Analysis of Garrett's scheme

Are, that this offense isn't a finished product. How much of the PB are they utilizing at this point?

In comment 15010368 crick n NC said:

Quote:

Are, that this offense isn't a finished product. How much of the PB are they utilizing at this point?

Why wouldn't they be utilizing a wider variety of wr routes, or at the least, arranging the routes to get receivers good match-up? Its six games into the season.

https://twitter.com/DDuggan21/status/1317105556398682112?s=19

This is making it harder for the QB, not easier.

is the Garrett/Judge don't trust the OL to pass block for longer periods of time successfully. Based on this longer patterns breaking off each other won't work because they take time. So he floods the short -to-mid range with receivers running short patterns, forcing a lot of man-to-man coverage, looking for the quicker hitters. Its up to Jones, likely via pre-snap reads, to find the best matchup and throw it in there. Its up the receiver to win that matchup.

At this level it makes sense. I really don't believe that Garrett is this moron out there who has no idea. I believe he (and Judge) are trying to find a scheme that works with the current talent/experience on the team. Obviously as we get better this will change. So keep trying to run, hit short passes in 1-on-1 matchups, and take the occasional deep pass to keep them honest.

I think this is the formula until we can pass block better. Remember there are a lot of weaker OL's that benefit from a QB/scheme that get the ball out fast. This is what he is trying to do. Getting the ball out fast means short routes.

Will have you know that he has a degree from Princeton.

I also have noticed/sensed that on many plays, the routes all break at the same time, which makes it impossible to go to a second, much less a thir read. We also don't use rub routes nearly often enough, nor wheel routes. Granted, wheel routes may take longer than our pass-pro can hold up for, but the others don't.And the notion that different routesshould break at slightly different times isn't rocket science. I watch the All-22 as well, and I see a large number of "4 curls" for example, where you really only get one person...two tops, to throw to. The others will be covered again by the time you come off the first read. We need more creativity in the routes, along with WRs who can actually juke/feignt their way open on occasion.

Garrett would be doing things differently if he had even average personnel. The Jones fumbling fears likely make this really difficult because we really can't afford to have him back there for more than 2-3 seconds.

I'd like to see more quick slants but I also need to watch more tape - i'm guessing defenses are sitting on shorter underneath routes more often than not.

There is more you can do than just ask your older or untalented WR group to consistently beat 1 on 1 match-ups in a predictable offense.

What's the expectation when the defense knows your routes are coming and the receiver isn't a special player?

Maybe Garrett isn't used to gameplanning around a weaker OL with subpar WR talent. He hasn't had to in almost a decade.

and the analytics community has been extremely critical of Garrett going back years.

In comment 15010389 Ten Ton Hammer said:

Quote:

There is more you can do than just ask your older or untalented WR group to consistently beat 1 on 1 match-ups in a predictable offense. What's the expectation when the defense knows your routes are coming and the receiver isn't a special player? Maybe Garrett isn't used to gameplanning around a weaker OL with subpar WR talent. He hasn't had to in almost a decade.

I don't think these a "routes" per say. I think he gets a few 1-on-1 matchups, and then the WR adjust left or right to get open depending on the angle the DB/LB takes on him. Sort of like blocking out in basketball. The DB comes at you from your left, you turn your back to him and turn right. Its the way TE's normally get open on short routes. They play to an area, and then shield themselves open. All Jones really has to do is throw to the opposite side of the DB.

See its simplifying things for Jones, the OL, and actually for inexperienced receivers too

or rollouts this year, either.

Granted I've only watched basically one full game (Steelers and it's been WAYYY too nice out so I've been playing golf every Sunday)

Am I wrong?

Gilbride's offense set records when we had talent and got him run out of town for being "too complicated" when we didn't. McAdoo's simplified WCO scheme only ever worked with prime Beckham. Shurmur and Garrett had offensive success before coming to the Giants. We need NFL starters or no scheme is going to "work for our personnel."

consistently at the top of the league. He knows something about this. I don't think its fair for people in the same breath to say "our OL can't pass block" and then "why aren't we running deeper routes". The two go together.

