Pure Progression

While some of the decision making is on Pickett... let us not forget that Tomlin didnt elect Pickett to do much overall in his second season. In addition, let us also not count out the fact that part of the success for Pittsburghs late season success relied on Field Position just as much as the Running Game. However, Pressley Harvin III's inconsistency cost the team far more oppurtunities than what is believed.



As for Pickett as a whole?! I agree. That said, given how this is his second OC, best to get someone who understands Arthur Smith well. As much as others hate it, Ryan Tannehill is very much on the Steelers radar for he knows how to operate in Smiths Offense. He can also aid young Kenny via the transition a lot faster as well.


Expect the final QB to be one of the two 4th Round picks (barring a trade up). I honestly dont see Mason back this season for the scarcity of the Backup QB Position is immense.

 

Just watching Kurt and the QB Coach break down the Canada scheme and the reads Pickett was supposed to be making, they put a lot of blame on the concepts and progression.

Note that the break down each of them did after Canada with Pickett and Trubisky, they both noted that the progression and route concepts were more in line with NFL offenses and noted how it produced more opportunities for the WRs/TEs to do something or run into windows.

 

I've taught this for years.
Kurt Warner is a guy I highly respect.

Canada's system was a joke. It was barely above high school level..
The passing tree's are always the same. What is different is the execution to get the 'leverage' to get the ball.
QB absolutely has have that 'mind meld' with the OC, but even more important he has to have same with the rec'rs.
Those disciplined routes create timing. As a QB you know where your guy is all the time, even if the play was called away from that WR.

Splitting the field is a little dangerous, but yes.. that's how they slow it down. Something Canada could not grasp.

I'm not going to say Authur Smith is a genius, he is not. But his offense is based off solid principals.
Smith now has a pretty hefty ground game to work with - could use a solid OT and C.
I question the WR's. Both have demonstrated some questionable characteristics... but they are talented. I'd like to see the pickup another good to press those two.
Smith should be able to get good production from each.
Our TE is going to have to find a way to stay on the field. Pat could have a very big year. TE's are a QB's best friend.

Warner nails it, he should as he was very good at it.

 

Yes Canada sucked. Yet they ran basically the same concepts, Mason found open target in. Before anyone says that's not true. I will put money on I can show many many many of the same plays run by both, and yet the outcome was different.
This is not to say that KFP will not get better, but to say stop blaming everything on the plays called.

 

Awww Blast learning football and sharing with others

 

What are you talking about? Mason didn't start until after Canada and Kenny only had 1 1/2 games without Canada. The offense was generating more chances with Kenny as well. Plus you had the interim coordinators gradually starting to implement better concepts.

What you can do is show Mitch running the exact same concepts and routes that Mason hit. Especially on the long RAC catches for scores. Both Kurt and the QB coach specifically cover some of those in their break downs pre and post Canada.

Let me be specific here though, SD has an article detailing the exact same play calls from both Mitch and Mason that Mitch absolutely butchered and Mason hit on the money.

 

Who do you think is a better QB Mason or KP?

 

Thanks for posting this. I have been decompressing after the season and have grown tired of arguing with people and trying to explain with long posts that get ignored anyway!

What Kurt Warner is talking about is what I have been trying to explain to people during the last two seasons. Canada's system does not work and makes the job of the quarterback harder, not easier.

Fans here are always screaming about players being open and Pickett not seeing them. When Warner talks about quarterbacks almost never going through 4 or 5 progressions, he speaks truth. People don't seem to understand that a quarterback rarely has enough time to go through that many progressions. Pickett averaged 2.4 seconds getting rid of the ball or being pressured. All anyone has to do right now while sitting in front of their laptop is turn to look and identify something, then move your head and eyes to the next target, then another, then another, then another. How long does it take you to turn your head and focus on all 5 targets, let alone determine if they are open or not with moving parts everywhere as a threat? It's common sense.

