tgo Posted September 10, 2019 Report Share Posted September 10, 2019 (edited) Something I've been pondering, and then I came across this Kuharsky article this morning: Vrabel quote: I just felt like with those one-timers, those one-hitters that whether you want to call them scheme plays, you’re only going to have one crack at it in the game,” he said. “I think we really took the next step and were able to hit those. Maybe we didn’t, for whatever reason, probably coaching on my part and then just the execution throughout practice, we probably didn’t hit as many of those (in the past)." https://www.paulkuharsky.com/news/mike-vrabel-liked-what-titans-did-with-one-crack-plays-in-cleveland I personally noticed during the game that a lot of the plays looked more like those highly schemed Mularkey plays than more routine LaFleur plays (run/pass conflict, run and pass looks the same, more reliant on routine pass plays and routine run plays) if you understand my meaning. I think the base offense and verbiage is based on the LaFleur/Shanahan scheme, but to me the mechanics of the offense looked more like a Mularkey offense with zone running. Maybe we now have a healthy mix of both. I'm looking forward to hearing Cosell's take on the offense tomorrow. The two plays above look a lot like Mularkey plays to me. There were a few other plays like this too, including the handoff to Jonnu Smith, the play with Daren Bates in at FB as an eligible receiver, and even the Derrick Henry screen. Regardless, my opinion is that at first sight over preseason and the first game, this system is better than LaFleur's at least for a mediocre QB. Thoughts? Edited September 10, 2019 by tgo Justafan, CreepingDeath, and Mythos27 3 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post Justafan Posted September 10, 2019 Popular Post Report Share Posted September 10, 2019 I noticed that the play action and shots downfield definitely reminded me of Mularkey. I also noticed that there was a quite a bit of traditional power blocking by the lineman. Last year, it was really zone heavy but this year it was more mixed. Not as many condensed sets as Mularkey though and I didn't see them try and run the same play 3 and 4 times trying to get it to "pop". Titans279, tgo, Bluth, and 3 others 5 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
reo Posted September 10, 2019 Report Share Posted September 10, 2019 I didn't notice a ton of schemed plays when I watched it live but I could easily be wrong. They did seem to throw it a ton in the first half though iirc. Seems like they almost threw it to open up the run later which was good to see. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
tgo Posted September 10, 2019 Author Report Share Posted September 10, 2019 1 minute ago, Justafan said: I noticed that the play action and shots downfield definitely reminded me of Mularkey. I also noticed that there was a quite a bit of traditional power blocking by the lineman. Last year, it was really zone heavy but this year it was more mixed. Not as many condensed sets as Mularkey though and I didn't see them try and run the same play 3 and 4 times trying to get it to "pop". This is what I was wondering, thanks for that insight. I agree on the last two points as well. Any idea on percentage of zone vs power? Can anyone else that really knows scheme chime in on how much power vs zone we used as well? @Face @NewsToTom Justafan 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post Mythos27 Posted September 10, 2019 Popular Post Report Share Posted September 10, 2019 He's definitely more Mularkey and that's a good thing. Mularkey's run scheme was brilliant and very intricately designed, it was his passing game that left a lot to be desired. Smith seems to be able to marry a comparable running game with a much better passing game. The other big difference is his timing/feel for the game as a play caller. He was absolutely brilliant yesterday and kept the Browns off balance all game. I'm more excited about Smith than any other individual performance we saw yesterday. oldschool, EagleEye, StephenIsLegend, and 8 others 10 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Justafan Posted September 10, 2019 Report Share Posted September 10, 2019 2 minutes ago, tgo said: This is what I was wondering, thanks for that insight. I agree on the last two points as well. Any idea on percentage of zone vs power? Can anyone else that really knows scheme chime in on how much power vs zone we used as well? @Face @NewsToTom It was just something I noticed. I would have to go back and really study each play to give you any credible percentages. Hopefully someone with all-22 can really break it down and give us a solid number because I would be interested to see the no shit numbers myself. tgo 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bizzyeddie Posted September 10, 2019 Report Share Posted September 10, 2019 4 minutes ago, Justafan said: I noticed that the play action and shots downfield definitely reminded me of Mularkey. I also noticed that there was a quite a bit of traditional power