Mike vs. Kyle
 

When I heard that we were bringing in Kyle Shanahan this off-season I was very excited. He proved with a very young team that he could build an explosive offense with unproven talent.

I was also excited about the signing of Mike Shanahan as I felt this team needed new leadership, discipline, and a coach with a clear vision of what he wanted to do.

With that being said, it appears as though Kyle's vision of how a game plan should be called differs greatly then what we've seen from a Mike Shanahan coached team in the past. Kyle seems to like to throw, throw, throw. Where Mike has openly said and proven that he wants to run, run, run.

My questions are...
1. Is it just my perception that there is a philosophical conflict in game calling?
2. Does Mike ever choose to take over the play calling during games?

I do understand that this team lacks the type of talent to make them an elite team. There are many many holes on this team in all three aspects of the game. I also understand it is going to take us a few years to acculuate the type of talent needed to run Mike or Kyle's offense.

Re: Mike vs. Kyle
 

Kyle is a good Coord. Our problem is personnel, no true Run game and very avg. WRs will hurt any team.

Re: Mike vs. Kyle
 

We're down to 2 undrafted free agents at RB. I'm sure they would love to pound the rock more, sometimes the circumstances just don't allow it.

Re: Mike vs. Kyle
 

I agree that Kyle is a good coordinator, but I am not sure if he and Mike are on the same page. For example, the first series today looked completely different then the rest of the game. I am thinking that the two scripted the first 15 together...then it all went south...

Re: Mike vs. Kyle
 

Seems to me that whenever we handed the ball to K Williams today, he was too slow to get to the hole to make his one-cut upfield. And whenever we handed it to J Davis, he folded like a beach chair as soon as a defender made contact.

The Vikings front seven is playing much better than they did early in the year. They just shut us down up front, Kyle noticed, and he adjusted.

If we had caught the ball today, this wouldn't be a discussion. Dropped passes (and a block in the back) are the reason we lost.

Re: Mike vs. Kyle
 

[quote=Mattyk;763484]We're down to 2 undrafted free agents at RB. I'm sure they would love to pound the rock more, sometimes the circumstances just don't allow it.[/quote]

I'm telling you when we actually get the players to run this system look out. Kyle/Mike do a great job of getting WRs opportunities to make plays. I love what I've seen from Davis/CC lately. Moss is a solid Num 2, AA is a number 3. When you dont have a Legit #1 WR and NO RUN GAME at all, you wont score many Points. If people are thinking 5 is the problem they are sadly mistaken.

Re: Mike vs. Kyle
 

[quote=Schneed10;763489]Seems to me that whenever we handed the ball to K Williams today, he was too slow to get to the hole to make his one-cut upfield. And whenever we handed it to J Davis, he folded like a beach chair as soon as a defender made contact.

The Vikings front seven is playing much better than they did early in the year. They just shut us down up front, Kyle noticed, and he adjusted.

If we had caught the ball today, this wouldn't be a discussion. Dropped passes (and a block in the back) are the reason we lost.[/quote]

Williams is a decent player but not a featured back by any means. Torain isn't dependable and this Davis guy is a ? Basically we are screwed at RB

Re: Mike vs. Kyle
 

I think we have a decent running game, the problem seems to be the OL, especially Rabach in the middle. Today was Davis first game, so I give him a pass. I think Kyle got inpatient and abandoned the running game way to early and never got into the flow. 13 running attempts in a game are pathetic. Williams had two good games against Philadelphia and the Titans (2 tough defenses) why abandoned the run? Beats me.

Re: Mike vs. Kyle
 

[quote=skinsfaninok;763490]I'm telling you when we actually get the players to run this system look out. Kyle/Mike do a great job of getting WRs opportunities to make plays. I love what I've seen from Davis/CC lately. Moss is a solid Num 2, AA is a number 3. When you dont have a Legit #1 WR and NO RUN GAME at all, you wont score many Points. If people are thinking 5 is the problem they are sadly mistaken.[/quote]

Oh I agree, right now we just don't have the horses. Some don't seem to see that though.

