BOLDnPurPnBlacK

Updated: Who Should Be Our Next OC? It's Trestman

665 posts in this topic

Bears had the second highest scoring offense in 2013 with Jay Cutler at the helm. You should try thinking before jumping to conclusions.

You should try reading before replying. The comment I was replying to said he was screen heavy but didn't have a vertical game. We don't exactly run screens efficiently.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

youre talking joe flacco, tom brady, and peyton manning, compared to jay cutler, the qb who cares less about his job than anyone else in the nfl.

 

Good point also.

 

 

You should try reading before replying. The comment I was replying to said he was screen heavy but didn't have a vertical game. We don't exactly run screens efficiently.

 

The comment I was specifically referring too was you saying we wouldn't score at all. But okay.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here's some info about the Chicago Bears Offense under Trestman. What we see here is a very efficient offense in 2013, and a huge regression in 2014. The concerns about his reluctance to run the ball seem warranted in both years. Does anyone know what could account for the offense's regression in 2014? Looks to me like the offensive line got worse, for one.

 

 

2013

Total YPG – 8th (382/game) PPG – 2nd (27.8/game)    TOP – 8th (31:02)

Passing: Attempts – 16th (36/game) YPG – 5th (267/game) YPA – 7th (7.7/attempt)

Rushing: Attempts – 24th (25/game) YPG – 16th (114/game) YPA –  7th (4.5/carry)

Sacks: 4th (30) QB Hits: 20th (85)

 

2014

Total YPG – 21st (327/game) PPG – 23rd (19/game) TOP – 17th (30:13)

Passing: Attempts – 7th (38/game)  YPG – 15th (237/game) YPA – 29th (6.6)

Rushing: Attempts – 30th (22.2/game) YPG – 27th (90.1) YPA – 16th (4.1)

Sacks: 19th (41) QB Hits: 17th (82)

 

Jay Cutler played a lot more in 2014.

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well...west coast offense...

I hate west coast offense. What is going to happen w/ our run game?

we just ran the wco all year
5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Good point also.

 

 

 

The comment I was specifically referring too was you saying we wouldn't score at all. But okay.

Right, following the statement how we don't run screens efficiently and Trestman doesn't run a vertical game. So, we simply won't score at all. Nice cherry picking from the entire post though. Good job.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well...west coast offense...

I hate west coast offense. What is going to happen w/ our run game?

You realize that Kubiak runs a west coast offense too, right?

4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well...west coast offense...

I hate west coast offense. What is going to happen w/ our run game?

Um, we ran the WCO last season
1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Right, following the statement how we don't run screens efficiently and Trestman doesn't run a vertical game. So, we simply won't score at all. Nice cherry picking from the entire post though. Good job.

he refuted your point though.

Your mad, we get it. But look into it first.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

we just ran the wco all year

Well trestman is more bill Walsh and Mike shanny/kubiak is more don coryell

I Dont think trestman respects the run game as much as shanny's/Kubiak does seeing how Bears run game fared this year

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wonder if he will try to take anyone from Chicago with him as we are needing a QB coach and tight ends coach.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

he refuted your point though.

Your mad, we get it. But look into it first.

 

Right? I never got this... like somehow pointing out that someone only bold highlighted one sentence of  your post is somehow a defense for having a terrible post.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I like the hiring...mainly because I think he will mesh with Flacco..Really hope the run game stays the same as it has worked out great so far. Trestman has had some big WRs in the past (in the CFL he had some big guys and Chicago obviosuly) kinda hope he pushes the FO to think about a no.1 with size on the outside...also he did a great job with Bennett so I am excited for whomever is lining up at TE for us

He managed to get along with Cutler, but he's still a head case.  Flacco at least works in ernest and isn't a pouty-pants.  They should be able to get on the same page quickly.  And Trestman and Kubiaks have similar schemes.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Trestmnan fall under the George Seifert coaching tree, which includes Gary Kubiak, both Shanahans and even Pete Carroll.  Gase was a great candidate, but Trestman looks like a better fit with minimal impact to the offense.

Siefert is from the wals coaching tree, but Shanahan changed the reads to look long before short passes. Thus the Kubiak and Shanahan branches of the WCO are a bit different. Most important is the verbiage is the same.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The concern is the screen game and regression. We're not a screen team necessarily and Trestman's offense is known to fall apart the next season. We need a big bodied WR still, so I'm very confident that F.O is going in that direction R1. 

