I know, but I was just saying that really limits the offense if we can only roll to the left. I don't know if it would be possible, but I think you can roll out to the right even with a subpar RT. It wasn't every single time Hunter was getting beat, and if Hunter forces his guy inside or there is PA, it could still work as the guy Hunter is supposed to block will be pushed or sucked into the middle of the line. Hunter got beat both outside and inside, but if he knew before the play that he could force his man inside, I think he could have done it.
If you rollout and/or move the pocket you help the offensive lineman because he gets extra effect out of his redirects. It's like a trap play in the run game, the offensive lineman gets to have the defender do half his job for him as long as he gets the initial position setup for him to do the other half. The other thing that works really well in that situation is that the linebackers covering the flats get hung out to dry often with conflicting responsibilities when the QB is outside the pocket. Sanchez is clearly a better asset outside the pocket and on the move than he is sliding around in a world 2-3 inches taller than him. The number of tipped passes that he throws is probably 30 to 40 a season. Avoiding those alone is probably enough to get his completion percentage up where it needs to be.
Yours is a reasonable position up to a point, but... First of all, don't you see there is an inconsistency in complaining the offense was too complex at the same time you say the Jets ended up only running a set number of plays out of each formation? My real point here is that we don't know why that came to pass. For example,we don't know if the CS, not only Schotty, thought the O could learn the formations, but had problems executing different plays out of them. I know IF the alternative were between 1. Large number of formations, but few plays run out of each, or 2. Small number of formations, but multiple plays run out of each... In most cases, you would pick 2 since opposing D's would learn watching film which small number of plays were associated with each formation and upon seeing the Jets line up in a particular formation would know which two or three plays were likely coming out of it. But I have a hard time believing as some here seem to think that were that true, the Jets CS would have persisted in taking the 1. approach. Out of perversity? Pride? More likely is that the CS recognized it was the execution of the plays themselves that was the problem, not the ability to line up in this or that formation. In other words 2. was not really an option. A related point is that the very decision to limit the number of plays run out of formations may have been entirely about the inability of the players, in particular the Qb, to handle executing more than a couple or three plays out of each formation. Given the common criticism that Schotty was too complicated, why would he willingly choose complexity in the number of formations, but not the number of plays run out of formations? I would have to deduce from what is known that lining up in different formations was not a problem, but executing different plays out of them was. And that in fact IS another way of saying the O was designed to deal with the talents, or lack thereof, of the players. Again, the CS has to be careful not to run too simple an O. All other things being equal, more simple means more predictable. Your point about ability to execute overcoming simplicity is not really a fair one. No doubt issues with execution were throughout the O, for the most part, but I don't think the Jet players as a whole were somehow below average in their ability to execute. On the other hand Sanchez was by any measure below average. (Yes, so was Hunter, but as important as RT is to the performance of the Qb, the Qb is more important to the performance of the Qb.) I think your suggestion that somehow by running plays calling for Sanchez to stay in the pocket that Schotty was being unfair in expecting his Qb to read defenses (I take it you agree that pocket passing requires such ability) is unfair. If, for argument's sake, a Qb literally is terrible at reading defenses pre-snap, unless you give up pocket passing completely, that lack of ability will be a problem. We will have to disagree on whether roll outs lead to more injuries in general, although by your shifting to blaming Hunter, I am not sure you are really saying that they do not, in general. I clearly think they do. If you are in effect suggesting that the Jets should have rolled away from the pass rush on Hunter's side much more often, in addition to that in itself being predictable, it is problematic also for a right handed Qb. But... I think as a percentage of plays, even as bad as Hunter was, it was not so bad that most pass plays were blown up by Hunter's man. In fact many more broke down due to poor execution elsewhere, especially by Sanchez. Hunter may well have been below average, but he was not that bad. I don't dispute that a few more roll outs could have been used to good effect, possibly, last year. But my main point which you seem to agree on is that depending on roll outs too much is a problem in itself. And if last year Sanchez had merely dropped the percentage of pass attempts from the pocket, he still would have had problems reading D's when he did so. That problem would not have gone away, only been lessened. Regarding next year, I doubt we will see an opportunity to isolate the variable of Schotty's playcalling in any event. I certainly hope Hunter is not the starter at RT, and that other personnel moves will be made that will lead to different abilities to execute different plays, and hopefully overall better execution. The real test is not of Schotty, obviously. It will be whether the changes made to the offensive roster and the different offensive schemes and playcalling will lead to a better result for Sanchez, and the team. While I do remain hopeful on the roster part of it, and also whether they will allow the Jets to find better execution in plays that do not rely on Sanchez's reading D's from the pocket, I am skeptical that, when situations dictate as they will that Sanchez does that, that we will see any significant improvement from him. I hope I am wrong. I have been before.
