View Single Post
Old 09-16-2009, 11:37 PM   #6
GTripp0012
Living Legend
 
GTripp0012's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Evanston, IL
Age: 38
Posts: 15,994
Re: Offensive Review: Giants

Quote:
Originally Posted by The Goat View Post
LOL good one.

I'm curious what you're opinion is on this one trip: what if Zorn just put the ball in Jason's hands so to speak? I know he's still climbing the learning curve of the WCO but I think we all know he studies his butt off...at this point he's probably got the playbook down. This question is sort of like asking who's offensive instincts do you trust more, Zorn or JC?
Let me put it this way: tomorrow, I'm doing a breakdown of Lions-Saints for my NFL blog. The average Lions game takes ~3:25. The average Skins game takes about a hour less than that.

What does this have to do with what you asked? The Skins offense (and defense) manages to make 9-10 total possessions last an entire game, whereas a team like the Lions who actually throws some incomplete passes and interceptions can get 14-16 possessions into regulation. That ends up being a difference of 20-25 plays per game. In a Redskins game, a wasted play can cost the Redskins what, two points or so in offensive potential? Good offenses only score on about 40% of their possessions, so if Zorn's offense scores 4 times in a game, it's doing well for itself.

Of course, 2 TDs and 2 FGs is what, 20 points? That's less than people would like to see, and that's the offense doing well for itself.

To answer your question, I think Jason and Zorn both have high football IQs, but if you put the ball in Jason's hands 40 times a game, it increases the margin for error. Zorn wastes too many plays to have a high powered offense. If Jason got more chances, he could make more plays and I think, in the long-run, win more games.
__________________
according to a source with knowledge of the situation.
GTripp0012 is offline   Reply With Quote

Advertisements
 
Page generated in 0.36964 seconds with 10 queries