National Football League

Page 266 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
on3m@n@rmy said:
Would Vegas even have a large enough NFL market to support a team? I dunno.

Run Pass Option (RPO) is an interesting trend in football programs at all levels (HS, NCAA, & pro). But first I wondered how football got to this point, even knowing offensive coaches are always trying to get an edge on defenses.

Several weeks ago I posted how one local HS coach, who has a son in the NFL (even if just barely) and who gets his way around to visiting college programs due to lots of spare time being a retired teacher, says that college football programs are “starving” for QBs. A few days later NFL radio aired a segment about the huge talent gap that exists between college QBs and NFL QBs. I chalked that up as interesting. On the heels of that, Bleacher Report posted this article on “Are RPO’s the next big thing to hit NFL offenses?” That got my attention.
http://bleacherreport.com/articles/2642541-are-rpos-the-next-big-thing-to-hit-nfl-offenses

This first question that came to mind was whether or not QB talent level is helping drive the change in HS and college teams to running RPO. There are a lot of interesting facets to RPO offenses. But here are a few facts when it comes to RPO:
- RPO is simpler for offensive line blocking. That is because the OL is ALWAYS run blocking, even when it is a pass. This puts second tier defenders (LBs, CBs, and safeties who occupy pass lanes) at conflict. No longer can these defenders immediate read pass because the O-Linemen heads are not popping up as in traditional drop back pass blocking. The defenders must use other reads, and the undisciplined defender will bite and fill a run gap.
- Because of that, the QB, instead of using full-field reads of the defense, just reads the defender at conflict for the given play. So, many times the play is simpler for the QB to execute to get the ball in the right hands. And often the pass is not long downfield.

And then if the play is easier for the QB to execute, then it is also easier to teach, which is particularly important at the HS and college level where teams only have players a few years. Helping fuel this trend to RPO offenses at the HS and NCAA level is the fact that many defenders are not well disciplined when it comes to executing their defensive role. Many defenders just want to get to the ball instead of performing their role, and find it difficult to learn to trust their teammates. That is part of why RPO in HS and NCAA is successful. That and the fact defensive coaches have to figure out how to stop RPO’s, which is a huge topic itself.

So, will RPO make more headway into the NFL? RPO is not the same as the NFL’s Read-Option that teams like SEA, CAR, and SF have run. RPO is full-scale commitment to a read option on EVERY play. That means there is a pass element to every run play, and a run element to every pass play. And to put defenders into conflict (e.g. do they play pass or read run and fill gaps), the OL tactics are to always run block. The twist to this style of blocking is OL guys cannot go too far downfield to continue their blocks. There is that “illegal man downfield” rule the OL guys can get caught breaking, which is being more than 3 yards downfield. A lineman might get away with being 4 or even 5 yards downfield, but the result is for them to pull up. THAT is the part of the RPO blocking scheme I dislike, which takes away some of the smash-mouth blocking style which is more punishing and more interesting to watch (to me anyway). (Side note – that might be required and end up as a rule change to reduce concussions from blocking in the trenches). At the end of the day, the RPO might become the next big thing in the NFL for the latter reason, but if not for that it might just come and go like wildcat plays. The reason RPO may not last for long in the NFL is for the simple reason that NFL defenders are more disciplined and know more about the game than HS and NCAA players, and NFL defensive coaches will find ways to limit the effectiveness of RPO offenses (e.g. attacking with interior & edge rushers).
Good post! IMO, in an effort to deceive the D, OCs have created offenses that also confuse the QB. Manning and Brady were able to do it because they got a little bit added to their plate each year, but the new guys get the entire thing heaped on their plate all at once. RPO simplifies things a little for the QB while still keeping the D guessing. IMO, a simple O can be very effective if everybody executes well.
 
movingtarget said:
Not surprised about Goff. But this is the whole argument about going all in for the number one draft pick and if Goff does not turn out to be a top line QB in the NFL it will be seen as a Rams fail for putting all of their eggs in the one basket. But it's early days yet for Goff. 49ers are supposed to be very happy with their rookie QB Driskel. Both the Rams and 49ers had terrible offensive records last year and they had a win each against each other. They are drawn to play in the first game of the new season and the 49ers have a horror schedule especially the first five games or so. I think they would like their chances against the Rams. But the Las Vegas bookies can't see them winning more than two games ! Be interesting to see if Chip Kelly can improve them in his first season.
True, it is way too early to judge Goff. Interesting statement made by Jeff (in a different report than i posted), Fisher claims he did not ever mean Goff would be the day-1 starter. Meaning, he may be willing to let Goff take sips of the cup, rather than make him drink from the fire hydrant, and instead let him develop at whatever pace it takes until he can become starter.

