1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Offensive strategy regarding WR's

Discussion in 'Miami Dolphins Forum' started by oakelmpine, Mar 20, 2013.

  1. oakelmpine

    oakelmpine New Member

    3,328
    339
    0
    Oct 16, 2012
    X's and O's aren't my strong suit, as I have said before I am just an ordinary fan, and didn't play ball in HS.

    But wouldn't it serve to say that because Wallace will now be the fastest guy and bigger threat, that teams defensively will put their best DB on him and then that frees up Hartline to be covered by a person of lesser ability ? Shouldn't Wallace really benefit Hartline and other WR's most of all ?

    Discuss if you can, just remember too much x's and o's will lose me.....you may get more questions LOL.
     
    P h i N s A N i T y likes this.
  2. shouright

    shouright Banned

    22,845
    8,861
    0
    Dec 13, 2007
    The key thing about the personnel in the receiving corps at this point is that all areas of the field can be attacked. Wallace deep, Hartline along the sideline, Gibson anywhere on the field in the short to intermediate ranges, Bess in the short area and behind the LOS on bubble screens, and Keller in the flat and down the seam intermediate and long. Then throw Miller in there as a pass-catcher and Thigpen as our version of Danny Woodhead/Darren Sproles, and you have a complete passing attack in terms of the areas of the field that can be threatened and have to be accounted for by opposing defenses. It's a huge upgrade IMO.
     
  3. oakelmpine

    oakelmpine New Member

    3,328
    339
    0
    Oct 16, 2012
    Thanks Shou :up:
     
  4. Fineas

    Fineas Club Member Luxury Box

    10,269
    10,246
    113
    Jan 5, 2008
    It depends on the team. Some might do that, but some teams will keep their CBs on whatever side they usually play on regardless of the WR matchup. Other teams may switch their CBs, but may put their fastest, as opposed to necessarily their best, CB on Wallace. Others might put their best CB on Hartline, but roll coverages toward Wallace's side to give deep safety help there.

    The idea that having a true No. 1 receiver would benefit Hartline, if valid, would have applied just as much, if not more, when Marshall was here. It didn't seem to benefit Hartline then and I don't expect it to necessarily benefit Hartline now. I have never seen anything to make me believe that having a great receiver on one side really benefits the others. It is spoken about a lot, but I have never seen any real evidence to suggest it is true. AS indicated, Marshall's presence here didn't particularly benefit the other receivers. Nor did it benefit the other receivers in Chicago. Vincent Jackson's presence in Tampa didn't seem to benefit Mike williams in any appreciable way. Williams put up a little better numbers last year than in 2011, but the same as 2010 when he was just a rookie. The fluctuation there seems to be due to Freeman, not Jackson. The presence of Calvin Johnson, Larry Fitzgerald and Andre Johnson does not seem to have particularly benefitted the other starting WR on those teams.
     
  5. dWreck

    dWreck formerly dcaf

    5,200
    2,975
    113
    Oct 23, 2011
    Sebring, FL
    Nice post shou, haven't seen you around in a while. :up:
     
  6. dWreck

    dWreck formerly dcaf

    5,200
    2,975
    113
    Oct 23, 2011
    Sebring, FL
    Considering hartline did as well as he did last season, its probably fair to say his numbers will go down a bit this season with MW, keller and gibby. I think primarily zone based schemes would suffer the most from the speedyness. and it should open quite a bit for other WRs under, but i dont think it will be anything extreme.
     
  7. Disgustipate

    Disgustipate Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    27,555
    38,720
    113
    Nov 25, 2007
    There are a lot of misconceptions about what a single wide receiver with certain qualities will do to the defensive looks that you'll get around here. Wallace probably isn't going to revolutionize thing. There are specific, situational benefits, but the idea that it's suddenly a whole new game offensively is silly.

    The big benefit is the more weapons you can utilize effectively the better. Wallace adds to that, but so does Keller, etc.
     
  8. Larryfinfan

    Larryfinfan 17-0...Priceless Club Member

    I think having Wallace benefits the rest of the WR corp a lot. The thing is, this offense is best run with precise route running. Gibson, Hartline and Bess fit that mold to a tee. Wallace's strength isn't his route running, although it's likely not quite as bad as some pundits seem to think. I mean, Todd Haley's offense even tho a vertical offense as opposed to the WCO, wants good route running and timing by the WRs...at any rate, Wallace will have to be recognized by opposing D's simply because he can outrun most CBs in the league... In theory, it can leave openings for the other WRs...however, a running game has to part of the equation...even if it's more of a threat of a running game...
     
