The Future of Football might be the past

and the Seahawks?

Article by Drew Magary of Deadspin. Some of it is tongue-in-cheek, but some correlation to the current Hawks. Thought it worth discussing as the draft, free agency and RWs contract come into play.


https://deadspin.com/the-future-of-football-is-a-lie-1832393001

"The NFL, which shamelessly copies college football schemes while simultaneously holding them in contempt, will soon follow suit. The Rams already use motion to catch defenses in vulnerable positions. Defenses, ugh, will adjust to this. You’re gonna see more smallish, quicker defenses deployed to keep similar offenses harnessed, and then you’ll see those offenses switch to a power game to mess those plans up. Belichick, primal marsh creature that he is, boned up on his history and beat the Rams essentially by changing defenses after the headset radio shut off and playing an old-fashioned style that forced the Rams to grind out yardage, which they couldn’t. Keep in mind that the Rams were also supposedly the future of this sport 17 years ago. As on Sunday, Belichick had other ideas back then." (edited for language)

Thanks for posting that Si.

It's interesting that the Seahawks were a team that went in this direction first. Our team's problem is their D isn't a s good as the D of the Patriots or perhaps they don't adjust as well or as quickly as the Patriots do. I wonder if it has ore to do with coaching or with defensive experience?

jammerhawk":1gx2sfu3 said:

Thanks for posting that Si.

It's interesting that the Seahawks were a team that went in this direction first. Our team's problem is their D isn't a s good as the D of the Patriots or perhaps they don't adjust as well or as quickly as the Patriots do. I wonder if it has ore to do with coaching or with defensive experience?

Click to expand...

I think experience was a bigger factor this year. Mental lapses on D leading to huge plays were something we really hadn't seen in 5+ years. Pete's D kept everything in front, forcing them to convert tough play after tough play, and punishing them for attempting the big play. Rams succeeded at explosive plays against us this year in both games (as did other teams), Patriots didn't let them get away with anything big. The continuity of the LOB knowing where everyone would be on every down is something that will be hard to replicate but I'm hopeful an offseason for the new guys working with Pete will fix these things.

mistaowen":lx61eqko said:

jammerhawk":lx61eqko said:

Thanks for posting that Si.

It's interesting that the Seahawks were a team that went in this direction first. Our team's problem is their D isn't a s good as the D of the Patriots or perhaps they don't adjust as well or as quickly as the Patriots do. I wonder if it has ore to do with coaching or with defensive experience?

Click to expand...

I think experience was a bigger factor this year. Mental lapses on D leading to huge plays were something we really hadn't seen in 5+ years. Pete's D kept everything in front, forcing them to convert tough play after tough play, and punishing them for attempting the big play. Rams succeeded at explosive plays against us this year in both games (as did other teams), Patriots didn't let them get away with anything big. The continuity of the LOB knowing where everyone would be on every down is something that will be hard to replicate but I'm hopeful an offseason for the new guys working with Pete will fix these things.

Click to expand...

Pats D got pressure on Goff off the snap as well. Put the Rams in a lot of 3rd and longs where the Pats could dictate the play calling.

From what i watched (2nd half), the Pats went to the ground game a lot. They rarely were held to a 3 and out, and flipped field position almost every possession. This also made the Rams playcalling more predictable.

It was an effective scheme, balanced offense (even if they weren't scoring, the ball was moving) and defense (taking advantage of field position).

Real chess match that McVay has admitted he didnt respond to.

I also read that the Patriots "finally" abandoned their offensive gameplan on the last two drives (netting 10 points) going to more empty sets and showing pass pre-snap. They had got the game where they wanted and were ready to finish it.

Some PC in that type of gameplan

Some points of the article are correct. As teams go towards pass rushers at DE, safeties at LB, stop carrying run-stopper type DT's, they literally will not have the personnel to deal with power running teams like ours, and more offenses will pack it in to take advantage of this. Now, New England has for many years emphasized physical defense above fast defense, so this isn't really anything new. The switching defenses after communication ended was absolute genius. That is a coach thinking outside the box to solve a problem, and might be a thing going forward. Really left the Rams with their pants down. They might actually have to try to teach Goff to play quarterback.

Uncle Si":3iavybqz said:

mistaowen":3iavybqz said:

jammerhawk":3iavybqz said:

Thanks for posting that Si.

