Welcome, Guest
Pewter Report  >>  Boards  >>  The Red Board (Moderators: 3rd String Kicker, PRPatrol)  >>  Topic: Dear Greg Olson, « previous next »
Page: 1 2

blackthoughtz

****
Starter

Posts : 664
Offline
: October 14, 2009, 12:16:46 AM

We have done everything you said except for the option play. If you watched the game our first scoring drive i believe was 4 plays where there were completions of 25,31,20 something and then the final endzone pass. The reason the run was abandoned so quickly is because they were blitzing so heavy that they were getting immediate pressure and bringing down the back for a loss. This happened the first two plays and wouldve kept happening had we kept running. When we played washington we had a HEAVY dose of the run and that's what i believe the offense will look like when there isnt immmediate pressure in the backfield such as in the philly game. If we can execute both of those gameplans in ONE game then we will win.

\\\"Never argue with a fool; onlookers may not be able to tell the difference.\\\"

BuccinTex

*
Hall of Famer
******
Posts : 4940
Offline
#1 : October 13, 2009, 11:52:39 PM

lol guy is an idiot. Plus he looks like he is high on something during his PCs.

Monte was hyper but never in the I just smoked a ton of meth kind of way.   Olson though...yeah.    He's got the bug eye thing going on.  I understand you have to pass more when you fall behind but when it's still early and you are down by one score and you break off a run on first down that goes for 8 why must you always pass on 2nd and 2?  Run the damn ball.   


warrenfb12

******
Hall of Famer

Posts : 5772
Offline
#2 : October 13, 2009, 10:24:58 PM

Enclosed is a recipe for success this sunday. Keep in mind it is not a recipe for a win, although it may help quite a bit. Everyone knows that this defense is a doormat for the opponenets. However, by following these simple steps this teams chance for success will be much better. The recipe is as follows:

1. Run the football. I understand that once you get down by a couple of touchdowns a team should start using the pass more than the run. So to avoid being down by a couple of scores, give a heavy dose of run on first and second down, of course mixing things up with the occasional pass. I think by forcing the issue in the running game you will find the offense in much more managable third downs.

2. Use play action passes in realistic situations. If you fail to establish the run, play action passing plays are often ineffective. If we are down by three touchdowns nobody on planet earth thinks we are about to run the football.

3. Do not be scared to be aggressive. I understand the desire to protect the football. Still, the patterns the WR have run in the short passing game have been ineffective. Let JJ step up and make some throws. Just because you have four opportunities to move the ball ten yards does not mean you have to use ALL FOUR!!! Mix up the calls and take the field in chunks. Obviously, this forces teams to keep fewer men in the box and can help the running game.

4. Use K2 more. This man is the only effective player we have on offense. As you propably know, K2 had over one hundred yards receiving last week. He also caught two touchdowns. Still, K2 was open 90% of the passing plays you ran. When a team is bull rushing the A gap as they were A BUNCH last sunday, the majority of the middle is open.

5. last but not least, KEEP THOSE STUPID OPTION PLAYS BURIED DEEP DOWN IN THE PLAYBOOK, I DO NOT EVER WANT TO SEE THAT CRAP AGAIN!!!! Learn how to call normal plays and get an effective offense before you start getting cute.



Thank You.


alldaway

*
Hall of Famer
******
Posts : 36754
Offline
#3 : October 13, 2009, 10:41:21 PM

Greg Olson's response:

1.  I figured if I pass a lot but with short passes I can have the best of both worlds (Jon Gruden and Mike Martz).  Besides Griese told me it would be a good idea.

2. Play action in the third quarter works because the defense is tired and they probably expect the Bucs to use a draw play on third down anyways when it is 3rd and 26.

3. Shoop informed me that bubble screens to WR's is an aggressive way to attack a defense, and even my BFF Brian vouches for this philosophy.

4. K2 is not nasty enough like Stevens which is why I have Jeremy out there as a blocker over Gilmore and as a receiver over K2.  K2 is also too nice compared to my man M 80 who lets me know he wants the ball.

