There are a number of problems facing the Lions, as with any team that does not win the championship.
Our quarterbacking could certainly be better. When Burris plays like that, he is very hard to stop. He is a great scrambler. He knows how to protect himself. Would-be tacklers do not get a clean shot at him. Even when he doesn't slide he angles himself so that the defenders don't hit him hard. He has a great escapability sense in the pocket. Burris can throw bullets, and throw with touch. His only weakness at this time is some inconsistency.
The weaknesses of Buck and Jarious have been catalogued many times. Both players have been around a while now. Burris and Calvillo took a long time to reach elite status. Nevertheless, both Buck and Jarious are behind schedule if they hope to reach the heights. Fans, and perhaps coaches, are tempering their expectations.
IMO our problems run deeper than QB performance.
Our run defence is not up to the task. IMO our personnel is not the problem here. Our front 4 work with great energy. Our LBs also work hard. Offences are so sophisticated now that they are able to isolate individuals on the D Line, and mislead and misdirect the LBs.
IMO the only way to defend state-of-the-art ground games and running backs is with overloads, movement and deception. Our D tends to line up the same way, with the same personnel, performing the same tasks. That gives all the strategic advantage to the O. (Even our blitzes are telegraphed). IMO we need to overload the LOS with 5, 6, 7 and even 8 man fronts. Some of the extra men can always back off pre or post snap, if you wish. Or they can blitz, or play tight to the line. The idea is to confuse the blockers, and to make it much more difficult for them to go about their assignments.
Another issue with run defence is that our DBs have been spoiled in Wally's time when we had supreme run stopper Tyrone Williams eating up double and triple teams and still making the stop. It is not enough, IMO, to rely on superior personnel. IMO a conservative philosophy is going to have a very difficult time against the more aggressive schemes nowadays.
It is similar on offence. We rely more on execution than we do on deception and variety. We tend to be predictable in our calls, tendencies and assignments. Once again, that gives all the advantage to more innovative schemes.
Even more than play calling, I believe our repetitiveness in how we execute plays, and our repetiveness in schemes and play design put us at a large disadvantage. When we no longer have the best personnel (the talent pool has evened out at a high level for all teams), when our execution is not superior, and our schemes are not as good as those of more innovative teams, we will find ourselves where we are now: working hard, struggling, and wondering why we are not winning more often.
Our run defence and our passing game are where we need to be more innovative and less predictable.
IMO it is not so much personnel or execution, but our attitude of "smash mouth", in your face, stop us if you can, philosophy, the attitude of executing so well that it does not matter if the opponent knows what you are going to do. Those qualities are fine, but would be even more effective if opposing Offences and Defences were not able to game plan precisely, with secure knowledge of our familiar schemes and approaches.
Schemes, Personnel, Execution, Play Design, and Play Calling
Moderator: Team Captains
-
WestCoastJoe
- Hall of Famer
- Posts: 17721
- Joined: Mon May 22, 2006 8:55 pm
an example of innovation on defence ...
Doug Plank learned the 46 defence when he played for Buddy Ryan with the Chicago Bears.
8-man front at the LOS against a 6-man line.
Tough to block. Tough to attack.
High risk. High reward.
Very aggressive. Very innovative.
Plank is now with the New York Jets.
Buddy Ryan named the defence after Plank, who wore that number.
photo from New York Times archives ...
Doug Plank learned the 46 defence when he played for Buddy Ryan with the Chicago Bears.
8-man front at the LOS against a 6-man line.
Tough to block. Tough to attack.
High risk. High reward.
Very aggressive. Very innovative.
Plank is now with the New York Jets.
Buddy Ryan named the defence after Plank, who wore that number.
photo from New York Times archives ...
A lot of teams are struggling to stop the run, a weaknesses of today's defenses as they cut down on linebackers to play additional defensive backs and also due to the conversion of defensive backs to play linebacker positions.
However, our run defense is the worst in the league and that mostly comes down to a lack of discipline. We just don't cancel gaps and our defensive ends take too many risks crashing down to cover the deficiency of our defensive tackle game against the run.
Offensively, I've argued for years that our offence just does not have the imagination or innovation to gain the edge against defenses. We're predictable, bland, and way too conservative.
However, our run defense is the worst in the league and that mostly comes down to a lack of discipline. We just don't cancel gaps and our defensive ends take too many risks crashing down to cover the deficiency of our defensive tackle game against the run.
Offensively, I've argued for years that our offence just does not have the imagination or innovation to gain the edge against defenses. We're predictable, bland, and way too conservative.
"When I went to Catholic high school in Philadelphia, we just had one coach for football and basketball. He took all of us who turned out and had us run through a forest. The ones who ran into the trees were on the football team". (George Raveling)
-
WestCoastJoe
- Hall of Famer
- Posts: 17721
- Joined: Mon May 22, 2006 8:55 pm
Innovation, adaptation ... the marks of coaches at the top of their game ...
