What is our best formation?

[nfoligno]

IMHO, we need to be spreading it out more. 2 TE sets or our power formations do little to advance the ball. We can't run from our power sets, and frankly, we take away weapons while doing little to improve the blocking. All these power sets do, IMHO, is make defenses more aggressively attack.

 

What I would really like to see is more spread formations. Use more 3 and even 4 WR sets. I want to see DA used more often. I also want to move Olsen around more, like we did last year. I just have not seen us moving him around this year like we did last year. Start him at TE, but then split him outside. Have a set where you have Olsen and Hester on the outside, while rotating between Knox, Bennett and DA.

 

When you look at what Forte did last year, a couple things stand out.

 

1. Forte had a 6.2 ypc avg in 0 TE sets. That number decreases w/ more TEs. 1 TE - 4.0. 2 TE - 3.6. Olsen I think is a key here. He simply is not an effective blocker, so having him in there as a TE does little to improve the blocking, but does guarantee an extra defender in the box. Get him outside and get a defender out of the box.

 

2. The more WRs on the field, and thus the more spread out, the better Forte ran. In 2 WR sets, Forte had a 3.6 ypc avg. In 3 WR sets, that avg went up to 5.2 (a huge jump). In 4 or more WR sets, his ypc avg was an amazing 6.2. We need to do a better job clearing out the box. As our players can't block them out of the box, we need to use the WRs on the outside to get them out.

 

From a passing standpoint, I think this would help also. Even when Cutler has had time, it doesn't appear our receivers do a good job of getting open. Well, if you add the number of weapons, you thin out the defense, and improve the chances of Cutler to find an open receiver.

 

Once I called for 2 TE sets, but now, I think we need to move away from that. Olsen, while I am not saying he should become a WR, needs to be put in motion more often, creating mis-matches as we did last year. Also, we need to get more weapons on the field to give Cutler more options.

[bowlingtwig]

IMHO, we need to be spreading it out more. 2 TE sets or our power formations do little to advance the ball. We can't run from our power sets, and frankly, we take away weapons while doing little to improve the blocking. All these power sets do, IMHO, is make defenses more aggressively attack.

 

What I would really like to see is more spread formations. Use more 3 and even 4 WR sets. I want to see DA used more often. I also want to move Olsen around more, like we did last year. I just have not seen us moving him around this year like we did last year. Start him at TE, but then split him outside. Have a set where you have Olsen and Hester on the outside, while rotating between Knox, Bennett and DA.

 

When you look at what Forte did last year, a couple things stand out.

 

1. Forte had a 6.2 ypc avg in 0 TE sets. That number decreases w/ more TEs. 1 TE - 4.0. 2 TE - 3.6. Olsen I think is a key here. He simply is not an effective blocker, so having him in there as a TE does little to improve the blocking, but does guarantee an extra defender in the box. Get him outside and get a defender out of the box.

 

2. The more WRs on the field, and thus the more spread out, the better Forte ran. In 2 WR sets, Forte had a 3.6 ypc avg. In 3 WR sets, that avg went up to 5.2 (a huge jump). In 4 or more WR sets, his ypc avg was an amazing 6.2. We need to do a better job clearing out the box. As our players can't block them out of the box, we need to use the WRs on the outside to get them out.

 

From a passing standpoint, I think this would help also. Even when Cutler has had time, it doesn't appear our receivers do a good job of getting open. Well, if you add the number of weapons, you thin out the defense, and improve the chances of Cutler to find an open receiver.

 

Once I called for 2 TE sets, but now, I think we need to move away from that. Olsen, while I am not saying he should become a WR, needs to be put in motion more often, creating mis-matches as we did last year. Also, we need to get more weapons on the field to give Cutler more options.

Nice assessment. I agree with your thinking. Hopefully I can work though. Opening up the running game will help Cutler more as the defense want be able to just T off on him.

[Connorbear]

Victory formation has always been my favorite.

 

Nice summary - thanks.

 

Peace

[ParkerBear7]

Right on NFO! Use the pass to set up the run and to take pressure off the QB. I like it and do not recall Olson being moved around as much either. I also like how we used Forte as a receiving threat last week as well.

[ParkerBear7]

What is your assesment regarding formation changes in the redzone? I would like to see a pakage that includes Davis and Olson and Clark. On the goaline or short yardage why not use Clark or an OL at FB? side note: Cut Mckey and call up the rookie.

[jason]

Probably when Maynard is in there.

