Candidates to be the next OC

[rmcjacket23]

10 hours ago, rossihunter2 said:

i mean the rumours were that lewis told the owners he would step down as head coach within a couple of years (probably to move officially into their FO) if hue jackson was pre-anointed as his successor

no way cinci fires him because they just let 3 potential hc candidates they groomed in house walk out the door

but even if hue jackson does get fired by the browns, some other team with a vacancy will pick him up as a head coach because despite going (probably) 0-16, he would have been screwed by a team in obvious rebuild mode and wont have proven himself a dud as it were

1. Marvin Lewis is perennially discussed as a firing candidate because they literally never win playoff games. I personally don't think he should be, but if you keep making playoff appearances and winning divisions and you can't even win ONCE, that's a problem.

2. The team has made some changes on offense, but for the most part, its not significantly different than it was last season. They're a bad football team this year. Most people would say "o AJ Green is injured", but they were utterly unimpressive when he wasn't here. Its kind of like blaming the 2015 Ravens season on Joe being out...he played half the season and they weren't good when he was on the field.

So you've got a coach who can't win a playoff game, on a team that lost some receivers they didn't use that well and their OC, and have now pretty much come close to hitting rock bottom. 

I don't think anybody would be shocked to see him fired. I wouldn't do it, and I don't think they will either.

As far as Hue, the ONLY reason I think he gets fired is IF the FO thinks he doesn't embrace the whole "analytics" approach to building a team, which is the direction the FO has taken. Other than that, I think the FO knows what the issue is with Cleveland, and its not the HC.

[PurpleCity5]

On 12/1/2016 at 0:52 PM, Ravensfan23 said:

I'm not saying Marty is the guy, but I am saying you better make damn sure if you replace him it's with something who will advance this offense. Otherwise you're just introducing more change to an offense when it's really not needed. Again it's only one example but I go back to the Steelers about 4 years ago. It seemed like every week there were reports of Ben and AB taking turn chewing Todd Haley out. Now look at that offense, it's one of the best in the NFL. The reason why imo is because that offense stayed together long enough for those players to be able to basically run it themselves. I don't think Haley is any better or worse of a OC/play caller than he was when things weren't working. That offense now can basically go out there and play backyard football at times because they are consistently on the same page. AB and Ben can make a simple sight adjustment that takes what would have been a run play and turn it into a 40 yard pass because they've been in that offense together for so long that now all they have to do is read the defense the same. Interestingly enough Flacco and Perriman had that same opportunity last game inside the redzone but I completely understood why the confidence to even consider it wasn't there.

Am i saying Marty is the only guy that can do that, absolutely not, but he's not a bad guy to keep around because you know him, the players like him and he's putting guys in position to be successful, which is all you can really ask. Those disappearing acts by the offense suck, but do they suck enough to say the offense isn't headed in the right direction? Or are there minor tweaks the offense needs to make that will take them from good enough to explosive. If Flacco and Perriman find a way to complete that deep pass in stride instead of Perriman making a diving attempt, what does the offense look like? If Wallace gets if second foot inbounds at the 1 yardline vs Dallas and the Ravens score how much different does that game look offensively? Are the drive stalling penalties a result of Marty not being good or putting games in great position or do the players just need more time in the offense? Again not saying that Marty is the guy, just cautioning making a change for the sake of making a change because we don't see an explosive offense right now. 

I agree that the Ravens cant take their foot off the gas paddle when you have a team down and that's all on Marty I think. But again is that something to say, oh he's not the guy because of it or is it something like Flacco said in his presser that he and Marty had a funny conversation about it. You have to be able to put teams away offensively and not ask your defense to stop everyone. No doubt about that. 

Also I can understand not being happy with the offense and its probably just my natural optimistic nature that has me excited about the future of this offense, but I know there needs to be some change, just not massive change. If you do change the offensive system and OC you better make sure it's with someone who can stick around for a while and implement it more than just one season like Kubes did. The Ravens could have the #1 type offense like the Steelers and I don't think people would come knocking at the door for Marty the same way. Does that make him the best man for the job? No but I think he's good enough to lead this offense into the top 10 and when you have guys like Flacco, Perriman, Dixon, Wallace, Waller, Stanley etc... together for a long period of time, that's when the offense takes that step into the elite ranks.  

I agree with the fact that we better replace him with someone who is good. I think Payton(If let go), McCoy, and Jackson are candidates that we make me move on from Marty, a few others too but I can't think of them at the moment.