blocking by the lineman. Last year, it was really zone heavy but this year it was more mixed. Not as many condensed sets as Mularkey though and I didn't see them try and run the same play 3 and 4 times trying to get it to "pop". in their defense...they did see a "hole" Justafan 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post Justafan Posted September 10, 2019 Popular Post Report Share Posted September 10, 2019 (edited) 6 minutes ago, Mythos27 said: He's definitely more Mularkey and that's a good thing. Mularkey's run scheme was brilliant and very intricately designed, it was his passing game that left a lot to be desired. Smith seems to be able to marry a comparable running game with a much better passing game. The other big difference is his timing/feel for the game as a play caller. He was absolutely brilliant yesterday and kept the Browns off balance all game. I'm more excited about Smith than any other individual performance we saw yesterday. Really liked how Art gameplanned to the strengths of the offense instead of expecting them to play his style. Obviously, I want to see sustained success against good defenses but it was a really positive sign for a first time playcaller and he's already much better than LaFluer imo. Of course, that's my bias because I don't think it's any secret that I thought ML was trash. Edited September 10, 2019 by Justafan Soxcat, ChemEngr79, tgo, and 2 others 5 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
OILERMAN Posted September 10, 2019 Report Share Posted September 10, 2019 Def Mularkey tgo 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
BudsOilers Posted September 10, 2019 Report Share Posted September 10, 2019 I think it's a combination of both but the sad reality is most of the plays in the playbook are used across the league. If someone adds a tweak, it shows up on film and other team's add it if it worked. I liked Smith's play calls/designs and they looked similar to plays run last year and also under Mularkey. I think Vrabel is pointing out that the plays have been there in the past but on Sunday they hit them as opposed to an inaccurate pass, blown block, drop, etc. The game is ENTIRELY different if the Henry screen pass is dropped, mis-blocked, or thrown way off target. Same for the TD passes to Walker. We've talked about all of the yards left on the field in the past and a lot of it was on Mariota. It was glaring because those often came in games with minimal scoring. On Sunday, the offense scored 4 TD's. oldschool, and Number9 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post LongTimeFan Posted September 10, 2019 Popular Post Report Share Posted September 10, 2019 As for the 75yd screen pass, they used the same play in the first qtr. The difference was that in the first qtr, Henry ran through the line and got caught up, hence Mariota overthrew him to avoid the sack. On the 75yd TD, Henry went around the back of the line and was free to catch the pass. Subtle change, big difference in results Somedude, TitanDuckFan, titanruss, and 4 others 7 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nash Posted September 10, 2019 Report Share Posted September 10, 2019 There was definitely some McVay there though.. the zone blocking was used to run away from Garrett on several plays I saw.. tgo 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
tgo Posted September 10, 2019 Author Report Share Posted September 10, 2019 Just now, Nash said: There was definitely some McVay there though.. the zone blocking was used to run away from Garrett on several plays I saw.. Probably an apt way to describe it is a good mix of both schemes, which is what many of us hoped for. TitanDuckFan, and nine 1 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bizzyeddie Posted September 10, 2019 Report Share Posted September 10, 2019 13 minutes ago, LongTimeFan said: As for the 75yd screen pass, they used the same play in the first qtr. The difference was that in the first qtr, Henry ran through the line and got caught up, hence Mariota overthrew him to avoid the sack. On the 75yd TD, Henry went around the back of the line and was free to catch the pass. Subtle change, big difference in results I noticed that also...Mariota had a little less time first time they tried it also. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
BudsOilers Posted September 10, 2019 Report Share Posted September 10, 2019 What is abundantly clear is that the passing game is going to be heavily reliant on play action or scheme to maximize the efficiency of MM (or minimize the deficiencies of MM). When they did do straight drop backs, it was ugly as Romo pointed out. I know this came up in another discussion but play action can work without the run game working but you have to be doing both from the same personnel grouping/formations to keep teams honest. Late in the year, the Rams faced this problem after Gurley was clearly playing hurt. Teams ignored play action and sent heat after Goff. His production from PA was far less effective. pat, and big2033 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.