[Guest TerraTor]

Left Out

[nfoligno]

In the red zone, if we want to get all 3 TEs in there, the only way I would consider it would be if Olsen were split outside. Just like between the 20s, we need to do a better job of opening things up in the endzone. This past week, Cutler's early endzone pick came from our being in a heavy package. We need to spread it out more, as well as making sure Cutler has enough targets.

 

 

 

What is your assesment regarding formation changes in the redzone? I would like to see a pakage that includes Davis and Olson and Clark. On the goaline or short yardage why not use Clark or an OL at FB? side note: Cut Mckey and call up the rookie.

 

[madlithuanian]

I think Cutler needs to stop calling timeouts in the red zone. Seems like when he does and waits for a call to come in....it kills any momentum we have.

 

I'd rather a TO than a pick...but if it's flowing, let it flow! Don't kill the vibe... Have a few bread n' butter plays you can audible to Jay!

 

In the red zone, if we want to get all 3 TEs in there, the only way I would consider it would be if Olsen were split outside. Just like between the 20s, we need to do a better job of opening things up in the endzone. This past week, Cutler's early endzone pick came from our being in a heavy package. We need to spread it out more, as well as making sure Cutler has enough targets.

 

[madlithuanian]

Actually, when Gould's lining up...

 

Probably when Maynard is in there.

 

[nfoligno]

TOs in red zone are most likely on Turner. Even if Cutler calls the TO, the reason is likely that either (a) it took so long to get the playcall in that we don't have time to lineup or ( after lining up, and reading the defense, it looks like they have our number.

 

I agree TOs can not only kill momentum, but offers the defense time to get established against us also.

 

Honestly, I would love to allow Cutler more freedom. Look at how well Cutler seems to move the ball in a two minute drill. In a two minute drill, there is not time for the OC to make every playcall, and often the QB becomes the OC. Cutler seems to do a pretty solid job moving the offense when he (IMHO) is calling the plays. But like you said, we then get into the red zone, call a timeout, and Turner sends in the play.

 

As w/ the comment that we need to open up and spread out the offense, I also think we need to take the reigns off Cutler. Yea, I know all about the picks, but I honestly believe that if we open it up more, and give him more freedom and authority, our offense will only improve.

 

My opinion here likely has as much to do w/ my confidence in Cutler as it does my lack of confidence in Turner.

 

I think Cutler needs to stop calling timeouts in the red zone. Seems like when he does and waits for a call to come in....it kills any momentum we have.

 

I'd rather a TO than a pick...but if it's flowing, let it flow! Don't kill the vibe... Have a few bread n' butter plays you can audible to Jay!

 

[madlithuanian]

Makes sense to me!

 

TOs in red zone are most likely on Turner. Even if Cutler calls the TO, the reason is likely that either (a) it took so long to get the playcall in that we don't have time to lineup or ( after lining up, and reading the defense, it looks like they have our number.

 

I agree TOs can not only kill momentum, but offers the defense time to get established against us also.

 

Honestly, I would love to allow Cutler more freedom. Look at how well Cutler seems to move the ball in a two minute drill. In a two minute drill, there is not time for the OC to make every playcall, and often the QB becomes the OC. Cutler seems to do a pretty solid job moving the offense when he (IMHO) is calling the plays. But like you said, we then get into the red zone, call a timeout, and Turner sends in the play.

 

As w/ the comment that we need to open up and spread out the offense, I also think we need to take the reigns off Cutler. Yea, I know all about the picks, but I honestly believe that if we open it up more, and give him more freedom and authority, our offense will only improve.

 

My opinion here likely has as much to do w/ my confidence in Cutler as it does my lack of confidence in Turner.

 

[jason]

TOs in red zone are most likely on Turner. Even if Cutler calls the TO, the reason is likely that either (a) it took so long to get the playcall in that we don't have time to lineup or ( after lining up, and reading the defense, it looks like they have our number.

 

I agree TOs can not only kill momentum, but offers the defense time to get established against us also.

 

Honestly, I would love to allow Cutler more freedom. Look at how well Cutler seems to move the ball in a two minute drill. In a two minute drill, there is not time for the OC to make every playcall, and often the QB becomes the OC. Cutler seems to do a pretty solid job moving the offense when he (IMHO) is calling the plays. But like you said, we then get into the red zone, call a timeout, and Turner sends in the play.

 

As w/ the comment that we need to open up and spread out the offense, I also think we need to take the reigns off Cutler. Yea, I know all about the picks, but I honestly believe that if we open it up more, and give him more freedom and authority, our offense will only improve.

