BDL 2018 Week 2 - Oklahoma City EF5s @ Louisiana Jazz

[TedLavie]

Ok Whicker I will try to be as accurate as I can be as this is the last time I'm posting in this game.

Depending on the formation they run Louisiana will know of you run or pass. That's all I meant. Yes there's different running and passing plays, thank you. They can adjust by changing the number of people in the box. That you elude to in your writeup. They can also adjust by changing personnel or switching individual assignments. If the defense knows it is playing the run or the pass they individually will play differently, at all levels.

Now at the end of the day, you're right, predictability is secondary. That's why predictability =/= conceptually broken. If I have a matchup between AJ green and let's say Phillip Gaines I'm going to go for it every snap. That's predictable but not conceptually broken. If you are 1vs1 upfront and your OL can execute then fine. I don't think they can and, maybe it's just preconceived ideas (not sure that's a word in English), but I don't think you can run behind your LT all game even though that's your best individual matchup (and that's not your plan anyway).

Anyway glad we had this discussion even though you called me ignorant twice. I love having my opinions challenged by a fellow BDL owner.

 

Lukic it is fair to say that I've seen more specific and complete gameplans from you on many occasions. I hate to go there because it's super subjective but what transpired for me is that OKC was much more motivated than you on this matchup and that you just assumed you'd win. I have a hard time excluding that from my voting process. But again, that's super subjective. 

[Whicker]

19 minutes ago, TedLavie said:

Ok Whicker I will try to be as accurate as I can be as this is the last time I'm posting in this game.

Depending on the formation they run Louisiana will know of you run or pass. That's all I meant. Yes there's different running and passing plays, thank you. They can adjust by changing the number of people in the box. That you elude to in your writeup. They can also adjust by changing personnel or switching individual assignments. If the defense knows it is playing the run or the pass they individually will play differently, at all levels.

Now at the end of the day, you're right, predictability is secondary. That's why predictability =/= conceptually broken. If I have a matchup between AJ green and let's say Phillip Gaines I'm going to go for it every snap. That's predictable but not conceptually broken. If you are 1vs1 upfront and your OL can execute then fine. I don't think they can and, maybe it's just preconceived ideas (not sure that's a word in English), but I don't think you can run behind your LT all game even though that's your best individual matchup (and that's not your plan anyway).

Anyway glad we had this discussion even though you called me ignorant twice. I love having my opinions challenged by a fellow BDL owner.

 

Lukic it is fair to say that I've seen more specific and complete gameplans from you on many occasions. I hate to go there because it's super subjective but what transpired for me is that OKC was much more motivated than you on this matchup and that you just assumed you'd win. I have a hard time excluding that from my voting process. But again, that's super subjective. 

I do not understand how considering I'm running both my run plays and pass plays out of the spread.

If they change the number of people in the box, the play changes. That's the point. If they sell out to stop the run by putting people in the box, we throw the ball. Out of the same formation.

I guess we just really, really, really, really misunderstand each other on the conceptually broken. I'm not talking at all about the 1v1 matchups. I'm talking about the playcalls. If I lined up and said "My five guys are going to block your five guys and I'm going to run it," you still don't know where I'm going. I'm saying this isn't something I'm making up to be "teeheeeeheeehee I can make an offense that just counters everything!!!!!!!!!" There's not some simple adjustment to make to it because it's "predictable" or anything else. It was run by smaller programs to make up for talent deficiency. It was so difficult to counter that it turned Baylor and Oregon into power schools. It was so difficult to counter that traditional power schools are adopting it. And I'm saying, its barrier to the NFL involves its dependence on the read-option, not because it won't work.

 

Also, there are double teams at the point of attack. This is clearly stated. Jesse Davis doesn't have to win a 1v1 against Sheldon Richardson for me to run the ball successfully.

Ignorance is not an insult. It's a state of not knowing. If you believe that the Smashmouth Spread can be beaten because it's predictable, that means you simply do not know it well enough.

[Whicker]

I misread your first point. I thought you said based on the formation you (I) run.

It does not matter that the defense knows whether we will run or pass. We run the ball when we have an advantage. We throw the ball when we have an advantage.

We run the ball when we have a five on five. There's no adjustment you can make. The play is going. If you add an extra body now, it's too late.

If you add an extra body early to defend against the run, we throw it. The extra body came from somewhere, and that's where we attack.

 

It really is that simple.