5.  That is all part of the evolution of the wildcat and I hope to showcase my genius even more by simply plagerizing Jon's playbook.

Signed Greg Olson


warrenfb12

******
Hall of Famer

Posts : 5772
Offline
#4 : October 13, 2009, 11:46:14 PM

lol guy is an idiot. Plus he looks like he is high on something during his PCs.


warrenfb12

******
Hall of Famer

Posts : 5772
Offline
#5 : October 14, 2009, 02:10:01 AM

Yes you are correct there was on our first scoring drive. Other than that it was not anything along those lines. A team cannot abandon the run game because they hit us behind the line a couple of times, this is the NFL, people are going to get tackled for a loss. We did not have a heavy dose of run against Washington. Blitzing is no reason to abandon the run.


watson

*
Hall of Famer
******
Posts : 5081
Offline
#6 : October 14, 2009, 07:57:50 AM

Yes you are correct there was on our first scoring drive. Other than that it was not anything along those lines. A team cannot abandon the run game because they hit us behind the line a couple of times, this is the NFL, people are going to get tackled for a loss. We did not have a heavy dose of run against Washington. Blitzing is no reason to abandon the run.
So let me get this straight.  There are 8 and sometimes 9 defenders standing in the box and your plan is to run the ball?? 

Truths:
1.  Never have an argument with an idiot.  They will drag you down to their level and then beat you with their experience.
2.  For some it would be better if they remained silent and be thought a fool than to speak and erase all doubt.

alldaway

*
Hall of Famer
******
Posts : 36754
Offline
#7 : October 14, 2009, 08:19:59 AM

Yes you are correct there was on our first scoring drive. Other than that it was not anything along those lines. A team cannot abandon the run game because they hit us behind the line a couple of times, this is the NFL, people are going to get tackled for a loss. We did not have a heavy dose of run against Washington. Blitzing is no reason to abandon the run.
So let me get this straight.  There are 8 and sometimes 9 defenders standing in the box and your plan is to run the ball?? 

If the much hyped o-line that the previous regime left behind can't generate enough push against eight defenders than they might as well have to rebuild it in the off season.


watson

*
Hall of Famer
******
Posts : 5081
Offline
#8 : October 14, 2009, 08:31:12 AM

Yes you are correct there was on our first scoring drive. Other than that it was not anything along those lines. A team cannot abandon the run game because they hit us behind the line a couple of times, this is the NFL, people are going to get tackled for a loss. We did not have a heavy dose of run against Washington. Blitzing is no reason to abandon the run.

So let me get this straight. There are 8 and sometimes 9 defenders standing in the box and your plan is to run the ball?? 

If the much hyped o-line that the previous regime left behind can't generate enough push against eight defenders than they might as well have to rebuild it in the off season.


ADW,
I've read your posts for a number of years and respect what you say, but have to disagree with you here.....trying to run against that many defenders never works......or it works about 1 in 10 times

I don't care how good your O Line is, you can't match their numbers.  There is always going to be a free defender.  Until you make them pay with your passing game and make them take those extra defenders out of the box you aren't going to be very successful running the ball. 

Truths:
1.  Never have an argument with an idiot.  They will drag you down to their level and then beat you with their experience.
2.  For some it would be better if they remained silent and be thought a fool than to speak and erase all doubt.

alldaway

*
Hall of Famer
******
Posts : 36754
Offline
#9 : October 14, 2009, 08:46:56 AM

Yes you are correct there was on our first scoring drive. Other than that it was not anything along those lines. A team cannot abandon the run game because they hit us behind the line a couple of times, this is the NFL, people are going to get tackled for a loss. We did not have a heavy dose of run against Washington. Blitzing is no reason to abandon the run.

So let me get this straight. There are 8 and sometimes 9 defenders standing in the box and your plan is to run the ball?? 

If the much hyped o-line that the previous regime left behind can't generate enough push against eight defenders than they might as well have to rebuild it in the off season.


