The Modern NFL: Innovate or Fail

[GM_Davenport]

Preliminary note: I want to apologize to everyone for my extended absence. The last couple months have been more time consuming than I could have ever imagined. I do hope to be able to engage with all of you more frequently in the future.



The NFL has always been the epitome of parity in professional sports; the “any given Sunday” mantra always profoundly entrenched in the minds of fans, journalists, and coaches alike. Six weeks through the 2011 season though, something seems to have gone terribly wrong. There are a lot of good football teams this year, but there are also a lot of bad football teams – not much in between.

So what’s the deal?

An easy answer would be some teams simply responded to the lockout better than others. Another explanation tossed around is that this season is the aftermath of the previous (uncapped) season. Then there’s the notion that some teams in quarterback disarray are tanking on purpose for the chance at Andrew Luck – a notion that for the sake of my own sanity I will call ridiculous.

I believe that teams are swinging on opposite sides of the success pendulum for a far more fundamental reason: If your organization is not innovative, mentally flexible, and apathetic to external opinions, then failure is merely a ticking time bomb.

The most glaring example of the aforementioned is the evolution of the league into the passing era. It doesn’t take a football guru to notice it either. If your team failed to acquire a quarterback that could go out and win a game – as opposed to some successful teams of the past that simply told their quarterback to not lose the game – then you are behind the pack and in the process of dealing with the consequences.

The passing onslaught that has overcome the NFL today is no accident; this was simply the natural progression of the game based on the development of the athletes in the NFL. In 80s and early 90s, the offense had an advantage running the football because the defensive linemen of that era were not running the 10 yard cone times that they are today – their body fat and agility were not even comparable. It took them longer to get off the ball or get in position to cover their gaps. This, partially, is why the prototypical 3-4 defense was so successful in that era. Instead of asking big defensive linemen to shoot through and penetrate, even numbered (Bear Bryant) techniques allowed those big guys to be as big as they wanted because they were only asked to “hold” the line, and cover two gaps instead of one. The risk was you wouldn’t be able to generate as much pressure in the passing game, but I’m sure you’ve heard the adage a hundred times from coaches that coached in that era “if you can’t stop the run, you will lose.” And it was true; if you could stop the run during that time it went a long way toward your team’s chances of success.

Athletes evolve though, and the style of football should evolve as a result. Many coaches that were supremely successful in previous eras are finding themselves scratching their heads. A perfect example is Bill Parcells, and those that stubbornly follow his principles. In his mind, he won a world championship with his brand of football and therefore it was a successful brand of football as long as the pieces were in place. Well, he now finds himself retired after more than 2 decades of trying to replicate those Giant teams of the late 80s.

I’m not here to advocate one style of football over another, but there was a natural trend in how athletes were developing and some coaches/managers were able to grasp the big picture better than others. Bill Belichick, for instance, was a part of those Erhardt – Perkins style offenses that relied heavily on bruising offensive linemen and setting up the play action pass. He realized, though, that this style of offense was dated and it needed to be altered with the progression of the modern athlete. The Patriots still use the Erhardt – Perkins numbering system for routes and alignments, but it has been tailored to the modern era of football — to the point where it is now a spread offense.

How does a predominantly run oriented offense evolve into one of the best passing offenses the league has ever seen? Innovation, mental flexibility, and apathy to external opinions.

Today, we are seeing prime examples of this on the defensive side of the ball as well. There was a time when every team in the league could identify their defense as a 1 gap (usually 4-3) defense or a 2 gap (usually 3-4) defense. That is no longer the case. More and more teams are finding that they need to have some mix of both 1-gap and 2-gap assignments in order to avoid predictability. Some coaches, such as Rex Ryan and his brother Rob, are on the verge of eliminating gap assignments entirely. To them it is a limited, simple, and dated method of stopping the run. In today’s NFL you can hold your opponent to 20 yards rushing and lose by 30, or your opponent can run for 200 yards and you can win. It is an entirely flip flopped trend relative to what this league has seen essentially since its commencement.

Being employed in the NFL today is a tough, tough business. Believe me, most of these coaches and personnel employees earn every penny they make. However, I firmly believe that to be successful you must be willing to innovate your schemes (in all three phases) in order to remain ahead of the trends of your opponent. Often, that will require you to have the mental flexibility to adopt a philosophy that is polar opposite of your fundamental beliefs. And in order to implement these innovations, you must be willing to remain apathetic to any external criticism you may endure in the process. To me, these qualities are what will allow a Head Coach or General Manager to succeed with longevity as the NFL moves forward into the unknown.

 

[Mr. Magoo]

I agree. Flexibility is paramount. Can I presume that your overall point re: the Dolphins is that Sparano and Ireland have not innovated or reacted to the times nearly enough? And in what specific areas do you think their sins were the most egregious?