In comment 15010397 widmerseyebrow said:

Quote:

Gilbride's offense set records when we had talent and got him run out of town for being "too complicated" when we didn't. McAdoo's simplified WCO scheme only ever worked with prime Beckham. Shurmur and Garrett had offensive success before coming to the Giants. We need NFL starters or no scheme is going to "work for our personnel."

bingo. Again we complain about the players, but then give the coaches no slack for trying to change things to be able to win with these players

You can develop route combinations to creates holes in coverage at various depths. Sean McVay and Shanahan are notorious for this.

Jones already often takes deep dropbacks, possibly as a way to help the OL and help him see more of the field. The Giants also don't motion receivers much. In fact its among the lowest percentage in the league.

Engram is seeing his most shallow routes in his career despite his strength being a downfield threat. You don't have to throw bombs, but SENDING him downfield opens up work for other receivers. Hell, a DB picked him off this year because he was sitting on a basic curl route he fell down on.

In comment 15010370 Ten Ton Hammer said:

Quote:

In comment 15010368 crick n NC said: Quote: Are, that this offense isn't a finished product. How much of the PB are they utilizing at this point? Why wouldn't they be utilizing a wider variety of wr routes, or at the least, arranging the routes to get receivers good match-up? Its six games into the season.

I don't have specific answers. I expressed to you yesterday my reasoning with Garrett and this offense. To me Garrett knows offensive football and didn't suddenly forget. My thoughts are:
Limited resources (players)
Limited practice and perhaps install time
Players not comfortable with offense

I am not saying you must see it this way, but for me this thinking makes more sense than to say "Garrett sucks".

if they don't trust the line to hold up, to still run conventional plays with some deep routes?

the idea is to try and get guys in space right? if you have 4 wrs and the DBs are playing 5-10 yard off of them but the wrs all run 10 yard curls how can you expect anyone to win their matchup with everyone being right "there"?

In comment 15010414 crick n NC said:

Quote:

In comment 15010370 Ten Ton Hammer said: Quote: In comment 15010368 crick n NC said: Quote: Are, that this offense isn't a finished product. How much of the PB are they utilizing at this point? Why wouldn't they be utilizing a wider variety of wr routes, or at the least, arranging the routes to get receivers good match-up? Its six games into the season. I don't have specific answers. I expressed to you yesterday my reasoning with Garrett and this offense. To me Garrett knows offensive football and didn't suddenly forget. My thoughts are: Limited resources (players) Limited practice and perhaps install time Players not comfortable with offense I am not saying you must see it this way, but for me this thinking makes more sense than to say "Garrett sucks".

Garrett knows football just fine. this isn't a personal attack. He can simply just not be working within this situation well. Its a problem he hasn't had to work around for 10 years, if not more. The cowboys had a good to great offensive line and top offensive weapons every year he coached and coordinated there. Its easier to coach when you have a high talent base and toys to work with.

Jones looked much better than this, and the Giants are not a significantly less talented offensive roster than last year to the point where they look non-functional in the passing game. It's fair to question what you're seeing.

In comment 15010378 PatersonPlank said:

Quote:

is the Garrett/Judge don't trust the OL to pass block for longer periods of time successfully. Based on this longer patterns breaking off each other won't work because they take time. So he floods the short -to-mid range with receivers running short patterns, forcing a lot of man-to-man coverage, looking for the quicker hitters. Its up to Jones, likely via pre-snap reads, to find the best matchup and throw it in there. Its up the receiver to win that matchup. At this level it makes sense. I really don't believe that Garrett is this moron out there who has no idea. I believe he (and Judge) are trying to find a scheme that works with the current talent/experience on the team. Obviously as we get better this will change. So keep trying to run, hit short passes in 1-on-1 matchups, and take the occasional deep pass to keep them honest. I think this is the formula until we can pass block better. Remember there are a lot of weaker OL's that benefit from a QB/scheme that get the ball out fast. This is what he is trying to do. Getting the ball out fast means short routes.

Not true. We do run some route concepts that have receivers at all three levels. Most of the time these are our most successful plays. We ran these concepts all year last season with an OL that was worse. I suggest you watch the complete video. There are plays in there where we run routes down the field.