Sanchez is not that short. Other Qb's his height have much less difficulty with batted balls. It's more a general problem he has with not seeing the field well. You also make it sound like roll out pass plays are in general better than pocket pass plays. This of course is not at all what we find in general in the NFL. It that were the case, all teams would use roll outs far more often. Again, the suggestion that Sanchez should have been used more in roll outs is really a reflection of how poor he is as a pocket passer.
I agree that there is a possible inconsistency, but that there's not necessarily one. Look at it this way, with fewer formations to remember and you running the same plays in every formation there is a lot less to remember than if your run numerous formations and run different plays out of each formation. In the latter scenario, you're not only remembering possibly radically different formations with differing responsibilities and keys, but also a different play or plays for each formation. There are more different factors to remember than when one is only using a couple of formations. If it was the execution that was a problem, then why wasn't that addressed? Also, why would having more formations to have to learn and practice make execution any better? It doesn't make sense to me that the players could learn to line up in different formations and execute a play or two specific to that formation, but they couldn't learn to execute those same plays in one or two formations. You do raise an interesting question, however. I don't blame Schotty alone. I think it's fairly obvious that the other offensive coaches must share some blame, as well as Rex for not being more involved with or demanding of the offense, and perhaps Tanny and the Scouting Dept. as well for not drafting smarter or more talented players (including Sanchez). I think Schotty would choose complexity because he liked to try to "outsmart" opponents. He has admitted that he over thought things and made things unnecessarily complex. I could be wrong here, but I think he thought he would keep opponents off-balance with the different formations. Perhaps he kept trying the same thing over and over, even when it didn't work, because that's all he knew to do. I think I've read somewhere also that his playbook was thicker than most. He may have required his players learn too many different plays, rather than just focusing on getting them to execute better on the ones they did know already. Let me ask you a related question. Why is it when a play would work very well in a game, Schotty would almost never go back to it during that game, or maybe not again? Not necessarily. I think that predictability has to do more with what plays (or in Schotty's case formations) one calls in certain situations. For example, the Jets tending to run to the right rather than straight up the gut or to the left, or tending to go to the same pass route while ignoring other routes altogether. Another example, would be generally calling a draw play on 3rd and long or calling for a pass route that's 3-5 yards short of the first down marker. (If that was the WRs cutting off their route too early, that could have been easily fixed with good coaching.) Another component of predictability was that the Jets almost always hiked the ball with 1 second left on the play clock. When opposing Ds know when the ball is going to be snapped, they can time their rush, explosion out of their stance and negate any advantage the OL has. Unfair? No, just stupid. One of the definitions of insanity is to keep doing something that's never worked in the past in the same way that it's always been done, yet expecting a different result. When something isn't working, you have to at least try something different. If the QB isn't getting the job done, then you either have to make things simpler for him, or move on to a different QB. If the problem is truly only or mostly Sanchez, then the Jets should have known prior to last season that he wasn't gonna be able to cut the mustard, and that they needed a Plan B other than Brunell at backup QB. They had the cap space to do something. Bruce Gradkowski, Shaun Hill or Dennis Dixon would have been better options than Brunell. That they didn't bring in a different QB to me suggests that either they're stupid and don't have a clue how to assess talent or that they thought that Sanchez wasn't really the problem and that his reading of Ds would improve. Schotty's and Cavanaugh's job was either to teach Sanchez how to read Ds or change to a system where he didn't have to make as many or as complex reads. The bottom line is that if he was gonna be the starter, they had to find a way to make him effective and utilize whatever talents and skills he has. Tanny's job was to assess the situation and if he saw that Sanchez wasn't getting the job done or couldn't ultimately get the job done, to find someone who could, or who could at least function as a stop gap temporary solution until they could find a better long term solution. I guess only time will tell whether it was mostly Schotty, mostly Sanchez, or mostly Tanny and/or the Scouting Dept., or some combination thereof.
