TheReverend
10-19-2005, 07:36 AM
Be aggressive
By Rich Eisen
Special to NFL.com
(Oct. 18, 2005) -- Mike Shanahan won my vote for the 2005 Coach of the Year on Sunday. Unfortunately for Mike, there are two self-evident matters in play here:
I have no actual vote for the award.
It's still quite early in the season.
I should pause to mention there are no plans to hold a First Annual Second 3/17ths of the Season Awards, even though the First Annual First 3/17ths of the Season Awards proved to be a resounding success not only with you, but also in the TV ratings.
(Editor's Note: The overnights showed The First Annual First 3/17th Awards trounced The Gilmore Girls in the key male 18-34 demographic, although it did lose the overall night to NCIS, which I believe stands for "Not CSI.")
Nevertheless, Shanahan gets my admittedly meaningless vote for Coach of the Year because not only does he have his Broncos at a surprising 5-1 atop the AFC West, but he also did something uncommonly seen in this day and age: He played to win, rather than not to lose.
Ah, yes. The dreaded "Prevent Offense."
With Tom Brady and the Patriots in the midst of mounting a major, big time, The-Dynasty-Is-Still-Intact-type comeback Sunday, the Broncos withstood the storm. Two rare New England late fourth-quarter miscues -- a drive-killing intentional grounding call against Brady preceded by an easy first-down reception dropped by David Givens -- returned the ball to the Broncos on their own 23 with 3:36 remaining in regulation.
Now, then.
How many times have we seen a team with this type of lead subsequently roll up into a fetal position and run it three straight times, hoping against hope for a first down? How many times is this team ultimately forced to leave the victory-sealing play in the hands of the defense -- or placekicker setting up just out of range? And, finally, how many times does this strategy backfire? Have no fear, we'll provide the answer: always. It always backfires.
The Broncos did NOT want to give Tom Brady a chance to win it.
In case you're somehow not hip to this scene, the line of thinking involved in this late-game gambit goes a little something like this: Any possible, remote inkling of a notion at being aggressive on offense greatly increases the chance of turning the ball over, and, of course, no one wants to do that. Plus, an incomplete pass could allow the other team to conserve precious timeouts. So, everybody turtle up! Let's run the ball into the line three straight times -- but whatever you do, heaven forbid DON'T FUMBLE -- and maybe get a first down. If not, we'll punt. Who cares if we took only, say, 10 seconds off the clock? Worse comes to worst, the defense can win the game against an opposition now forced to run the hurry-up offense with, most likely, no timeouts left. And everyone knows how difficult that is, except for Brady and Favre and Montana and Elway and yada, yada, yada… Of course, there is an inherent problem in this approach: It is completely counter-intuitive to the widely held and time-tested belief that football is an aggressive game. Why lose your aggressiveness at the end when, most likely, it is that aggressiveness that got you the lead in the first place?
But, let's forget about high falootin', conceptual approaches here. Let's get down to basics: Why in the world would you ever leave the game-sealing to your defense when it is the one unit that does not have the ball! Isn't that the idea of the game -- hold on to the ball? Isn't that why coaches hate turnovers because you lose control of the ball? So, why, late in the game, when you have the lead, would a coach willingly give up the ball? That's exactly what happens when turning to the Prevent Offense.
Back to Denver, now. With the chips down and his team in possession of the ball deep in its own end, leading a Patriots team with two timeouts left, all eyes fell on Shanahan Sunday. On the first play, it sure looked like the Prevent Offense had infested the Shanahan playbook, which immediately ran Mike Anderson right up the middle for 3 yards to his 26. Across the field, Bill Belichick countered by sitting tight. (By the way, I'm using every ounce of my being to resist a cardinal sports writer's rule that mandates I refer to this coaching by-play as a "chess match" or "game of cat and mouse.") The modern-day Lombardi didn't budge and let the clock tick down.
Upstairs, in the CBS booth, Phil Simms said of Belichick's maneuver: "Make Denver make the decision here. In other words, put pressure on Mike Shanahan. What's he gonna do? Is he gonna run it and maybe waste a down because it might not gain a lot of yards, or does he take the chance and throw it and if it's incomplete it stops the clock. That's what the Patriots are hoping for."
On his couch, your humble narrator wondered why in the name of Chuck Knox would Shanahan go turtle when all it would inexorably lead to is yet one more chance for Tom Brady to be the hero -- again?
Sure, enough, with 2:56 to go, Shanahan took the initiative. He got aggressive. He put the onus back on Belichick by taking that Phil Simms chance and throwing it. And guess what? An interception? An incompletion? Nope, Jake Plummer found his tight end Jeb Putzier, who made a play for a first down. New England used its second timeout. Next play, another Mike Anderson run to force the Patriots to use their final timeout with 2:20 to go. Suddenly, the Broncos stood one first down away from winning it. Shanahan didn't waste any time.
Denver put the game in Jake Plummer's hands ... and he delivered.
As for other coaches, how many would just run it one more time, take it down to the two-minute warning and put the pressure on his quarterback to make a play on third down? Not Shanahan. Very next snap (on second down to capitalize on the element of surprise) Plummer hit the old reliable Rod Smith and the man with the most catches, receiving yards and receiving touchdowns of any undrafted player in NFL history sealed the deal with a simple 8-yard gain. One more run and two Plummer knees took it to the final gun, with Brady standing harmlessly on the sideline.
Now, was that so tough? Anyone? Bueller?