It's interesting that the Seahawks were a team that went in this direction first. Our team's problem is their D isn't a s good as the D of the Patriots or perhaps they don't adjust as well or as quickly as the Patriots do. I wonder if it has ore to do with coaching or with defensive experience?

Click to expand...

I think experience was a bigger factor this year. Mental lapses on D leading to huge plays were something we really hadn't seen in 5+ years. Pete's D kept everything in front, forcing them to convert tough play after tough play, and punishing them for attempting the big play. Rams succeeded at explosive plays against us this year in both games (as did other teams), Patriots didn't let them get away with anything big. The continuity of the LOB knowing where everyone would be on every down is something that will be hard to replicate but I'm hopeful an offseason for the new guys working with Pete will fix these things.

Click to expand...

Pats D got pressure on Goff off the snap as well. Put the Rams in a lot of 3rd and longs where the Pats could dictate the play calling.

From what i watched (2nd half), the Pats went to the ground game a lot. They rarely were held to a 3 and out, and flipped field position almost every possession. This also made the Rams playcalling more predictable.

It was an effective scheme, balanced offense (even if they weren't scoring, the ball was moving) and defense (taking advantage of field position).

Real chess match that McVay has admitted he didnt respond to.

I also read that the Patriots "finally" abandoned their offensive gameplan on the last two drives (netting 10 points) going to more empty sets and showing pass pre-snap. They had got the game where they wanted and were ready to finish it.

Some PC in that type of gameplan

Click to expand...

The change they made was going to empty, with 22 personnel (splitting out their HB and FB.) This kept the Rams in base personnel, that they were then able to spread out and work the middle of the field.

Haven't you heard? According to Sergeant we are not suppose to use Bellichick as an example of what to do or works because we have Pete. Then he goes on to bash those that don't agree with Pete and thinks we should just flop over and watch the league pass us by.

Haven't your heard? Hass was TWICE the QB that Russ is :stirthepot:

Tical21":11tlkski said:

Some points of the article are correct. As teams go towards pass rushers at DE, safeties at LB, stop carrying run-stopper type DT's, they literally will not have the personnel to deal with power running teams like ours, and more offenses will pack it in to take advantage of this. Now, New England has for many years emphasized physical defense above fast defense, so this isn't really anything new. The switching defenses after communication ended was absolute genius. That is a coach thinking outside the box to solve a problem, and might be a thing going forward. Really left the Rams with their pants down. They might actually have to try to teach Goff to play quarterback.

Click to expand...

The switching defenses after communication thing was brilliant. Romo was certain the rams were doing it too.

I imagine that was the Rams response. Staying in the huddle until 15 seconds to limit NE time to change.

In the end, took 40 seconds off the clock and slowed them down.

Thought Rams only good run of play was when they went no huddle. Got the field goal from it. Long sack ruined another drive. But they werent in it long.

Uncle Si":gsc1fzxg said:

. Defenses, ugh, will adjust to this. You’re gonna see more smallish, quicker defenses deployed to keep similar offenses harnessed, and then you’ll see those offenses switch to a power game to mess those plans up.

Click to expand...

This is exactly what the Chargers did in the playoffs, power run on offense, and 5-6 DB's on defense..................it worked well against the Ravens, and didn't work well at all against the Patriots.

This entire article is why I don't get worked up when everyone freaked out after the Rams/Chiefs game, when we all screamed that football was ruined. Smashcut to the lowest scoring SB in NFL history.

That's the beauty of football, it's a game of innovation AND a game of adjusting to that innovation. Chess match, plain and simple.

Good points, a very good defense will trump a so called "unstoppable" offense. One game of over a hundred points doesn't mean the league stopped playing defense etc. I didn't enjoy that game like many because I prefer some defense.

Uncle Si":beedg50e said:

Tical21":beedg50e said:

Some points of the article are correct. As teams go towards pass rushers at DE, safeties at LB, stop carrying run-stopper type DT's, they literally will not have the personnel to deal with power running teams like ours, and more offenses will pack it in to take advantage of this. Now, New England has for many years emphasized physical defense above fast defense, so this isn't really anything new. The switching defenses after communication ended was absolute genius. That is a coach thinking outside the box to solve a problem, and might be a thing going forward. Really left the Rams with their pants down. They might actually have to try to teach Goff to play quarterback.

