Did Sherman substitute too much?

[Patler]

Since there is absolutely nothing of football substance to discuss, I thought I would bring up some things I have been thinking about to see if anyone wants to discuss them. My Jagodzinski thread was the first, this is another.

In an article last year about audibles, Favre stated he seldom audibled because they had so many specific personnel groupings for plays that it was unlikely the proper personnel group was in for the play he would audible to. Therefore, they simply ran the called play even when they knew the defense was set to stop it.

Is this the situation with most teams, or did Sherman use too many different personnel groups? Obviously there were specific plays when Henderson was in the game, or when Fisher was in the game, with 2, 3 or 4 wide receivers, 2 tight ends, the U71 plays, etc.

Will it be the same with a more simplified West Coast offense. Will we see more audibles from Favre as we did in the later Holmgren years?

[Sparkey]

I remember watching games with my brother and when we saw certain players enter the game we would call out what the play was going to be. That fact that we were right about 70% of the time is a bit scary considering we are not coaches or have experience at scouting NFL teams.

So if we can be right 70% of the time, what do you think opposing teams were doing with the consistent substittution patterns.

By all means, you want the players in the best positions to succeed. But excessive substitutions, like Sherman used last year (getting predictable) is not a good thing.

[Harlan Huckleby]

Re: Did Sherman substitute too much?

Favre stated he seldom audibled because they had so many specific personnel groupings for plays that it was unlikely the proper personnel group was in for the play he would audible to.

I would think that there would be 10 plays that could be run out of a given formation. Perhaps it would be VERY hard for a QB to recall those 10 plays at the line of scrimmage, and choose the best one. That sort of computerized thinking may not be Favre's strong suit.

[Badgepack]

Sherman has been outcoached in numerous games over the past few years.
2nd half adjustments made by the opposing coaches killed us. Predictable play calling certainly is part of that.

[swede]

An interesting question.

Compared to Rodgers, Brett's experience makes him a better candidate for recognizing situations in which a called play should be changed at the line. The first SB touchdown to Rison was an audible, wasn't it? Brett knows how to do this if given the opportunity.

I hadn't thought about it before, Sham, but would the "flexibility" of all those personnel packages really reduce a QB's ability to audible? Why couldn't every formation have a corresponding line-call that morphs a play into one or two designated alternate plays depending on the defense?

[Sparkey]

An interesting question.

Compared to Rodgers, Brett's experience makes him a better candidate for recognizing situations in which a called play should be changed at the line. The first SB touchdown to Rison was an audible, wasn't it? Brett knows how to do this if given the opportunity.

I hadn't thought about it before, Sham, but would the "flexibility" of all those personnel packages really reduce a QB's ability to audible? Why couldn't every formation have a corresponding line-call that morphs a play into one or two designated alternate plays depending on the defense?

I think you could be in a situation where the only back in the formation is TOny Fisher and the play call is for him to slide out to the left as a safety valve and the play is designed to go to the TE or a slot.

THe defense switches to a dime with doubles on the TE and slot so a good play call switch would be to run a quick trap up the middle. Except, your back is Tony FIsher and no one ever said he was "quick"

That is where excessive player groupings for specific plays can prevent an audbile from being any better than the original play.

Just my thoughts....

[HarveyWallbangers]

An interesting question.

Compared to Rodgers, Brett's experience makes him a better candidate for recognizing situations in which a called play should be changed at the line. The first SB touchdown to Rison was an audible, wasn't it? Brett knows how to do this if given the opportunity.

Both long TD throws (to Rison and to Freeman) were audibles.

[pbmax]

Re: Did Sherman substitute too much?

Holmgren ran base, 2 TE, 3 WR + TE and short yardage/goaline. That might be a couple less than Sherman, which would make it easier.

But the changes in personnel weren't so dramatic. He usually had Chmura or Harris on the field. He had Bennett or Levens depending on the down. And the TE was always on the field for what might look like 4 wides, except for hail marys. And the O-line remained the same.

McCarthy learned from Hackett the West Coast offense that Montana ran in KC. Denver runs two TEs and Jags would have learned that from Gibbs and Mora. So there is a good chance we'll be back to fewer formations.

And after the U-71 comments, probably fewer lineman coming in and out.

[pbmax]

An interesting question.

Compared to Rodgers, Brett's experience makes him a better candidate for recognizing situations in which a called play should be changed at the line. The first SB touchdown to Rison was an audible, wasn't it? Brett knows how to do this if given the opportunity.

Both long TD throws (to Rison and to Freeman) were audibles.

Wasn't Rison's audible just him looking at Favre and nodding? I seem to remember that story, or perhaps that was Free?

[jack's smirking revenge]

I don't think Sherman substituted enough. He should've tried Splenda with a few more of his meals. The dude is F-A-T.

tyler

[BlueBrewer]

Come on, I think shermy was trying for the Pear look.

[jack's smirking revenge]

Well, then he achieved it with flying colors.

tyler

[Merlin]

Sherman ran a very complicated offense that relied on personell packages. Once we were down to Gado, there were less of those packages available because Gado didn't know the whole offense. This put a stranglehold on the audibles. In fact, I don't remember Favre calling any that's how few he called. With each package came a group of audibles, again, relying on the personell in the game. When Favre didn't know the people he was playing with he wouldn't call the hot read because he was unsure of the player. That is and isn't his fault. He needed to throw the ball and hand it off to whoever was in there. He let the drops and fumbles get into his head too much and focused to much on someone like Driver, then the CB's would jump the route. The part that isn't his fault is the fact his offense was basically decimated and Sherman could have scaled the packages down and changed the plays up to better fit the offense that was there.

[Patler]

Sherman ran a very complicated offense that relied on personell packages. Once we were down to Gado, there were less of those packages available because Gado didn't know the whole offense. This put a stranglehold on the audibles. In fact, I don't remember Favre calling any that's how few he called. With each package came a group of audibles, again, relying on the personell in the game. When Favre didn't know the people he was playing with he wouldn't call the hot read because he was unsure of the player. That is and isn't his fault. He needed to throw the ball and hand it off to whoever was in there. He let the drops and fumbles get into his head too much and focused to much on someone like Driver, then the CB's would jump the route. The part that isn't his fault is the fact his offense was basically decimated and Sherman could have scaled the packages down and changed the plays up to better fit the offense that was there.

I may have confused the issue a bit by refering to "last year". The article was last year, but discussed Favre's decreasing use of audibles since the 1990s. His comment was that for several years (ie under Sherman) he goes for ENTIRE GAMES without a single audible. There are automatic adjustments that backs and receivers should make based on defensive formations, etc. but not complete different play calls.

A comment made, (I think from Favre) was that the play you would want to go to might not be one that some of the people on the field had even practiced. The philosophy is run the play, take you lums and go on to the next one. If you don't trust your QB, maybe that's smart. If you have a 14 year veteran of basically the same offense forever, it seems you are limiting yourself.

[MJZiggy]

If they are indeed simplifying the offense as has been reported, wouldn't it stand to reason that with the simplified WCO would come with simpler personnel packages that would eliminate this problem, and yes, I do consider it a problem if it limits the quarterbacks audible possibilities on the field. It's fine to tell him what play to run, but he has to have the flexibility to change things at the line when necessary. To have him look around and know he can't do that is not using your weapons effectively.