ADW,
I've read your posts for a number of years and respect what you say, but have to disagree with you here.....trying to run against that many defenders never works......or it works about 1 in 10 times

I don't care how good your O Line is, you can't match their numbers.  There is always going to be a free defender.  Until you make them pay with your passing game and make them take those extra defenders out of the box you aren't going to be very successful running the ball. 


JJ showed more than enough by attacking down field, so it wasn't a Gradkowski situation.

Here are the pass attempts by the QB's in the last five games under Olson's direction:

Game 1: 41
Game 2: 50
Game 3: 26
Game 4: 22
Game 5: 50

Of those five contests the Bucs were close in four of them, but no commitment to the running game as in all those contests the pass attempts outnumber the run attempts.  The running game was performing at its peak week 1, but Olson refused to stick with it.  Earlier in the week before leading to the Eagles game Olson would feature Carnell and be committed to the running game.  So much for that plan and in fact when the Bucs defense forced the Eagles to punt in the third quarter when down by two touchdowns Olson dialed up three consecutive passing plays.  That is bad play calling anyway you slice it, and not what this team is trying to do long term.   And if this o-line needs Faine to just be NFL average than they need to be replaced because they are way overhyped, and the previous regime left this team with a bunch of lemons.


watson

*
Hall of Famer
******
Posts : 5081
Offline
#10 : October 14, 2009, 09:54:55 AM

Yes you are correct there was on our first scoring drive. Other than that it was not anything along those lines. A team cannot abandon the run game because they hit us behind the line a couple of times, this is the NFL, people are going to get tackled for a loss. We did not have a heavy dose of run against Washington. Blitzing is no reason to abandon the run.

So let me get this straight. There are 8 and sometimes 9 defenders standing in the box and your plan is to run the ball??

If the much hyped o-line that the previous regime left behind can't generate enough push against eight defenders than they might as well have to rebuild it in the off season.


ADW,
I've read your posts for a number of years and respect what you say, but have to disagree with you here.....trying to run against that many defenders never works......or it works about 1 in 10 times

I don't care how good your O Line is, you can't match their numbers. There is always going to be a free defender. Until you make them pay with your passing game and make them take those extra defenders out of the box you aren't going to be very successful running the ball.


JJ showed more than enough by attacking down field, so it wasn't a Gradkowski situation.

Here are the pass attempts by the QB's in the last five games under Olson's direction:

Game 1: 41
Game 2: 50
Game 3: 26
Game 4: 22
Game 5: 50

Of those five contests the Bucs were close in four of them, but no commitment to the running game as in all those contests the pass attempts outnumber the run attempts. The running game was performing at its peak week 1, but Olson refused to stick with it. Earlier in the week before leading to the Eagles game Olson would feature Carnell and be committed to the running game. So much for that plan and in fact when the Bucs defense forced the Eagles to punt in the third quarter when down by two touchdowns Olson dialed up three consecutive passing plays. That is bad play calling anyway you slice it, and not what this team is trying to do long term. And if this o-line needs Faine to just be NFL average than they need to be replaced because they are way overhyped, and the previous regime left this team with a bunch of lemons.


I won't disagree that he has abandoned the run too early too often this year, but Sunday I don't see where there was any place to run.  The Eagles flooded every lane and said that they were going to make JJ beat them.  I think he was doing his part....for the biggest portion of the day, but his WRs let him down.  If.....and that is a BIG IF....they had caught even half of the dropped passes, that defense would have loosened up and committed more to stopping the passing game.  I wish they could run the ball every down and just punish the defense, but when the defense overloads and dare you to beat them with the pass, there isn't a high percentage of success in the run game.

Truths:
1.  Never have an argument with an idiot.  They will drag you down to their level and then beat you with their experience.
2.  For some it would be better if they remained silent and be thought a fool than to speak and erase all doubt.

warrenfb12

******
Hall of Famer

Posts : 5772
Offline
#11 : October 14, 2009, 10:30:47 AM

Yes you are correct there was on our first scoring drive. Other than that it was not anything along those lines. A team cannot abandon the run game because they hit us behind the line a couple of times, this is the NFL, people are going to get tackled for a loss. We did not have a heavy dose of run against Washington. Blitzing is no reason to abandon the run.