Click to expand...

The switching defenses after communication thing was brilliant. Romo was certain the rams were doing it too.

I imagine that was the Rams response. Staying in the huddle until 15 seconds to limit NE time to change.

In the end, took 40 seconds off the clock and slowed them down.

Thought Rams only good run of play was when they went no huddle. Got the field goal from it. Long sack ruined another drive. But they werent in it long.

Click to expand...

Yeah man. They were both doing it, but for slightly different reasons. With the Rams changing defenses, it had nothing to do with the communication between coach and quarterback. It was just their way of changing up looks on Brady, because they knew that once he saw what defense they were in, he'd be able to pick it apart. A lot of teams try to do this in some degree to Brady.

But with Goff, McVay literally gives him his reads on the field once he sees the defense. So, by staying in the huddle longer, I don't see an advantage in not letting the Patriots switch defenses. I think it was taking longer because McVay had to tell Goff "if they run this defense, your read is this. If they run this defense..., If they run this defense." Essentially, trying to teach him how to play quarterback in 20 seconds. Teams will copycat this no doubt. We're gonna see if McVay can teach Goff to play QB without training wheels. I don't think he can

Uncle Si":1iv0o8x9 said:

and the Seahawks?

Article by Drew Magary of Deadspin. Some of it is tongue-in-cheek, but some correlation to the current Hawks. Thought it worth discussing as the draft, free agency and RWs contract come into play.


https://deadspin.com/the-future-of-football-is-a-lie-1832393001

"The NFL, which shamelessly copies college football schemes while simultaneously holding them in contempt, will soon follow suit. The Rams already use motion to catch defenses in vulnerable positions. Defenses, ugh, will adjust to this. You’re gonna see more smallish, quicker defenses deployed to keep similar offenses harnessed, and then you’ll see those offenses switch to a power game to mess those plans up. Belichick, primal marsh creature that he is, boned up on his history and beat the Rams essentially by changing defenses after the headset radio shut off and playing an old-fashioned style that forced the Rams to grind out yardage, which they couldn’t. Keep in mind that the Rams were also supposedly the future of this sport 17 years ago. As on Sunday, Belichick had other ideas back then." (edited for language)

Click to expand...

This dovetails with my wish that more NFL coaches were scholars of the game and could lean on making that which is old new again with a twist or a stunt here and there.

Uncle Si":2gamlsrz said:

mistaowen":2gamlsrz said:

jammerhawk":2gamlsrz said:

Thanks for posting that Si.

It's interesting that the Seahawks were a team that went in this direction first. Our team's problem is their D isn't a s good as the D of the Patriots or perhaps they don't adjust as well or as quickly as the Patriots do. I wonder if it has ore to do with coaching or with defensive experience?

Click to expand...

I think experience was a bigger factor this year. Mental lapses on D leading to huge plays were something we really hadn't seen in 5+ years. Pete's D kept everything in front, forcing them to convert tough play after tough play, and punishing them for attempting the big play. Rams succeeded at explosive plays against us this year in both games (as did other teams), Patriots didn't let them get away with anything big. The continuity of the LOB knowing where everyone would be on every down is something that will be hard to replicate but I'm hopeful an offseason for the new guys working with Pete will fix these things.

Click to expand...

Pats D got pressure on Goff off the snap as well. Put the Rams in a lot of 3rd and longs where the Pats could dictate the play calling.

From what i watched (2nd half), the Pats went to the ground game a lot. They rarely were held to a 3 and out, and flipped field position almost every possession. This also made the Rams playcalling more predictable.

It was an effective scheme, balanced offense (even if they weren't scoring, the ball was moving) and defense (taking advantage of field position).

Real chess match that McVay has admitted he didnt respond to.

I also read that the Patriots "finally" abandoned their offensive gameplan on the last two drives (netting 10 points) going to more empty sets and showing pass pre-snap. They had got the game where they wanted and were ready to finish it.

Some PC in that type of gameplan

Click to expand...

For sure, the Pats definitely had a Pete mentality for this game knowing the Rams could put up big points and wanted to dictate throughout. Ball control, field position, trust the D. Sony Michel had an awesome game and were comfortable relying on Edelman to move the chains. Late in the game they went to looks they knew would work, especially the gutsy deep ball to Gronk that essentially sealed the game.