 

[KB21]

I agree. Flexibility is paramount. Can I presume that your overall point re: the Dolphins is that Sparano and Ireland have not innovated or reacted to the times nearly enough? And in what specific areas do you think their sins were the most egregious?

IMO,

1. Their emphasis on size and tackling ability when evaluating defensive backs rather than coverage skills and ball skills. We have defensive backs that will hit you, but most of them can't find the ball in the air for anything.
2. The emphasis on size at the linebacker position while ignoring instincts. You know what they miss about Channing Crowder? He could read the blocking schemes and get people into position. The guys we have now can't do that, so they are often late and out of position to make a tackle or a play.
3. Most of the emphasis on linemen has been towards guys who can play in a power scheme, not players who can move their feet in pass blocking and get to the second level to make blocks.
4. The lack of attention paid to the quarterback position. Pat White doesn't count.
5. The tight end position. This is becoming one where you have to have guys who can be flex tight ends that can work the inside seams, and Miami has a bunch of lumbering blockers who don't really block that well. Fasano is a solid all around tight end, but the team has absolutely no depth here.

 

[GoonBoss]

I thought I could sharpshoot you on the use of the Semicolon. I can't.

Good work. Seriously. Omar is a worse writer than you are. You should
have his job. Seriously, I'd submit this article. It's better than most of what
passes for journalism in Miami.

 

[GM_Davenport]

I agree. Flexibility is paramount. Can I presume that your overall point re: the Dolphins is that Sparano and Ireland have not innovated or reacted to the times nearly enough? And in what specific areas do you think their sins were the most egregious?

I think, given the opportunity, both Sparano and Ireland would do better the second time around. I hate to point the finger at one person more than another, because when an organization fails it is a collective failure among everyone. With that said, I think Bill Parcells came in with a blueprint that Sparano and Ireland were charged with following. After his departure, you began to notice them veering away from the prototypical Parcells players/style, but the foundation was already there. The result, this year, was an attempt at developing a vertical passing attack with the personnel to run a physical, run based brand of football. The encouraging part was that they were willing to attempt to change their principles -- and I think given enough time they may actually be capable of turning things around. That's just not how the NFL works anymore though; the days of organizations sticking behind their coach/GM through thick and thin are long gone.

With that said, I don't think I can give Sparano a pass for some of his failures. He is great at creating a structured environment, and a fine coach for teaching fundamentals. He also has shown a willingness to go outside his comfort zone and do what he feels is right for his team (Wildcat in '08, aggressive defense in '10, vertical passing this year). However, he also has visibly altered some of Mike Nolan's defensive scheme to be more in line with what he is comfortable with. In an effort to eliminate big plays, the defensive backs are playing a lot more 7 yard outside shades and very little variation in safety assignments. I won't bore you with more details, but as a whole these changes hinder a defenses ability to be aggressive greatly. Defensive players can't read and jump routes as frequently, and the blitz repertoire is very limited. It is a drastic change from last season and now is more of a "bend but don't break" philosophy.

I don't give Nolan a pass either, he has shown very poor judgment at times this season (example: asking a backup CB to play a press trail technique with the safety aligned inside the hash mark). I just don't think Sparano is cut out to be a head coach. His game plan on a week to week basis is far too consistent, and he very often fails to exploit weaknesses of his opponent. He's the type of coach that wants to "out tough" your team in the 4th quarter, but that's difficult to do when you're down by two scores and forced to throw.

From an overall perspective though, I think the team has acquired talented players -- a credit to Jeff Ireland -- but I also feel like they missed on some key acquisitions. When they drafted Chad Henne in the 2nd round, they made the poor evaluation that he could be a 1st round talent. He certainly has an elite arm, but he has lived up to his draft value almost exactly. At times he will wow you, and he often won't be the sole reason you lose, but at the end of the day he will never be an elite passer. To me, that's the type of quarterback you should expect in the 2nd round.

To answer your question more concisely: They brought in talented players, but they did not bring in players that collectively could compete in a modern brand of football. They also too often made their players fit the scheme, and not vice versa -- a major sin for any head coach.

 

[uscalum]

Someone needs to look at a defensive scheme with no down linemen..a lot of confusion pre-snap and sending 5 or 6 from anywhere on the field.

 

[KB21]

I think, given the opportunity, both Sparano and Ireland would do better the second time around. I hate to point the finger at one person more than another, because when an organization fails it is a collective failure among everyone. With that said, I think Bill Parcells came in with a blueprint that Sparano and Ireland were charged with following. After his departure, you began to notice them veering away from the prototypical Parcells players/style, but the foundation was already there. The result, this year, was an attempt at developing a vertical passing attack with the personnel to run a physical, run based brand of football. The encouraging part was that they were willing to attempt to change their principles -- and I think given enough time they may actually be capable of turning things around. That's just not how the NFL works anymore though; the days of organizations sticking behind their coach/GM through thick and thin are long gone.

