Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Drew Lock Thread

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by samparnell View Post

    FWIW Andrew Beck and Jeremy Cox had about 9% of the offensive snaps in 2020. In contrast Andrew Beck and Andy Janovich had 39% of the offensive snaps in 2019. That should come as no surprise in view of the fact that Scangarello came from (and returned to) the Niners who just re-signed Kyle Juszczyk to a five year $27 million contract. They like Fullbacks in San Francisco.

    It's the difference between OCs. Joe Gibbs' Counter Series was one of the most successful rushing attacks in NFL history. He said he stole it from Tom Osborne's Counter Sweep/Dive Series. Osborne used a Fullback which Nebraska is famous for producing (e.g. Frank Solich, Tom Rathman, Andy Janovich, et al.) Gibbs chose to run his Counter Series mostly from a Single Back formation with two TEs one of which was off and often in motion as an H-Back.

    Scangarello and Shurmur both ran the ball around 45% of the plays, so one wasn't more committed to the run than the other, just different. Shurmur ran 85 more plays in 2020 than Scangarello did in 2019 which is at least one good game's worth of offensive snaps plus.
    On the points about Beck/Jano not only were they getting reps but it was interesting to me when I was doing research on Lock under Scags how much they were involved in successful plays. Probably main reason is a play to the FB is a high percentage play.

    I think I get why teams like to use the FB. The run play seems to be more straight forward to execute. FBs usually have better blocking skills than TEs. It seems to favor younger teams that are not as good executing as more experienced NFL players.
    Time to build on the win and grow the team from some solid play higher level of play

    Comment


    • So it's down to the broncos and 9ers for watson

      https://www.ninersnation.com/2021/3/...ers-or-broncos

      Comment


      • Originally posted by rst08tierney View Post
        So it's down to the broncos and 9ers for watson

        https://www.ninersnation.com/2021/3/...ers-or-broncos
        Don't count out N.E. Pansey's.
        Utah Bronco Freak

        Comment


        • Another QB found a home. Trubisky to Buffalo as a # 2.

          https://www.nfl.com/news/former-bear...eal-with-bills


          Paton has seen and analyzed this guy, Apparently not someone he thought would be a good fit for the Broncos.

          Comment


          • Originally posted by colowoz01 View Post
            Another QB found a home. Trubisky to Buffalo as a # 2.

            https://www.nfl.com/news/former-bear...eal-with-bills


            Paton has seen and analyzed this guy, Apparently not someone he thought would be a good fit for the Broncos.
            Seems like he has created enough cap space to be in a position to trade for Deshaun Watson, if the opportunity presents. Otherwise, if Drew Lock was definitely the plan, they might have already made a move for a quality veteran to help out in the QB room. Alex Smith is still available, but don't know for how much longer. Presumably, a vet won't be needed in the event they trade for Watson.
            "Stultum est timere quod vitare non potes." ~ Publilius Syrus

            Comment


            • Originally posted by samparnell View Post

              Seems like he has created enough cap space to be in a position to trade for Deshaun Watson, if the opportunity presents. Otherwise, if Drew Lock was definitely the plan, they might have already made a move for a quality veteran to help out in the QB room. Alex Smith is still available, but don't know for how much longer. Presumably, a vet won't be needed in the event they trade for Watson.
              Or there could be the possibility of a domino effect. Let’s say Garropolo or Bridgewater aren’t included in a potential trade and are cut. Bridgewater could very well be a guy Paton is high on and he’s been under Shurmur before as well.

              Comment


              • Originally posted by beastlyskronk View Post

                Or there could be the possibility of a domino effect. Let’s say Garropolo or Bridgewater aren’t included in a potential trade and are cut. Bridgewater could very well be a guy Paton is high on and he’s been under Shurmur before as well.
                Good point. Didn't consider potential new UFAs or other trade possibilities.
                "Stultum est timere quod vitare non potes." ~ Publilius Syrus

                Comment


                • And now Deshaun Watson facing lawsuits over sexual misconduct.......
                  sigpic WHEC-724

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by nickmeyer View Post
                    And now Deshaun Watson facing lawsuits over sexual misconduct.......
                    What a shock. Nothing like drama on top of drama and then there will be some more drama as the off season progresses.
                    Utah Bronco Freak

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by samparnell View Post

                      Balanced Offense committed to the run with half the pass attempts play action from formations using mostly 12, 11 and 21 personnel.
                      I'm dreaming of 2TE/3WR empty set with Hamler looping back to the mesh point to threaten from a RB position.
                      Adopt-A-Bronco: Kendell Hinton

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by listopencil View Post

                        I'm dreaming of 2TE/3WR empty set with Hamler looping back to the mesh point to threaten from a RB position.
                        02 personnel? Players are classified by position, so if two TEs and three WRs are on the field, most defensive staffs would call it 02 personnel regardless of where they line up. The concept of Bill Walsh's WCO is to dictate to defense through the use of formations. He wrote a thirteen part outline on it. One thing he did was to line a WR up in the backfield. If D is in Cover 1/0, it creates a mismatch when that player runs a route. When any eligible player arrives at a meshpoint, it's either a handoff or play action which must be accounted for.
                        ​​​
                        "Stultum est timere quod vitare non potes." ~ Publilius Syrus

                        Comment


                        • Now back to the draft ? Or just a smokescreen ?