So let me get this straight. There are 8 and sometimes 9 defenders standing in the box and your plan is to run the ball??

If the much hyped o-line that the previous regime left behind can't generate enough push against eight defenders than they might as well have to rebuild it in the off season.


ADW,
I've read your posts for a number of years and respect what you say, but have to disagree with you here.....trying to run against that many defenders never works......or it works about 1 in 10 times

I don't care how good your O Line is, you can't match their numbers. There is always going to be a free defender. Until you make them pay with your passing game and make them take those extra defenders out of the box you aren't going to be very successful running the ball.


JJ showed more than enough by attacking down field, so it wasn't a Gradkowski situation.

Here are the pass attempts by the QB's in the last five games under Olson's direction:

Game 1: 41
Game 2: 50
Game 3: 26
Game 4: 22
Game 5: 50

Of those five contests the Bucs were close in four of them, but no commitment to the running game as in all those contests the pass attempts outnumber the run attempts. The running game was performing at its peak week 1, but Olson refused to stick with it. Earlier in the week before leading to the Eagles game Olson would feature Carnell and be committed to the running game. So much for that plan and in fact when the Bucs defense forced the Eagles to punt in the third quarter when down by two touchdowns Olson dialed up three consecutive passing plays. That is bad play calling anyway you slice it, and not what this team is trying to do long term. And if this o-line needs Faine to just be NFL average than they need to be replaced because they are way overhyped, and the previous regime left this team with a bunch of lemons.


I won't disagree that he has abandoned the run too early too often this year, but Sunday I don't see where there was any place to run. The Eagles flooded every lane and said that they were going to make JJ beat them. I think he was doing his part....for the biggest portion of the day, but his WRs let him down. If.....and that is a BIG IF....they had caught even half of the dropped passes, that defense would have loosened up and committed more to stopping the passing game. I wish they could run the ball every down and just punish the defense, but when the defense overloads and dare you to beat them with the pass, there isn't a high percentage of success in the run game.

you cannot turn one dimensional, stick to the run.


watson

*
Hall of Famer
******
Posts : 5081
Offline
#12 : October 14, 2009, 11:01:46 AM

Yes you are correct there was on our first scoring drive. Other than that it was not anything along those lines. A team cannot abandon the run game because they hit us behind the line a couple of times, this is the NFL, people are going to get tackled for a loss. We did not have a heavy dose of run against Washington. Blitzing is no reason to abandon the run.

So let me get this straight. There are 8 and sometimes 9 defenders standing in the box and your plan is to run the ball??

If the much hyped o-line that the previous regime left behind can't generate enough push against eight defenders than they might as well have to rebuild it in the off season.


ADW,
I've read your posts for a number of years and respect what you say, but have to disagree with you here.....trying to run against that many defenders never works......or it works about 1 in 10 times

I don't care how good your O Line is, you can't match their numbers. There is always going to be a free defender. Until you make them pay with your passing game and make them take those extra defenders out of the box you aren't going to be very successful running the ball.


JJ showed more than enough by attacking down field, so it wasn't a Gradkowski situation.

Here are the pass attempts by the QB's in the last five games under Olson's direction:

Game 1: 41
Game 2: 50
Game 3: 26
Game 4: 22
Game 5: 50

Of those five contests the Bucs were close in four of them, but no commitment to the running game as in all those contests the pass attempts outnumber the run attempts. The running game was performing at its peak week 1, but Olson refused to stick with it. Earlier in the week before leading to the Eagles game Olson would feature Carnell and be committed to the running game. So much for that plan and in fact when the Bucs defense forced the Eagles to punt in the third quarter when down by two touchdowns Olson dialed up three consecutive passing plays. That is bad play calling anyway you slice it, and not what this team is trying to do long term. And if this o-line needs Faine to just be NFL average than they need to be replaced because they are way overhyped, and the previous regime left this team with a bunch of lemons.