  9. Stringer Bell

    Stringer Bell Post Hard, Post Often Club Member

    43,947
    21,523
    113
    Mar 22, 2008
    Really depends on who your opponent is, and what their tendencies are.
     
  10. KB21

    KB21 Almost Never Wrong Club Member

    23,956
    40,163
    113
    Dec 6, 2007
    I've always said the argument that getting (plug in receiver's name here....Marshall/Wallace) is going to open things up for the other receivers on the team is an impact that is highly overrated. I've challenged folks to give me a subjective, tangible number that shows me just how much of an impact this really has, because if there is an impact, it can be measured.

    The impact a receiver makes is when the ball is in his hands, and the more players you have at this position that can make plays with the ball in their hands, the better.
     
    Fineas likes this.
  11. Lee2000

    Lee2000 Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    11,561
    6,492
    113
    Mar 23, 2008
    Pearl, Mississippi
    Well, Philbin wants all his receivers to have the ability to run any route on the field. Now we know Bess isn't likely to be running deep on a frequent basis, and most of the attempts to get the ball to him long last year didn't pay off. But Philbin wants all his receiver to run all of the route tree, or have the ability to run all the routes if needed. That probably ties in to his disinterest in "specialist". I actually think Austin could run every route given his burst and speed. So even though initally I believed he might be that "specialist", I now believe he was commenting more so on the idea of a "slot receiver" only description. He would not be seeking to find a guy that only ran in the slot, but preferred using receivers who could line up anywhere.

    All that to say if Miami drafts Austin, I believe they view him as a guy they could line up anywhere, and a guy that could run the entire route tree.
     
  12. cspooner13

    cspooner13 New Member

    39
    11
    0
    Mar 23, 2013
    Not only that, you can also line Austin up in the backfield if you want to roll him out on a wheel or screen that way. Austin is a very versatile player that would fit well with the direction that we want to go on offense. I would like the choice a lot.
     
  13. ToddPhin

    ToddPhin RIP Phinsational Luxury Box Club Member

    40,161
    22,141
    113
    Jul 6, 2012
    NC
    xoxoxxxxxooxoxoxoxxoxooxxoxoxoxoxoxoxxx
    xoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxxxxxxxxooooxoxoxooooooooxoxoxoxxxoxxoxxoxox
    xoxoxoxxoxooooxxxxxxoxoxoxxoxoxoxoxoxoxxxxxooxoxoxoxxoxooxxoxoxoxoxoxoxxx
    xoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxxxxxxxxooooxoxoxooooooooxoxoxoxxxoxxoxxoxox
    xoxoxoxxoxooooxxxxxxoxoxoxxoxoxoxoxxxxxoxoxoxxxxoxoxoxxoxoxxxxxooxoxoxoxxoxooxxoxoxoxoxoxoxxx
    xoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxxxxxxxxooooxoxoxooooooooxoxoxoxxxoxxoxxoxoxxxxxoxox
    xoxoxoxxoxooooxxxxxxoxoxoxxoxoxoxoxoxoxxxxxooxoxoxoxxoxooxxoxoxoxoxoxoxxx
    xoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxxxxxxxxooooxoxoxooooooooxoxoxoxxxoxxoxxoxox
    xoxoxoxxoxooooxxxxxxoxoxoxxoxoxoxoxxxxxoxoxoxxxxooxox

    See ya in a few months. lol
     
    djphinfan and Da 'Fins like this.
  14. LBsFinest

    LBsFinest Banned

    3,972
    2,062
    0
    Jul 24, 2012
    Too bad we only have one.
     
  15. Da 'Fins

    Da 'Fins Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    23,307
    19,457
    113
    Dec 19, 2007
    Birmingham, AL
    These are some fascinating observations. Especially what you have them doing with Wallace and Miller.

    Pretty deep stuff ...
     
    ToddPhin and djphinfan like this.
  16. Fin-Omenal

    Fin-Omenal Initiated

    36,954
    10,268
    0
    Mar 25, 2008
    Thee...Ohio State University
    As has been said before, Wallace does so much for this offense even when he is not the target. We have a dynamic deep threat, great intermediate route runners, now we just need that guy who when in open space can kill a defense. One of the reasons iam now warming up to Tavon Austin @12.
     