I disagree with change on the offense not needed. The current offense that we implement now revolves around a short/intermediate passing game with not a lot of the deep shots that Joe and other desire. You can hear Joe wired or in his post-game that there are elements that he believes the offense should add, I certainly believe that will come with a new OC. Again, if an offensive system doesn't work for 2 seasons straight and you have guys frustrated to the core than there are absolutely changes needed.

The Steelers example is a good one and there isn't much to say to that, but I can't really think of many teams out there who would keep the same OC in that type of situation for 4 seasons straight.

As far as plays that we could've made as you said the Perriman hook up or the Mike Wallace TD that should've happened if he kept his feet in-bounds goes, I certainly think the same case could be made for Trestman. If Perriman keeps both feet in bounds against the Redskins for what would've been a game winning TD than Trestman is preparing for the Giants. I think players have to execute in that sense, but I've seen those cases exist for many of Trestman and even Cameron in all honesty.

I like Marty, I really do, but if someone better comes along then I couldn't care much for continuity. Especially if all things considered that he could possibly stick around for more than 1 season.

[BOLDnPurPnBlacK]

Honest question - I dont think this will happen, but ive heard rumblings... Let's say Chip Kelly is let go in San Fran, and he would accept a role as an OC in the NFL.

Would you be interested? 

I live in the Philly area now, and have a sour taste in my mouth from his tenure with the Eagles. They HATE him here for what he did from a personnel standpoint, even though he did accomplish some good things with sub-par talent on offense (that sub-par talent thing was his own doing, of course).

My worries are, the longer his tenure went, the less effective his offense became. He came out of the gates on fire, 2nd year had a lot of success on offense but the Foles injury and defense really held them back, and then fell apart year 3 under Bradford.

He hasnt really impressed me in SF, though the talent is really lacking there as well... and since the transition to Kaep they have had some encouraging outings.

 

His offense scares me. It has worked, but seems too gimmicky to me. It's too hot and cold. He hasnt seemed to come off his stubborn desire to constantly go 100 miles per hour even when situation football calls for bleeding the clock. His defenses have routinely played almost 2+ more games than most teams in terms of # of snaps. They get worn out. I dont think he a good HC.

But could he be a good OC?? Maybe... I really dont know where i stand on it. What do you guys think? And if available would you be interested?

Edited December 2, 2016 by BOLDnPurPnBlacK

[hereweare]

8 minutes ago, BOLDnPurPnBlacK said:

Honest question - I dont think this will happen, but ive heard rumblings... Let's say Chip Kelly is let go in San Fran, and he would accept a role as an OC in the NFL.

Would you be interested? 

I live in the Philly area now, and have a sour taste in my mouth from his tenure with the Eagles. They HATE him here for what he did from a personnel standpoint, even though he did accomplish some good things with sub-par talent on offense (that sub-par talent thing was his own doing, of course).

My worries are, the longer his tenure went, the less effective his offense became. He came out of the gates on fire, 2nd year had a lot of success on offense but the Foles injury and defense really held them back, and then fell apart year 3 under Bradford.

He hasnt really impressed me in SF, though the talent is really lacking there as well... and since the transition to Kaep they have had some encouraging outings.

 

His offense scares me. It has worked, but seems too gimmicky to me. It's too hot and cold. He hasnt seemed to come off his stubborn desire to constantly go 100 miles per hour even when situation football calls for bleeding the clock. His defenses have routinely played almost 2+ more games than most teams in terms of # of snaps. They get worn out. I dont think he a good HC.

But could he be a good OC?? Maybe... I really dont know where i stand on it. What do you guys think? And if available would you be interested?

I can't find a puking emoticon, but this will do.... 

[BmoreBird22]

24 minutes ago, BOLDnPurPnBlacK said:

Honest question - I dont think this will happen, but ive heard rumblings... Let's say Chip Kelly is let go in San Fran, and he would accept a role as an OC in the NFL.

Would you be interested? 

I live in the Philly area now, and have a sour taste in my mouth from his tenure with the Eagles. They HATE him here for what he did from a personnel standpoint, even though he did accomplish some good things with sub-par talent on offense (that sub-par talent thing was his own doing, of course).

My worries are, the longer his tenure went, the less effective his offense became. He came out of the gates on fire, 2nd year had a lot of success on offense but the Foles injury and defense really held them back, and then fell apart year 3 under Bradford.

