The new Roman Offense

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • ghz in pittsburgh
    Registered User
    • Aug 2004
    • 5861

    The new Roman Offense

    Well no one has seen it in Buffalo. But the personnel sign is pointing to versatility. Specifically same grouping, against different defensive personnel, he wants to have at least one play for one player to have an advantage in match-up.

    McCoy can run or catch. Felton can run, block, catch. Harvin is a good slot receiver, but can also run out of back field very well. They wanted Clay because he can do just about everything reasonably well. And they want a QB who can effectively use his legs well, too.

    The Bills have a very predictable offense and they don't have a Manning, Rogers, or Brady back there (mind you in the playoff, even those guys can be beat if they are predictable). When they have Spiller in, its going to be a run and probably some bouncing outside (when he goes against grain to run inside, usually not successful). When Chandler is in, it's usually for pass because he can beat pretty easily if he has to do blocking.

    This is by no means devalue an absolute stud like Watkins who can beat just about every one facing across from him just by doing one thing of running routes. That's where an stud QB is so, so valuable, but throughout the history of the league, at any one time, you have 5 or 6 in the whole NFL. There are no abundance of stud QBs in FA for you to sign, nor anyone available for trade.

    So I imagine ground and pound is the main theme here. But if obvious match-up advantage is there, the QB should take it, like a single covered Watkins, a Brandon Spikes kind of guy on McCoy, a safety or gosh a linebacker on Harvin ...

    They probably don't want the QB to make difficult throws, just make the right decisions.
  • Mace
    Haha...yeah you think so ?
    • Mar 2013
    • 20314

    #2
    Re: The new Roman Offense

    Well, on the plus side we're going to see a lot more play action. Roman sets up the pass with the run, so we're looking at a lot of 3rd and 5's, because defenses will stack the box and McCoy needs holes. The passes will come or should come when you aren't expecting them, but they'll be expecting them because we're run heavy. Cassel is great at smallball, honestly Manuel might be too so don't count him out at the intended offense yet.

    Ryan is figuring 3 scores should win a game and they will sometimes.

    Honestly what I am expecting is Manuel/Cassel to throw way more often than you'd think. I'm dubious on whether it works or not, because honestly, Ryan has a history now of doing what you wouldn't think but not being capable of it and teams know it, so he gets stuck doing what they know he has to.

    I think we're going to see a productive offense that stalls terrible in the red zone because that's where Ryan lets his OC get cutesy and they start predictably slinging, and Roman may not want to sling, but Palmer and Lee will run the passing game, while Rex either cheers or rants on the sideline at the results, taking all the blame after and being properly upset while nothing changes the following week.

    I think they're going 8-8 with a lot of rabid board arguments on who's fault it was.

    Comment

    • Strongman
      Registered User
      • Apr 2006
      • 763

      #3
      Re: The new Roman Offense

      It does look like they are trying to make an offense where any one player isn't emphasized.

      Comment

      • Mace
        Haha...yeah you think so ?
        • Mar 2013
        • 20314

        #4
        Re: The new Roman Offense

        Originally posted by Strongman View Post
        It does look like they are trying to make an offense where any one player isn't emphasized.
        Really tough to say, Ryan's team acquired Tebow for the wildcat, made him a personal punt protector, purposely didn't emphasize him, and had no success not emphasizing him in the Wildcat and as a personal punt protector. He loves getting pieces he can't use because he wanted the pieces that might be used, emphasizing not emphasizing pieces unsuccessfully.

        Yeah I come off bummed about it, hope I'm wrong but I just don't see this turning out well, if not turning out well loudly with much press.

        Comment

        • Meathead
          Insufferable prick and perpetual crybaby
          • Jul 2002
          • 21349

          #5
          Re: The new Roman Offense

          man i thought we lost both spiller and chandler but thank god i was wrong
          One set of rules for all in the beloved community

          Comment

          • Strongman
            Registered User
            • Apr 2006
            • 763

            #6
            Re: The new Roman Offense

            Originally posted by Mace View Post
            Really tough to say, Ryan's team acquired Tebow for the wildcat, made him a personal punt protector, purposely didn't emphasize him, and had no success not emphasizing him in the Wildcat and as a personal punt protector. He loves getting pieces he can't use because he wanted the pieces that might be used, emphasizing not emphasizing pieces unsuccessfully.

            Yeah I come off bummed about it, hope I'm wrong but I just don't see this turning out well, if not turning out well loudly with much press.
            I'm interested in seeing how it comes together. I'd be happy to see them get away from some personnel groupings or which basically gave away if it was going to be a run or pass play.

            Comment

            • streetkings01
              Registered User
              • Jul 2006
              • 2980

              #7
              Re: The new Roman Offense

              Originally posted by Mace View Post
              Really tough to say, Ryan's team acquired Tebow for the wildcat, made him a personal punt protector, purposely didn't emphasize him, and had no success not emphasizing him in the Wildcat and as a personal punt protector. He loves getting pieces he can't use because he wanted the pieces that might be used, emphasizing not emphasizing pieces unsuccessfully.

              Yeah I come off bummed about it, hope I'm wrong but I just don't see this turning out well, if not turning out well loudly with much press.
              living here in Jets/Giants country I can tell you that Rex and his staff didn't want Tebow........it was the owners decision in an attempt to sell seats. Woody wanted Tebow not Rex and it showed in the amount of snaps he got on offense. The Jets old ST coach does a weekly show on the Micheal Kay Show and pointed it out many times how Rex and his staff did not want Tebow.
              You can call me streetkings

              Comment

              • YardRat
                Well, lookie here...
                • Dec 2004
                • 86147

                #8
                Re: The new Roman Offense

                One of these QB's better step up and be able to make the right pre-snap read the vast majority of the time then.
                YardRat Wall of Fame
                #56 DARRYL TALLEY
                #29 DERRICK BURROUGHS#22 FRED JACKSON #95 KYLE WILLIAMS

                Comment

                Working...
                X