Jump to content

Early look at Possible Regression


ragevsuall17

Recommended Posts

OK, so it seems like most AFCS fans and some "analysts" think the Titans are due to regress this year. There's no in-depth or intelligent argument attached to their opinion... Othetwise known as the Twitter effect...But I'd still like to discuss... Try to detach emotion to our opinion... And see if regression is a real or likely possibility. 

I guess the most obvious argument is the schedule. We went into 2017 with the 2nd easiest schedule going into the season based on 2016 records (tied with the Jags, with the Colts the only team with an easier schedule.) We ended the season with the easiest SOS, again tied with the Jags. 

Bit we go into 2018 with what I gather to be the 2nd easiest schedule. I haven't been able to find a listing of all the teams, but this website (https://www.fantasyindex.com/2018/01/19/scheduletron/strength-of-schedule-analysis) shows the Titans with the 2nd easiest schedule... And the  opponents winning % does match the Titans' opponents of 119 wins and 137 losses. 

There is a lot of hooplah of us playing the both SB, but they are the only teams outside the Jags with double digits wins. In fact, 8 of our games are against opponents with under 8 wins... 3, 4, 4, 4, 4, 5, 6, 7. We have 4 games against teams with 9 wins, the 2 Jags games and the 2 SB teams. In reality the schedule is not that daunting going. The Jags have the exact same schedule, but instead of facing the Ravens and Bills, they face the Steelers and Chiefs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It'll come down to the coaching staff and how quickly they're able to get the ball rolling. I expect to be more talented than this year, as we're not going to lose a guy whose production will be hard to duplicate elsewhere. I'm hoping that it just clicks very quickly with Marcus, and I think it can. He's healthy this offseason and finally has a modern coaching staff (which should also be able to get better production out of Davis and Taylor). 

 

I think offensive coaching was what made us regress last year more than anything. If we're able to get the O sorted out and add some talent on D, I think we are a team that should be better than we were this year.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Reason #2 for a possible regression:  Coaching

Vrabel is an unknown and considered raw.  He comes in after 1 season as a coordinator... and it was a season that saw them finish as one of the worst units in the NFL.  He was my favorite candidate going in (LaFleur was my 2nd, but a little more on that later)... so I'm obviously optimistic.  I feel he has the demeanor and reputation to be the kind of leader that can take this team to the next step.  I expect him to give LaFleur and Pees the liberty to run their units with minimal interference other than the obvious.  

Thing is... that even with Vrabel's uncertainty factor... he seems to match Mularkey in what he did best during his time here.... he seems like a guy who will unite the locker room, and who will have his players running through walls for him.  He has the respect from having played at a very high level during his career.  But he also seems to instantly upgrades where Mularkey failed... mainly in being flexible and adjustable in his approach and plan of attack.  We will no longer be looking to fit those square pegs through round holes.  Not only does it appear that he's going to apply this to our team and players, but he's going to apply this weekly based on opponent.  

LaFleur also brings some of the same concerns that Vrabel  does.  He doesn't have any experience calling plays... but all 1st time coordinators come that way.... and LaFleur is essentially a 1st timer.  But LaFleur would likely have been the most sought after OC candidate this year had he actually been on the OC list.  He was on the HC list... and we landed him as an OC.  

I'm not as down on Pees as some others seem to be.  If nothing else, he'll keep the defense playing at a similar level to where we were last year... and has the potential to upgrade it considerably into a top 10 unit.  There's some talent there, and he'll likely get another good piece or 4 this offseason.

Getting a DC with so much experience... one that you can likely leave alone  for the most part, gives Vrabel a chance to be more involved with the offense... to sit and learn... and to help LaFleur with high level decisions and design.  

 

I feel that even with some uncertainty, the coaching factor is improved. LaFleur's scheme really won't be much different than Robiskie's... at least not the foundation and general concepts of it.  But the way he'll call plays, the way he'll adjust weekly and play by play will be light years of where Robiskie was capable of.  This is the biggest difference going into next year.. and the biggest reason why it's not unreasonable to expect further improvement and advancement.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Personnely wise... outside of Byard and Woodyard, we don't have anyone who played above what most us anticipated last year.  We're also only slated to lose Jones and Williamson via FA.  Jones was playing very well, but there wasn't noticeable dropoff once he was done for the year.  Johnson and even Sly stepped up and the run D was a force.  I would love for us to make a splash with someone like Richardson to replace Jones... but a good rotational piece will keep this unit playing at the same level, at the very least.  Williamson also helped in the run phase, but has been a huge liability in the pass game. I really don't think it'll take much to find a replacement who can play on par with where Williamson has been  playing. 

