Analyzing the offense

[Ring 6]

I think the coaching staff maximized an average talent pool and it resulted in good looking aggregate stats but failure in key situations where big time players step up. That's not on the coaching staff to fix (other than helping the young players develop further to achieve their potential), that's on the GM to fix.

A team coming off a struggling season, with a rookie QB and 45% of the snaps played by players who weren’t here last year, goes 10-7, looks great on statistical aggregate, but lose a number of close games largely due to untimely mistakes, disappointing clutch play and inconsistency.
I don’t understand how that us shocking.
Id ask for examples of other teams with a rookie qb who were more productive on offense, how many won more games, and how many teams had better seasons within 45% roster turnover.
I’m not sure how we went from people thinking .500 would be great before the season to acting like any flaw is reprehensible, and heads must roll.
Every team that doesn’t win a championship has fatal flaws. I’ll take the team that scored on the second most % of possessions and was scored on in the second least and feel pretty good about the future as they work on those flaws.

 

[captain stone]

And don't forget their Top-4 Defense, too.

 

[UrbanCowboy]

Lemme see if I'm getting this. So, you're saying that the data shows that the offensive philosophy of the team is favoring "manageable third downs" over "chunk plays." FWIW, one of my favorite [uninformed] bar stool rants is that Josh seems to fall in love with the "three yard passes" at times. In fairness, its seems it could be that Mac is checking down more than he "should."

Your argument to reconsider that philosophy seems really sensible to me (if I do have it right).