I'd like to see the stats, if there are any, on QB injuries. Since most QBs tend to stay in the pocket unless flushed out, I would tend to think that most injuries occur when the QBs are in the pocket, not rolling out or scrambling. It seems to me that in rolling out, he's moving away from most defenders and most QBs or at least Sanchez can move faster than most DL or LBers. He should be able to throw the ball to (or at least towards) a WR, throw it away, run out of bounds or run for a short gain and slide. It is convenient to blame Hunter, but let's also not forget how awful Baxter was at C. Brick also had a subpar season. Moore was coming back from a major injury/surgery and age may have started taking a toll on him. Sanchez was often running for his life. It's hard to be poised, make good reads and decisions when one is fearing for one's life, especially when one wasn't confident in the game plan or calls. It was stated by a player following the season that Sanchez often looked defeated in the days leading up to a game and thus he wasn't playing in a relaxed fashion with confidence. He was thinking too much or struggling to try to do some things he wasn't confident in or capable of. Many coaches in the NFL are guilty of not being astute evaluators of whether players can do what they ask/expect of them. They frequently try to fit square pegs into round holes. It wouldn't surprise me in the least to hear confirmation that Schotty was yet another of those stooges. Lessened, or anything for that matter would have helped. One or two plays in a key moment in a key game can be the difference between making the playoffs or sitting at home. I'm not saying that it would have made the difference, only that it could have. IMO when your QB and offense is struggling, you have to try something different to get things going. We all have to hope that you're wrong about Sanchez' ability to read Ds. I fear you may not be. Regardless, I know that you only want what is best for the team and will lead to a SB victory. In spite of his struggles, Sanchez has shown real flashes of brilliance and exceptional play. The Jets have to try to find something/some way that will enable him to be more consistent in his play, to grow in the position, and maximize whatever talent and skill he has. I wasn't a fan of his. I was against drafting him and especially trading up for him, but he has played well enough to make me think that my initial evaluation of him was hasty and wrong. I hope that I was wrong, and that he will prove to indeed be the QB that Tanny, Rex or Schotty thought he could become. I agree with the rest of this last section. The test will be of Rex, of his learning from the mistakes of last season, of whether he will take the time to learn about offense and become more involved, and coach the entire team. It will be a test of Rex's and Tanny's decision making in the hiring of Sparano as OC and the retention of Cavanaugh as QB coach. It will be a test of Tanny's handling of FA and the draft in this offseason, and will also provide further evidence of the type of job he has done (or not done) over the last several off seasons. Thanks for the interesting dialogue and for pushing me to look deeper into these issues. I'll look forward to continued discussion.
There's obviously a lot to cover here, and I could post a long post on what we agree on, and then another on what we seem to disagree on. But instead I will post about what I don't know. The first concerns playcalling v. execution. Your posts have focused my attention on something that is rarely if ever noted or acknowledged around here, and that is that there is often not a sharp clear line between playcalling and execution. As I watched particularly this past season unfold, I would hear the common complaint about the playcalling. When what i was usually seeing was poor execution by the players. Now what I would also recognize is the overall responsibility of the CS is not limited to calling plays. It is not even limited beyond game management to coaching in practice. In addition there is the role the CS should have in selecting players and putting together the roster. But focusing on preparing and developing the players, both in terms of overall use of their talent but also in how to play the system and plays the team wants them to execute, is the subject. I have long felt critical of focusing too much on complaints about the playcalling at the same time I understand there is a responsibility for the apparent poor preparation of the players. The problem is in identifying that which is the responsibility of the CS versus the responsibility of the players themselves, and by extension of the FO and CS in selecting those players. As I believe you also recognize, it is tempting to many to prefer to think one single variable is responsible for all that hurt the Jets last season. Not only would that mean the problems would be easier to fix going forward. It also called for less analysis of what the nature of the problems truly were. Your posts indicate to me an implicit acknowledgement that an analysis of the actual division of responsibility ends up calling for an awareness of things we might be able to make an educated guess about, but really do not know. For example, I don't really know what the Jet coaches and FO think of Sanchez, how good they really feel about having gotten him, what they really think are the odds he will improve substantially, this coming year or ever. Another thing in the discussion we have been having I don't know is figuring out why the Jets had the mix of playcalls they did. For example, I understand your point about needing to learn to line up in certain formations. I think you are saying why spend too much time doing that and not enough learning to execute plays from those formations? I don't know the answer to that, but I doubt that it comes from the perversity of Schotty sticking with what he wanted to do unalloyed with any recognition of how that was working with the players. In other words I doubt it was just Schotty being Schotty. I don't mean to say he never showed poor judgment, and even on occasion questionable play calling. Coming at this issue from a different angle, remember how often Ryan would say "we had a great week of practices"? What was that about? Was he simply lying? Or did in fact they have great practices, and just did not execute for whatever reasons in the game? Or was it something else, like maybe they were not practicing the right things, or the right things hard and long enough? Was the CS missing stuff during practices? Going back to the issue of number of plays v. number of formations, perhaps the CS felt that certain plays out of certain formations were likely to be ineffective given the matchup that week with the particular opponent. That's something else I don't know.