 

My opinion here likely has as much to do w/ my confidence in Cutler as it does my lack of confidence in Turner.

 

This is the key to your entire statement...and I agree wholeheartedly. I honestly believe that Turner really doesn't understand how to get an offense to flow. He may know verbiage, and he may have been doing it a while, but he makes far too many stupid calls, stupid substitutions, and lacks the ability to adjust midgame.

[madlithuanian]

Bingo! I think he lacks "flow". He cannot get a "feel". Instead, he's just a ace student basically (and I may be giving him too much credit for his knowledge). Knows all the plays, when you should make them, etc...but only in a textbook kind of way.

 

This is the key to your entire statement...and I agree wholeheartedly. I honestly believe that Turner really doesn't understand how to get an offense to flow. He may know verbiage, and he may have been doing it a while, but he makes far too many stupid calls, stupid substitutions, and lacks the ability to adjust midgame.

 

[nfoligno]

Read an interesting question in a Q&A. Person said he was a HS football coach, and said he could call pretty much every play Turner called, and didn't even have tape to review prior to a game as the opposing DCs have. Response was interesting, if only in the way they talked about it.

 

Said the best aspect of film review is not necessarily to show what a team will do in a particular down/distance situation, but more what they will not do. For example. If it is 3rd and 8, we may do a couple different things, but in reviewing film, what you can more accuratly do is scratch off the plays we never attempt. In doing this, you really narrow down what plays Turner leaves on the table to run in such a down/distance. You further narrow the scope when you attach plays to allignments. So, when the D see's what formation we come out in, they know the small selection of plays Turner usually runs, making it easier to defend.

 

The person answering said this situation is made worse as Turner lacks a more extensive playbook, so when you narrow down what you can bet will not be run, you are left w/ a very small group of options.

 

It was a long way of saying Turner is predictable, but I liked it in how it was discussed.

 

This is the key to your entire statement...and I agree wholeheartedly. I honestly believe that Turner really doesn't understand how to get an offense to flow. He may know verbiage, and he may have been doing it a while, but he makes far too many stupid calls, stupid substitutions, and lacks the ability to adjust midgame.

 

[madlithuanian]

Sad.

 

Turner will be ousted. A new OC will come in, confuse up Hester more, then be off once Smith is riden out of town, and start it over once again...

 

Read an interesting question in a Q&A. Person said he was a HS football coach, and said he could call pretty much every play Turner called, and didn't even have tape to review prior to a game as the opposing DCs have. Response was interesting, if only in the way they talked about it.

 

Said the best aspect of film review is not necessarily to show what a team will do in a particular down/distance situation, but more what they will not do. For example. If it is 3rd and 8, we may do a couple different things, but in reviewing film, what you can more accuratly do is scratch off the plays we never attempt. In doing this, you really narrow down what plays Turner leaves on the table to run in such a down/distance. You further narrow the scope when you attach plays to allignments. So, when the D see's what formation we come out in, they know the small selection of plays Turner usually runs, making it easier to defend.

 

The person answering said this situation is made worse as Turner lacks a more extensive playbook, so when you narrow down what you can bet will not be run, you are left w/ a very small group of options.

 

It was a long way of saying Turner is predictable, but I liked it in how it was discussed.

 

[lemonej]

Read an interesting question in a Q&A. Person said he was a HS football coach, and said he could call pretty much every play Turner called, and didn't even have tape to review prior to a game as the opposing DCs have. Response was interesting, if only in the way they talked about it.

 

Said the best aspect of film review is not necessarily to show what a team will do in a particular down/distance situation, but more what they will not do. For example. If it is 3rd and 8, we may do a couple different things, but in reviewing film, what you can more accuratly do is scratch off the plays we never attempt. In doing this, you really narrow down what plays Turner leaves on the table to run in such a down/distance. You further narrow the scope when you attach plays to allignments. So, when the D see's what formation we come out in, they know the small selection of plays Turner usually runs, making it easier to defend.

 

The person answering said this situation is made worse as Turner lacks a more extensive playbook, so when you narrow down what you can bet will not be run, you are left w/ a very small group of options.

 

It was a long way of saying Turner is predictable, but I liked it in how it was discussed.

Bingo Turner lacks the ability to scout his own tendancies and whenever his offense struggles he scales back the play book instead of opening it up more especially at this point in the season you should be adding not subtracting.

[adam]

I believe that the formations would be true for most teams. The more you spread them out, the better chance you have at positive yards.

[nfoligno]

Not to be argumentative, but not necessarily. If you have a solid, powerful OL and an inside runner, you can just plow your way upfield.

