The Grit, The "C" Team and The Endless Bloody Injuries

[Willbacker]

So taking the 2 pt 50% shot is analytically better than the 100% not dying xp? Idk we played even with them for 60 minutes and everybody just wants to say oh it would've been a foregone conclusion that the Pack was just gonna drive it down our depleted secondary with 1 timeout and 40 seconds left. That's 40 yds at minimum they have to get and Crosby sure as hell is no sure thing. Then you got a 50/50 chance at winning the coin toss. Hell if we don't win it it's still keep them out of the endzone. To me sometimes it's just better to stretch and play with the extra cards instead of piling all your chips in the middle of the table.

Roman also needs to come up with better money plays. Rollouts and QB draws..........

 

[UPennChem]

i just think what's frustrating (with wink somewhat as well) is that he's shown the ability to adjust his gameplan, design and playcalling when we're significantly under-manned to take advantage and simplify some stuff to create effective offence despite various difficult circumstances...

but then takes none of the lessons from those experiences - when we get back enough personnel he goes back to the base offence that either works or doesnt work

Yeah it's really not a good look

 

[Argentina Raven]

So that's a no, then?

Roman is such a fan of offenses that he has 2 books with a thousand plays each, one for Lamar, another for Huntley, the one he had from Macsorley, he filed it away and now he is creating one for Johnson just in case, luckily we have the offensive talent to learn that many moves and know assignments, locks and routes by heart ...

 

[29BmoreBird22]

Roman is such a fan of offenses that he has 2 books with a thousand plays each, one for Lamar, another for Huntley, the one he had from Macsorley, he filed it away and now he is creating one for Johnson just in case, luckily we have the offensive talent to learn that many moves and know assignments, locks and routes by heart ...

So this is a long winded way of saying no, the offense wasn't the same because the Ravens tailored the offense to the strength of the quarterback, similar to what the Ravens did here.

 

[Simba]

It’s not an argument, Tyler has played better than Lamar has in recent weeks. People look at that as an indictment on Lamar and it’s not at all. Huntley just has the hot hand , but his level of success is not sustainable. Lamar’s body of work speaks for itself. Like you said , people shouldn’t overreact to Huntley playing well, just as they shouldn’t be overreacting to a shit stretch for Lamar.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I think the argument is that if you ask Huntley to do the things they've been asking Lamar to do, the results would likely be drastically different. Huntley is running a vanilla offense right now. Give him some of the complexity and the reads Lamar has to make and see what happens.

 

[rmcjacket23]

So taking the 2 pt 50% shot is analytically better than the 100% not dying xp? Idk we played even with them for 60 minutes and everybody just wants to say oh it would've been a foregone conclusion that the Pack was just gonna drive it down our depleted secondary with 1 timeout and 40 seconds left. That's 40 yds at minimum they have to get and Crosby sure as hell is no sure thing. Then you got a 50/50 chance at winning the coin toss. Hell if we don't win it it's still keep them out of the endzone. To me sometimes it's just better to stretch and play with the extra cards instead of piling all your chips in the middle of the table.

Roman also needs to come up with better money plays. Rollouts and QB draws..........

I mean you just answered your own question. You listed like 6 things that have to happen for us to have a shot to win if we kick a PAT.
1. First we have to stop Rodgers for driving into FG range, which based on how the game was going, was a 50/50 proposition, at best. And if he does get them in range, we have to hope the kicker misses the FG.
2. Then we have to hope to win the coin toss. If we do, we then have to drive the length of the field and score a TD so Aaron doesn't get the ball at all. There's no math on Earth where that's > 50% likely to happen. And if we don't do that, regardless if we get a FG or no points at all, we then have to go and stop Aaron from a lengthy scoring drive (something he had done 5 times in the game already), so we can get the ball back.
3. If we lose the coin toss, we still have to stop Aaron from scoring a TD (something he had gone the length of the field and done 4 times already) AND then our offense has to match or exceed whatever he did.

So yes, we could just gain two yards and eliminate the possibility of all of that happening, or we can load the gun and leave one chamber open (your scenario) and see what happens.

It's two yards folks.

 

[BoredMarine13]

I think the argument is that if you ask Huntley to do the things they've been asking Lamar to do, the results would likely be drastically different. Huntley is running a vanilla offense right now. Give him some of the complexity and the reads Lamar has to make and see what happens.

