The Bucs O-line is dominant. That's making Coen look really good.
Uh huh.
I'm sure that's the reason why.
The Bucs O-line is dominant. That's making Coen look really good.
Uh huh.
I'm sure that's the reason why.
I don't think the line played one of their better games. Certainly better in the 2nd half and running it down their throat but overall below average (for them).
I'd have to see the grades but I'd give them a B-
The Bucs O-line is dominant. That's making Coen look really good.
Its almost a little bit of the opposite of that.
I agree with your premise that you need a GOOD offenieve line and I DEFINITELY agree that we have some dominant guys, althoogh one of them is a rookie who had two holding penalties today BUT OUR RUNNING SUCCESS IS ALSO DIRECTLY LINKED TO COEN's OFFENSE.
There are many ways to see this but the easiest (and shortest lol) way is just to look at the success of the "pony" package. Josh Q has been covering it extensively:
https://www.pewterreport.com/week-13-bucs-pony-package-update/
But in his latest article covering the "pony" package he starts off this like this:
"I have enjoyed documenting the evolution of this package throughout this season. And this past week Bucs offensive coordinator Liam Coen brought new wrinkles to further level up this innovative portion of his offense."
NOTE: "new wrinkles" and "innovative"
And the Pony package is just ONE thing that Coen does DIRECTLY to positively impact our running game. He does many other things, both directly (in game modifications) and indirectly (formations that make it difficult for the defense to know run pass).
We have talent on the offensive line BUT we are not dominating SOLELY because of that talent
The Bucs O-line is dominant. That's making Coen look really good.
Uh huh.
I'm sure that's the reason why.
I don't think the line played one of their better games. Certainly better in the 2nd half and running it down their throat but overall below average (for them).
I'd have to see the grades but I'd give them a B-
I agree
I have posted a couple times that I want to hear how Coen describes this game because its almost if the game plan was to go way off tendency in the first half and then in the second to return heavily to the run heavy stuff we were always doing successfully
That ^^ would be the most flattering way of describing it
I say flattering because one alternative explanation for the two very different halves would be something like Coen losing his mind a bit in almost abandoning the run (Mayfield top rusher of fist half) and screen game in the first half AND THEN regained his composure (or something) at halftime and reverted back to where we should have been all along.
Hard to say which one is true. Probably somewhere in between BUT in the first half we looked more like pre-Coen offenses
No doubt Cohen's offense has unlocked the Bucs running game, but in this game with all the shifting and motioning no wide receivers got carries. Bucs RBs had a total of 13 receiving yards. About 200 yards came from the running backs running.
Last year a 1st down run up the gut would usually get about two yards at the most. This year it's more than likely going to get five or six yards. I think that's largely due to better play from the center position in addition to further development of Goedeke and Mauch and an improvement at LG as well. I'm just saying that if Coen took a HC job somewhere with an inferior O-line he's going to have a tough time making a difference with that team.
No doubt Cohen's offense has unlocked the Bucs running game, but in this game with all the shifting and motioning no wide receivers got carries. Bucs RBs had a total of 13 receiving yards. About 200 yards came from the running backs running.
Last year a 1st down run up the gut would usually get about two yards at the most. This year it's more than likely going to get five or six yards. I think that's largely due to better play from the center position in addition to further development of Goedeke and Mauch and an improvement at LG as well. I'm just saying that if Coen took a HC job somewhere with an inferior O-line he's going to have a tough time making a difference with that team.
I totally get your point with the last sentence in bold and agree.
I think maybe the part your discounting though is that everything is connected, right? The Bucs offense is not A running game and A passing game it is an offense that has both INTERCONNECTED weapons.
So, one reason we got to run for 200 yards was because we converted 3rd downs. We converted a number of them by PASSING, which then gave us more running attempts. Last year Canales had trouble keep our offense on schedule down and distance so converting third downs was harder. This year we are one of the best at converting 3rd downs. So, success passing improves the running and vice versa.
Another big reason we ran for 200 yards is because we had a LEAD .. . because we were successful on 3rd down and with the passing game. We scored on our three possessions in the 3rd quarter. The key EXPLOSIVE plays on each drive were pass, run, pass, so the scoring was 2/3 passing and that is what allowed us to keep running hard in the 4th quarter.
So, yes IF Coen went to a team with a shit O-line that would limit him, but i would think he would get MUCH MORE out of that running game then say Canales with the same shitty O-line. That is because Coen's offense is not only better overall but its also DYNAMIC meaning he's changing things up all the time. Canales only changed when things were not working. he moved Godwin back inside and he started to change BNACK to some of Goodwin's run game. Coen is taking looks he puts on film one week and showing the same look the next BUT then having the play roll out with A WRINKLE. He's even making those kind of changes in game, according to Quepo.
Coen deserves the credit he is getting. Its not just a better line
I say flattering because one alternative explanation for the two very different halves would be something like Coen losing his mind a bit in almost abandoning the run (Mayfield top rusher of fist half) and screen game in the first half AND THEN regained his composure (or something) at halftime and reverted back to where we should have been all along.
Hard to say which one is true. Probably somewhere in between BUT in the first half we looked more like pre-Coen offenses
Wirfs make it sound like it was the latter
"“I think we committed to the run a little bit,” Wirfs said of the mentality after halftime. “We had some runs sprinkled in, in the first half, where we were kind of mainly throwing.
“So [at halftime] we were like, ‘Let’s stick to the ground game and get the chains moving. It worked out for us.”
I think the scheme is helping the line over perform. It's the same as last year but with Barton. Yes players got better but arguably Wirfs has played slightly worse.
So I think Coen is putting the solid talent we have in a better position to succeed. He has great feel for balance.
Canales was all over the place but he was nothing of not run to set up the pass 100%
arguably Wirfs has played slightly worse.
You're correct. That is arguable. In what aspect do you think he has played "slightly worse"?