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wonder if he will try to take anyone from Chicago with him as we are needing a QB coach and tight ends coach.

Cavanaugh was our qb coach Bischoff was te coach. you can have em both

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well trestman is more bill Walsh and Mike shanny/kubiak is more don coryell

I Dont think trestman respects the run game as much as shanny's/Kubiak does seeing how Bears run game fared this year

Shanahan and Kubiak are not anything like Air Coryell. Two different types of offenses.

Mike martz

Joe Gibbs

Norv turner are examples of air coryell

Edited by RavensFanMania
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

he refuted your point though.

Your mad, we get it. But look into it first.

who refuted what point?

 

I was responding to what someone else said about Trestman. That he likes screens and doesn't run a vertical game. Wasn't my point about him. My point was we do not run screens efficiently. No one has refuted that point.

 

What he scored running screens with another team has no bearing on our team and how inefficient we are with them most of the time.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Siefert is from the wals coaching tree, but Shanahan changed the reads to look long before short passes. Thus the Kubiak and Shanahan branches of the WCO are a bit different. Most important is the verbiage is the same.

Shanahan gave Kubiak his job in Denver and they have Super Bowl rings together in the Elway era.  They Kubiak hired Shanny's son, Kyle as is OC in Houston for 8 seasons.  I think their all pretty well intertwined.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Cavanaugh was our qb coach Bischoff was te coach. you can have em both

HI and welcome, if that's Matt Cavanaugh who was here before OH HECK NO!
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Right? I never got this... like somehow pointing out that someone only bold highlighted one sentence of  your post is somehow a defense for having a terrible post.

Because the sentence he bolded was in direct context with liking to run screens and having no vertical game. It was not saying because it is Trestman we won't score. It was directly responding to a lack of a vertical game and how we have not been exactly efficient with screens. It was taken out of context.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Because the sentence he bolded was in direct context with liking to run screens and having no vertical game. It was not saying because it is Trestman we won't score. It was directly responding to a lack of a vertical game and how we have not been exactly efficient with screens. It was taken out of context.

but you said exactly that.

"Now we just won't score at all"

If that's not what you mean, don't say it.

We normally agree on most things, but your backtracking here.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Because the sentence he bolded was in direct context with liking to run screens and having no vertical game. It was not saying because it is Trestman we won't score. It was directly responding to a lack of a vertical game and how we have not been exactly efficient with screens. It was taken out of context.

 

I think the point that you're missing that I think we're all assuming is that the original point indicated coaching being a factor in screen inefficiency, i.e. not emphasized by any of our previous coaches. If Trestman bases his offense on it, he'll emphasize it and correct it to be more efficient. He did this in Chicago, thus confidence he could do it here. And if he, with a screen heavy, lite on vertical passing based scheme could near lead the league in scoring 2 years ago with McCown, there is some indication that scoring wont be the issue here.

 

Does everything have to be spelled out?

 

And regardless of context "we wont score at all" is a pretty direct and clear statement. It stands alone and apart from the rest of your post.

Edited by BOLDnPurPnBlacK
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the point that you're missing that I think we're all assuming is that the original point indicated coaching being a factor in screen inefficiency, i.e. not emphasized by any of our previous coaches. If Trestman bases his offense on it, he'll emphasize it and correct it to be more efficient. He did this in Chicago, thus confidence he could do it here. And if he, with a screen heavy, lite on vertical passing based scheme could near lead the league in scoring 2 years ago with McCown, there is some indication that scoring wont be the issue here.

 

Does everything have to be spelled out?

 

And regardless of context "we wont score at all" is a pretty direct and clear statement. It stands alone and apart from the rest of your post.

do you want a coach whose go to is screens, end arounds and check downs when your qb has and arm that can be used  more effectively?

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Shanahan gave Kubiak his job in Denver and they have Super Bowl rings together in the Elway era.  They Kubiak hired Shanny's son, Kyle as is OC in Houston for 8 seasons.  I think their all pretty well intertwined.

In Houston Kyle was qb coach and WR coach before becoming OC for Kubiak in 2008-10. Two seasons

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Siefert is from the wals coaching tree, but Shanahan changed the reads to look long before short passes. Thus the Kubiak and Shanahan branches of the WCO are a bit different. Most important is the verbiage is the same.

At this point in time it's hard for someone not to be part of the Walsh coaching tree.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now