I won't disagree that he has abandoned the run too early too often this year, but Sunday I don't see where there was any place to run. The Eagles flooded every lane and said that they were going to make JJ beat them. I think he was doing his part....for the biggest portion of the day, but his WRs let him down. If.....and that is a BIG IF....they had caught even half of the dropped passes, that defense would have loosened up and committed more to stopping the passing game. I wish they could run the ball every down and just punish the defense, but when the defense overloads and dare you to beat them with the pass, there isn't a high percentage of success in the run game.

you cannot turn one dimensional, stick to the run.
But, one of the mantras of the running game using the ZBS has been that you can't have negative plays and with that many defenders in the box, the liklihood of having negative plays is much greater.  As I said, I don't like not running the ball either, but I can't fault them for going to the pass when the odds are stacked against them.  Has Olson abandoned the run too early in some games.....yes.  Last Sunday was an odd situation and the Eagles forced them to rely on the young QB to beat them.  If I'm the Carolina DC, I would be doing the same thing this week.

Truths:
1.  Never have an argument with an idiot.  They will drag you down to their level and then beat you with their experience.
2.  For some it would be better if they remained silent and be thought a fool than to speak and erase all doubt.

warrenfb12

******
Hall of Famer

Posts : 5772
Offline
#13 : October 14, 2009, 11:15:49 AM

Yes you are correct there was on our first scoring drive. Other than that it was not anything along those lines. A team cannot abandon the run game because they hit us behind the line a couple of times, this is the NFL, people are going to get tackled for a loss. We did not have a heavy dose of run against Washington. Blitzing is no reason to abandon the run.

So let me get this straight. There are 8 and sometimes 9 defenders standing in the box and your plan is to run the ball??

If the much hyped o-line that the previous regime left behind can't generate enough push against eight defenders than they might as well have to rebuild it in the off season.


ADW,
I've read your posts for a number of years and respect what you say, but have to disagree with you here.....trying to run against that many defenders never works......or it works about 1 in 10 times

I don't care how good your O Line is, you can't match their numbers. There is always going to be a free defender. Until you make them pay with your passing game and make them take those extra defenders out of the box you aren't going to be very successful running the ball.


JJ showed more than enough by attacking down field, so it wasn't a Gradkowski situation.

Here are the pass attempts by the QB's in the last five games under Olson's direction:

Game 1: 41
Game 2: 50
Game 3: 26
Game 4: 22
Game 5: 50

Of those five contests the Bucs were close in four of them, but no commitment to the running game as in all those contests the pass attempts outnumber the run attempts. The running game was performing at its peak week 1, but Olson refused to stick with it. Earlier in the week before leading to the Eagles game Olson would feature Carnell and be committed to the running game. So much for that plan and in fact when the Bucs defense forced the Eagles to punt in the third quarter when down by two touchdowns Olson dialed up three consecutive passing plays. That is bad play calling anyway you slice it, and not what this team is trying to do long term. And if this o-line needs Faine to just be NFL average than they need to be replaced because they are way overhyped, and the previous regime left this team with a bunch of lemons.


I won't disagree that he has abandoned the run too early too often this year, but Sunday I don't see where there was any place to run. The Eagles flooded every lane and said that they were going to make JJ beat them. I think he was doing his part....for the biggest portion of the day, but his WRs let him down. If.....and that is a BIG IF....they had caught even half of the dropped passes, that defense would have loosened up and committed more to stopping the passing game. I wish they could run the ball every down and just punish the defense, but when the defense overloads and dare you to beat them with the pass, there isn't a high percentage of success in the run game.

you cannot turn one dimensional, stick to the run.
But, one of the mantras of the running game using the ZBS has been that you can't have negative plays and with that many defenders in the box, the liklihood of having negative plays is much greater. As I said, I don't like not running the ball either, but I can't fault them for going to the pass when the odds are stacked against them. Has Olson abandoned the run too early in some games.....yes. Last Sunday was an odd situation and the Eagles forced them to rely on the young QB to beat them. If I'm the Carolina DC, I would be doing the same thing this week.

so basically, when there are a lot of defenders in the box we should just give up the run? Throw it 50 times with a QB that has started one or in this case two games?


alldaway

*
Hall of Famer
******
Posts : 36754
Offline
#14 : October 14, 2009, 11:21:51 AM

Yes you are correct there was on our first scoring drive. Other than that it was not anything along those lines. A team cannot abandon the run game because they hit us behind the line a couple of times, this is the NFL, people are going to get tackled for a loss. We did not have a heavy dose of run against Washington. Blitzing is no reason to abandon the run.