How do you stop a powerhouse running attack? Load up the LOS. Don Matthews did it. Buddy Ryan with the Bears did it. It is extremely aggressive. It is high risk. But it is very hard for the Offence to attack also. It does not mean the D blindly charges straight forward every play. You attack from all different angles with many different combinations. Sometimes you drop back into pass coverage. But you mix things up.
The QB has virtually no time to make more than one read. The running game is under attack right at the LOS. The blockers are facing different threats each snap. The blockers do not know from play to play precisely what they are facing.
That is one aggressive way to attack an offence.
If your defensive scheme lines up 4 men at the LOS, over and over, performing the same assignments, over and over, it allows the Offence to attack in very precise ways, causing isolations and overloads, and double teams. That is a huge advantage to give away to the opponent.
How does the O attack such an aggressive defence? Not by being timid. The Dolphins were the only team to solve the 46 defence in the Bears' championship season.
Dan Marino played a wonderful game. He rolled out a lot. Imagine that: Marino rolling out. He utilized extremely quick passing plays. They attacked the one on one pass coverage.
It goes back and forth between the O and the D. But innovation and an attack philosophy are certainly my preference over the comfort of doing what is best known and safest, over and over. Besides which, if coaches such as Trestman and Hufnagel raise the bar by innovating, your team must adapt or fall to the bottom of the league. Counting on superior personnel, and superior execution are not enough if your team does not also include the more cerebral side of the game. That would be innovation, subtlety and variety, on both O and D.
How do you stop a powerhouse running attack? Load up the LOS. Don Matthews did it. Buddy Ryan with the Bears did it. It is extremely aggressive. It is high risk. But it is very hard for the Offence to attack also. It does not mean the D blindly charges straight forward every play. You attack from all different angles with many different combinations. Sometimes you drop back into pass coverage. But you mix things up.
The QB has virtually no time to make more than one read. The running game is under attack right at the LOS. The blockers are facing different threats each snap. The blockers do not know from play to play precisely what they are facing.
That is one aggressive way to attack an offence.
If your defensive scheme lines up 4 men at the LOS, over and over, performing the same assignments, over and over, it allows the Offence to attack in very precise ways, causing isolations and overloads, and double teams. That is a huge advantage to give away to the opponent.
How does the O attack such an aggressive defence? Not by being timid. The Dolphins were the only team to solve the 46 defence in the Bears' championship season.
Dan Marino played a wonderful game. He rolled out a lot. Imagine that: Marino rolling out. He utilized extremely quick passing plays. They attacked the one on one pass coverage.
It goes back and forth between the O and the D. But innovation and an attack philosophy are certainly my preference over the comfort of doing what is best known and safest, over and over. Besides which, if coaches such as Trestman and Hufnagel raise the bar by innovating, your team must adapt or fall to the bottom of the league. Counting on superior personnel, and superior execution are not enough if your team does not also include the more cerebral side of the game. That would be innovation, subtlety and variety, on both O and D.
-
Toppy Vann
- Hall of Famer
- Posts: 9798
- Joined: Sat Jul 23, 2005 12:56 pm
If you look at Buck's play when he first arrived his shooting the lights out and passes were both short and long and accurate. People think his injuries are affecting him and at times, yes, the more you get hit the tougher it is to be spot on. The O line and the blocking is not the consistent stuff the Lions of old had. This affects the QB as he can't just be thinking receivers, he must also be thinking of pressure. If you get to Cavillo and rock him off his game and 2 second release you can end his day pretty well. It is not different here.Blitz wrote:A lot of teams are struggling to stop the run, a weaknesses of today's defenses as they cut down on linebackers to play additional defensive backs and also due to the conversion of defensive backs to play linebacker positions.
However, our run defense is the worst in the league and that mostly comes down to a lack of discipline. We just don't cancel gaps and our defensive ends take too many risks crashing down to cover the deficiency of our defensive tackle game against the run.
Offensively, I've argued for years that our offence just does not have the imagination or innovation to gain the edge against defenses. We're predictable, bland, and way too conservative.
With the Stamps and the TiCats, it is just that they all know the Lions offence so well that they can cheat on plays and negate them. That short square out to the RGR Geroy near the goal line is designed to be a quick toss to Simon with time for him to square up to the D and beat just one guy. But that one guy saw it and got Geroy before he could turn. Everyone blames Buck but that was the play and he was to get it out there fast not look around.
There is little rhyme or reason to a lot of offensive play calling. I think the play caller gets into ruts and just can't think in a game situation what to do. When they did anything that other teams weren't expecting you get the top notch play of old from Pierce.
Buck didn't become a bad QB - but a bad system that other teams know like your guys do - can make a good QB look bad. If the Lions had that outstanding offensive line like Dickinson had, he'd be a different QB.
Stopping the run is another matter. Discipline comes from coaching and Mike has yet to learn how to rise to the challenges.