[WFLukic]

35 minutes ago, TedLavie said:

Lukic it is fair to say that I've seen more specific and complete gameplans from you on many occasions. I hate to go there because it's super subjective but what transpired for me is that OKC was much more motivated than you on this matchup and that you just assumed you'd win. I have a hard time excluding that from my voting process. But again, that's super subjective. 

It's a divisional match at home, we're hardly going to be unmotivated.

I understand I've been more specific and detailed in the past, but at the end of the day, I'm relying on my players' quality rather than needing to scheme. Whicker's built a great team, particularly his front 7 but I feel with a team featuring players like Brady, Elliott, Thomas, Ertz and Watkins in the skill positions and an OL that is below average for BDL standards, but not atrocious, it's just a matter of executing. Those guys are all among the best in the league at what they do and it's what I'm telling them to do. I shouldn't fall victim for simplicity where the situation doesn't call for complexity. Defensively perhaps I could've predicted the spread, sure. It was creative by Whicker and props to him. I don't think it'll work because I've got a deep defensive line that I'm going to rotate, and I'm confident in my front 7 to take advantage of a struggling OL. I could also have gone into the intricacies of my coverage schemes too, but given I'll primarily be competing against a spread offense, then it becomes somewhat redundant.

I don't think I've missed anything glaringly, Cook aside. If you think Mixon can consistently run behind that OL against my DL, if Andrews, Stills, Thielen and Woods can consistently win against my back 7, then fair enough. If my offense can't win the matchups given to them, then fair enough. I just don't think there's anything in my gameplan to suggest I've thrown this away, even if it isn't overly detailed.



 

[TedLavie]

51 minutes ago, Whicker said:

I do not understand how considering I'm running both my run plays and pass plays out of the spread.

If they change the number of people in the box, the play changes. That's the point. If they sell out to stop the run by putting people in the box, we throw the ball. Out of the same formation.

I guess we just really, really, really, really misunderstand each other on the conceptually broken. I'm not talking at all about the 1v1 matchups. I'm talking about the playcalls. If I lined up and said "My five guys are going to block your five guys and I'm going to run it," you still don't know where I'm going. I'm saying this isn't something I'm making up to be "teeheeeeheeehee I can make an offense that just counters everything!!!!!!!!!" There's not some simple adjustment to make to it because it's "predictable" or anything else. It was run by smaller programs to make up for talent deficiency. It was so difficult to counter that it turned Baylor and Oregon into power schools. It was so difficult to counter that traditional power schools are adopting it. And I'm saying, its barrier to the NFL involves its dependence on the read-option, not because it won't work.

 

Also, there are double teams at the point of attack. This is clearly stated. Jesse Davis doesn't have to win a 1v1 against Sheldon Richardson for me to run the ball successfully.

Ignorance is not an insult. It's a state of not knowing. If you believe that the Smashmouth Spread can be beaten because it's predictable, that means you simply do not know it well enough.

 

47 minutes ago, Whicker said:

I misread your first point. I thought you said based on the formation you (I) run.

It does not matter that the defense knows whether we will run or pass. We run the ball when we have an advantage. We throw the ball when we have an advantage.

We run the ball when we have a five on five. There's no adjustment you can make. The play is going. If you add an extra body now, it's too late.

If you add an extra body early to defend against the run, we throw it. The extra body came from somewhere, and that's where we attack.

 

It really is that simple.

And I promised myself to not answer...

The bolded part is where you got it backwards. I'm not saying it can be beaten by being predictable (or at least I don't think I did and shouldn't have). I'm saying you don't have the OL to make it work consistently enough but could benefit from an element of surprise at first which would fade as the game went on. At least that's what I meant.

Now onto more general points.

First, I don't think the reasons you listed for college offenses not translating to the NFL are the only ones. Athleticism, awareness and preparation are at a different level and that's why it's much harder to scheme your way out of poor talent. It can happen from time to time, for example the Wildcat, but it's not like Miami ran 100% of it's plays out of it.

Second, yes, I believe it makes a difference for a defender to know if an opposing offense will throw or run. And I'm talking about individual play and assignment, not scheme here. For me that's quite obvious but apparently it's not. So maybe I'm wrong I don't know

[Whicker]

13 minutes ago, TedLavie said:

 

And I promised myself to not answer...

The bolded part is where you got it backwards. I'm not saying it can be beaten by being predictable (or at least I don't think I did and shouldn't have). I'm saying you don't have the OL to make it work consistently enough but could benefit from an element of surprise at first which would fade as the game went on. At least that's what I meant.

Now onto more general points.