                          https://gazette.com/sports/broncos/b...111734ee6.html

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by samparnell View Post

                            02 personnel? Players are classified by position, so if two TEs and three WRs are on the field, most defensive staffs would call it 02 personnel regardless of where they line up. The concept of Bill Walsh's WCO is to dictate to defense through the use of formations. He wrote a thirteen part outline on it. One thing he did was to line a WR up in the backfield. If D is in Cover 1/0, it creates a mismatch when that player runs a route. When any eligible player arrives at a meshpoint, it's either a handoff or play action which must be accounted for.
                            ​​​
                            Thanks, I was wondering about that. I was tempted to say 0/2/3 because 02 looked weird to me. I was thinking of lining up two TE's and three WR's in what would normally be a 5-wide (5WR?) set. Sutton and Jeudy both on the outside with Fant and Albert O just a bit off the Tackles. Hamler would be lined up as the #3WR on one of the sides but pre-snap motion would take him looping behind the LOS towards a potential mesh point with the QB for a hand off that may or may not happen. How is a Defense going to react to that? Crap their pants, maybe?
                            Adopt-A-Bronco: Kendell Hinton

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by listopencil View Post

                              Thanks, I was wondering about that. I was tempted to say 0/2/3 because 02 looked weird to me. I was thinking of lining up two TE's and three WR's in what would normally be a 5-wide (5WR?) set. Sutton and Jeudy both on the outside with Fant and Albert O just a bit off the Tackles. Hamler would be lined up as the #3WR on one of the sides but pre-snap motion would take him looping behind the LOS towards a potential mesh point with the QB for a hand off that may or may not happen. How is a Defense going to react to that? Crap their pants, maybe?
                              The first number is how many Backs and the second is how many TEs. WRs aren't included and it's understood that O-Linemen and the QB (10) aren't included, so five eligible players minus the total personnel number equals how many WRs. For many years 21 personnel was the norm, so there were two WRs in that package: a Fullback (20), a Halfback/Tailback (30), one TE (Y) and two WRs one on (X) and one off (40/Z) At one time the different I Formations showed the X, Y, Z/40, 30, 20, 10 skill personnel (i.e., Pro, Wing, Slot, Twins, Power, Tight, Offset)

                              Wonder what the D assistant in the box tells the DC when O sends in the so-called "Wildcat" package, since the personnel number system doesn't include the QB? Maybe they just say "Wildcat" and they have D personnel to defend the limited set of plays they have scouted. Depends on the system.

                              02 personnel is encountered in empty packages regularly. A common response from D would be Dime with three Corners and three Safeties or four and two. There could be four down linemen in a split front, or two with two OLBs as standup DEs and a Backer as a mirror/spy. Coverage could be Man, Zone or Combo. Cover 1 would have a FS, or could double the best receiver in a Zero call. Zone could be deep thirds and four short zones including the Backer. Combo could double the best receiver and zone the rest among other possibilities.

                              The pre-snap motion you suggest by the off WR was a staple of Wing-T we called Fly Motion, but is considered Jet Sweep motion now with meshpoint at the QB who is always in Gun from Empty. There are plenty of ways for D to defend that. One defender can be assigned to go with the motion. Which defender could depend on who is in motion. If it's the off receiver, should be a Corner. Sounds like you have both TEs off, so if one of them motions, could the Backer or an End. The run play possibilities from Empty 02 personnel are limited, so the priority is still pass D. Depending on their style defenses either want to funnel or spill run plays including Jet Sweep. The former would need to contain and the latter would need to defend all gaps and pursue to the boundary.

                              "Stultum est timere quod vitare non potes." ~ Publilius Syrus

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by samparnell View Post

                                The first number is how many Backs and the second is how many TEs. WRs aren't included and it's understood that O-Linemen and the QB (10) aren't included, so five eligible players minus the total personnel number equals how many WRs. For many years 21 personnel was the norm, so there were two WRs in that package: a Fullback (20), a Halfback/Tailback (30), one TE (Y) and two WRs one on (X) and one off (40/Z) At one time the different I Formations showed the X, Y, Z/40, 30, 20, 10 skill personnel (i.e., Pro, Wing, Slot, Twins, Power, Tight, Offset)

                                Wonder what the D assistant in the box tells the DC when O sends in the so-called "Wildcat" package, since the personnel number system doesn't include the QB? Maybe they just say "Wildcat" and they have D personnel to defend the limited set of plays they have scouted. Depends on the system.

                                02 personnel is encountered in empty packages regularly. A common response from D would be Dime with three Corners and three Safeties or four and two. There could be four down linemen in a split front, or two with two OLBs as standup DEs and a Backer as a mirror/spy. Coverage could be Man, Zone or Combo. Cover 1 would have a FS, or could double the best receiver in a Zero call. Zone could be deep thirds and four short zones including the Backer. Combo could double the best receiver and zone the rest among other possibilities.

                                The pre-snap motion you suggest by the off WR was a staple of Wing-T we called Fly Motion, but is considered Jet Sweep motion now with meshpoint at the QB who is always in Gun from Empty. There are plenty of ways for D to defend that. One defender can be assigned to go with the motion. Which defender could depend on who is in motion. If it's the off receiver, should be a Corner. Sounds like you have both TEs off, so if one of them motions, could the Backer or an End. The run play possibilities from Empty 02 personnel are limited, so the priority is still pass D. Depending on their style defenses either want to funnel or spill run plays including Jet Sweep. The former would need to contain and the latter would need to defend all gaps and pursue to the boundary.
                                Thanks. That's a lot of info and you laid it out very nicely, I appreciate it. I'd like for our base package to be Gordon/Fant+Albert O/ Sutton+Jeudy. So 12 personnel. Then I'd like to sub Hamler in for plays designed to get him in space, or to take advantage of specific match ups, or just to surprise the Defense. Also I'd like to sub Patrick in as the outside WR and put Jeudy in the slot as another option with 3WR's, but mainly I'm thinking of oddball ways to use Hamler's skill set.
                                Adopt-A-Bronco: Kendell Hinton

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X