| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
ZoomWaffle
Joined: 25 Apr 2010
Posts: 4578
Location: AZ
|
 Posted: Fri Jan 18, 2013 9:54 am Post subject: |
 |
|
|
| nbaker1933 wrote: | | oakdb36 wrote: | | Professor Oak wrote: | | Dessie wrote: | | oakdb36 wrote: | | So, apparently, McFadden is here to stay and we're likely to go back to a power blocking scheme. |
Did he say that he isn't a lateral runner? |
| Quote: | | McKenzie acknowledged the ZBS didn't fit McFadden. "He's not a lateral mover. As soon as he can go north and south, he's at his best." |
| Quote: | | McKenzie on McFadden: "I'm not an offensive guru, but I do know when Darren is running certain plays, it's pretty doggone good." |
I'm just happy they came to this conclusion & can finally move away from ZBS. |
I'm pretty confused how they didn't come to this conclusion one year ago though. |
I think they had the vision that the ZBS can make not so great HB's look good, and weren't ready to stick to a system that fit One injury prone player.
I mean the system made Cel look pretty good for a couple games. |
Thats what I'm thinking, too. McFadden is not only injury prone, but he was also nearing the end of his contract. Not exactly a player/situation you should build your offense around. I still think keeping the same scheme and Saunders at OC would have been the smart choice for continuity's sake.
_________________
Silver&Black88 on the sig
| La_Vader wrote: | | I wouldn't trade Pryor for any prospect in this years draft. Quote me on that |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
oakdb36
Joined: 02 Mar 2006
Posts: 12742
|
| Posted: Fri Jan 18, 2013 11:30 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
| ZoomWaffle wrote: | | nbaker1933 wrote: | | oakdb36 wrote: | | Professor Oak wrote: | | Dessie wrote: | | oakdb36 wrote: | | So, apparently, McFadden is here to stay and we're likely to go back to a power blocking scheme. |
Did he say that he isn't a lateral runner? |
| Quote: | | McKenzie acknowledged the ZBS didn't fit McFadden. "He's not a lateral mover. As soon as he can go north and south, he's at his best." |
| Quote: | | McKenzie on McFadden: "I'm not an offensive guru, but I do know when Darren is running certain plays, it's pretty doggone good." |
I'm just happy they came to this conclusion & can finally move away from ZBS. |
I'm pretty confused how they didn't come to this conclusion one year ago though. |
I think they had the vision that the ZBS can make not so great HB's look good, and weren't ready to stick to a system that fit One injury prone player.
I mean the system made Cel look pretty good for a couple games. |
Thats what I'm thinking, too. McFadden is not only injury prone, but he was also nearing the end of his contract. Not exactly a player/situation you should build your offense around. I still think keeping the same scheme and Saunders at OC would have been the smart choice for continuity's sake. |
I don't disagree with that. But now we're going back to a different scheme because it fits Mcfadden better. At least, that's what McKenzie said yesterday. So what is it? Do they like the ZBS more and don't care how Mcfadden fits in it? Or do they feel Mcfadden is too important and the system has to be a fit for him? I wish they would just make up their mind once and for all because they're clearly contradicting themselves with those kind of statements.
And why did we interview Juan Castillo, a ZBS guy, for OL coach if we plan to ride Mcfadden one more year?
I just don't get the logic in that.
