Haley going to run conservative Offense

[chiefzilla1501]

Originally Posted by FringeNC

Did Cassel really play worse? His QB rating was worse, but primarily because Haley actually had Cassel throwing downfield, and he through some picks. But overall offensively, pre-bye, our offense was a joke. Post-bye, it was probably close to NFL-average. 2 of the last 3 games we had 490 yards or more.

My guess is Haley doesn't think we have the WRs to spread the field. ****ers can't get open, so may as well keep them in to block.

Look, nothing in Haley's bio suggests that we are going to see Herm II. Everything in Herm's bio and rhetoric suggested he did plan to play not-to-lose. Ironically, Herm was given the benefit of the doubt, and no one thought he would mess with the offense....whereas with Haley, the opposite seems to be true.

I think our offense will be better next year, but it will be hard to compare, given we are moving from essentially the easiest schedule the NFL to the hardest. If Haley sucks as an offensive coach, get rid of his ass, because that is what he is supposed to bring to the table. Haley will earn his paycheck next year or get fired.

Unfortunately, our best formula for success is to pound the ball with the run and soften the defense so Cassel can throw. Until he proves otherwise.

Even if we bring in a marquee receiver, I would think the same thing, except maybe a tad bit more pass friendly. I don't see a problem with a more conservative offense if Cassel is our QB.

[Extra Point]

Originally Posted by chiefzilla1501

Unfortunately, our best formula for success is to pound the ball with the run and soften the defense so Cassel can throw. Until he proves otherwise.

Even if we bring in a marquee receiver, I would think the same thing, except maybe a tad bit more pass friendly. I don't see a problem with a more conservative offense if Cassel is our QB.

Good thoughts.

Jones better be in good shape. Battle on the payroll will only help. We have a slug of one-back RB's. Castille? What has he done? He's caught a few balls, and helped in short yardage downs. One drawback to the O was forgetting we have the FB position.

The onus is on the defense, no question. Arguing about the spread vs. tight formations is BS. If we have to catch up, we're toast, if we're locked into the running game. You can't pass the ball without protection, and/or an effective ground game.

I saw Herm v2.0 two seasons ago. I don't want to see v3.0.

[chiefzilla1501]

Originally Posted by Extra Point

Good thoughts.

Jones better be in good shape. Battle on the payroll will only help. We have a slug of one-back RB's. Castille? What has he done? He's caught a few balls, and helped in short yardage downs. One drawback to the O was forgetting we have the FB position.

The onus is on the defense, no question. Arguing about the spread vs. tight formations is BS. If we have to catch up, we're toast, if we're locked into the running game. You can't pass the ball without protection, and/or an effective ground game.

I saw Herm v2.0 two seasons ago. I don't want to see v3.0.

Well, we did see in 2010 that a predictable running attack can work real well. Much better, IMO, than even Herm's offense. Of course, the only legit defense we really faced down the stretch was against Baltimore. This offense could be downright scary with a slightly more conservative run-centered offense if only we could prove we can throw the damn ball downfield, even when the defense is gunning to stop the run.