Thread: Off Season Moves

Originally Posted by CoachChaz

Remember this name...

Richie Grant

https://thedraftnetwork.com/articles...s-richie-grant

Sounds like a perfect fit.

Originally Posted by Hawgdriver

Are you suggesting that if Shurmur looked at Lindsay as an inscrutable jigsaw piece that Lindsay might not excel?

I'm fine with the GM making solid moves according to a vision, and apparently that vision doesn't include Lindsay. So be it, we move on.

In general, it seems foolish to me for the OC responsible for the highest-turnover offense in the league, which also most highly correlates to the most team losses, not to value 600 touches and 0 fumbles.

Ultimately I think you need to be able to contribute more that not fumbling. If he's going to be such a liability in the passing game you can't put him on the field for passing plays, it's hard to justify a big role for him.

Originally Posted by Hawgdriver

Are you suggesting that if Shurmur looked at Lindsay as an inscrutable jigsaw piece that Lindsay might not excel?

I'm fine with the GM making solid moves according to a vision, and apparently that vision doesn't include Lindsay. So be it, we move on.

In general, it seems foolish to me for the OC responsible for the highest-turnover offense in the league, which also most highly correlates to the most team losses, not to value 600 touches and 0 fumbles.

Does the OC execute the plays and turn the ball over? Or does he call the plays with the expectation that a player will not turn it over? Shurmur has ALWAYS valued and utilized backs that can catch out of the backfield. Heavy workloads and pass catching are not Lindsay's area, so...we find the players to fit the system.

This isn't high school where you are limited to the players that live in a specific neighborhood and you have to adapt to the talent you are given. It's the NFL, where you find players that can execute the system you are running. Keeping a one trick pony in the backfield makes as much sense as drafting a 4-3 defensive end for a Fangio defense. You won't see that happen and I'll let you guess why

Originally Posted by Jaded

https://thedraftnetwork.com/articles...s-richie-grant

Sounds like a perfect fit.

Justin Simmons 2.0

Originally Posted by CoachChaz

Justin Simmons 2.0

Ive heard he is awesome but not the best fit for fanio scheme for one reason or another? hes more man or somthing I do not know.


Tell me about him as I have heard he is really good.

Originally Posted by underrated29

Ive heard he is awesome but not the best fit for fanio scheme for one reason or another? hes more man or somthing I do not know.


Tell me about him as I have heard he is really good.

Great against the run and the pass...was covering WR's during Senior Bowl week better than the CB's were...fits nicely at SS in nickel and dime packages...brings a special teams mentality to the field...very scheme diverse...

He's probably a late 2nd round/early 3rd round pick, so I'd love to get him with our 2nd rounder. He won't be available after that. Any safeties rated ahead of him will be long gone.

Originally Posted by CoachChaz

Then we get one that has had success for a long time

I get what you are saying that Shurmur is the OC with possibly the most league cred in recent history, but I look at Shurmur's resume and fail to see any success. If anything, feels like there's some sort of crony Minnesota/Denver connection on the executive level--Keenum, Paton, Kubiak, Shurmur. Maybe I'm just seeing things.

As far as the numbers go, in 13 seasons, his offenses have barely been top 10 three times, and two of those are when Chip Kelly was running the offense. The year in Minnesota when he was the OC of the #10 offense, he benefitted from the league's #1 defense--he was playing from the ladies' tees.

Is that success?



Dude is mediocre if results are the measure. His performance last year was along the same lines if not worse.

As far as it being irrational or w/e to blame Shurmur for Lindsay's woes, that doesn't seem odd to me. The OC should use the talent on the roster, not force squares into round holes. Isn't that good coaching 101?

Originally Posted by CoachChaz

Does the OC execute the plays and turn the ball over? Or does he call the plays with the expectation that a player will not turn it over? Shurmur has ALWAYS valued and utilized backs that can catch out of the backfield. Heavy workloads and pass catching are not Lindsay's area, so...we find the players to fit the system.

This isn't high school where you are limited to the players that live in a specific neighborhood and you have to adapt to the talent you are given. It's the NFL, where you find players that can execute the system you are running. Keeping a one trick pony in the backfield makes as much sense as drafting a 4-3 defensive end for a Fangio defense. You won't see that happen and I'll let you guess why

In that case I'm looking forward to great things when we get players that fit his system.

I'm not sure that Lindsay is one-trick pony as you say, but it doesn't matter since the die is already cast.