In comment 15010397 widmerseyebrow said:

Quote:

Gilbride's offense set records when we had talent and got him run out of town for being "too complicated" when we didn't. McAdoo's simplified WCO scheme only ever worked with prime Beckham. Shurmur and Garrett had offensive success before coming to the Giants. We need NFL starters or no scheme is going to "work for our personnel."

Ten Ton recommended an excellent article by Dan Duggan in The Athletic. The issue isn’t so much what’s wrong with the scheme now as much as it’s what’s different that’s causing Jones to look far worse than last season. The offense is more complicated in the reads the QB needs to make. The throws can be more difficult, especially for a kid struggling with confidence and pass rushers on him. The scheme is also definitely an issue for Evan Engram. It isn’t utilizing his one true gift... straight line speed. There’s all sorts of extra variables like COVID affected off-season and Jones background in easier offenses on top of that.

In comment 15010426 Ten Ton Hammer said:

Quote:

In comment 15010414 crick n NC said: Quote: In comment 15010370 Ten Ton Hammer said: Quote: In comment 15010368 crick n NC said: Quote: Are, that this offense isn't a finished product. How much of the PB are they utilizing at this point? Why wouldn't they be utilizing a wider variety of wr routes, or at the least, arranging the routes to get receivers good match-up? Its six games into the season. I don't have specific answers. I expressed to you yesterday my reasoning with Garrett and this offense. To me Garrett knows offensive football and didn't suddenly forget. My thoughts are: Limited resources (players) Limited practice and perhaps install time Players not comfortable with offense I am not saying you must see it this way, but for me this thinking makes more sense than to say "Garrett sucks". Garrett knows football just fine. this isn't a personal attack. He can simply just not be working within this situation well. Its a problem he hasn't had to work around for 10 years, if not more. The cowboys had a good to great offensive line and top offensive weapons every year he coached and coordinated there. Its easier to coach when you have a high talent base and toys to work with. Jones looked much better than this, and the Giants are not a significantly less talented offensive roster than last year to the point where they look non-functional in the passing game. It's fair to question what you're seeing.

I put more value into practice time and pre-season time, especially for a new system. Maybe too much time, but not unreasonable.

and one that should have been knocked more last week is the fact that at the end of the game, with a tie being in hand at the moment Garrett changes the Giants personnel and pretty much hands Dallas our game plan.

All game long we had either Freeman or Gallman in as our backs. We ran and passed with those guys on the field. Then we get the ball and with a decent amount of time BUT, limited timeouts (1 I believe) we decide to come out with Lewis in the backfield.

1) That took any real running threat out of the game at a time where we still could run or at least threaten the run.
2) This then allowed Dallas the ability to TEE off on our weak tackles and bring extra pressure keeping lewis in as a blocker or severly limiting his release, keeping his ability to catch the pass to within 2 yards of the LOS (before and after).
3) That also meant Dallas was able to put in extra pass defenders as again, no need to worry about the run.


When you look at how we did things on that last drive, we literally went away from everything we did earlier when we didn't have to. It was almost like we were trailing instead of tied and that we were desperate to get that win.

We could have used Freeman still and used him out of the backfield as a receiver or run him on a delay or hard up the gut. Any of those options would be there and Dallas would have to respect those possibilities. Once he was off the field and Gallman was off the field none of those things mattered.

A strictly out of the backfield receiving running back is far from a weapon when all your other receivers are so damn close to the LOS too. At the same time I can send a rusher towards the back forcing him to block or forcing the pass to come out quickly to the back (with a trailing defender behind the blitzer with the responsibility of picking up the releasing back.

We literally, by design, formation and personnel, gave Dallas exacty what they needed then- the ability to rush without fear of the run at all.