First, I don't think the reasons you listed for college offenses not translating to the NFL are the only ones. Athleticism, awareness and preparation are at a different level and that's why it's much harder to scheme your way out of poor talent. It can happen from time to time, for example the Wildcat, but it's not like Miami ran 100% of it's plays out of it.

Second, yes, I believe it makes a difference for a defender to know if an opposing offense will throw or run. And I'm talking about individual play and assignment, not scheme here. For me that's quite obvious but apparently it's not. So maybe I'm wrong I don't know

First, I'm not talking about college offenses in general. I'm talking about this specific one. I'm saying that this one is robust enough to work at the NFL level if the read-option were viable. It's not something you just adjust to, because it contains natural counters to those adjustments. The read-option almost took over the NFL. It, at its conceptual level, didn't just work at the NFL level, it thrived. I've read a couple of articles about it when writing my gameplan and just now to be sure: the read-option died at the NFL level because its best counter was defenders blowing up QBs. Yes, there are other ways to defend against the read-option. But, I can say with confidence that awareness and athleticism isn't beating this scheme. Yes, awareness and athleticism will help you beat the man in front of you, but it does not render the concepts of this scheme useless or lessened. I shouldn't have mentioned the Wildcat. The Wildcat is a gimmicky offense that is not conceptually sound. It can be schemed against. The Smashmouth Spread is different.

I believe you are wrong about that last point. Either that or I don't understand what you're saying.

[WFLukic]

Somebody once told the spread was gonna roll me
I ain't the sharpest tool in the shed

[TedLavie]

Went with the Jizz in the end. Heyward and Tuitt in the middle vs a run first team is a little too light imho

[Jlash]

20 hours ago, Whicker said:

I'm not worried about the hits Newton will take. 

Yea no reason to be concerned for exposing your QB all game.

[Jlash]

I like Whicker's idea on offense. I don't like how much it exposes a QB who already takes an unfair amount of hits in the league. I think in the long run it's a bad idea. I think even with a below average offensive line they can wear out the Jazz defensive line who is playing 3 defensive tackles along the line the entire time and will give Cam more time to throw the ball than many expect. 

On the flip side, the Jazz have one of the better OL in BDL, one of the best QB's in football and a dominant RB to go along with a really good group of receiving options. I think the dominant Jazz OL and the dominant OKC pass rush will essentially cancel each other out. 

In the end, I think Jazz have enough depth on the DL to overcome this spread attack they'll be subject to, and they'll be able to move the ball more effectively on the ground with the better RB and better OL in this one. Close game, low scoring game. Jazz win.

[SirA1]

Performance - Lou; Game Plan - OKC; Matchup - OKC

It actually came down to the game plan this week for me. I like the OKC defense this week to eek out a tough one.

[Xmad]

I like OKC to pull off the upset, Newton can take the hits it's not a thing that will work all season long but it can work a few times this season. Louisiana IMO doesn't have the personel to contain Newton consistently. 

OKC's front seven vs. the Jazz's o-line is a matchup I can see both teams winning, but I'll give the edge to OKC in the trenches given they're the better overall unit. Brady keeps this really close but OKC's gameplan tips it for me. OKC with a 1 point win.

[WFLukic]

Might need to rethink the 4 OL is auto lose if a spread behind that dumpster fire can have success.

[RuskieTitan]

OKC NeedBetterNames come into town and sweep the Jazz away... okay horrible puns aside, I do think they get the slight edge with the game plan and Newton being an X factor.

[MD4L]

The only prominent issue I have with the offense of Whicker is starting someone like Mark Andrews. I like the concepts of mixing guys like Treadwell for blocking and Taylor bc he can move around.

Catching Louisiana sort of sleep walking is also a major factor to beat them.

More importantly, I see LOU’s offense and Michael Thomas dealing with Pat Peterson is huge. While he’s effectively matchup proof, Peterson is winning his fair share.

Now onto the offense, I’m compelled. Cam is special running around, and Mixon is a solid secondary piece if you want a feared second option. Likewise, there was a brilliant idea by Lukic to lockin on Thielen w Harris bc I consider that matchup high level. Also, I think Thielen can have a little more success than Thomas and visa versa.

Considering the pass rush from both teams, I see this being low scoring until the offenses get going. This is a great wake up call for Louisiana and I’ve always had respect for OKC’s team (even if their chairman gets extremely emotional at times). I like the capabilities of Watkins, Ertz, and Lockett + homefield and the level of talent on the Jazz to pull through, but this game seems more important to the road team. They pull out the improbable victory.