Makes sense, maybe people are talking at cross purposes a bit here.
[Reply]

Because some people want to have discussion unlike you who blatantly sugarcoats everything then throws a tantrum of insults when anyone doesn't totally and completely align with you.

Lots of good discussion here. Overall I think hawkeyechief raises some good points which is somewhere between where I'm at and DJ is at. We executed better but it was also way better intentional design and strategy
[Reply]

It was?
[Reply]

OK, we have had 19 turnovers this year and 11 of those were in the last 5-6 games and to that leading the league in dropped passes (I have seen the number vary from 21-30 dropped passes) you can clearly see staylor's points. Coaches and players have both stated they need to execute better... how can you discount this?

The rotation being shorter is a factor here as well. Clearly the script and coaching changed something to make it better but they players still had to "execute" the plan which is something that has been lacking most of the season.
[Reply]

I thought it was
Better WR rotations and way less of them
Really good use of the screen game especially on the outside. With real good blocking.
Way more intentional targets to Pacheco and especially rashee
Way more of a power offense even than what we used last year
Much better to hide our bottom 3 WRs who did a fine job blocking
Way better gameplanning off script

Remains to be seen how defenses adjust. But for the raiders it was about as good of a gameplan as we've seen all year
[Reply]

Because I think it speaks volumes when the guys making the lions share of those mistakes, which includes missed routes, are not one of our big 3 playmakers (Pacheco/kelce/rashee). When you phase out your bottom 3 playmakers as passing targets the team as a whole is going to make less mistakes.

And it's not because we were too dumb to figure out that we should be feeding Kelce and rice. Thats realky hard when defenses are blanketing these guys. Weve tried to push the ball to them in the past but had some challenges. We had a plan that creatively and very deliberately gave them opportunities to get the ball, and then got the blocking to move the ball when they got it. Is that sustainable? I don't know. At some point you'll need games where everything funnels to the bottom 3 and those guys gotta make plays. But for Sunday it worked beautifully
[Reply]

There's no great change in design of anything. The Pacheco passes in the flat have been there all year long, Patrick was looking elsewhere. All of this stuff is Andy Reid 101, we just haven't executed it cleanly. It's all been there. It's clear that you don't go back and watch afterwards.

They literally just made fewer mistakes.

As for the smaller rotation, we can all hope that stays, but reality is, we were down two guys and had one guy back from the IR all season. So yeah, smaller rotation. I agree that's probably helpful in getting things in synch.

But that's it really. There weren't like...a bunch of new route concepts or anything.
[Reply]

THIS!!!! I can't tell you how many times I have watched Patrick refuse to even look at Pacheco when he was open in the flat. It was frustrating, but it looks like Patrick fixed that... we will definitely see Sunday night!
[Reply]

Sometimes I wonder Patrick hurting his ankle actually forced him to rely on those underneath reads and be more quick and precise from the pocket than he had been to end the regular season.

It’s like how some bands will literally force themselves into 1960’s studios to rely on their talent to carry them over today’s production resources.

Or maybe I’m looking too far into it.
[Reply]

But we haven't before revolved an entire gameplan around drags and screens. We aren't talking about checkdowns. We're talking about a full blown gameplan where we are scripting plays to rice and Pacheco and even Kelce.

This was the most scripted offense we've seen all year by a mile. Even Kelce who's one of the smartest "WRs" in the game looked like he was running on script. And maybe that's unlocking something. Our WRs will make less mistakes if you tell them exactly where to be. But is that sustainable? Does this make it easier to gameplan us or is this just a back to basics to where we dial it up a notch eventually.

That is way different. They went from complex to Sesame Street simple, and there’s pluses and minuses on if that works
[Reply]

I don't think you understand what 'scripted' means.

I agree, they looked like they knew what they were doing! That's how it is supposed to be.

They looked like that for about half the Charger game. They've looked like it for a drive or two here and there.

That's the first time they have looked like that for three quarters.

Doesn't mean they were running a different scheme. It's the same staple stuff that exploits the defensive rules of coverage. They just executed. Andy called a great game, Patrick took what was there and didn't force things, and Rice and Kelce were dialed in. It's really just that simple. There were some more screens than prior weeks, but drag routes is what we DO, man.

Now, let's make it a habit.
[Reply]

When I say scripted I’m talking about predetermined routes and even dialing kelce and mahomes back to where they’re predetermining a lot of the play. And maybe they’re on to something. Or it’s just a building block. But they simplified the offense tremendously which helps the offense execute, but it also could become easier to scheme against. That is a very different approach from previous games. That strategy certainly changed this week.

I think it’s good if it means back to basics. But can we sustain this level of simplicity in the stretch run? We will see. I personally want to see us leverage the brains of mahomes and kelce.
[Reply]

The thing is, though-you don't want to have a discussion. You want confirmation bias.

You had decided quite on your own, that KC had done a lot of very different things last week.

Most of us have said-nah, it's the same route concepts and stuff, they just played better.

No, that can't be it, you insist.

But it is. Rice and Kelce particularly got it together in the second quarter and played great. But it's the same stuff we always do, because it works as long as you execute it.

We still had MVS running deep routes primarily. Watson mostly, too. Rice and Moore mostly either taking WR screen type plays at the line or drags across the formation while Kelce drifts into the seams. It's the same stuff we always do. They just did it better.

The only play I hadn't seen before was the reverse flea-flicker thing. There ya go! Now THAT was different.

Of course, when the pitch happened, I yelled -OH SHIT WHAT THE FUCK!

Followed closely by- YAAAAAAS!!!

LOL.

Alright, Andy. That was cute. Let's not make a habit of THAT, lol.

They just got in a groove, man. That's all. They didn't script 40 plays. You couldn't.

They got a good feel for where to go with the ball, and how to attack the coverage rules, and the players executed.
[Reply]

I don't know, but I fucking love that kid.

He's the definition of a 'DAWG'.
[Reply]

Like maybe there are less post snap options than before for them?

sure, maybe. No way to know that.

There had been talk about getting back to fundamentals, so maybe so.

That's got nothing to do with scripted, though, and the WR screens and stuff we do all the time. Hell, MOST of Rice's catches have been almost that exact play.
[Reply]