The other thing about the progressions in Canada's offense was how often he ran mirror routes on each side of the formation. In other words, both outside receivers would be running out routes, curls, go-routes, deep ins, etc..., and at exactly the same timing. Both progressions aren't available because you can't look at one side to determine if a player is open and then look to the other side. There is no time for that. In Canada's offense, many of the routes are designed to be open at exactly the same time....which eliminates progressions.

The more I think about this stuff, the more my head wants to explode.

Anyway, it's what I have been harping on and trying to help people see how what their eyes are seeing as players open isn't reality because of the limited time and no opportunity for progressions.

There is so much to talk about from the video, but everyone just needs to watch Kurt Warner explain it.

I'm so happy that Warner is breaking this down to illustrate and explain why the offense makes it difficult for a quarterback to execute.

 

Honestly right this moment. Mason.

 

I'm telling You Mason, Mitch, and KFP ran many many many of the same plays, and concepts. Mason looked better running the same plays. Just because Canada was gone they didn't throw the playbook out. It's simple.

 

I see you thought my post above was hilarious again with no explanation. Maybe you could explain what you don't agree with or think is hilarious.

Yes, they ran many of the same plays. They were still using Canada's offense and his play book. They altered plays and added new plays weekly, but they couldn't replace the entire offense.

They may have used the same offense and terminology, but Faulkner and Sullivan made several significant changes to the entire way the offense operated:

They changed how they prepared the offense and game planned for the games.

They changed the play calling and altered some of the plays they did run by adding wrinkles so defenses wouldn't be able to diagnose the play as easily.

They made in-game adjustments where they altered plays within the game and changed routes to react to what defenses were doing.

They made a real effort to get plays in to the quarterback much quicker than Canada did. This allowed the quarterback more time pre-snap to read the defense and to call protections and audibles. This was huge in helping the quarterback for the rest of the season.

They gave the quarterbacks more input by allowing them to run plays they felt they executed better and had more confidence running.

They gave Offensive Line coach Meyer more control over the technical aspects of offensive line technique after Canada was let go.

As quarterback coach, Sullivan was able to give his own direction to the quarterbacks after being fed how to work with and teach the offense from Canada. Canada wanted no direct contact with the quarterbacks. That's a completely different approach to how the quarterback was coached.

Everything I listed here altered how the quarterback and the offense operated from practice and preparation to game day after Canada.

 

TBD obviously

 

I was trying to say the same thing. The Mirror stuff was pretty much thrown out as soon as Canada was gone. (to be clear they had some, but it was fundamentally changed to make it progression friendly) Many of the concepts in Canadas Offense felt like they were there just because he'd heard that's what made a successful offense. Didn't put any defenders in conflict and made the receivers "have" to make a play every time instead of giving them a chance to make a play by play design.

 

I want you on the gridiron JEH. Get a damn helmet and get out there.

 

Real men didn’t wear helmets

 

that's why it's didn't and not don't

 

I'd vote for Kurt to be our OC next year if Smith comes up mediocre. Heck, make Kurt the HC and finally punt the corpse that is Tomlin.

 

I'm not saying you are wrong about any of these points. I'd probably say you both are correct. But you seem overly certain about your points that you would have no way of knowing. None of us were in the locker rooms or in practice. We don't actually know what changed and what worked. There were some obvious changes right away... KP had his best game throwing to TE's in the middle of the field. That change was pretty simple and it clearly took our opponent off guard because we were so predictable all season. That early success after MC left was squelched once there was film. The offense got worse the more opponents saw it. Absolutely Mason ran the offense better. The huge difference between KP and Mason IMO is the patience in the pocket. I think Mason gave him self extra time but also took more hits.

 

LoL. Didn't read. Don't care. Hey but keep on thinking what You say is the least bit important to me. I enjoy knowing You wrote this, and I didn't even bother to read....please write some more stuff to me ... I wont read ...LoL. Thor....LoL

 

If you really didn't read it, you missed an interesting part of the conversation. That's your loss. I'm not sure he is right about all of it, but ignoring things that fly in the face of your thoughts on a subject simply takes away from the validity of your own claims.