He hasnt really impressed me in SF, though the talent is really lacking there as well... and since the transition to Kaep they have had some encouraging outings.

 

His offense scares me. It has worked, but seems too gimmicky to me. It's too hot and cold. He hasnt seemed to come off his stubborn desire to constantly go 100 miles per hour even when situation football calls for bleeding the clock. His defenses have routinely played almost 2+ more games than most teams in terms of # of snaps. They get worn out. I dont think he a good HC.

But could he be a good OC?? Maybe... I really dont know where i stand on it. What do you guys think? And if available would you be interested?

He's done a lot of good in SF with very little. I'd take him.

[BOLDnPurPnBlacK]

7 minutes ago, BmoreBird22 said:

He's done a lot of good in SF with very little. I'd take him.

I think he would get a lot out of Wallace, Perriman and Waller especially. His mantra of "big guys beat up little guys" would fit there, especially with the speed they have for his quick hitting offense. Dixon and Buck Allen would also be great fits.

Foles is a drastically less talented, and even less mobile pocket passer than Flacco, and Kelly did get him to perform incredibly well, 2 years in a row.

I just dont know if it sustains, and if hes adaptable enough to change if it stops being effective.

Edited December 2, 2016 by BOLDnPurPnBlacK

[Cillmatic]

42 minutes ago, BOLDnPurPnBlacK said:

Honest question - I dont think this will happen, but ive heard rumblings... Let's say Chip Kelly is let go in San Fran, and he would accept a role as an OC in the NFL.

Would you be interested? 

I live in the Philly area now, and have a sour taste in my mouth from his tenure with the Eagles. They HATE him here for what he did from a personnel standpoint, even though he did accomplish some good things with sub-par talent on offense (that sub-par talent thing was his own doing, of course).

My worries are, the longer his tenure went, the less effective his offense became. He came out of the gates on fire, 2nd year had a lot of success on offense but the Foles injury and defense really held them back, and then fell apart year 3 under Bradford.

He hasnt really impressed me in SF, though the talent is really lacking there as well... and since the transition to Kaep they have had some encouraging outings.

 

His offense scares me. It has worked, but seems too gimmicky to me. It's too hot and cold. He hasnt seemed to come off his stubborn desire to constantly go 100 miles per hour even when situation football calls for bleeding the clock. His defenses have routinely played almost 2+ more games than most teams in terms of # of snaps. They get worn out. I dont think he a good HC.

But could he be a good OC?? Maybe... I really dont know where i stand on it. What do you guys think? And if available would you be interested?

He seems like a guy who isn't too likable, plus his offense simply doesn't work at a professional level. He needs to take his butt back to Oregon or something.

[JoeyFlex5]

15 hours ago, BOLDnPurPnBlacK said:

Honest question - I dont think this will happen, but ive heard rumblings... Let's say Chip Kelly is let go in San Fran, and he would accept a role as an OC in the NFL.

Would you be interested? 

I live in the Philly area now, and have a sour taste in my mouth from his tenure with the Eagles. They HATE him here for what he did from a personnel standpoint, even though he did accomplish some good things with sub-par talent on offense (that sub-par talent thing was his own doing, of course).

My worries are, the longer his tenure went, the less effective his offense became. He came out of the gates on fire, 2nd year had a lot of success on offense but the Foles injury and defense really held them back, and then fell apart year 3 under Bradford.

He hasnt really impressed me in SF, though the talent is really lacking there as well... and since the transition to Kaep they have had some encouraging outings.

 

His offense scares me. It has worked, but seems too gimmicky to me. It's too hot and cold. He hasnt seemed to come off his stubborn desire to constantly go 100 miles per hour even when situation football calls for bleeding the clock. His defenses have routinely played almost 2+ more games than most teams in terms of # of snaps. They get worn out. I dont think he a good HC.

But could he be a good OC?? Maybe... I really dont know where i stand on it. What do you guys think? And if available would you be interested?

Chip will never be a NFL OC and definitely not under harbaughs rule. He'll go back to college first.

[Willbacker]

The more I think of this right now I'm fine with Martyball. We've been looking for somebody long term and he's been an upgrade over Trestman imo. He doesn't give up on running the ball which gives us the playaction.