Blitz has posted before on the Kruck-Dorazio play calling and where did those plays disappear to?
Quite frankly, the best before date thinking on some offensive players has led in part to the demise of our top performing always winning team and that old adage that it doesn't matter if they know what we are doing we will execute it better is no longer reasonable here. I too subscribe to that thinking. Execution trumps predictability but now the Lions ain't got the offensive linemen and blocking to make that statement true. More of the same won't get a different result. Bring out the Kruck - Dorazio play book and let Kruck call the plays!
"Ability without character will lose." - Marv Levy
I believe a gentleman who had more input on that then he will be given credit for now resides in Saskatchewan.Blitz has posted before on the Kruck-Dorazio play calling and where did those plays disappear to?
I would submit, again, that if you really want to shake things up a bit offensively, reach a little bit further into the past you might wait out the season and give a cantankerous SOB in Toronto a call.
-
TheLionKing
- Hall of Famer
- Posts: 25103
- Joined: Sat Feb 19, 2005 10:13 pm
- Location: Vancouver
Lions defense hasn't been the aggressive, attacking self since the departure of Dave Ritchie. We're letting the offence dictate what they're going to do rather than us forcing the issue. We're too passive and predictable.
-
DanoT
- Hall of Famer
- Posts: 4319
- Joined: Mon Sep 17, 2007 6:38 pm
- Location: Victoria, B.C. in summer, Sun Peaks Resort in winter
Please identify who you are talking about by using their name as not all of us reading these posts are history buffs.I believe a gentleman who had more input on that then he will be given credit for now resides in Saskatchewan.
I would submit, again, that if you really want to shake things up a bit offensively, reach a little bit further into the past you might wait out the season and give a cantankerous SOB in Toronto a call.
Clermont and Buratto, respectively I believe.DanoT wrote:Please identify who you are talking about by using their name as not all of us reading these posts are history buffs.I believe a gentleman who had more input on that then he will be given credit for now resides in Saskatchewan.
I would submit, again, that if you really want to shake things up a bit offensively, reach a little bit further into the past you might wait out the season and give a cantankerous SOB in Toronto a call.
Entertainment value = an all time low
Cal murphy is in toronto????cromartie wrote:I believe a gentleman who had more input on that then he will be given credit for now resides in Saskatchewan.Blitz has posted before on the Kruck-Dorazio play calling and where did those plays disappear to?
I would submit, again, that if you really want to shake things up a bit offensively, reach a little bit further into the past you might wait out the season and give a cantankerous SOB in Toronto a call.
Every day that passes is one you can't get back
-
Toppy Vann
- Hall of Famer
- Posts: 9798
- Joined: Sat Jul 23, 2005 12:56 pm
I think he was referring to former Lion assistant coach (RBs) Jamie Baresi who was hired in Riderland and Burratto.Rammer wrote:Clermont and Buratto, respectively I believe.DanoT wrote:Please identify who you are talking about by using their name as not all of us reading these posts are history buffs.I believe a gentleman who had more input on that then he will be given credit for now resides in Saskatchewan.
I would submit, again, that if you really want to shake things up a bit offensively, reach a little bit further into the past you might wait out the season and give a cantankerous SOB in Toronto a call.
"Ability without character will lose." - Marv Levy
-
PigSkin_53
- Hall of Famer
- Posts: 3926
- Joined: Mon Aug 09, 2004 11:47 am
Until we learn to how adjust and respond to what opposing offenses and defenses around the league are doing to exploit our one-dimensional, high school performances on both sides of the ball, our defense and offense will never been anything more than one-trick ponies, inept, inadequate, and unable to cope with the evolving world of professional football in the CFL.
The buck stops at the desk of Wally Buono for the defending and mollycoddling of his coaching staff, and their constant taking advantage of his goodwill and loyalty toward them.
Coaching changes must follow in the off-season or Wally should do what is best for the team and leave as Lion’s head coach.
This is a business not an old boys club.
The buck stops at the desk of Wally Buono for the defending and mollycoddling of his coaching staff, and their constant taking advantage of his goodwill and loyalty toward them.
Coaching changes must follow in the off-season or Wally should do what is best for the team and leave as Lion’s head coach.
This is a business not an old boys club.
"Just Win Baby" ~ Al Davis
PigSkin_53 wrote:Until we learn to how adjust and respond to what opposing offenses and defenses around the league are doing to exploit our one-dimensional, high school performances on both sides of the ball, our defense and offense will never been anything more than one-trick ponies, inept, inadequate, and unable to cope with the evolving world of professional football in the CFL.
The buck stops at the desk of Wally Buono for the defending and mollycoddling of his coaching staff, and their constant taking advantage of his goodwill and loyalty toward them.
Coaching changes must follow in the off-season or Wally should do what is best for the team and leave as Lion’s head coach.
This is a business not an old boys club.
Right you are sir, this Buono fellow is a softy and never will amount to much in this league.
████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████