On the flip side, I think we can realistically expect improvements from the following:

  • Mariota
  • Run game/interior OL
  • WRs... Davis will benefit from his first full off-season... Matthews will benefit from less attention... we should expect more explosiveness from our 3rd WR, whoever that ends up being
  • Pass rush -  our sack leader was at 7.5, and we only had 3 above 5
  • CBs - Jackson showed the potential to really improve with a full offseason.  Sims started good before we lost him to injury... and there's a strong possibility we improve depth pushing him to the 4th spot next offseason

Lewan, Conklin, Walker, Casey, Rak/Morgan, Ryan all played within expectations, and much of the same is expected next season from them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the unit as a whole imoroves.

I think our run offense could regress, or just stay bad, as we get used to zone blocking and trying to find the guys we want inside for that scheme. I think our run defense could also regress if we lose Jones and Williamson. Williamson is a liability everywhere else, but strong against the run.

I think our passing offense will improve significantly, as will our passing D. I think from a talent standpoint Mariota is a future top 5 QB and when we get into a scheme that creates opportunities for him instead of relying on him to create them with perfect reads and passes we will see him really take off. We have some talent in our secondary with Byard, Ryan, and Jackson. If we can improve our CB depth and get quicker with our pass rush, I think we could see a real improvement with Pees.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, ragevsuall17 said:

 

 

Thing is... that even with Vrabel's uncertainty factor... he seems to match Mularkey in what he did best during his time here.... he seems like a guy who will unite the locker room, and who will have his players running through walls for him.  He has the respect from having played at a very high level during his career

 

The bolded is a great advantage for Vrabel. Listening to the radio in Denver this morning, Mark Schlereth made a good point about with the way the CBA is currently, having a former player as coach can be an advantage. He said that with practice time being as little as it is, it could be easier for former players to explain things they want done because they have been there before playing at that level versus a guy who hasn't played at this level.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2/11/2018 at 2:24 PM, ragevsuall17 said:

The Jags have the exact same schedule, but instead of facing the Ravens and Bills, they face the Steelers and Chiefs.

We both play every team in the AFC East. Ravens and Chargers are our two different ones from the Jags.

I think the main reason most analysts are writing us off as a likely regression candidate is simply the other teams in the division being more attractive options on the surface. The Jaguars were everyone's darling last year and no one wants to hear that we thoroughly handled them twice, and DeShaun Watson was EVERYONE's new favorite player in the media before his injury. Throw in the likelihood of a healthy Luck coming back to Indy and boom, all too easy to write off the other team in the South that sucks all the time anyway. It's lazy at its core, but that's not really surprising when you consider the usual work of most mainstream experts.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am glad someone brought this topic up...I wanted to pose the question of what our ceiling/floor is now vs if we kept Mularkey. To which I would answer the same way as Rage's question...we have a much better chance to improve!!!

In fairness, I would say that we regressed this year...even though we made the playoffs...so not sure what improvement vs regression looks like??? Our one improvement was closing out in close games...which we may regress in this coming year.

I think that we will not regress from a production standpoint....however our win total may in fact decrease by one possibly two because of coaching inexperience.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, imDelusional said:

I think the main reason most analysts are writing us off as a likely regression candidate is simply the other teams in the division being more attractive options on the surface. The Jaguars were everyone's darling last year and no one wants to hear that we thoroughly handled them twice, and DeShaun Watson was EVERYONE's new favorite player in the media before his injury. Throw in the likelihood of a healthy Luck coming back to Indy and boom, all too easy to write off the other team in the South that sucks all the time anyway. It's lazy at its core, but that's not really surprising when you consider the usual work of most mainstream experts.

The bolded part is a fair point. But really looking at it in depth...  

That Jags defense was great last year... but how many injuries did they suffer?  Can they expect to stay as healthy as they did all year?  Tha'ts going to be hard to replicate... if they do, they're at or near the top again, no doubt.  Can they though? The offense could get Robinson back... but does Bortles have another gear to offset some fall off from the D?  I expect Fournette to continue getting better... but how hard is if for him taking the pounding he takes from teams not respecting Bortles?  Can he hold up to that kinda beating?

The Texans are on the opposite spectrum... they had injuries galore last season.  But what can they expect from their guys returning... in particular the big 2?  How does Watt return after missing the past 2 years... is he still the same or near the same dominant force he's been, or does regression start to take hold?  Can Watson return after his 2nd major knee injury in 3 years?  He's still young enough and it wasn't the same knee... but by the same token, he's 25 and both of his knees have had ACL tears.  Throw in available NFL film on Watson, a lack of 1st and 2nd round picks... and they have a small margin for error.

The Colts may have the worst roster in the NFL. I mean... being completely honest... I see 3 players that would have significant roles on our team right now... Hilton, Doyle (as a TE2), and Hankins.  A healthy Hooker would make it 4.  That's it.  Even if Luck comes back... and even if he comes back as good as he was prior to his injury... they have a long way to go to be worth a damn.  

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 hours ago, TitanSS said:

I think our run offense could regress, or just stay bad, as we get used to zone blocking and trying to find the guys we want inside for that scheme.