So let me get this straight. There are 8 and sometimes 9 defenders standing in the box and your plan is to run the ball??

If the much hyped o-line that the previous regime left behind can't generate enough push against eight defenders than they might as well have to rebuild it in the off season.


ADW,
I've read your posts for a number of years and respect what you say, but have to disagree with you here.....trying to run against that many defenders never works......or it works about 1 in 10 times

I don't care how good your O Line is, you can't match their numbers. There is always going to be a free defender. Until you make them pay with your passing game and make them take those extra defenders out of the box you aren't going to be very successful running the ball.


JJ showed more than enough by attacking down field, so it wasn't a Gradkowski situation.

Here are the pass attempts by the QB's in the last five games under Olson's direction:

Game 1: 41
Game 2: 50
Game 3: 26
Game 4: 22
Game 5: 50

Of those five contests the Bucs were close in four of them, but no commitment to the running game as in all those contests the pass attempts outnumber the run attempts. The running game was performing at its peak week 1, but Olson refused to stick with it. Earlier in the week before leading to the Eagles game Olson would feature Carnell and be committed to the running game. So much for that plan and in fact when the Bucs defense forced the Eagles to punt in the third quarter when down by two touchdowns Olson dialed up three consecutive passing plays. That is bad play calling anyway you slice it, and not what this team is trying to do long term. And if this o-line needs Faine to just be NFL average than they need to be replaced because they are way overhyped, and the previous regime left this team with a bunch of lemons.


I won't disagree that he has abandoned the run too early too often this year, but Sunday I don't see where there was any place to run. The Eagles flooded every lane and said that they were going to make JJ beat them. I think he was doing his part....for the biggest portion of the day, but his WRs let him down. If.....and that is a BIG IF....they had caught even half of the dropped passes, that defense would have loosened up and committed more to stopping the passing game. I wish they could run the ball every down and just punish the defense, but when the defense overloads and dare you to beat them with the pass, there isn't a high percentage of success in the run game.

you cannot turn one dimensional, stick to the run.
But, one of the mantras of the running game using the ZBS has been that you can't have negative plays and with that many defenders in the box, the liklihood of having negative plays is much greater.  As I said, I don't like not running the ball either, but I can't fault them for going to the pass when the odds are stacked against them.  Has Olson abandoned the run too early in some games.....yes.  Last Sunday was an odd situation and the Eagles forced them to rely on the young QB to beat them.  If I'm the Carolina DC, I would be doing the same thing this week.

Olson is counterproductive in my opinion to the direction of this football team which is why I feel Raheem made a mistake turning to him.

Olson has incorporated some of the old man on man blocking which has had some success, but overall more failures.  The problem is this team can't stick with one or the other, and it is causing lack of cohesion/confusion with the o-line.  I want the o-line to stick with purely the ZBS moving forward, and a commitment to the running game to materialize because that is the long term goal of this new regime for the offensive side of the ball.

Jon Gruden is a superior play caller than Olson and has a better understanding of the offense Olson's is trying to use.  People talk of Jags' offense being figured out but where is the evidence?  Teams have figured out Olson's offense because he is simply using Jon's which there is over a decade of film on compared to the scarcity of Jags' offense. Jags offense may have been simple but so was Les Steckel's (and it was effective).  How is the offense improving under Olson by going back to Jon's complex offense?  Jon understood you needed a vet QB to run it, and passing 50 times with a veteran like Griese is not the same as a young second year pro like JJ.



Page: 1 2
Pewter Report  >>  Boards  >>  The Red Board (Moderators: 3rd String Kicker, PRPatrol)  >>  Topic: Dear Greg Olson, « previous next »
:

Hide Tools Show Tools