With that said, I don't think I can give Sparano a pass for some of his failures. He is great at creating a structured environment, and a fine coach for teaching fundamentals. He also has shown a willingness to go outside his comfort zone and do what he feels is right for his team (Wildcat in '08, aggressive defense in '10, vertical passing this year). However, he also has visibly altered some of Mike Nolan's defensive scheme to be more in line with what he is comfortable with. In an effort to eliminate big plays, the defensive backs are playing a lot more 7 yard outside shades and very little variation in safety assignments. I won't bore you with more details, but as a whole these changes hinder a defenses ability to be aggressive greatly. Defensive players can't read and jump routes as frequently, and the blitz repertoire is very limited. It is a drastic change from last season and now is more of a "bend but don't break" philosophy.

I don't give Nolan a pass either, he has shown very poor judgment at times this season (example: asking a backup CB to play a press trail technique with the safety aligned inside the hash mark). I just don't think Sparano is cut out to be a head coach. His game plan on a week to week basis is far too consistent, and he very often fails to exploit weaknesses of his opponent. He's the type of coach that wants to "out tough" your team in the 4th quarter, but that's difficult to do when you're down by two scores and forced to throw.

From an overall perspective though, I think the team has acquired talented players -- a credit to Jeff Ireland -- but I also feel like they missed on some key acquisitions. When they drafted Chad Henne in the 2nd round, they made the poor evaluation that he could be a 1st round talent. He certainly has an elite arm, but he has lived up to his draft value almost exactly. At times he will wow you, and he often won't be the sole reason you lose, but at the end of the day he will never be an elite passer. To me, that's the type of quarterback you should expect in the 2nd round.

To answer your question more concisely: They brought in talented players, but they did not bring in players that collectively could compete in a modern brand of football. They also too often made their players fit the scheme, and not vice versa -- a major sin for any head coach.

Personaly, I don't think this staff teaches fundamentals well at all. The line simply has not progressed with fundamental techniques. The tackling on this team is beyond bad at this point. Our linebackers cannot read their keys. Our safeties are completely lost in coverage.

I think this staff does a good job of scheming, but they are horrible teachers.

 

[NorFlaFin]

Is Henne worth continuing to develop? As a a backup/part-time starter or trade bait?
To me; hes is been so woefully under-coached it's hard to get a good read on what his level of production can truly be.

 

[Finland]

Great points. Miami's failures have had an impact on this site for sure. Thanks for your post. We need more of that.

 

[KB21]

Is Henne worth continuing to develop? As a a backup/part-time starter or trade bait?
To me; hes is been so woefully under-coached it's hard to get a good read on what his level of production can truly be.

I think the best you can hope for from Henne is as a game manager.

 

[Shouright]

Personaly, I don't think this staff teaches fundamentals well at all. The line simply has not progressed with fundamental techniques. The tackling on this team is beyond bad at this point. Our linebackers cannot read their keys. Our safeties are completely lost in coverage.

I think this staff does a good job of scheming, but they are horrible teachers.

Plus, since the head coach's authority was undermined by the owner in the offseason, I don't think anybody's listening real close.

 

[Etuoo33]

I believe that Miami's OL woe's are partially described above, having the wrong personnel for the task at hand. We have slow lumbering plodders at G that can neither dominate at the first level or get up stream to the second level and finish blocks. This lack of athleticism is a more of a liability in the passing game, since our guards are likely to be beaten 'schematically' and not be able to recover. Very interesting observations... finally a thread that is on point, and not so whiny. (I'm guilty too)

 

[Kinzua]

Excellent OP and several other comments in this thread. I also agree that the OP should consider submitting this for publishing somewhere. It's an excellent explanation of what has happened in the league.

 

[wonderl33t]

Is Henne worth continuing to develop? As a a backup/part-time starter or trade bait?
To me; hes is been so woefully under-coached it's hard to get a good read on what his level of production can truly be.

I agree and I think it started at the beginning when they told him to avoid the INT at all costs. You can't make plays with that mentality.

 

[GM_Davenport]

I think the game today, more than others, highlighted the deficiencies of Sparano as a coach. As the lead increased to 15-0, the Dolphins went conservative across the board. There was no killer instinct that I think all coaches in today's league need to have in order to sustain success.

The coverage backed up, they opened up the middle of the field, and stubbornly ran between the tackles instead of operating the same offense that was successful the previous two drives. Statistics say that the Dolphins still should have won the game, but this is a new NFL that is defying statistics and the coaching/management personnel of the teams that fail to realize this are going to find themselves unemployed sooner than later.

The days of playing not to lose are over. If you want to win in the NFL, you have to play to win for 60 minutes.