 

Further, much depends on the QB. At times, we spread it out w/ Rex under center, but the number of weapons didn't always matter when the QB is quickly pressured and without the ability to escape. For some QBs, you should do everything you can to simply maxamize protection and buy as much time as possible, because those QBs may not read the field as well, go through progessions as quickly, or get rid of the ball fast enough. Cutler is one who I think can handle the situation of a spread offense. While he will still be pressured, as he is now, he would have more weapons in route, and thus a greater chance of players getting open.

 

I believe that the formations would be true for most teams. The more you spread them out, the better chance you have at positive yards.

 

[nfoligno]

What is frustrating is that is seems like every year we hear about how we are having to "dumb down" our playbook. Now, many would point to a player like Hester and say our players are just not smart enough. To an extent, for some players, maybe that is true. But as we have had many players roll in and out of here, and the problems remain the same, I tend to think it falls on those constants rather than the intangibles.

 

For years, our WRs seem to struggle in the following:

 

- solid grasp of playbook, as we so often have heard about the need to "dumb down the playbook"

- Ability to beat the press

- Ability to gain quicker seperation

- Ability/knowledge to breakoff a route and come back to help a QB under pressure

- Ability to read defenses and be on the same page w/ the QB, which is greatest seen in hot routes

 

Since Turner and Drake have been here, these are problems which seem to be constants, regardless of the WR. Whether we are talking about a relatively higher round draft pick from a major program or a later pick from a smaller program. Whether we are talking about a 4 year college player or one considered more raw. Basically, across the board, our WRs seem to struggle in these areas which I think has to point to coaching.

 

Look at two of our recent draft picks. Bennett was drafted in the 3rd, and considered a very smart WR. He may not have had elite raw talent, but he was considered a smart player who was likely to quickly pickup the offense, yet we had to burn an entire year developing him before he was considered good enough to get on the field. Iglesias was considered in a similar regard. Iglesias was considered one of the more NFL ready WRs in the draft. He didn't have the ceiling of some others, but was considered a player who could come in an provide an immediate contribution, yet according to our staff, struggled to pickup the offense.

 

I don't know if this falls more on Turner, Drake or both, but when it seems like most every WR we have brought in over the years has struggled in the same areas, while the coaching has remained the constant, I simply think you have to look at the coaching, and their inability to "teach" the young players we add.

 

Bingo Turner lacks the ability to scout his own tendancies and whenever his offense struggles he scales back the play book instead of opening it up more especially at this point in the season you should be adding not subtracting.

 

[defiantgiant]

I agree with Nfo that we should use more 3 and 4 WR sets, maybe some shotgun sets with Forte lined up next to Cutler. Forte's great at reading defenses and finding a running lane (when there is one,) so it seems like he could do a lot better with the defense spread out.

 

The inside-out 4-wide set where Olsen and Clark line up on the outside has some potential, although I think it could be better if they substituted Kellen Davis for Clark. Davis could run a little three-step curl or a quick slant and there's no way a corner could cover him. It wouldn't be good for a long gain, but I bet we could reliably pick up 5-7 yards that way.

 

As for the goal line, I'd still like to see Lance Louis in as a goal line fullback or a blocking TE when we're a yard or two out. McKie and Olsen just aren't good blockers, especially not in power-running situations. We need to find somebody who can clear a hole for Forte, and there's no good reason not to give Louis a shot at it.

 

I think I'm a little more optimistic about our receivers than most guys here: it's a position where it's hard to make an immediate impact, and all our guys are showing very good progress. Hester, in particular, looks like a high-quality #2 receiver at the very least. That said, none of them are big targets and none of them are particularly good at beating a jam. That could account for some of our struggles throwing the ball in the red zone: teams don't have to double-cover Hester there, since they can just stick our WRs at the line. That frees them up to double Olsen, then Cutler doesn't have anybody open, and then he has to either force the ball or take a sack.

 

I don't think we need Brandon Marshall like all the talking heads have been saying, but I do think we could use a guy like the Chargers' Malcom Floyd: a jumbo wide receiver for goal-line formations. Floyd goes 6'5" 226 pounds and has pretty reliable hands, so he's a tough matchup down in the red zone. We could use a red-zone specialist like that, so Cutler has more targets than just Olsen. When Clark was hurt and Kellen Davis got some playing time, he looked like he could potentially be a go-to guy down by the goal line: he made some really nifty catches, and his height and vertical leap mean that he's pretty much always open. I could see him helping our red-zone passing game in a big, big way down the road.