Perhaps the real issue is Roman , asking Lamar to run a more complicated offense with a severely beat up team around him. Im not play caller so it’s hard to tell what’s vanilla or not , but it’s currently working so maybe we should stick with it.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Simba]

Perhaps the real issue is Roman , asking Lamar to run a more complicated offense with a severely beat up team around him. Im not play caller so it’s hard to tell what’s vanilla or not , but it’s currently working so maybe we should stick with it.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

And I don't disagree with that entirely. The tricky thing with all of this is Lamar's development. If you jump back to this vanilla type of offense that Huntley was running where it's basically one read and throw, you're going to pick up yards and you're going to move the ball. But then that hinders Lamar's development because you're asking him not to make reads and go through progressions. You're not asking him to have any sort of deep ball. You're basically asking him to go out there and perform a script instead of letting Lamar be Lamar. So there's room for simplification but you can't go back to bare bones and limit Lamar from being the dynamic player that he is. Part of the problem is the play calling and asking him to be superhuman and part of it is Lamar putting that pressure on himself. In reality, there probably needs to be something in the middle where we simplify some things and try to get into a rhythm and then let Lamar be Lamar. Too much pressure has been put on him to be the guy and hopefully this simplification allows Harbaugh and company to see that you probably need to sprinkle some of that in to get him back to where he needs to be.

 

[UPennChem]

And I don't disagree with that entirely. The tricky thing with all of this is Lamar's development. If you jump back to this vanilla type of offense that Huntley was running where it's basically one read and throw, you're going to pick up yards and you're going to move the ball. But then that hinders Lamar's development because you're asking him not to make reads and go through progressions. You're not asking him to have any sort of deep ball. You're basically asking him to go out there and perform a script instead of letting Lamar be Lamar. So there's room for simplification but you can't go back to bare bones and limit Lamar from being the dynamic player that he is. Part of the problem is the play calling and asking him to be superhuman and part of it is Lamar putting that pressure on himself. In reality, there probably needs to be something in the middle where we simplify some things and try to get into a rhythm and then let Lamar be Lamar. Too much pressure has been put on him to be the guy and hopefully this simplification allows Harbaugh and company to see that you probably need to sprinkle some of that in to get him back to where he needs to be.

The answer here is obviously let's just add some balance. Not entirely single reads, but also not constantly Lamar you get 90% of the yards.

 

[rmcjacket23]

Perhaps the real issue is Roman , asking Lamar to run a more complicated offense with a severely beat up team around him. Im not play caller so it’s hard to tell what’s vanilla or not , but it’s currently working so maybe we should stick with it.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

My opinion... you wouldn't see the same defensive looks if Lamar is in the game. So what you're saying Huntley do the defense probably wouldn't allow if Lamar was out there.

 

[Simba]

The answer here is obviously let's just add some balance. Not entirely single reads, but also not constantly Lamar you get 90% of the yards.

Exactly. And I'd be remiss if I didn't say Lamar is still putting a lot of that on himself too. But when our offensive system is predicated on these long drawn out routes with a suspect OL, what can Lamar really do? He's not perfect but almost no QB is succeeding with the circumstances we've been putting him in. Need to simplify some things, let him get into a rhythm, and hopefully that will open up the rest for him.

And to get back to the original point, none of this is to shame Huntley. He's played well with what they've given him. But what they've asked him to do the last 2 weeks compared to what they ask Lamar to due isn't even comparable and that's why it's not much of a debate that Lamar is and always will be a far superior QB.

 

[Willbacker]

I mean you just answered your own question. You listed like 6 things that have to happen for us to have a shot to win if we kick a PAT.
1. First we have to stop Rodgers for driving into FG range, which based on how the game was going, was a 50/50 proposition, at best. And if he does get them in range, we have to hope the kicker misses the FG.
2. Then we have to hope to win the coin toss. If we do, we then have to drive the length of the field and score a TD so Aaron doesn't get the ball at all. There's no math on Earth where that's > 50% likely to happen. And if we don't do that, regardless if we get a FG or no points at all, we then have to go and stop Aaron from a lengthy scoring drive (something he had done 5 times in the game already), so we can get the ball back.
3. If we lose the coin toss, we still have to stop Aaron from scoring a TD (something he had gone the length of the field and done 4 times already) AND then our offense has to match or exceed whatever he did.