_________________
| Plush wrote: | | Papa was a trolling stone |
Last edited by oakdb36 on Fri Jan 18, 2013 11:35 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Silver&Black88
Joined: 24 Feb 2009
Posts: 24624
Location: Rochester, NY
|
| Posted: Fri Jan 18, 2013 11:33 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
| oakdb36 wrote: | | I don't disagree with that. But now we're going back to a different scheme because it fits Mcfadden better. At least, that's what McKenzie said yesterday. So what is it? Do they like the ZBS more and don't care how Mcfadden fits in it? Or do they feel Mcfadden is too important and the system has to be a fit for him? I wish they would just make up their mind once and for all because they're clearly contradicting themselves with those kind of statements. |
+1. It seems like they just make decisions because they have to be made. Rather than having certain reasoning behind them. I hate how they waffle on reasoning and how it's always a gray area trying to figure out why things are/were done the way they are/were. Like the PBS/ZBS. Is it because McFadden? Do we prefer the scheme? Is it because our other players fit the scheme better too? Just come up with a good reason why to do something and stick with it for the love of god. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
oakdb36
Joined: 02 Mar 2006
Posts: 12742
|
| Posted: Fri Jan 18, 2013 11:40 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
| Silver&Black88 wrote: | | oakdb36 wrote: | | I don't disagree with that. But now we're going back to a different scheme because it fits Mcfadden better. At least, that's what McKenzie said yesterday. So what is it? Do they like the ZBS more and don't care how Mcfadden fits in it? Or do they feel Mcfadden is too important and the system has to be a fit for him? I wish they would just make up their mind once and for all because they're clearly contradicting themselves with those kind of statements. |
+1. It seems like they just make decisions because they have to be made. Rather than having certain reasoning behind them. I hate how they waffle on reasoning and how it's always a gray area trying to figure out why things are/were done the way they are/were. Like the PBS/ZBS. Is it because McFadden? Do we prefer the scheme? Is it because our other players fit the scheme better too? Just come up with a good reason why to do something and stick with it for the love of god. |
Yeah, and while trying to make sense of that, i hope they're just trying to build some leverage to trade Mcfadden away. I guess we'll have to wait and see.
_________________
| Plush wrote: | | Papa was a trolling stone |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Silver&Black88
Joined: 24 Feb 2009
Posts: 24624
Location: Rochester, NY
|
| Posted: Fri Jan 18, 2013 11:45 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
| oakdb36 wrote: | | Silver&Black88 wrote: | | oakdb36 wrote: | | I don't disagree with that. But now we're going back to a different scheme because it fits Mcfadden better. At least, that's what McKenzie said yesterday. So what is it? Do they like the ZBS more and don't care how Mcfadden fits in it? Or do they feel Mcfadden is too important and the system has to be a fit for him? I wish they would just make up their mind once and for all because they're clearly contradicting themselves with those kind of statements. |
+1. It seems like they just make decisions because they have to be made. Rather than having certain reasoning behind them. I hate how they waffle on reasoning and how it's always a gray area trying to figure out why things are/were done the way they are/were. Like the PBS/ZBS. Is it because McFadden? Do we prefer the scheme? Is it because our other players fit the scheme better too? Just come up with a good reason why to do something and stick with it for the love of god. |
Yeah, and while trying to make sense of that, i hope they're just trying to build some leverage to trade Mcfadden away. I guess we'll have to wait and see. |
I do think that's a part of it. He didn't say 'We have big plans for Darren' or 'McFadden is a big part of our future plans' or anything remotely close to that. He just pumped McFadden up. I still think he's on the block as jtagg said and it sounds like you agree. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
oakdb36
Joined: 02 Mar 2006
Posts: 12742
|
| Posted: Fri Jan 18, 2013 11:48 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
| Silver&Black88 wrote: | | oakdb36 wrote: | | Silver&Black88 wrote: | | oakdb36 wrote: | | I don't disagree with that. But now we're going back to a different scheme because it fits Mcfadden better. At least, that's what McKenzie said yesterday. So what is it? Do they like the ZBS more and don't care how Mcfadden fits in it? Or do they feel Mcfadden is too important and the system has to be a fit for him? I wish they would just make up their mind once and for all because they're clearly contradicting themselves with those kind of statements. |
+1. It seems like they just make decisions because they have to be made. Rather than having certain reasoning behind them. I hate how they waffle on reasoning and how it's always a gray area trying to figure out why things are/were done the way they are/were. Like the PBS/ZBS. Is it because McFadden? Do we prefer the scheme? Is it because our other players fit the scheme better too? Just come up with a good reason why to do something and stick with it for the love of god. |
Yeah, and while trying to make sense of that, i hope they're just trying to build some leverage to trade Mcfadden away. I guess we'll have to wait and see. |
I do think that's a part of it. He didn't say 'We have big plans for Darren' or 'McFadden is a big part of our future plans' or anything remotely close to that. He just pumped McFadden up. I still think he's on the block as jtagg said and it sounds like you agree. |
I'm not sure i agree, i just hope. So i guess i want to agree.
_________________
| Plush wrote: | | Papa was a trolling stone |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Raidin
Joined: 05 Mar 2007
Posts: 4309
Location: Dublin
|
| Posted: Fri Jan 18, 2013 11:52 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
Reggie also said this:
| Quote: | | I don’t think Dennis was married to a scheme. He saw a scheme that he was interested in and liked what it had to offer. To me, it’s not about scheming. People get so tied up in scheme; it’s how you use your players and how you execute.” |
He might just want an OC who'll run the ZBS primarily but also have use the PBS just for Mcfadden or simply call less stretch plays when McFadden is behind centre. The play like the one against the Steelers is probably what they want to see with McFadden more often. Although I think the injury has actually affected McFadden quite a bit, I'm don't think he's the same runner as before.
_________________
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
dawsonleery
Joined: 31 Oct 2012
Posts: 316
|
| Posted: Fri Jan 18, 2013 12:00 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| Raiders never really had a scheme, its always just been big, fast guys. That was Al's scheme, speed. Raiders have no identity right now, I don't know what we are, its gonna take a few years to figure it out. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
NCOUGHMAN
Joined: 25 Mar 2008
Posts: 12581
Location: Stockton via East Palo Alto
|
| Posted: Fri Jan 18, 2013 12:47 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| Raidin wrote: | Reggie also said this:
| Quote: | | I don’t think Dennis was married to a scheme. He saw a scheme that he was interested in and liked what it had to offer. To me, it’s not about scheming. People get so tied up in scheme; it’s how you use your players and how you execute.” |
He might just want an OC who'll run the ZBS primarily but also have use the PBS just for Mcfadden or simply call less stretch plays when McFadden is behind centre. The play like the one against the Steelers is probably what they want to see with McFadden more often. Although I think the injury has actually affected McFadden quite a bit, I'm don't think he's the same runner as before. |
imo the quote contradicts itself. so DA wasnt married to a scheme? really seems like it was ZBS or bust. DA talked up the ZBS like it was the best thing since sliced bread. DA just forgot dmac completely sucks in the ZBS. funny thing is knapp knew that from his last time here and he still ran it till the wheels fell off.
Hue + Knapp + cp = 
_________________
| green24 wrote: | | NCOUGHMAN >>>>>> all of you |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
OakRaiders3828
Joined: 18 Aug 2007
Posts: 9140
Location: Pennsylvania
|
| Posted: Fri Jan 18, 2013 1:53 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
Live and learn, I think they now understand that it's about playing to the strength of your players, not forcing them into a scheme they don't fit.
_________________
O A K L A N D R A I D E R S
Joe_is_the_best on the sig! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
NCOUGHMAN
Joined: 25 Mar 2008
Posts: 12581
Location: Stockton via East Palo Alto
|
| Posted: Fri Jan 18, 2013 2:15 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| OakRaiders3828 wrote: | | Live and learn, I think they now understand that it's about playing to the strength of your players, not forcing them into a scheme they don't fit. |
now? lolol
these guys are supposed to be professionals i thought that was basic knowledge. feels like this whole season was a stupid experiment. smh.
we know cp isnt a roll out qb....why didnt they know that
we knew dmac sucked in zbs...why didnt they know that
we knew the o-line was built for pbs...why didnt they know that.
smh.
_________________
| green24 wrote: | | NCOUGHMAN >>>>>> all of you |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Raidin
Joined: 05 Mar 2007
Posts: 4309
Location: Dublin
|
| Posted: Fri Jan 18, 2013 2:30 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| OakRaiders3828 wrote: | | Live and learn, I think they now understand that it's about playing to the strength of your players, not forcing them into a scheme they don't fit. |
I think this is a terrible way to do it actually. You figure out your scheme and then get your players to fit it. It seems our GM and HC have no real clue what they want though.
_________________
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
OakRaiders3828
Joined: 18 Aug 2007
Posts: 9140
Location: Pennsylvania
|
| Posted: Fri Jan 18, 2013 2:40 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| NCOUGHMAN wrote: | | OakRaiders3828 wrote: | | Live and learn, I think they now understand that it's about playing to the strength of your players, not forcing them into a scheme they don't fit. |
now? lolol
these guys are supposed to be professionals i thought that was basic knowledge. feels like this whole season was a stupid experiment. smh.
we know cp isnt a roll out qb....why didnt they know that
we knew dmac sucked in zbs...why didnt they know that
we knew the o-line was built for pbs...why didnt they know that.
smh. |
Well, Knapp was responsible for making CP roll out, not DA or reggie. I think they were going about it the way Raidin described at first but have now changed their philosophy. Rookie mistakes happen, but it seems that they have learned from them, which is ok because I understand that they're human and new at their positions.
Raidin, I respect your opinion, IMO I'd rather have a coach be able to adapt to the players that he has to work with, rather than force a scheme on them that they don't fit. It's the reason why Mike McCoy was such a hot commodity, it's exactly what attracted Trestman to the bears, it's what the Patriots have done for years, it's what the 49ers, Seahawks and Redskins did, and it's what Chip Kelley said is the Mark of a great coach, being able to take the players on your roster and build the scheme around the strengths of them and what they do best.
ZBS/PBS, idk what they want to do, probably a little of both, but to me it seems like they just want a guy in here that will put the current players, and whoever they bring in in the best possible situations to succeed. It doesn't seem like they really care what scheme it is, like RM said "it’s not about scheming. People get so tied up in scheme; it’s how you use your players and how you execute."
_________________
O A K L A N D R A I D E R S
Joe_is_the_best on the sig! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
NCOUGHMAN
Joined: 25 Mar 2008
Posts: 12581
Location: Stockton via East Palo Alto
|
| Posted: Fri Jan 18, 2013 2:46 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| OakRaiders3828 wrote: | | NCOUGHMAN wrote: | | OakRaiders3828 wrote: | | Live and learn, I think they now understand that it's about playing to the strength of your players, not forcing them into a scheme they don't fit. |
now? lolol
these guys are supposed to be professionals i thought that was basic knowledge. feels like this whole season was a stupid experiment. smh.
we know cp isnt a roll out qb....why didnt they know that
we knew dmac sucked in zbs...why didnt they know that
we knew the o-line was built for pbs...why didnt they know that.
smh. |
Well, Knapp was responsible for making CP roll out, not DA or reggie. I think they were going about it the way Raidin described at first but have now changed their philosophy.
Raidin, I respect your opinion, IMO I'd rather have a coach be able to adapt to the players that he has to work with, rather than force a scheme on them that they don't fit. It's the reason why Mike McCoy was such a hot commodity, it's exactly what attracted Trestman to the bears, it's what the Patriots have done for years, it's what the 49ers, Seahawks and Redskins did, and it's what Chip Kelley said is the Mark of a great coach, being able to take the players on your roster and build the scheme around the strengths of them and what they do best. |
agree with the bold to the fullest
imo da was responsible for knapp and reg is responsible for da. da or reg should have stepped on knapps toes around week 6. things didnt change until mark davis stepped in later in the season.
_________________
| green24 wrote: | | NCOUGHMAN >>>>>> all of you |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Pozzi
Joined: 21 Aug 2012
Posts: 210
Location: Carson City, NV
|
| Posted: Fri Jan 18, 2013 3:00 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| NCOUGHMAN wrote: | | OakRaiders3828 wrote: | | Live and learn, I think they now understand that it's about playing to the strength of your players, not forcing them into a scheme they don't fit. |
now? lolol
these guys are supposed to be professionals i thought that was basic knowledge. feels like this whole season was a stupid experiment. smh.
we know cp isnt a roll out qb....why didnt they know that
we knew dmac sucked in zbs...why didnt they know that
we knew the o-line was built for pbs...why didnt they know that.
smh. |
Forcing McFadden back into the ZBS was beyond frustrating, and a lot of fans knew this was going to be a bad idea.
I'm willing to forgive and forget I guess. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
|
FAQ
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