Chip Kelly sounds interesting and Joe seems to do pretty good with hurry ups and we do have good speed on offense but I do not see him taking a backseat as OC. Personally as a fan Id rather see us keep a more chew up the clock style.

[robbie29]

I think Marty is doing the best with what he's got. Keep in mind- this isn't his first gig as an OC. In fact, each of the 7 seasons he was OC in Philly, the offense always finished in the top 10. Marty is in the unenviable position of having to game plan with a bottom-tier QB who is either unable or unwilling to step into throws and go deep to Wallace and Perriman. Marty also has to game plan with one of the worst rushing attacks in the league. So, when you're dealing with a sub-par QB and poor running game, there's only so much you can do. You can draw up the most genius offensive plays in the world, but it means squat if you don't have playmakers- especially at QB and RB.

[ravens rule]

10 minutes ago, robbie29 said:

I think Marty is doing the best with what he's got. Keep in mind- this isn't his first gig as an OC. In fact, each of the 7 seasons he was OC in Philly, the offense always finished in the top 10. Marty is in the unenviable position of having to game plan with a bottom-tier QB who is either unable or unwilling to step into throws and go deep to Wallace and Perriman. Marty also has to game plan with one of the worst rushing attacks in the league. So, when you're dealing with a sub-par QB and poor running game, there's only so much you can do. You can draw up the most genius offensive plays in the world, but it means squat if you don't have playmakers- especially at QB and RB.

I'm not a big Flacco fan but we have to keep in mind that it really takes two years with an acl injury.

[BOLDnPurPnBlacK]

1 hour ago, ravens rule said:

I'm not a big Flacco fan but we have to keep in mind that it really takes two years with an acl injury.

Not only that but Marty's had to call an offense using a foundation that isn't his. This is still largely Trestmans offense called by Marty and with some wrinkles thrown in. 

Hes certaintly changed and added some but you just can't start all over mid-season. So we still don't really know what Marty's offense will look like and how it will work with these players. 

I'm all for giving Marty another year unless there's a hands down better candidate available. I want to see how he does with a full offseason and TC to implement his offense. 

Caldwell calling Cam's offense and then Caldwell calling his own offense were two completely different things (a negative example). Similarly I think if Marty's here in 2017 it'll be totally different than this Trestman/Marty offense we see now -- for better or worse. 

[JoeyFlex5]

3 hours ago, BOLDnPurPnBlacK said:

Not only that but Marty's had to call an offense using a foundation that isn't his. This is still largely Trestmans offense called by Marty and with some wrinkles thrown in. 

Hes certaintly changed and added some but you just can't start all over mid-season. So we still don't really know what Marty's offense will look like and how it will work with these players. 

I'm all for giving Marty another year unless there's a hands down better candidate available. I want to see how he does with a full offseason and TC to implement his offense. 

Caldwell calling Cam's offense and then Caldwell calling his own offense were two completely different things (a negative example). Similarly I think if Marty's here in 2017 it'll be totally different than this Trestman/Marty offense we see now -- for better or worse. 

Marty's offense is quite different. He likes to go deep far more often than trestman, and he usually had a strong ball control game plan on the second half. I feel like he's adding his own wrinkles week by week as shown by our slightly more committed approach to running the ball. At least it appears that way... I haven't looked at rushing attempt numbers or anything.

[BmoreBird22]

I don't understand why people say Chip Kelly's offenses don't work in the NFL.

It's really not a bad philosophy.

[BOLDnPurPnBlacK]

9 minutes ago, BmoreBird22 said:

I don't understand why people say Chip Kelly's offenses don't work in the NFL.

It's really not a bad philosophy.

Yea... it clearly worked in 2013 and 2014 especially. 

It works with the right personnel and that's really what was his undoing in Philly. With Desean, Maclin, Shady, Sproles and Ertz and Foles under center they were an offensive machine. 

It was his thinking that the offense made those guys and that it would work just as well with inferior pieces. 

 

His issue isn't his offense, it's his situational coaching. He hasn't figured out when to diverge from the break neck pace and control the clock. 

But take his offense and play calling, keep him far away from personnel decisions and put him under a strong HC who understands how to win football games and what to do from a situational standpoint and I think it could be very successful.

The question is whether Chips ego would allow him to accept a role like that. 