In comment 15010450 crick n NC said:

Quote:

In comment 15010426 Ten Ton Hammer said: Quote: In comment 15010414 crick n NC said: Quote: In comment 15010370 Ten Ton Hammer said: Quote: In comment 15010368 crick n NC said: Quote: Are, that this offense isn't a finished product. How much of the PB are they utilizing at this point? Why wouldn't they be utilizing a wider variety of wr routes, or at the least, arranging the routes to get receivers good match-up? Its six games into the season. I don't have specific answers. I expressed to you yesterday my reasoning with Garrett and this offense. To me Garrett knows offensive football and didn't suddenly forget. My thoughts are: Limited resources (players) Limited practice and perhaps install time Players not comfortable with offense I am not saying you must see it this way, but for me this thinking makes more sense than to say "Garrett sucks". Garrett knows football just fine. this isn't a personal attack. He can simply just not be working within this situation well. Its a problem he hasn't had to work around for 10 years, if not more. The cowboys had a good to great offensive line and top offensive weapons every year he coached and coordinated there. Its easier to coach when you have a high talent base and toys to work with. Jones looked much better than this, and the Giants are not a significantly less talented offensive roster than last year to the point where they look non-functional in the passing game. It's fair to question what you're seeing. I put more value into practice time and pre-season time, especially for a new system. Maybe too much time, but not unreasonable.

My view simply is that I am unsure how comfortable the players are in this new system and how much of that is affecting the results.

In comment 15010389 Ten Ton Hammer said:

Quote:

Maybe Garrett isn't used to gameplanning around a weaker OL with subpar WR talent. He hasn't had to in almost a decade.

Name an OC who is good at this? Don't forget no run game.

breathe a little bit before we start calling for Garrett's head. Practically no OTA's and no preseason, with an OL still finding their way.

I actually think the playcalling has been good.

with Garrett's play calling and ability to sustain drives. It's not near where it will be but I'm seeing signs of life and think once they get into a groove this will be a good offense. Unfortunately with Barkley out, expectations should be lowered.

In comment 15010462 uther99 said:

Quote:

In comment 15010389 Ten Ton Hammer said: Quote: Maybe Garrett isn't used to gameplanning around a weaker OL with subpar WR talent. He hasn't had to in almost a decade. Name an OC who is good at this? Don't forget no run game.

Jason Garrett is probably thinking he had no idea that a NFL Offensive Line can play this bad after coming from where he was.

Look at who we have at RB.
Look at who we have at TE.
Look at who we have at WR.
Look at how the OL is playing.
Look at how the QB is playing.

In comment 15010462 uther99 said:

Quote:

In comment 15010389 Ten Ton Hammer said: Quote: Maybe Garrett isn't used to gameplanning around a weaker OL with subpar WR talent. He hasn't had to in almost a decade. Name an OC who is good at this? Don't forget no run game.

There are plenty of nfl coaching staffs who don't have a top 5 offensive line or WRs, yet can still post an at least league average offense. This is not some kind of difficult standard to meet.

Freeman and Lewis are legitimate NFL running backs, btw.

Cleveland and Carolina have new coaching staffs. Carolina has a new quarterback also. The off-season hasn't stopped them from being productive on offense and winning games.

The Giants are short on talent, yeah. But if you think Garrett is doing a good job maximizing what he does have then we are watching different things.

In comment 15010516 Go Terps said:

Quote:

Cleveland and Carolina have new coaching staffs. Carolina has a new quarterback also. The off-season hasn't stopped them from being productive on offense and winning games. The Giants are short on talent, yeah. But if you think Garrett is doing a good job maximizing what he does have then we are watching different things.

I disagree on Covid. Each team has their own different challenges.

On my stance.

I am in no way saying Garrett doesn't have his own errors in this formula of offensive football. I am also not saying Garrett is some guarantee that will work out. I believe in waiting a certain amount of time before deciding on what I believe are fair critiques. I am not an avid film watcher, I am not one of experience breaking down X's and O's. Others may be able to see mistakes that I am not able to see. I feel Garrett has very good expertise regarding offense from his time in the league as a good backup qb to a good offensive coordinator under Wade Phillips. I feel whatever struggles he is currently having he has an answer for dealing with that struggle. Considering his success in this league I have him on a longer leash until I start to really wonder about Garrett. As for answers of why the offense currently attacks the way it does, I believe that getting to the point where players can play instead of think is crucial before deciding how effective a system is. I do not consider the players to be there yet, and I think the lack of practice time and pre-season time has stunted the understanding of this offense.