Re: Mike vs. Kyle
 

[quote=Mattyk;763513]Oh I agree, right now we just don't have the horses. Some don't seem to see that though.[/quote]

Well we all had high hopes with the Shanny's but it happens.. Lets just be patient, this is a team that won 4 games last year! We are better just not playoff better.. 8-8 would be a good year IMO

Re: Mike vs. Kyle
 

[quote=Mattyk;763513]Oh I agree, right now we just don't have the horses. Some don't seem to see that though.[/quote]

I agree completely, but I just hope that Shanahan can pull a quality RB out of no where and we don't spend a top pick on one next year. We have too many holes to spend a high pick on an RB.

I would love to see more of Cooley and Davis on the field together. I think that can be an impressive combo if we can get it rolling. Davis, Cooley, Moss, and Armstrong are the only receivers we have. They should be on the field together more often. I also would like to see a little, not a lot, more of Banks on offense. If we can get him in space, he can make it happen.

Re: Mike vs. Kyle
 

[quote=mmil12;763517]I agree completely, but I just hope that Shanahan can pull a quality RB out of no where and we don't spend a top pick on one next year. We have too many holes to spend a high pick on an RB.

I would love to see more of Cooley and Davis on the field together. I think that can be an impressive combo if we can get it rolling. Davis, Cooley, Moss, and Armstrong are the only receivers we have. They should be on the field together more often. I also would like to see a little, not a lot, more of Banks on offense. If we can get him in space, he can make it happen.[/quote]

Banks sure is fun to watch my man.. We had that damn game won! Shanny will get a RB or 2 that will fit the scheme, hey who knows? Maybe Davis could be the guy.. Torain is good when healthy and Williams is decent but lacks speed and quickness.

Re: Mike vs. Kyle
 

Wonder if they'll reach out to Willie Parker again?

Re: Mike vs. Kyle
 

[quote=skinsfaninok;763480]Kyle is a good Coord. Our problem is personnel, no true Run game and very avg. WRs will hurt any team.[/quote]

Does anyone know how many Int's this year should be credited to poor reciever play. I don't know if it was an exaggeration but I've heard that Galloway alone is responsible for 3 or 4. With Santana today it's at least around 4 or 5. Maybe the NFL should start using a receiver rating that gives receivers a TD:INT ratio.

We probably look at yards way to often without looking at how many passes they catch that are thrown their way. Not unlike NBA fans that look at PPG stats while ignoring field goal percentage. Then again maybe stats are overrated to begin with.

Re: Mike vs. Kyle
 

[quote=Dirtbag359;763528]

We probably look at yards way to often without looking at how many passes they catch that are thrown their way. Not unlike NBA fans that look at PPG stats while ignoring field goal percentage. Then again maybe stats are overrated to begin with.[/quote]

Stats are pretty much "lossy compressed data" designed to approximate what was physical performed in the game. However, unlike ripping music files, stats can horribly mislead(aka change the actual notes played)

Re: Mike vs. Kyle
 

[quote=skinsfaninok;763519][B]Banks sure is fun to watch[/B] my man.. We had that damn game won! Shanny will get a RB or 2 that will fit the scheme, hey who knows? Maybe Davis could be the guy.. Torain is good when healthy and Williams is decent but lacks speed and quickness.[/quote]

He would have been more fun to watch had he been used as a receiver. He would have been perfect on the kind of play they used Moss for when Moss slapped the ball.

What is wrong with dumping some short ones off to him and letting him go to work? Or letting him escape the secondary for something deep? We have the horses, we just leave them in the barn.

Re: Mike vs. Kyle
 

[quote=SmootSmack;763520]Wonder if they'll reach out to Willie Parker again?[/quote]

I was thinking the same thing. I don't believe he got picked up by anybody yet.