It's fascinating how the Pats D changed after the huddle because of the pre-snap alignment McVay read and Goff looked like he was a rookie again. The Pats LB's deserve a ton of credit though, they had awesome coverage and came at them with some amazingly creative blitzes. They were relentless charging at Goff, off the top of my head I can't remember a clean pocket he had all night.

jammerhawk":18gedlcy said:

Our team's problem is their D isn't a s good as the D of the Patriots or perhaps they don't adjust as well or as quickly as the Patriots do. I wonder if it has ore to do with coaching or with defensive experience?

Click to expand...

I think it was personnel related partly due to inexperience, and partly due to the handicap that we only had ~$125m of our salary cap on the active roster last season due to all of the dead money we were carrying.

Going forwards I have the most uncertainty about our defensive line. Ford and Reed looked good against the run and pass respectively but it still felt like we were missing a few pieces. Maybe Naz Jones moving outside will give us the run defense boost we are looking for, and maybe Green/Martin will both make progress over their first full NFL off-season.

AgentDib":30vv0jxn said:

jammerhawk":30vv0jxn said:

Our team's problem is their D isn't a s good as the D of the Patriots or perhaps they don't adjust as well or as quickly as the Patriots do. I wonder if it has ore to do with coaching or with defensive experience?

Click to expand...

I think it was personnel related partly due to inexperience, and partly due to the handicap that we only had ~$125m of our salary cap on the active roster last season due to all of the dead money we were carrying.

Going forwards I have the most uncertainty about our defensive line. Ford and Reed looked good against the run and pass respectively but it still felt like we were missing a few pieces. Maybe Naz Jones moving outside will give us the run defense boost we are looking for, and maybe Green/Martin will both make progress over their first full NFL off-season.

Click to expand...

Maybe an easier way to frame it is how far away is our D line from being a top 5 D line and in what ways?

mrt144":3jhwbysw said:

Uncle Si":3jhwbysw said:

and the Seahawks?

Article by Drew Magary of Deadspin. Some of it is tongue-in-cheek, but some correlation to the current Hawks. Thought it worth discussing as the draft, free agency and RWs contract come into play.


https://deadspin.com/the-future-of-football-is-a-lie-1832393001

"The NFL, which shamelessly copies college football schemes while simultaneously holding them in contempt, will soon follow suit. The Rams already use motion to catch defenses in vulnerable positions. Defenses, ugh, will adjust to this. You’re gonna see more smallish, quicker defenses deployed to keep similar offenses harnessed, and then you’ll see those offenses switch to a power game to mess those plans up. Belichick, primal marsh creature that he is, boned up on his history and beat the Rams essentially by changing defenses after the headset radio shut off and playing an old-fashioned style that forced the Rams to grind out yardage, which they couldn’t. Keep in mind that the Rams were also supposedly the future of this sport 17 years ago. As on Sunday, Belichick had other ideas back then." (edited for language)

Click to expand...

This dovetails with my wish that more NFL coaches were scholars of the game and could lean on making that which is old new again with a twist or a stunt here and there.

Click to expand...

I think they are.. but they are also creatures of habit and consistency.

BB is fascinating because of the risks hes willing to take. Most coaches, at any sport, find their strength and ride that to success.

And when it stops being successful they are out of a job and waiting for someone else to ask them to do the same thing.

Not talking about ingenuity here either... most coaches are uniquely creative in their own ways. But its rare for a head coach to be consistently flexible as there strongest attribute.

Its why McVay will be interesting to watch over the years. Hes young, already successful and seems keenly aware of what just happened to him

Uncle Si":2cgwelll said:

mrt144":2cgwelll said:

Uncle Si":2cgwelll said:

and the Seahawks?

Article by Drew Magary of Deadspin. Some of it is tongue-in-cheek, but some correlation to the current Hawks. Thought it worth discussing as the draft, free agency and RWs contract come into play.


https://deadspin.com/the-future-of-football-is-a-lie-1832393001

"The NFL, which shamelessly copies college football schemes while simultaneously holding them in contempt, will soon follow suit. The Rams already use motion to catch defenses in vulnerable positions. Defenses, ugh, will adjust to this. You’re gonna see more smallish, quicker defenses deployed to keep similar offenses harnessed, and then you’ll see those offenses switch to a power game to mess those plans up. Belichick, primal marsh creature that he is, boned up on his history and beat the Rams essentially by changing defenses after the headset radio shut off and playing an old-fashioned style that forced the Rams to grind out yardage, which they couldn’t. Keep in mind that the Rams were also supposedly the future of this sport 17 years ago. As on Sunday, Belichick had other ideas back then." (edited for language)

Click to expand...