As for what Chip can accomplish in season-1 in SF, I'm not sure he has the talent needed. And by the time he has the talent needed, defenses will be more accustomed to seeing what they are running and therefore be able to be more prepared to defend it. I will say this, regardless of talent, if he can get his offense into prime shape and then be able to run plays as fast as humanly possible, that will put huge pressure on defenses as they wear out as the game progresses. That kind of conditioning edge to his advantage can overcome opposing defenses with the talent edge, or talent depth (by taking away defensive rotations).


jmdirt said:
Good post! IMO, in an effort to deceive the D, OCs have created offenses that also confuse the QB. Manning and Brady were able to do it because they got a little bit added to their plate each year, but the new guys get the entire thing heaped on their plate all at once.

RPO simplifies things a little for the QB while still keeping the D guessing. IMO, a simple O can be very effective if everybody executes well.
Thanks. A good analogy contrasting the difference between Manning/Brady vs the new QB: Drinking. Manning/Brady drank sips from a cup, the new QB is like drinking from a fire hydrant - it'll rip the lips right off. You are right about that.

Good points. I'd only add the objective of the RPO is to put a defender into conflict of run support vs pass. In the NFL, defenders generally tend to be more disciplined, so not as many players fall for the bait. Even though we often see aggressive, athletic defenders get fooled and become undisciplined. A good example is the read option vs the DE. Without stunts, the DE should always have outside contain (trust mates to cover inside) or with stunts someone else should have outside coverage, but how often do we see the DE bite on the run and crash down inside, leaving the QB a clear outside run route.

On execution, the same can be said of defenses, which also try to keep the QB guessing. Simple, well executed defenses can also be very effective. The offense may still get their yards, but the defense only has to make a stop at some time during a drive (prevent TDs). The bottom line is, who has the most athletic, disciplined players on defense vs opposing offenses? A good RPO can slice up an average defense by consistently putting defenders at conflict. But won't have so much success vs a really good defense. {NCAA's Ole Miss runs the RPO, but ended up at 6-2, second to Alabama} A really good defense almost has to have a lock down CB, allowing them to flood the zone on the opposite side with an extra defender. For example, say the O lines up with trips left and X WR to the right. A lock down can cover the X WR without over the top safety coverage. Then on the other side the defense can put 4 (not 3) defenders vs the trips WRs. The D can get the extra man advantage in coverage with a nickle, dropping LB, or hybrid safety that plays more like a LB. It is interesting to note the NFL trend of getting more athletic at the LB position by finding faster, yet traditionally undersized LBs, or using SS to perform LB roles. Speed kills.

Actually, lots of things defenses can do can kill what offenses want to do. Diversity is one. Call it more defensive weapons. Take a team that is stacked with edge rushers, but has no interior rushers vs the team who has both interior and edge rushers. Interior rushers (e.g. Rams McDonald, Fins' Ndamukong Suh) have a shorter distance to the QB and collapse the pocket so pocket-passing QBs like Brady can't climb the pocket. You can make the case guys like Suh should be more highly paid than prime edge rushers (so watch what happens with Broncos Von Miller - interesting - plus Elway won't overpay, as we saw with Ostweiller). Other D weapons: LB speed, secondary depth, having true lock-down corner. Anyway, I'm starting to ramble too much.
 
Good news, bad news. Looks like Seattle undrafted free agent rookie QB from TCU, Trevone Boykin, will make the Seattle 53-man roster unless he gets run over by a beer truck. That's good news for him. The bad news is what likely has cemented that. Previously not out of the picture for Seattle, but now completely out (and probably for life) was free agent QB Tavaris Jackson, who was arrested for aggravated assault for pulling a gun on his wife. Just Nuts!
 
Jun 22, 2009
4,991
0
0
Who knew?

Bills wide receiver Marquise Goodwin is also this year's world no.1 in the long jump, and is going to Rio for gold!
 
Re:

on3m@n@rmy said:
Andrew Luck's new deal is an abomination. Like, $140+M over 6 years, more than $80M guaranteed. WAY OVERPAID. NOT. WORTH. IT.
:eek: WTH! All of these big contracts make me like the game less. I guess I feel 'good' that I don't support the money machine because I don't buy tickets, team apparel, or pay for cable, etc. I do watch 3-5 games per week though.
 
Re:

on3m@n@rmy said:
Andrew Luck's new deal is an abomination. Like, $140+M over 6 years, more than $80M guaranteed. WAY OVERPAID. NOT. WORTH. IT.
The money can be a noose around their neck. Kaep thought he could waltz into Denver on the same money as the 49ers are paying him but Elway did not see it that way. The reality is that it causes problems if they are unhappy and want to move on as they think they are worth it but many other teams won't touch them especially if they are not playing that great. So they hold out to be paid what they think they deserve and miss opportunities sometimes with other good teams. Luck must think it's Christmas in July !
 