  17. jim1

    jim1 New Member

    5,902
    3,054
    0
    Jul 1, 2008
    I don't really understand this. If a speed player like Wallace can command a double team, that's one less DB to cover the other WRs. If he takes a Safety out of the box to focus more on covering him deep, there's more room underneath for the other offensive players to maneuver. If he draws the best CB to cover him 1 on 1, that allows the rest of our WRs to be covered by lesser CBs.

    As to this impact being measured statistically the same problem exists, too many variables/ moving parts. QBs are different, the teams' 2nd tier WRs are different, OL, RBs, they all have a direct or indirect effect and they're all different. Same with opposing defenses. All this can lead to statistics which don't tell the whole story or can be manipulated, jmo.

    Personally I'd rather use simple logic. If a star WR demands more coverage and attention, there's less of those two things to be spread around to the other WRs. Bottom line, it's that simple. Example: if Wallace is flying down the sideline against a cover 2 defense and not only is a CB engrossed in keeping up with him but a Safety is frantically hauling in that direction to prevent a big play, that deep half of the defense just opened up. And if the Safeties are preoccupied with Wallace and bite on his moves, they can be maneuvered out of position for other receivers and routes.

    Compare that to our offense last year. Against the Jets iirc the Safeties gave very little respect to our WRs deep speed, one of them jumped in and picked off a pass intended for Fasano. The CB covering our WR, iirc, wasn't exactly preoccupied with his deep speed either. Most would agree that our passing game was constricted. The opposite of that is our passing game being opened up- that's hopefully what we got with Wallace. Maybe the impact can be measured decently well in increased production of the passing game this year versus last year, I don't know. But Tannehill is no longer a rookie, Jake Long and Reggie Bush are gone, etc., Brandon Gibson is now here as well. That kind of study would work better if Wallace was the one variable, and he isn't. Plenty more changes would have to be factored in for a true apples to apples comparison and I don't see at what point, with 11 players on offense and players jumping to different teams in FA all the time, that would be possible. You could try, but imo there are just too many variables to do it well.
     
    DPlus47, ToddPhin, 2k5 and 4 others like this.
  18. djphinfan

    djphinfan Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    96,966
    49,877
    113
    Dec 20, 2007
    I don't agree that Marshall would have the same impact as what mike wallace speed would do for an offense in terms of spacing, It looks as though this player might have that little extra that gets inside the opponents head, maybe? I mean if it takes two secondary players to watch, to roll over, to cover, to think about, it's an unfair platform for the play mentally, and literally, maybe that's why people pay top dollar for elite speed.If you aquire the correct skillsets to compliment that concept, than you take full advantage of it, which then increases the value of an elite speed player, and essentially making it easier on some other players..Tavon Austin or Tyler Eifert have the skillsets to do it..I think you can win with either player taking advantage of what space Wallace and his speed can open up, I think to a degree you can scheme your intermediate and your underneath stuff just by knowing how certain defenders will react to Wallace, getting them the ball, and letting the great athletes and players add up that yac.

    You also have the thought process of the secondary, if the speed is lethal, than the speed is in their head, if the speed is not there, theres no reason to think about it..I think that is a tangible advantage.

    Brandon Marshall scares no'one deep..big and physical yes, fast no, also doesn't threat on horizontal routes like Wallace can do, Wallace will house a crossing route with pure ability, Marshall skillset will keep going out of bounds with a slight angle backwards..lol

    I'll just say that I'm gonna wait to see on this one, I'm very confident that to compliment Wallace's speed to the max, Austin and Eifert are the best skillsets to do so because if how they work in space, it would make this offense as dangerous as it could get, conceptually, unless, you were to do everything possible to aquire both if the other NFL general managers slip up in their evals..which they do..
     
  19. Stringer Bell

    Stringer Bell Post Hard, Post Often Club Member

    43,947
    21,523
    113
    Mar 22, 2008
    Defenses very rarely dedicate themselves to a single player. The Jets played the same stuff against Miami that they normally do. They play a lot of man and let teams try and beat them deep. Teams are mostly basing their coverages on offensive personnel packages.

    The advantage Mike Wallace adds is more direct than indirect.
     
  20. Vinny Fins

    Vinny Fins Token Gay Dolfan

    3,320
    2,263
    113
    Oct 26, 2009
    Bklyn
    We've gone from a WR corps without a Number 1 to one of the deepest in the league. It opens up so much because Defenses have to honor the deep ball now. Not just in the passing game, either. Can't really stack the box with Wallace on the field.
     