Rest of article: http://www.nfl.com/nflnetwork/story/8979727
By Rich Eisen
Special to NFL.com
(Oct. 18, 2005) -- Mike Shanahan won my vote for the 2005 Coach of the Year on Sunday. Unfortunately for Mike, there are two self-evident matters in play here:
I have no actual vote for the award.
It's still quite early in the season.
I should pause to mention there are no plans to hold a First Annual Second 3/17ths of the Season Awards, even though the First Annual First 3/17ths of the Season Awards proved to be a resounding success not only with you, but also in the TV ratings.
(Editor's Note: The overnights showed The First Annual First 3/17th Awards trounced The Gilmore Girls in the key male 18-34 demographic, although it did lose the overall night to NCIS, which I believe stands for "Not CSI.")
Nevertheless, Shanahan gets my admittedly meaningless vote for Coach of the Year because not only does he have his Broncos at a surprising 5-1 atop the AFC West, but he also did something uncommonly seen in this day and age: He played to win, rather than not to lose.
Ah, yes. The dreaded "Prevent Offense."
With Tom Brady and the Patriots in the midst of mounting a major, big time, The-Dynasty-Is-Still-Intact-type comeback Sunday, the Broncos withstood the storm. Two rare New England late fourth-quarter miscues -- a drive-killing intentional grounding call against Brady preceded by an easy first-down reception dropped by David Givens -- returned the ball to the Broncos on their own 23 with 3:36 remaining in regulation.
Now, then.
How many times have we seen a team with this type of lead subsequently roll up into a fetal position and run it three straight times, hoping against hope for a first down? How many times is this team ultimately forced to leave the victory-sealing play in the hands of the defense -- or placekicker setting up just out of range? And, finally, how many times does this strategy backfire? Have no fear, we'll provide the answer: always. It always backfires.
The Broncos did NOT want to give Tom Brady a chance to win it.
In case you're somehow not hip to this scene, the line of thinking involved in this late-game gambit goes a little something like this: Any possible, remote inkling of a notion at being aggressive on offense greatly increases the chance of turning the ball over, and, of course, no one wants to do that. Plus, an incomplete pass could allow the other team to conserve precious timeouts. So, everybody turtle up! Let's run the ball into the line three straight times -- but whatever you do, heaven forbid DON'T FUMBLE -- and maybe get a first down. If not, we'll punt. Who cares if we took only, say, 10 seconds off the clock? Worse comes to worst, the defense can win the game against an opposition now forced to run the hurry-up offense with, most likely, no timeouts left. And everyone knows how difficult that is, except for Brady and Favre and Montana and Elway and yada, yada, yada… Of course, there is an inherent problem in this approach: It is completely counter-intuitive to the widely held and time-tested belief that football is an aggressive game. Why lose your aggressiveness at the end when, most likely, it is that aggressiveness that got you the lead in the first place?
But, let's forget about high falootin', conceptual approaches here. Let's get down to basics: Why in the world would you ever leave the game-sealing to your defense when it is the one unit that does not have the ball! Isn't that the idea of the game -- hold on to the ball? Isn't that why coaches hate turnovers because you lose control of the ball? So, why, late in the game, when you have the lead, would a coach willingly give up the ball? That's exactly what happens when turning to the Prevent Offense.
Back to Denver, now. With the chips down and his team in possession of the ball deep in its own end, leading a Patriots team with two timeouts left, all eyes fell on Shanahan Sunday. On the first play, it sure looked like the Prevent Offense had infested the Shanahan playbook, which immediately ran Mike Anderson right up the middle for 3 yards to his 26. Across the field, Bill Belichick countered by sitting tight. (By the way, I'm using every ounce of my being to resist a cardinal sports writer's rule that mandates I refer to this coaching by-play as a "chess match" or "game of cat and mouse.") The modern-day Lombardi didn't budge and let the clock tick down.
Upstairs, in the CBS booth, Phil Simms said of Belichick's maneuver: "Make Denver make the decision here. In other words, put pressure on Mike Shanahan. What's he gonna do? Is he gonna run it and maybe waste a down because it might not gain a lot of yards, or does he take the chance and throw it and if it's incomplete it stops the clock. That's what the Patriots are hoping for."
On his couch, your humble narrator wondered why in the name of Chuck Knox would Shanahan go turtle when all it would inexorably lead to is yet one more chance for Tom Brady to be the hero -- again?
Sure, enough, with 2:56 to go, Shanahan took the initiative. He got aggressive. He put the onus back on Belichick by taking that Phil Simms chance and throwing it. And guess what? An interception? An incompletion? Nope, Jake Plummer found his tight end Jeb Putzier, who made a play for a first down. New England used its second timeout. Next play, another Mike Anderson run to force the Patriots to use their final timeout with 2:20 to go. Suddenly, the Broncos stood one first down away from winning it. Shanahan didn't waste any time.
Denver put the game in Jake Plummer's hands ... and he delivered.
As for other coaches, how many would just run it one more time, take it down to the two-minute warning and put the pressure on his quarterback to make a play on third down? Not Shanahan. Very next snap (on second down to capitalize on the element of surprise) Plummer hit the old reliable Rod Smith and the man with the most catches, receiving yards and receiving touchdowns of any undrafted player in NFL history sealed the deal with a simple 8-yard gain. One more run and two Plummer knees took it to the final gun, with Brady standing harmlessly on the sideline.
Now, was that so tough? Anyone? Bueller?
Rest of article: http://www.nfl.com/nflnetwork/story/8979727