In comment 15010503 Eric from BBI said:

Quote:

Look at who we have at RB. Look at who we have at TE. Look at who we have at WR. Look at how the OL is playing. Look at how the QB is playing.

I get all those things. Believe me I understand the limitations we have and have reduced expectations as a result. But the guy's analysis is that if you have limitations with talent at WR having an offense predicated on them winning one one one battles isn't going to work. And having routes where eberyone breaks simultaneously isn't going to work because Jones effectively has no progressions. I'll admit Garrett has forgotten more football than I'll ever know and maybe I'm talking out of my a$$. Just putting it out there for discussion

In comment 15010503 Eric from BBI said:

Quote:

Look at who we have at RB. Look at who we have at TE. Look at who we have at WR. Look at how the OL is playing. Look at how the QB is playing.

I thought it was just me.

Just putting your hands in the air and saying "we have no talent" is the easiest possible explanation of a much more complicated issue.

Its the same WR and TE talent as last year. You want to argue that Sterling Shepard is the difference between a middle of the back offense and embarrassment?

Engram is far from a perfect player, but his size/speed creates mismatches that aren't being exploited by having him run hooks. Slayton is a good player with excellent speed too.

And look at Jones. He's struggling terribly, but there are things he does well...including run with the ball. Why isn't that being featured early and often in games?

The scheme doesn't maximize the players; not even close.

big 3-Ring binder? Fine, do it yourself then while I play Minecraft.

In comment 15010669 LBH15 said:

Quote:

big 3-Ring binder? Fine, do it yourself then while I play Minecraft.

Classic!

how, I don't know, but ok.

Garret is now dealing with an offense that he probably been trying ot figure out what is each players strength. It's not like he walked in and the OL was even 3/5 stable.

So you have tryouts and your working all young players, low draft picks, UDFA's and 2 or 3 veterans. So you're panning around that and then your start RB goes down. And your seasoned #2 in Shep.

Garret is now trying to run an offense with a 3/5 new OL, sans top RB and #2 WR. Your #2 - 4 WR's are are either team castaways (non-NFL caliber) or UDFA's. Add in a 2nd year QB in a new system.

How much success do we think Garret or an New HC can get out of a roster like this??

All of this, and we didn't even add and COVID related issues..

In comment 15010651 Ten Ton Hammer said:

Quote:

Just putting your hands in the air and saying "we have no talent" is the easiest possible explanation of a much more complicated issue. Its the same WR and TE talent as last year. You want to argue that Sterling Shepard is the difference between a middle of the back offense and embarrassment?

Occam's razor.

I don't think Shepherd is particularly good, but he was 15% of our receiving yards playing in only 10 games. You're also leaving out our most talented player, who is out for the season. That's another 10% of our receiving yards gone replaced by guys who are little to no threat to score from the ground or air like Barkley was. Surely that could explain our offensive slide from not very good to worst?

Look, I'm no Jason Garret (or McAdoo or Shurmur) fanboy by any stretch, but until we start picking NFL starters again, we'll be having this same discussion with the next offensive coordinator.

the way the front office threw Shurmur under the bus and talked about what a horrible coach he was, only to turn around and preach patience with a veteran like Garrett. If the coaching was so bad we shouldn't see such a DROP in production.

It's kind of funny how people talked about on the Marc Columbo thread that we should just "trust the expert" when he said Thomas was going to be fine. I'm not sure why anyone would trust anything the Giants say

In comment 15010727 NoGainDayne said:

Quote:

the way the front office threw Shurmur under the bus and talked about what a horrible coach he was, only to turn around and preach patience with a veteran like Garrett. If the coaching was so bad we shouldn't see such a DROP in production. It's kind of funny how people talked about on the Marc Columbo thread that we should just "trust the expert" when he said Thomas was going to be fine. I'm not sure why anyone would trust anything the Giants say

I know Mike Lombardi can be an asshole, but he has been spot on about Garrett + Jones to date. He has said Garrett’s scheme is not a good fit for what Jones does well.

I was not a fan of Shurmur. I did not think he handled the media well. I felt he made excuses and felt he lacked presence. With that said, his offense seems to have been a much better fit for Jones.

It’s 5 games. But, there needs to be an uptick in production from Jones.