So yes, we could just gain two yards and eliminate the possibility of all of that happening, or we can load the gun and leave one chamber open (your scenario) and see what happens.

It's two yards folks.

Yep it's 2 yds. A hard 2 yds that a team is doing everything in its power to stop you from getting especially at the end of the game. Having to get 2 yards at different points of the game is just different. Odds factors for those 2 yds changes. The way it's being played we should just not even bother with extra points.

I do hear you and agree the odds would have been low on winning the toss and scoring the td

 

[Argentina Raven]

The plays that we are calling for Huntley, with little contribution from our rb, is the way to break the blitz and cover 0?

 

[ndub]

How did Ben Cleveland look yesterday?

 

[rmcjacket23]

Yep it's 2 yds. A hard 2 yds that a team is doing everything in its power to stop you from getting especially at the end of the game. Having to get 2 yards at different points of the game is just different. Odds factors for those 2 yds changes. The way it's being played we should just not even bother with extra points.

I do hear you and agree the odds would have been low on winning the toss and scoring the td

Well a lot of your analytic models and win predictors would tell you that, yes, teams far too often opt to kick when they shouldn't. Especially true when the PAT is at its lowest % of success in like several decades.

As I suggested earlier, if you look at the models, the more "questionable" decision was the TD before the last one, which is one where all analytics would tell you we should have gone for 2, down 31-23, instead of kicking the PAT. In that scenario:
a) if you make the 2PC, you're down 31-25, meaning the TD at the end of the game ties it, and you kick the PAT to go up 32-31
b) if you miss the 2PC, you're down 31-23, meaning you still need a 2PC to tie the game.

Kicking the PAT on the first and second TD, which is what most people who don't follow analytics would suggest, is 100% saying that you have no intention of winning the game in regulation. If your objective is to win the game in regulation, you need 15 points in two drives. And in those situations, it's better to go for 2 early so you know what you need on the second drive before you even start the drive.

 

[Argentina Raven]

How did Ben Cleveland look yesterday?

In my opinion it was the best of the line, it made Villanueva and Bozeman look better.

 

[Tank]

And I don't disagree with that entirely. The tricky thing with all of this is Lamar's development. If you jump back to this vanilla type of offense that Huntley was running where it's basically one read and throw, you're going to pick up yards and you're going to move the ball. But then that hinders Lamar's development because you're asking him not to make reads and go through progressions. You're not asking him to have any sort of deep ball. You're basically asking him to go out there and perform a script instead of letting Lamar be Lamar. So there's room for simplification but you can't go back to bare bones and limit Lamar from being the dynamic player that he is. Part of the problem is the play calling and asking him to be superhuman and part of it is Lamar putting that pressure on himself. In reality, there probably needs to be something in the middle where we simplify some things and try to get into a rhythm and then let Lamar be Lamar. Too much pressure has been put on him to be the guy and hopefully this simplification allows Harbaugh and company to see that you probably need to sprinkle some of that in to get him back to where he needs to be.

You can call it a "vanilla type offense" but those types of one read passes are the exact plays any good QB goes to when reading a blitz/cover zero, the looks Lamar has faced often the past few games. Letting "Lamar be Lamar" has it's place, but it's not an end all, consistent recipe for success. Gotta take what they give to you. And all of this is complicated for both Tyler and Lamar by not having a reliable run game to act as a diversion.

 

[Argentina Raven]

the playbook is different ...








P.d. edromeo RSR images

 

[RavensMania]

Roman is such a fan of offenses that he has 2 books with a thousand plays each, one for Lamar, another for Huntley, the one he had from Macsorley, he filed it away and now he is creating one for Johnson just in case, luckily we have the offensive talent to learn that many moves and know assignments, locks and routes by heart ...

that's not the point. However we did have many different play calls for Huntley than we did for Lamar. I don't think anyone is saying we have the Huntley book and the Lamar book. Huntley just has a more simplified book.

 

[ndub]

that's not the point. However we did have many different play calls for Huntley than we did for Lamar. I don't think anyone is saying we have the Huntley book and the Lamar book. Huntley just has a more simplified book.

And maybe until Lamar gets going again, this simplified playbook should be the offense’s Bible