  21. Ohio Fanatic

    Ohio Fanatic 30 years and counting Club Member

    26,243
    12,103
    113
    Nov 26, 2007
    Concord, MA
    there were situations last year where, on 3rd and long, defenses would just double cover Hartline because no one else on our team was effective. Having more weapons can only help Tannehill.
     
    Fin-Omenal likes this.
  22. jim1

    jim1 New Member

    5,902
    3,054
    0
    Jul 1, 2008
    No one mentioned "dedicate". I'm talking about double teams, Safeties cheating over at other times and more likely out of the box, that kind of stuff. It's one of the reasons why offensive balance is stressed and also a good part of the reason how Paul Warfield was so valuable, keeping DBs occupied, not able to discard him and to focus on stopping the Miami running game. Plus Warfiled caught the ball and scored TDs, as Wallace most likely will. Direct, indirect, whatever. It's production and synergy.
     
  23. GMJohnson

    GMJohnson New Member

    14,291
    5,841
    0
    Jan 27, 2010
    Mike Wallace does in fact change the game. Especially for our offense. I'm willing to bet we won't see safeties milling about at 10-12 yds the way we did last season. We also won't see single high looks with a FS in the deep middle. IMO you can pretty much take the defensive game plans we saw last year and trash them.

    If we can run the ball the way we did last year MW will be a tremendous asset. IMO all we are missing is the big physical WR to work the middle and create space and opps in the red zone.
     
  24. Disgustipate

    Disgustipate Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    27,555
    38,720
    113
    Nov 25, 2007
    I think people pretty heavily overrate the correlation between safeties playing deep and the "respect" of a passing game. A safety coming into the box doesn't inherently mean more or less conservative coverage deep.

    We'll certainly still see it. Teams will want to keep deep coverage over Wallace but that certainly doesn't mean you won't see single high looks.
     
  25. shouright

    shouright Banned

    22,845
    8,861
    0
    Dec 13, 2007
    That should be a tight end like Tyler Eifert.
     
  26. alen1

    alen1 New Member

    52,829
    20,379
    0
    Dec 16, 2007
    There's a difference between natural bracket and bracket coverage. I think people get that confused. You're going to see more of the former than you did before. That means more Cover 2 and 4 and their variations with pattern reading.

    As for the talk that a receiver doesn't change anything -- I'm talking about your comments, KB, it's simply false and all you have to do is look at the schematic tendencies of the defense. That won't show up in the numbers.

    Yes you will.
     
    Fin D and djphinfan like this.
  27. Fin-Omenal

    Fin-Omenal Initiated

    36,954
    10,268
    0
    Mar 25, 2008
    Thee...Ohio State University
    People who don't like the move are going to argue Wallace doesn't change the defensive gameplan much. Ofcourse he will not see over the top coverage every passing down, but what can happen is when defenses take that risk? We have a WR that can make the defense pay dearly.

    Personally I'm guessing we will see a decent amount of cover 2 early on with the "non Wallace" Saftey on his toes and not his heels. Until we prove we can run the ball effectively anyhow.

    Having Wallace in general will change the way defenses scheme for us, not sure how anyone can deny that.
     
  28. Limbo

    Limbo Mad Stillz

    2,476
    1,128
    113
    Mar 21, 2013
    The question for me is, What's the ideal number of targets/gm for Mike Wallace? I don't remember him being fed the ball a ton in Pittsburgh; but if we're paying him 12mil, do we have to force it to him some, even when he doesn't seem to me to be someone that needs/excels with high-volume targets?
     
  29. cspooner13

    cspooner13 New Member

    39
    11
    0
    Mar 23, 2013
    Wallace isn't a guy that you need to feed the ball to 10-15 times a game to get his numbers. If he's getting five or six catches a game, he should put up fantastic numbers. I don't think he's a "catches" guy as much as he is a "stats" guy. But that's just my take
     
  30. shouright

    shouright Banned

    22,845
    8,861
    0
    Dec 13, 2007
    Regarding how teams are going to defend the passing game, IMO they're still going to make Ryan Tannehill beat them, since he hasn't proven he can do that on a regular basis in the NFL. Sure he'll have better surrounding talent now, but again, he still hasn't proven he can make use of it to the tune of reliably beating teams with the passing game. If I'm coordinating a defense against Ryan Tannehill, I'm still putting eight in the box, putting the heat on him and the running game, and making him beat me with his arm. There's no reason defensive coordinators should fear using that approach at this point. It'll be up to Tannehill to make them learn their lesson, but of course that has yet to happen and may not for all we know. He's going to have to step up.
     