[BOLDnPurPnBlacK]

34 minutes ago, JoeyFlex5 said:

Marty's offense is quite different. He likes to go deep far more often than trestman, and he usually had a strong ball control game plan on the second half. I feel like he's adding his own wrinkles week by week as shown by our slightly more committed approach to running the ball. At least it appears that way... I haven't looked at rushing attempt numbers or anything.

And that's my point to the people saying we shouldn't bring back Marty based on what we've seen so far 

We haven't seen Marty's offense yet. He's adding his spin on things little by little, and I think the marginal improvements are a result of that. 

But this is still largely trestmans offense. 

He deserves next year to fully implement what he wants to do, because honestly it fits our identity and personnel much better. 

Granted it could end up worse (I doubt it) but deciding that Marty's offense won't work here based on the small taste of it we're getting this year doesn't make sense. That'd be like firing Trestman twice.  In essence letting Marty go bc Trestmans offense didn't work. 

[FlocksGottaFeed]

3 minutes ago, BOLDnPurPnBlacK said:

And that's my point to the people saying we shouldn't bring back Marty based on what we've seen so far 

We haven't seen Marty's offense yet. He's adding his spin on things little by little, and I think the marginal improvements are a result of that. 

But this is still largely trestmans offense. 

He deserves next year to fully implement what he wants to do, because honestly it fits our identity and personnel much better. 

Granted it could end up worse (I doubt it) but deciding that Marty's offense won't work here based on the small taste of it we're getting this year doesn't make sense. That'd be like firing Trestman twice.  In essence letting Marty go bc Trestmans offense didn't work. 

Agreed. One of the most fair and honest assessments I've read on the subject.

[JoeyFlex5]

23 minutes ago, BmoreBird22 said:

I don't understand why people say Chip Kelly's offenses don't work in the NFL.

It's really not a bad philosophy.

people have no clue what chips offense is, thats why. people honestly still think his offense is the mariota-led ducks offense. 

blows my mind that people actually think chip kelly, who was the hottest coaching prospect just 4 years ago, got to the NFL by telling the philly GM that he wanted to run an NFL offense with the QB as the feature ball carrier.

[BmoreBird22]

7 minutes ago, JoeyFlex5 said:

people have no clue what chips offense is, thats why. people honestly still think his offense is the mariota-led ducks offense. 

blows my mind that people actually think chip kelly, who was the hottest coaching prospect just 4 years ago, got to the NFL by telling the philly GM that he wanted to run an NFL offense with the QB as the feature ball carrier.

That's also not really the Oregon offense...

[The Raven]

33 minutes ago, BmoreBird22 said:

I don't understand why people say Chip Kelly's offenses don't work in the NFL.

It's really not a bad philosophy.

It's because they're incapable of complex, rational thought and lack an understanding of how important it is to have players that execute.

[BmoreBird22]

6 minutes ago, The Raven said:

It's because they're incapable of complex, rational thought and lack an understanding of how important it is to have players that execute.

I really like the Chip Kelly offense because it is extremely simple and complex. It just requires a quarterback who can move and can process the defensive looks.

Past that, Kelly likes to have an answer for every single defensive front he's shown.

[FlocksGottaFeed]

36 minutes ago, BmoreBird22 said:

I don't understand why people say Chip Kelly's offenses don't work in the NFL.

It's really not a bad philosophy.

True. It's really not a bad philosophy...for college. It's not the offensive scheme. It's truly innovative. It's the fact that paid, professional players with agents and the NFLPA representing them aren't going to have enough of the extensive amounts of practice reps, OTAs, film study and live full-speed/contact drills to master it. Another consideration - youth and endurance.

It's a great college offense, but not for grown men. They would have to extend the roster to 80 players per team along with everything mentioned before that. 

[BmoreBird22]

1 minute ago, FlocksGottaFeed said:

True. It's really not a bad philosophy...for college. It's not the offensive scheme. It's truly innovative. It's the fact that paid, professional players with agents and the NFLPA representing them aren't going to have enough of the extensive amounts of practice reps, OTAs, film study and live full-speed/contact drills to master it. Another consideration - youth and endurance.

It's a great college offense, but not for grown men. They would have to extend the roster to 80 players per team along with everything mentioned before that. 

I don't know if people actually know what Chip Kelly's offense is. 

It is really simple and would be very easy for an NFL player to pick up.

Plus, college has pretty extensive rules limiting practice times, too. It isn't exclusive to the NFL, except college players have class, so they aren't always a full team together at practice.