The possibility to regress is obviously there.  But we weren't a good running team last year... middle of the pack in most running stats worth a damn.  Take Mariota's runs from the totals, and we're much worse.  

I think more important than OL in a zone blocking is a RB with the vision to find the hole.  That's the thing about zone blocking... the hole will likely not be where the play intended the hole to be.  It allows OL to adjust based on what's in front of them.  Maybe Henry does fit this style of blocking.  I just have a hard time believing we'll be worse than 4 ypc next season (we averaged 3.97 ypc once Mariota's stats are removed).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, ragevsuall17 said:

The possibility to regress is obviously there.  But we weren't a good running team last year... middle of the pack in most running stats worth a damn.  Take Mariota's runs from the totals, and we're much worse.  

I think more important than OL in a zone blocking is a RB with the vision to find the hole.  That's the thing about zone blocking... the hole will likely not be where the play intended the hole to be.  It allows OL to adjust based on what's in front of them.  Maybe Henry does fit this style of blocking.  I just have a hard time believing we'll be worse than 4 ypc next season (we averaged 3.97 ypc once Mariota's stats are removed).

Yeah we sucked last year that's why I tried to qualify the statement with "or just stay bad" lol. I think the OL is going to be incredibly important and with a completely new scheme and coaches, they may not know at the start of the season which 3 guys in the middle they want to start. 

Henry may not have what it takes, and if they don't think he does then hopefully he's traded to a man scheme, but I do think he will be effective if we give him another back to share the carries with him. 

Hyde is a guy I think you've mentioned before who played in Shannahan's zone blocking scheme this year and I believe he haf some success. We could add him, but I think he and Henry are similar players.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ideally, Lewis is a Titan next year... I think Henry and Lewis would compliment each other really well. But I also know he's probably the top back in the market so he'll get his share of offers. 

Hyde really reminds me of Murray... He's a bigger back who can pound it inside, but has the vision and enough quickness to be more than just a "power" back. Like Murray, he's a good 3 down back, willing and able to identify and pick up blitzers, and has good hands to be a nice threat out of the backfield. 

He's also had some injury issues, and is likely the type of RB that has that quick decline when he hits 30... So he's likely a 2 year solution. 

As far as Henry, I keep repeating my concern of him... I just dont know if he has the vision for a zone blocking scheme. There will be some opportunities to bounce it outside and on designed outside zones, but I dont know if he can see or feel the cut back hole. Thats going to be key. If we could guarantee Murray would be healthy and if he'd be willing to take a paycut, I think he'd be an amazing back in this system... Similar to Arian Foster with the Texans. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, ragevsuall17 said:

Ideally, Lewis is a Titan next year... I think Henry and Lewis would compliment each other really well. But I also know he's probably the top back in the market so he'll get his share of offers. 

Hyde really reminds me of Murray... He's a bigger back who can pound it inside, but has the vision and enough quickness to be more than just a "power" back. Like Murray, he's a good 3 down back, willing and able to identify and pick up blitzers, and has good hands to be a nice threat out of the backfield. 

He's also had some injury issues, and is likely the type of RB that has that quick decline when he hits 30... So he's likely a 2 year solution. 

As far as Henry, I keep repeating my concern of him... I just dont know if he has the vision for a zone blocking scheme. There will be some opportunities to bounce it outside and on designed outside zones, but I dont know if he can see or feel the cut back hole. Thats going to be key. If we could guarantee Murray would be healthy and if he'd be willing to take a paycut, I think he'd be an amazing back in this system... Similar to Arian Foster with the Texans. 

Looking back at Henry's Freshman year at Alabama, it looked like they ran some zone concepts and he was able to hit it.  This is nothing but a highlight so not seeing any possible horrible runs by him.
He was also smaller then too, but he has shown some history of being able to do it.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Looking at his college tape you'll see plenty of tape of the hole not being where he expected it and he makes one cut and hits the actual hole. I really don't think his vision is bad at all. What I disliked about him was that when the hole wasn't there he bounced it out looking for a hole instead of just lowering the boom on someone and using those 247 lbs. I think that could actually transition well into a zone blocking scheme.

Alabama did sprinkle in a few zone runs. When it's just an inside or outside zone play it can be hard to tell the difference on tape without knowing the assignment before the snap. If its not a trap, power, counter, etc where the guards tell you it's a man scheme, it's not going to jump out to you on the tape. (I actually like this because when I played LB I was taught to read the guards and they actually gave a great deal of information away about the play the second it was snapped.)

When they run zone stretch plays and the linemen actually run parallel with the LOS is when it is very obvious that it's zone.

If Alfred Morris can average 4.7 YPC in this scheme, I'm not really worried about Henry failing. I think we need to pair him with someone to take about a quarter of the carries and provide some 3rd down ability and we'll be in a really good position.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...