    Rhody Phins Fan likes this.
  31. cspooner13

    cspooner13 New Member

    39
    11
    0
    Mar 23, 2013
    Oh, absolutely agree. I haven't seen anything from our RB's to let me know that they can take any pressure off of RT. Then, when you add in the questions we have at LT (let's be honest, I think we all have reservations about whether Martin is the answer over there), there's no reason not to put eight in the box, blitz, and take your chances.
     
  32. cspooner13

    cspooner13 New Member

    39
    11
    0
    Mar 23, 2013
    And as for RT, you have to remember he was a WR his first two seasons at Texas A&M, so he's still adjusting to the QB position. He was a little bit of a project when he came in, it's going to take a bit of time for him to get everything down. He'll get there, I have no doubt about that.
     
  33. Pauly

    Pauly Season Ticket Holder

    3,204
    3,147
    113
    Nov 29, 2007
    I think that the situation is that a deep threat opposite a true #1 helps the #1, more than a #1 helps the other WRs.

    If you take the situation with Dallas when they had Alvin Harper opposite Michael Irvin as an example. By having a deep threat that had to respected opposite Irvin meant the defences couldn't roll deep help Irvin's way all the time because of the threat of Alvin Harper taking big chunks of yards off them. The same with John Taylor opposite Jerry Rice.
     
  34. Alex13

    Alex13 Welcome to the NEW Miami Club Member

    18,178
    16,223
    113
    Dec 21, 2007
    Berlin,Germany
    no, no , no according to you there are all the same
     
  35. shouright

    shouright Banned

    22,845
    8,861
    0
    Dec 13, 2007
    Also James Jett and Tim Brown.

    Question is, if that's the model that works, why do you need to pay the speed guy so much, if his contribution consists merely of keeping defenses honest vertically by virtue of his speed? Sure the guy can't be a scrub. He has to make plays to keep defenses honest. But Alvin Harper, John Taylor, and James Jett weren't paid like Mike Wallace. Then again, Brian Hartline isn't Michael Irvin, Jerry Rice, or Tim Brown.
     
  36. shouright

    shouright Banned

    22,845
    8,861
    0
    Dec 13, 2007
    Right, but these defensive gameplans we're talking about have a whole lot more to do with Ryan Tannehill than with the running backs or the offensive line, IMO. When there are eight in the box and/or a blitz, the quarterback has to beat the defense with his arm, reliably, for defenses to change their tune. Granted he has to get at least adequate protection, but in the case of a blitz, he's also going to need to recognize it and make a play against it with his own ability. If that can't happen, all this extra surrounding talent won't make the intended difference.
     
  37. southbeachbeast

    southbeachbeast New Member

    37
    21
    0
    Aug 20, 2010

    hahaha okay you want a "subjective, tangible" number?

    Tom Brady's stats the year before Randy Moss: 3,529 yds., 61.8 % comp., 24 TDs, 12 INTs

    Certainly not elite QB type #'s, now with Moss: 4,806 yds., 68.9 % comp., 50 TDs, 8 INTs......

    So theres that, okay one more example?

    Donovan McNabb's #'s year before TO: 3,216 yds., 57.5 % comp., 16 TDs, 11 INTs

    Pretty average, here it is now with TO: 3,875 yds., 64.0 % comp., 31 TDs, 8 INTs

    So I hope those are enough subjective, tangible numbers for ya

    I dont know how you think that impact is overrated, I mean Brady more than DOUBLED his TD passes and Mcnabb almost did too....

    Anyways should be fun to see what RT can do this year with a guy like Wallace on the outside now!!
     
    cspooner13 likes this.
  38. Pauly

    Pauly Season Ticket Holder

    3,204
    3,147
    113
    Nov 29, 2007
    To paraphrase a NBL coaching cliche you can't coach speed.

    It's why a guy like Ted Ginn Jr got drafted in the 1st round, because when you have speed like that AND the ability to make consistent plays with that speed then you push back the DBs 3-5 yards on every play. The problem with Ginn was that he couldn't make enough plays to justify his draft position.
     

Share This Page