Edited December 4, 2016 by BmoreBird22

[JO_75]

Is there any Position coaches out there in terms of a WR Coach, RBs Coach who could be a young up and comer looking to make a name for themselves as a OC we could look at? Unless Hue Jackson gets fired for going 0-16 and is available, I don't see anyone in terms of a current head coach who could be fired. 

[BmoreBird22]

3 minutes ago, JO_75 said:

Is there any Position coaches out there in terms of a WR Coach, RBs Coach who could be a young up and comer looking to make a name for themselves as a OC we could look at? Unless Hue Jackson gets fired for going 0-16 and is available, I don't see anyone in terms of a current head coach who could be fired. 

Sean McVay is the name I want. 

He's a Rick Dennison type OC

[FlocksGottaFeed]

22 minutes ago, BmoreBird22 said:

I don't know if people actually know what Chip Kelly's offense is. 

It is really simple and would be very easy for an NFL player to pick up.

Plus, college has pretty extensive rules limiting practice times, too. It isn't exclusive to the NFL, except college players have class, so they aren't always a full team together at practice.

Chip's schedule worked well in college (double what professionals do even with the quesay rules they say they're following), but not so much in Philli. He adjusted it during his second run with San Fran. Players were very pleased.
http://www.oregonlive.com/nfl/index.ssf/2016/08/chip_kellys_training_camp_sche.html

13 games in and...look at the results. College players don't have agents and NFLPA representation (I saw what you did...conveniently leaving that part out).

It's about reps. They just don't apply to game time. Practice time reps are just as wearing to the body as game time reps. Doubling the reps means shortening the careers of players. That's millions of dollars flushed down the toilet. Ask an agent.

Now, once your in the league for 5-6 years imagine the wear and tear on your body. Like I stated before - it's great for college and I'll add X-Box. Oregon wants him back for millions. He's probably gone anyway.

Edited December 4, 2016 by FlocksGottaFeed
even with the quesay rules they say they're following

[BmoreBird22]

3 minutes ago, FlocksGottaFeed said:

Chip's schedule worked well in college (double what professionals do even with the quesay  rules they say their following), but not so much in Philli. He adjusted it during his second run with San Fran. Players were very pleased.
http://www.oregonlive.com/nfl/index.ssf/2016/08/chip_kellys_training_camp_sche.html

13 games in and...look at the results. College players don't have agents and NFLPA representation (I saw what you did...conveniently leaving that part out).

It's about reps. They just don't apply to game time. Practice time reps are just as wearing to the body as game time reps. Doubling the reps means shortening the careers of players. That's millions of dollars flushed down the toilet. Ask an agent.

Now, once your in the league for 5-6 years imagine the wear and tear on your body. Like I stated before - it's great for college and I'll add X-Box. Oregon wants him back for millions. He's probably gone anyway.

That was a proposed practice schedule. We have no idea if they liked it any more or less than what was previously implemented.

Anyway, it's two players who complained about tough practices. The Ravens are notoriously known for their extremely grueling practices, so it's just a culture that needs to be created.

It's also not fair to say that the reps are nearly as intense as a game. It's one thing to do two times as many reps in shorts and a practice jersey. It is entirely different to be smacked in the mouth play after play. 

But this still doesn't change the fact that his offense is very simple (probably one of the most simple in the NFL) and if an NFL player can't pick it up from February, they probably don't need to be starting.

[JoeyFlex5]

45 minutes ago, BmoreBird22 said:

That's also not really the Oregon offense...

i know it isnt, but because of marcus mariotas reputation in college that seems to be the common thoughts on a chip kelly offense.

[BmoreBird22]

Just now, JoeyFlex5 said:

i know it isnt, but because of marcus mariotas reputation in college that seems to be the common thoughts on a chip kelly offense.

Mariota was third in carries well behind Thomas and Barner. He didn't even really run that often.

Kelly himself said he wants a quarterback who is capable of running, not a running back who is capable of throwing. He doesn't want a Tim Tebow offense.

Mariota was much more prolific as a passer than given credit for. I was personally wrong on how the up tempo spread offense would effect his transition to the NFL, but that's a discussion for another day.

[RaineV1]

1 hour ago, BmoreBird22 said:

I don't understand why people say Chip Kelly's offenses don't work in the NFL.

It's really not a bad philosophy.

I think an altered version of it can work very well. He just needs to know when to slow down a bit during the second half to sit on a lead and not tire out his defense.