Re: Re:

jmdirt said:
on3m@n@rmy said:
Andrew Luck's new deal is an abomination. Like, $140+M over 6 years, more than $80M guaranteed. WAY OVERPAID. NOT. WORTH. IT.
:eek: WTH! All of these big contracts make me like the game less. I guess I feel 'good' that I don't support the money machine because I don't buy tickets, team apparel, or pay for cable, etc. I do watch 3-5 games per week though.
Yup. I stopped attending games myself. Here's more gas for the fire: Goodell made over $31M in 2015. FOR DOING SUCH A GOOD JOB?
http://www.theredzone.org/BlogDescription/tabid/61/EntryId/57222/Goodell-s-2015-salary-was-a-little-over--31-million-for-2015/Default.aspx
 
Re: Re:

movingtarget said:
on3m@n@rmy said:
Andrew Luck's new deal is an abomination. Like, $140+M over 6 years, more than $80M guaranteed. WAY OVERPAID. NOT. WORTH. IT.
The money can be a noose around their neck. Kaep thought he could waltz into Denver on the same money as the 49ers are paying him but Elway did not see it that way. The reality is that it causes problems if they are unhappy and want to move on as they think they are worth it but many other teams won't touch them especially if they are not playing that great. So they hold out to be paid what they think they deserve and miss opportunities sometimes with other good teams. Luck must think it's Christmas in July !
Can you imagine what it would mean if next season Luck were to get a career ending or season ending injury that keeps him from returning to the same level of play, yet Indy is due to pay him $87M guaranteed?
 
Re: Re:

on3m@n@rmy said:
movingtarget said:
on3m@n@rmy said:
Andrew Luck's new deal is an abomination. Like, $140+M over 6 years, more than $80M guaranteed. WAY OVERPAID. NOT. WORTH. IT.
The money can be a noose around their neck. Kaep thought he could waltz into Denver on the same money as the 49ers are paying him but Elway did not see it that way. The reality is that it causes problems if they are unhappy and want to move on as they think they are worth it but many other teams won't touch them especially if they are not playing that great. So they hold out to be paid what they think they deserve and miss opportunities sometimes with other good teams. Luck must think it's Christmas in July !
Can you imagine what it would mean if next season Luck were to get a career ending or season ending injury that keeps him from returning to the same level of play, yet Indy is due to pay him $87M guaranteed?
Yes it's crazy. How good a QB is he if they did not make the playoffs ? On that money he would have to be the next Brady and I don't hear anyone saying that.
 
oh wizened cyclingnews NFL pundits, how does the Von Miller situation pan out?

I'm finding it most intriguing... certainly something that could be speculated on (in the absence of any in-season news).
 
Brady loses his appeal. The only court left is the SC, which may not even hear the case.

Agree on Luck's contract. I think he's a great young QB who hasn't quite lived up to his potential, but has played quite well. But he's not worth that much cash. The team is banking the NFL continues to really expand in cash and the next CBA in a few years is favorable. That's a big gamble as I see it.
 
I don't think much about what might happens in the Vonn Miller & Broncos situation, as intriguing as it may be. But my gut tells me Vonn is butting heads with the wrong GM, because I don't think Elway will budge. I don't even know what this Friday's deadline means so I can't speculate beyond that and would just be guessing. But Vonn knows, & Elway should know, Vonn could skip the entire preseason and camps then come in for the first regular season game and not skip a beat. At that point the DC would probably have to ease him in a bit because he won't be quite game ready to take hitting, just to preclude injury.

Agree the Luck deal's rationale is a gamble on cap increases.
 
Re:

on3m@n@rmy said:
I don't think much about what might happens in the Vonn Miller & Broncos situation, as intriguing as it may be. But my gut tells me Vonn is butting heads with the wrong GM, because I don't think Elway will budge. I don't even know what this Friday's deadline means so I can't speculate beyond that and would just be guessing. But Vonn knows, & Elway should know, Vonn could skip the entire preseason and camps then come in for the first regular season game and not skip a beat. At that point the DC would probably have to ease him in a bit because he won't be quite game ready to take hitting, just to preclude injury.

Agree the Luck deal's rationale is a gamble on cap increases.
Elway did not look like budging with the proposed Kaep deal. He made it clear that Kaep was not worth what he he was asking for. And I think a lot of good judges agreed with him. If Kaep does not step up this year or at least see off Gabbert for the starting role it's not looking good for him and the 49ers will get rid him probably sooner rather than later. Probably post season and especially if Kelly can't get some improvement out of them.
 