Re: Mike vs. Kyle
 

[quote=skinsguy;763607]I was thinking the same thing. I don't believe he got picked up by anybody yet.[/quote]

I heard a report that they reached out to him and he declined.

Re: Mike vs. Kyle
 

[quote=Pocket$ $traight;763643]I heard a report that they reached out to him and he declined.[/quote]

Yup, that's why I said I wonder if they'll reach out again?

Re: Mike vs. Kyle
 

Why would Parker accept the offer next time if he declined it in first place? More money in the offer or?

Re: Mike vs. Kyle
 

[quote=GridIron26;763723]Why would Parker accept the offer next time if he declined it in first place? More money in the offer or?[/quote]

More money maybe? More playing time? When they first reached out to him I believe Torain was still the planned starter, may not be the case at this point. Fewer games to play? Or he might just change his mind and accept...if offered.

Re: Mike vs. Kyle
 

[quote=SmootSmack;763731]More money maybe? More playing time? When they first reached out to him I believe Torain was still the planned starter, may not be the case at this point. Fewer games to play? Or he might just change his mind and accept...if offered.[/quote]I wouldn't see the point. We could use the depth at the position, but what does Willie Parker bring that our practice squad guys do not? Go with our best and see if you can rattle off a few wins in a row, otherwise, there's no point giving carries to a five game rental.

Re: Mike vs. Kyle
 

[quote=GTripp0012;763732]I wouldn't see the point. We could use the depth at the position, but what does Willie Parker bring that our practice squad guys do not? Go with our best and see if you can rattle off a few wins in a row, otherwise, there's no point giving carries to a five game rental.[/quote]

For the record, I wouldn't do either. Just saying that they've reached out to him once this season, and I wonder if they'd do it again

Re: Mike vs. Kyle
 

[quote=Mattyk;763484]We're down to 2 undrafted free agents at RB. I'm sure they would love to pound the rock more, sometimes the circumstances just don't allow it.[/quote]


Add to that a rather weak offensive line and you don't have a running attack. Thing is though look around the league. It seems the NFL as a whole is becoming pass happy. Very few feature backs are coming out of the NCAA anymore. The nature of the how the RB is used in the NFL is changing. A back hitting 1,500 yards will be rare anymore, if not unheard of.

Re: Mike vs. Kyle
 

[quote=GTripp0012;763732]I wouldn't see the point. We could use the depth at the position, but what does Willie Parker bring that our practice squad guys do not? Go with our best and see if you can rattle off a few wins in a row, otherwise, there's no point giving carries to a five game rental.[/quote]


Part of our problem is the line anyway, so why waste money on Willie? He isn't going to get the job done. If he did he would have been kept on the active roster. Same with Larry Johnson.

Re: Mike vs. Kyle
 

[quote=Mattyk;763484]We're down to 2 undrafted free agents at RB. I'm sure they would love to pound the rock more, sometimes the circumstances just don't allow it.[/quote]

I'm pretty sure draft status doesn't matter much after the draft. Keiland has been adequate while Davis barely knows the playbook.

Re: Mike vs. Kyle
 

[quote=SirClintonPortis;763863]I'm pretty sure draft status doesn't matter much after the draft. Keiland has been adequate while Davis barely knows the playbook.[/quote]

Just stating what the level of talent is at RB. Most teams would also struggle if they were down to their 3rd back and a guy just signed off the street.

Re: Mike vs. Kyle
 

[quote=skinsfaninok;763480]Kyle is a good Coord. Our problem is personnel, no true Run game and very avg. WRs will hurt any team.[/quote]

You can end the thread right here. It's obvious he can do the job, just look at his tenure in Houston with a real QB/WR/TE combo to see that.

Re: Redskins
 

I was happy when we got Kyle but I knew we didn't have the talent on offense that He had with Houston, especially at WR. I wasn't too keen on us hiring Mike because I've heard from a couple of Bronco fans I've chatted with about his "ego power trips" which have been validated here. Frankly I think he is overrated.