner04]

Skull,

That's some good stuff, and a very valid counter-argument. And I see exactly what you're saying. But I can't turn loose the thing I see EVERY Sunday at the end of ballgames. Every damn week I watch the NFL and I see a team take a lead with 90 seconds to play. They celebrate but, deep down, they know. The fans in the stands, they know. Everybody at home watching, they know. They know the team that just took the lead is screwed.

I'd love to believe the speed of defenses today would render my argument void, but I've watched my Vikings implode on "D" during the two-minute drill too many times to not think there's some merit in flinging the ball all over field.

(And please don't forget that this system I propose is a stop-gap. We're drafting nothing but defense, remember? That's how we'll become great).

Anyhow, I'm looking at the heap of guys passed over in the draft for one reason or another and salivating at who I could pick up for my offense. Graham Harrell, come on down. Wes Welker, step right up. Davone Best, get thee to the slot. Greg Camarillo, hello! Antonio Gates? He'll do.

Since you're not paying outlandish guaranteed money to first round draft picks, you festoon your cash on the best scouting department in the free world. You litter your receiving corps with 5'11'' speed merchants. You send out flyers to every 6'4'' power forward graduating from college who's too short for the NBA. All the while you're stockpililng defensive talent through the draft.

And remember, we're not going to put some led-footed schmo back there into a 14-step drop. Step, step and fire. So what if Freeney is coming on a mad bull rush from the side? He'll never get there. And he'll spend so much energy "pinning his ears back" that he'll be on oxygen before half the fans have found their seats.

We're not winning a title here. We're just buying time. It can't get any worse! We're the Lions, for God's sake.

[the_ouskull]

Skull,

That's some good stuff, and a very valid counter-argument. And I see exactly what you're saying.

Thank you. Coming from someone whose sports opinion I respect, I'll take that as the compliment it was intended.

But I can't turn loose the thing I see EVERY Sunday at the end of ballgames.

...now stop being a ruhtard. :D

I'd love to believe the speed of defenses today would render my argument void, but I've watched my Vikings implode on "D" during the two-minute drill too many times to not think there's some merit in flinging the ball all over field.

I think that's part of your problem right there. The Vikings, especially their d-backs, aren't really "cover" guys, so much as, "give me a head to rip off and a neck to sh*t down" guys. I looooove Winfield, but he and Griffin aren't lockdown corners. They're just not. Williams has tallied 50 tackels in only 11 games, but only 2 INT's. Johnson? He's still a little too young, but he played in every game last season, and he got 1 INT to show for it. And the nickle and dime corners, Paymah and Sapp? More of the same. Minnesota shouldn't be playing the ball that late in the game. They should be playing to separate the ball. That's their problem. Winded players can't no-huddle either, you know...?

(And please don't forget that this system I propose is a stop-gap. We're drafting nothing but defense, remember? That's how we'll become great).

Anything that weakens the overall team isn't a stop-gap, though. It's an excuse. Maybe an offense like that is exciting... but I honestly don't think 1) the receivers would catch well enough, 2) the line would block well enough, and 3) the QB would, under those circumstances, last long enough, to make any magic happen. I think an 8-8 defense, plus a 0-16 offense, makes for an oh and sixteen team.

Anyhow, I'm looking at the heap of guys passed over in the draft for one reason or another and salivating at who I could pick up for my offense. Graham Harrell, come on down. Wes Welker, step right up. Davone Best, get thee to the slot. Greg Camarillo, hello! Antonio Gates? He'll do.

What's to say that you don't pass over those guys too? Welker put up good return numbers in college, but his receiving numbers, adjusted for pace (sorry, I've been reading basketball metrics all day, Basketball Reference just came out with their 2009-10 Win Score projections. Yay Stat Nerds!) weren't that impressive.

Since you're not paying outlandish guaranteed money to first round draft picks, you festoon your cash on the best scouting department in the free world. You litter your receiving corps with 5'11'' speed merchants. You send out flyers to every 6'4'' power forward graduating from college who's too short for the NBA. All the while you're stockpililng defensive talent through the draft.

Assuming, of course, that 1) the defensive talent matches your needs, and 2) stays around a losing team long enough to make them a winning team. Eventually, you'll have to pay all of these players. Try to justify two $15 million / year defensive ends to an owner. Try to justify a $20 million / year corner to your fans after raising ticket prices. Winning allows you to do this. Stopgaps don't.

And remember, we're not going to put some led-footed schmo back there into a 14-step drop. Step, step and fire. So what if Freeney is coming on a mad bull rush from the side? He'll never get there. And he'll spend so much energy "pinning his ears back" that he'll be on oxygen before half the fans have found their seats.

I think you underestimate the ability of elite athletes. Gerald McCoy usually looks tired on the field. He also usually makes the plays. For an athlete like Freeney, pinning his ears back is the easy part of the job. If that's all that they have to do is chase the QB, defensive linemen ARE resting. It's the balance between "are they going to pass block me or run block me" that helps give offensive linemen any kind of a chance at all. If you're setting up to bull rush the passer, and it turns out to be a run play to your side, or worse, a misdirection run that leads you into a pulling guard, you're taking one in the pooper on that down. Eventually, it keeps you honest. If the team is 100% spread, 4 WR's and a TE, or 5 WR's, with no back, then one linebacker, of even a safety, can keep tabs on the QB, and everybody else can man up. Game over shortly.

We're not winning a title here. We're just buying time. It can't get any worse! We're the Lions, for God's sake.

It CAN get worse. Millen could come back.

the_ouskull

[Sooner04]

I thank all of you for participating. I grow tired of the copycat nature of football coaches, and I'd love to see someone try some new things at the highest level. The fawning over the Wildcat gets old because it's nothing more than 7th grade single wing.

Oh well. Maybe someone will be bold one of these days in the aftermath of an 0-16 nuclear disaster.

[LRoss]

I like your thinking, but Jello's really correct. The Lions, incidentally, DID try something extremely close to that back in about the late 80's/early 90's. Their QB WAS a USC guy who had almost won a Heisman but was taken in the late rounds (141st overall) and surrounded by quick, tiny wr's. The defense was ok as I recall and it actually helped give them their best year in the Super Bowl era when they went 12-4 and won their ONLY playoff game in '91. Before that they were under .500, and after that it was ditched. Atlanta then tried it for a while if memory serves, but I have no idea how that went.

It was called something different, but didn't the Bengals try a "all-time hurry-up" at some point also?

[GottaHavePride]

04:

You're wrong because you eat your onion rings weird.

Take THAT!

Ha.