This dovetails with my wish that more NFL coaches were scholars of the game and could lean on making that which is old new again with a twist or a stunt here and there.

Click to expand...

I think they are.. but they are also creatures of habit and consistency.

BB is fascinating because of the risks hes willing to take. Most coaches, at any sport, find their strength and ride that to success.

And when it stops being successful they are out of a job and waiting for someone else to ask them to do the same thing.

Not talking about ingenuity here either... most coaches are uniquely creative in their own ways. But its rare for a head coach to be consistently flexible as there strongest attribute.

Its why McVay will be interesting to watch over the years. Hes young, already successful and seems keenly aware of what just happened to him

Click to expand...

Yes, absolutely. I really don't give coaches in the NFL a fair shake a lot of times, hoping they are excessively less prone to their own humanity. I wish I could fully explain why I hold coaches especially to such a high standard but perhaps it's because I've been told over and over and over again they're absolutely the best at their craft to the point of being beyond critique...and yet I'm totally unsatisfied by the notion there's only one guy as good as BB. It bugs me a lot actually that one guy seems to get it so much more than other coaches who are part of the coaching pantheon.

I think within football, more than other games and even sports, consistency in execution is integral to success and yet as you point out, many coaches interpret that as locking on to one successful thing and then riding it to the end of its usefulness. And yet we have an object lesson that honing intuition on when to switch things up might be just as valid as consistent practice and execution of tactical football ideals.

That intuition is not only supported by past success but simply by longevity in the HC position. And this isn't something that just naturally develops with coaching tenure as Marvin Lewis in Cincy shows to an extent.

To your point on McVay, I am keen on seeing if he and Nagy can use their experience as building blocks for future decisions. I wish we had an intriguing situation like that with the Hawks but we don't.

The more things change, the more they stay the same. Yeah, Pete runs largely an "old school" program, which has worked fairly well, considering we've been in the playoffs almost every year he's been HC.

In the end, it goes back to basics. Who blocks better? Who tackles better? Who makes the clutch catches? Who can extend a play and make something happen when it counts? Football is still football.

Yeah, we came close on both games against the Lambs this season, and missed out because, as was discussed above, our D is young and inexperienced, and at the end of the year a bit thin from injury. People like to tout the latest fantasy player fave all the time, but in the end you beat individual stars with schemes and disciplined play.

Oh and on the fly sweep (or the jet sweep, whatever? ), the thing you do is have your DE/OLB stand up so he can see the guy coming and watch for the handoff. Then two steps forward and the guy is swerving into the backfield where your pursuit can run him down. Actually, that's basic DE play on a running down. Cross the line and seal the edge. Again, discipline. :229031_shrug:

sutz":10dj4rf2 said:

The more things change, the more they stay the same. Yeah, Pete runs largely an "old school" program, which has worked fairly well, considering we've been in the playoffs almost every year he's been HC.

In the end, it goes back to basics. Who blocks better? Who tackles better? Who makes the clutch catches? Who can extend a play and make something happen when it counts? Football is still football.

Yeah, we came close on both games against the Lambs this season, and missed out because, as was discussed above, our D is young and inexperienced, and at the end of the year a bit thin from injury. People like to tout the latest fantasy player fave all the time, but in the end you beat individual stars with schemes and disciplined play.

Oh and on the fly sweep (or the jet sweep, whatever? ), the thing you do is have your DE/OLB stand up so he can see the guy coming and watch for the handoff. Then two steps forward and the guy is swerving into the backfield where your pursuit can run him down. Actually, that's basic DE play on a running down. Cross the line and seal the edge. Again, discipline. :229031_shrug:

Click to expand...

And conceptually a lot of what has transpired with offense is breaking that discipline through specific tactics like read option did for a time. Tactics in football are almost like theraputics - an old drug with new purpose.