Another huge issue is this business of how Sanchez seems to have difficulty reading defenses. To me, the best way to understand not only what appears to be the likely connection among the palpable and obvious difficulties he has is what appears to be his poor level of ability to see what the opponent is doing and how their play will unfold as the play develops. It even helps explain his inconsistency, how sometimes he seems effective, while others he is ineffective. That follows since even having a relatively poor ability does not mean he has none. Sometimes he sees it, gets it, knows what to do, and gets it done. But not often enough for an NFL starting Qb. But concededly I reach this conclusion by deduction from what I think it relevant to the analysis, despite that information being to some extent limited. Even assuming I and others who point to this as the issue are right, what explains it? Your analysis notes that Schotty not only had a responsibility to help Sanchez learn to read defenses, but also to design a game plan that would take his level of talent in reading defenses into account. Going forward, this is an immensely important issue for the whole franchise, since if most of the problem here was with Schotty, than hopefully and presumably a different OC and offensive coaching staff can fix the situation. If the problem was primarily with Sanchez himself, immune to better coaching or even game plans, then obviously the Jets will be set back substantially in their search for a championship. Conversely if it was primarily with Schotty and perhaps some of the other coaches, then there is a reasonable prospect that we can and will see marked improvement as early as the start of the season. But this is clearly something we do not know the answer to. And despite what I just said it is possible we will fall into some middle ground next season without getting a clear answer. For example perhaps the Jets get a new RT, the OL gets back to a high level, and the pass protection improves, thereby leading to better results, but we still see the inexplicable pick six, just maybe less of them? Or even if Sanchez shows no improvement at all, maybe that will just mean that the new coaches on offense have not improved over the old ones? Another thing is that the issue of isolating the variable of Schotty's effect on the team is already in the past. We are only here even talking about it in order to have some mix of optimism and pessimism particular to each of us about going forward. All other things being equal, it is fair to say about Schotty being gone that those who blamed him most will be more optimistic than those who place more of the blame elsewhere. But some of what will actually result next season will have more to do with other things than the playcalling, such as changes to the roster. In other words, we in the end will not be clearly able to assess the exact role Schotty played in the disappointing results of last season. We will instead see how well the 2012 Jets do, and will see that without Schotty on the sidelines. Even seeing how he does on the Rams will have some interest, but will not provide a clear answer, either. Perhaps the main thing going foward is what you allude to in your closing thoughts, which is that the ultimate question is how the team will do this coming season regardless of the past controversies. I think the upcoming season will provide a reasonably clear answer. I know, perhaps the team finishes 9-7 and out of the playoffs again. Perhaps Sanchez merely moves up a few rungs and no more on statistical measures. And perhaps some, or even many, will blame the new CS for shortcomings as they did the old. But I think it more likely we will either see a marked improvement or Sanchez and the offense as a whole, or we will at the least know that Sanchez has a relatively low ceiling, and from that we can move on to thinking about what the Jets do with that realization.