Re:

movingtarget said:
http://bleacherreport.com/articles/2649937-every-nfl-teams-riskiest-move-so-far-this-offseason/page/2649937-every-nfl-teams-riskiest-move-so-far-this-offseason

Interesting reading. Von Miller situation seems no closer to being resolved even though he is happy with the contract amount. The way the contract is structured seems to be the sticking point.
Because the "contract amount" is nearly meaningless. In the NFL, contracts aren't guaranteed, so the structure (guaranteed money in which years) is all that matters. The guaranteed money is the contract amount. The rest is all open to restructuring.
 
Re: Re:

red_flanders said:
movingtarget said:
http://bleacherreport.com/articles/2649937-every-nfl-teams-riskiest-move-so-far-this-offseason/page/2649937-every-nfl-teams-riskiest-move-so-far-this-offseason

Interesting reading. Von Miller situation seems no closer to being resolved even though he is happy with the contract amount. The way the contract is structured seems to be the sticking point.
Because the "contract amount" is nearly meaningless. In the NFL, contracts aren't guaranteed, so the structure (guaranteed money in which years) is all that matters. The guaranteed money is the contract amount. The rest is all open to restructuring.
Thanks, did not know that.
 
Re: Re:

movingtarget said:
red_flanders said:
movingtarget said:
http://bleacherreport.com/articles/2649937-every-nfl-teams-riskiest-move-so-far-this-offseason/page/2649937-every-nfl-teams-riskiest-move-so-far-this-offseason

Interesting reading. Von Miller situation seems no closer to being resolved even though he is happy with the contract amount. The way the contract is structured seems to be the sticking point.
Because the "contract amount" is nearly meaningless. In the NFL, contracts aren't guaranteed, so the structure (guaranteed money in which years) is all that matters. The guaranteed money is the contract amount. The rest is all open to restructuring.
Thanks, did not know that.
Sure, no worries. Looks like they closed on a deal with 70 million in guaranteed money. Must be nice!
 
NFL contracts are definitely fuzzy and not like MLB, or other sports. Agents are infamous for tossing out bloated numbers of giant deals players, especially QBs get, but most of those numbers are often perfect-case scenarios loaded with incentives, like the player plays every game, wins a lot of games, and awards and hits big numbers as well. Von Miller's contract is a perfect example. "$114 million!!!"

Meanwhile, Tom Brady has accepted his four game suspension, closing one of the strangest chapters in NFL history.
 
Re: Re:

on3m@n@rmy said:
movingtarget said:
Interesting Interview With Aaron Rodgers

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lvX8diWgriA
Snap! That is a great interview. Not just your normal material.

Re Vonn, I misjudged Elway. I think he made the right decision to pay the man. Even if the worth is debatable.
I think Elway made the right decision with both Vonn and Kaep. This year will be a critical year for Kaep. Some observers seem to think that Kelly is good at getting the best out of mediocre QBs. Kaep was formerly better than that but is in a slump. Kaep and Gabbert are going head to head on the training field in the pre-season. I have a feeling that if Gabbert gets the nod Kaep will be lucky to make it back this season as the starter and that will be the end of his career at the 49ers as they will trade him.
 
Re:

movingtarget said:
Can't say that I blame him. He's had a great career. Lot's of memories. Bonds with teammates that could last a lifetime. Another explanation for his leaving: http://www.theplayerstribune.com/eugene-monroe-nfl-retirement/:
My first practice drill was a memorable one: Bull in the Ring. I was in the center of a circle of my teammates. When our coach blew the whistle, one of them would try to run across the ring while I tried to tackle them. As I laid out teammate after teammate, one of my coaches kept screaming, “Put his d*ck in the dirt!” I had no idea what he was talking about, but his tone suggested that I should keep laying people out! I was 11.

I also remember feeling dizzy and disoriented after the drill was over. Was that my first concussion? Probably, but nobody seemed too worried about head trauma in 1998. I shook it off and continued to battle.

It would become a never-ending cycle: injury, shake it off, “recover,” repeat.
My wife used to joke about the “little things I forget,” but now she’s more concerned about things like me putting my phone in the freezer and then tearing up our house looking for it. Things like that were just a joke around the house until this past winter, when my four-year-old daughter said, “Daddy you don’t remember anything!” Since then, she’s said it a few more times.
So, IMO a lot more needs to be done to come up with better gear, better playing techniques, possible rule changes, continuing to advance the clinical side of head injuries (on/off field assessments and treatments), and TRAINING tailored to the specific needs of team medical/training staff, coaches, and owners.

And once again, Roger Goodell is not doing a good enough job of leading the way. Roger has a huge responsibility that goes way beyond the NFL, who has the money. What the NFL does with this will reach out to colleges and high schools. But do colleges and high schools have the money to lead the way? No. So it falls on the NFL to lead the way and Roger needs to kick it in high gear instead of just maintaining status quo. :mad:
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY