Novice question about Josh McD

[lorijean]

I do have a question for the football experts here. During the past season's game threads many posters have slammed Josh for aspects of his play calling. There were tons of posts lamenting the stupid play the Pats had just run. Is it difficult for an OC to figure out plays for Brady, Moss and Welker? I would like to know if Josh is truly gifted, lucky or somewhere in between? And, if he leaves, who do you think would be a good replacement? Or is he maybe being groomed to replace BB in the not so distant future?

 

[T-ShirtDynasty]

First you have to understand that bashing the OC is a long-held time honored tradition (or annoyance depending on your point of view) here at PatsFans. It happened with Charlie Weiss during Super Bowl runs, it happened with JMcD during the 16-0 season, and it will happen with whoever the next guy is.

 

[Rob0729]

I am a McDaniels fan and been accused of being a McDaniels homer, but T-ShirtDynasty is right. There are always hotbutton players (Hobbs, Caldwell before him) or coordinators (McDaniels) who will do everything right 99.9999% of the time in a game and when he screw up that 0.0001% of the time everyone bashes him.

McDaniels is a very polarizing figure in this town. Some love him. Some hate him. There is some irrationality on both sides.

I think McDaniels is a pretty good play caller, a very good gameplanner, and a very good teacher. Both Brady and Cassel love the guy (he is also the QB coach). I don't know if he is ready to take the next step to be a Head Coach, but he has tons of potential to.

 

[since67]

The egocentric arrogant smug armchair QB/OC/put your own acronym here set has always offended me. (Take your smack talking nit wit speculation out of my airspace and STFU).

Mark my words...
I predict...
I said it...
I was right...
Let me be the first...

"When you overcome the impulse to insist that you know better, you open your mind to new horizons, perspectives and growth possibilities. And most importantly, friends and associates will no longer shun your company."

-- Lora J Adrianse --

BUT...that's the way it is...it's always been around...sad but true.

 

[MassPats38]

Offensive Coordinators generate game plans, and make adjustments to curves a defense throws at them during the game. Those plans may be limited by available personnel, so a lack of success may be a factor of lack of qualified personnel to execute a game plan (due to injuries or simply lack of skills on a roster) or being outcoached by another team. It is difficult, given the lack of accurate injury information provided by teams, to conclusively say what causes a bad result. And the credit for success could be incredible talent on the field, good use of talent or both. Last year's incredible success could be McDaniels, it could be Brady, Moss, and Welker, or it could be a little of both.

As an example of how hard it is to assess the success of offensive coordinators, look at Brian Billick. He was the offensive coordinator for the Vikings the year they set the offensive record broken by the Patriots last year. That team had Randy Moss and Cris Carter. When he went to the Ravens, his teams were known for defense and he never really put a good offense together. Not really the offensive genius he appeared to be on the Vikings.

 

[JoeSixPat]

I do have a question for the football experts here. During the past season's game threads many posters have slammed Josh for aspects of his play calling. There were tons of posts lamenting the stupid play the Pats had just run. Is it difficult for an OC to figure out plays for Brady, Moss and Welker? I would like to know if Josh is truly gifted, lucky or somewhere in between? And, if he leaves, who do you think would be a good replacement? Or is he maybe being groomed to replace BB in the not so distant future?

Personally I was more critical of McDaniels playcalling last year and the year before than I was this year. I've got very little constructive criticism with McDaniels' playcalling this year and am pretty damn impressed with his playcalling - especially some of the games where the weather was a major factor.

Often people can't see the forest through the trees - i.e., how could you criticize the #1 offense last year where Moss had 22 TDs? Well, you might start by suggesting that perhaps Moss was over-used - something that Belichick and McDaniels all but admitted in the offseason, and they made adjustments accordingly this year.

Overall, can we even find one game this year where the Offense let the team down in a loss?

 

[PatsWickedPissah]

Good points Joe. I like Josh. Despite that his over use of Moss in '07 and his (and the rest of the staff's BB and Scar) failure to anticipate the excellent Jints defense and his failure to adjust the offense at halftime was a significant contributor in the team loss to the Giants in that awful Feburary disaster.

I think that the 2008 Josh is an even better, more experienced and wizened OC. Better than Weis whom I also liked. Your mileage may vary.

 

[RayClay]

First you have to understand that bashing the OC is a long-held time honored tradition (or annoyance depending on your point of view) here at PatsFans. It happened with Charlie Weiss during Super Bowl runs, it happened with JMcD during the 16-0 season, and it will happen with whoever the next guy is.

That's why I don't worry about losing him. There are at least 3,000 people here who could do the job better.

 

[DarrylS]

That's why I don't worry about losing him. There are at least 3,000 people here who could do the job better.

For sure..

OTOH I always thought that McDaniels was heir apparent to BB.. he fits the mold, intellligent, football smart, does a real good job and has worked his way up the food chain.. he is really young about 33 I believe...

 

[hwc]

I don't believe it is possible for fans to evaluate playcalling.

a) The NFL is a statistics driven league. You have to call plays to achieve the kind of statistical picture you seek to achieve. As a very simple example, you need to call enough runs (even if they aren't working that well) so that teams scouting you over the course of the season have to respect the run. Now mutitply that by every grouping of plays.

b) In the NFL, every play is part of a group of plays, run out of the same "look", designed to catch the defense overplaying. Each play is designed to set up the other variations. So, the fact that a play is stopped dead in the first quarter may be just fine if the defense reacts the same way in the fourth quarter on a variation designed to burn that reaction.

c) Some of the playcallling in the first quarter is designed to flush out the defensive game plan for the day. An offensive coordinator may want to know how the defense will react to maybe five different personell groupings or formations and file that information away for later.

It's easy to sit at home and say "bad play calling" when a play doesn't gain eight yards or "good play calling" when it does. But, that's not even on the same planet of statistical sophistication that would be necessary to evaluate play calling.

 

[DaBruinz]

I don't believe it is possible for fans to evaluate playcalling.

a) The NFL is a statistics driven league. You have to call plays to achieve the kind of statistical picture you seek to achieve. As a very simple example, you need to call enough runs (even if they aren't working that well) so that teams scouting you over the course of the season have to respect the run. Now mutitply that by every grouping of plays.

b) In the NFL, every play is part of a group of plays, run out of the same "look", designed to catch the defense overplaying. Each play is designed to set up the other variations. So, the fact that a play is stopped dead in the first quarter may be just fine if the defense reacts the same way in the fourth quarter on a variation designed to burn that reaction.

c) Some of the playcallling in the first quarter is designed to flush out the defensive game plan for the day. An offensive coordinator may want to know how the defense will react to maybe five different personell groupings or formations and file that information away for later.

It's easy to sit at home and say "bad play calling" when a play doesn't gain eight yards or "good play calling" when it does. But, that's not even on the same planet of statistical sophistication that would be necessary to evaluate play calling.

I'm going to be honest here. I think you are way off unless the "statistic" you are talking about is POINTS. The only thing that matters is scoring points. Period. That is the end result that matters.. The only result that counts.

If you are talking about defining trends of the opposing team or opposing coaches, then, to an extent, yes, the game is about statistics. However, a really good coach will do his best to be robotic and try and split his play calling up evenly amongst his plays making it that much harder to defend against.

I am also going to say that your claim of not being able to evaluate a play call is also wrong as well.. When you telegraph what your plays are going to be, its poor play-calling unless you only have 6 offensive plays in your play book ala the Titans from the movie "Remember the Titans". The idea there was to run them to perfection and be arrogoant about challenging the defense to stop you. In todays game, its all about deception. Its why they have 6-8 or even 10 different plays out of the same offensive formation.

That all being said, McDaniels has gotten progressively better each year as a OC and I think its helped him tremendously to also be the QB coach. I think he learned as much from Brady as Brady did from him. He may not be the strategist that Charlie Weiss was, but I feel that McDaniels is a better tactician. However, Weis and McDaniels are both human which means they can make mistakes. But telegraphing your plays is almost a cardinal sin. Like ALWAYS running on 1st down. Or ALWAYS passing on 3rd downs.

Basically, what I am saying is that you need to clarify your definition a bit better before you can says that the game is just statistics.

 

[p8ryts]

That's why I don't worry about losing him. There are at least 3,000 people here who could do the job better.

Hey, sign me up for the OC job. I remember once I said why don't they call a screen and sure enough they did and it worked. I'm definitely qualified. If you need me as DC I'm available for that also. I remember once I said stop the run and they did. See, I'm am multi qualified and most importantly, I'm AVAILABLE!!!!!!!!

 

[JoeSixPat]

I don't believe it is possible for fans to evaluate playcalling.

**** Jauron would heartilly agree with you.

 

[BionicPatriot]

I don't look at it play by play. In the long run, like Bruinz said, how productive was the offense? I see it like this. This is also why I don't think all of Josh's production is Moss and Welker Lets look at his 3 "official" years as an OC and his one year as the un-named OC in training during 05

05- They just lost Weis. Dillon was older and injured, they had no running game. Yet the offense still produced like a top ten unit in the league. Nothing great, his first year. But nothing bad. Lets see if he produces?

06 - This year a lot of people including myself criticized him. He had some reason to be, but again this was his first year as an OC growing. He had no WRs, we just lost Branch and Givens. Replacing them with Gaffney and Caldwell, we still had a productive albeit sometimes stagnant offense. The end result was an AFC title collapse by the defense that ended a super bowl run. Not a bad year.

07- McDaniels has the dream offense, although he has no feature running back. The result? The best offense ever in virtually almost ever single category outside of running. That's what makes him great. even w/out a back, he creates an historic offense.

08- his Q!B goes down, we end the season the 2nd highest scoring team in the league. By far, even moreso than last season, his best yet.

I see nothing but growth and production. IMO, he'd be better off tweaking his skills as a coach for at least 2 or more years before chasing the money. remember, a lot of great coaches were assistants for a good while. It's often when teams fall in love with the new young hot name coach they give him everything, something the young coach cannot handle.

I look at BB with all his years as an assistant and he needed the first ride to really get the handle of things. So is McDaniels a good OC? IMO, the best young mind in the game for offense. Would I hire him right now this year? No, because I think sometimes young coaches get overwhelmed.

 

[PATSNUTme]

Josh has done an excellent, not perfect, but excellent job as OC,IMO. What the bashers don't seem to come to terms with is Josh is BB choice. They also ignore that every play called is going through BB headset.

So by bashing Josh they are really bashing BB,

 

[RayClay]

I don't believe it is possible for fans to evaluate playcalling.

I agree.

.............

 

[RayClay]

What the bashers don't seem to come to terms with is Josh is BB choice. They also ignore that every play called is going through BB headset.

So by bashing Josh they are really bashing BB,

An unusual amount of insight in this thread.

 

[RayClay]

Hey, sign me up for the OC job. I remember once I said why don't they call a screen and sure enough they did and it worked. I'm definitely qualified. If you need me as DC I'm available for that also. I remember once I said stop the run and they did. See, I'm am multi qualified and most importantly, I'm AVAILABLE!!!!!!!!

Sorry, you need to know the play they didn't call would have definitely worked.

 

[Boston Boxer]

The egocentric arrogant smug armchair QB/OC/put your own acronym here set has always offended me. (Take your smack talking nit wit speculation out of my airspace and STFU).

Mark my words...
I predict...
I said it...
I was right...
Let me be the first...

"When you overcome the impulse to insist that you know better, you open your mind to new horizons, perspectives and growth possibilities. And most importantly, friends and associates will no longer shun your company."

-- Lora J Adrianse --

BUT...that's the way it is...it's always been around...sad but true.

well i am glad to see you are above it all. this is a message board people. let people vent.

 

[hwc]

Basically, what I am saying is that you need to clarify your definition a bit better before you can says that the game is just statistics.

No. I believe at the level of a good NFL team, the development of the game plan (i.e. the plays that will be run that day) is "just statistics". Although, the phrase "just statistics" hardly does justice to the level of sophistication that goes into predicting defensive tendencies in a given down and distance situation and calling a play that will exploit vulnerabilities.

How can you possible evaluate a play call unless you know what defensive formation the play call expected and whether or not he got it? I can't even tell what defensive alignment they are in from the TV broadcast, let alone have any idea what McDaniels was anticipating.

Belichick has explained all this. Offensive play calling is simply trying to tilt the odds a little in your favor by exploiting scouted tendencies. Whether a given play works or not depends on factors out of your control.

Remember that many of the plays being called have options at the line of scrimmage or even at the snap depending on what the defense does.