I'd like to see the difference between offensive production during Lindsay's snaps and during the snaps of other backs for the 3 years Phil has taken snaps at RB.

I understand Phil has significant limitations and I'm not an expert who can *know* things correctly based on intuition and eye-test alone. Perhaps you are, perhaps Shurmur is, either way the numbers and results will bear it out.

But I'd like to see the 3yr differential on offense through that one metric--production/Yards-per-play when Phil takes a snap vs when he doesn't. If it's worse when he's in then I'm the dummy.

And yeah, Shurmur isn't fumbling the ball himself, but he can make choices about which players take snaps. The turnovers make it hard to win games. Maybe MG3 saved some pass pro QB fumbles--I get that Phil is a limited player.

Bottom line it seems like there is a spot on every NFL roster for a player like Lindsay, and that player helps the team win more games. I see it as an indictment on Shurmur's abilities that he was unable to get that out of Lindsay.

But wtf do I know??

Originally Posted by Hawgdriver

I get what you are saying that Shurmur is the OC with possibly the most league cred in recent history, but I look at Shurmur's resume and fail to see any success. If anything, feels like there's some sort of crony Minnesota/Denver connection on the executive level--Keenum, Paton, Kubiak, Shurmur. Maybe I'm just seeing things.

As far as the numbers go, in 13 seasons, his offenses have barely been top 10 three times, and two of those are when Chip Kelly was running the offense. The year in Minnesota when he was the OC of the #10 offense, he benefitted from the league's #1 defense--he was playing from the ladies' tees.

Is that success?



Dude is mediocre if results are the measure. His performance last year was along the same lines if not worse.

As far as it being irrational or w/e to blame Shurmur for Lindsay's woes, that doesn't seem odd to me. The OC should use the talent on the roster, not force squares into round holes. Isn't that good coaching 101?

And quite honestly...I think he used Lindsay as best he could...but did it within his system. He's not going to change his playbook for one player, especially when that player ends up missing 5 games.

Shurmur has been good enough at OC to get a HC gig ... twice.

He runs ONLY his scheme, which frustrates even me, but he’s a legit NFL OC.

If he ends up getting replaced I’ll be fine to see him go, especially if he’s the kind of OC that has to have Scrubby Doo “Coach on the field “ QB, but he’s far more accomplished than Lindsay ... this drama makes no sense.

Originally Posted by CoachChaz

And quite honestly...I think he used Lindsay as best he could...but did it within his system. He's not going to change his playbook for one player, especially when that player ends up missing 5 games.

Agree. It's unreasonable to warp an offense to a unique piece unless it's winning more games (maybe Tyreek Hill is an example?) Bc when the piece is gone then you are maybe sunk.

I'm actually not a Lindsay fanboi. I just like that he looks explosive, doesn't fumble, has swagger. It just *seems* wrong to me that he's not more prominent. I wish I could see the numbers of how his limitations are a detriment. I wish I could understand if he's not good out of the backfield as a receiver (wasn't he decent a CU?)

Whatevs. I am honestly good with seeing Shurmur have full reign and executing his vision. I'd like to see good shit happen.

Originally Posted by Jaded

As long as we’re ignoring injury history Malik Hooker would be a good Buy Low Safety option.

Sign me up.

Originally Posted by Jaded

he’s far more accomplished than Lindsay ... this drama makes no sense.

Idk about 'far more'. Lindsay did get the rookie pro bowl nod. That has to mean something.

Shurmur may be legit, but there's probably some vague equivalence in terms of OC-talent and RB-talent.

To be clear: I am in favor of cheap contract RBs who don't turn the ball over (ie replaceable). If Phil is gone, or if he stays, I wish him the best in his career and hope he finds a place that allows him to do his thang.

Originally Posted by Hawgdriver

Agree. It's unreasonable to warp an offense to a unique piece unless it's winning more games (maybe Tyreek Hill is an example?) Bc when the piece is gone then you are maybe sunk.

I'm actually not a Lindsay fanboi. I just like that he looks explosive, doesn't fumble, has swagger. It just *seems* wrong to me that he's not more prominent. I wish I could see the numbers of how his limitations are a detriment. I wish I could understand if he's not good out of the backfield as a receiver (wasn't he decent a CU?)

Whatevs. I am honestly good with seeing Shurmur have full reign and executing his vision. I'd like to see good shit happen.

The tweet thread Buff linked gave some great stats suggesting why he hasn't been a winning player. Here are some of them.

Why does this feel like a funeral?

I still think there’s a good chance Lindsay comes back.