(10-01-2024, 11:06 AM)Jaguarmeister Wrote: Is it oversimplifying it to say that Doug has a system that has been affirmed by a Super Bowl win and now he's gotten lazy with it thinking he doesn't need to scheme up too much for specific opponents or even keep opponents on their toes by regularly adding wrinkles?  That he just needs guys to come in and run the "Super Bowl winning" scheme and it's completely on them to do so?  I hate putting it in these terms not being in the building privy to anything.  It's hardly ever one thing or one reason, but when searching for who to blame, the human psyche still needs to find that one person or reason.

Yeah and the twitter/x reaction to Trevor's deep misses this past week and some being "done with him".  Cleatwood makes a very good point.  Trevor has historically had VERY GOOD deep accuracy.  This past Sunday wasn't a trend in that regard.  September football can have weird outcomes, especially with a lot of new faces on both sides of the ball as we have.  Hopefully they'll get their [BLEEP] together before the wheels come off if they haven't already.

I don't necessarily think Doug has gotten lazy.

I think they had a great idea to enter this season with a revamped interior line that should have (on paper) allowed them to put TL under center more and run more play action. 

They did implement the increase in UC and PA plays, but... 

It has not had the effect hoped largely because the tackles gave ups tons of pressure in weeks one thru three and no one saw that wrinkle coming. Then of course, there were other aspects of poor offensive execution that had negative impact as well.

I do think the league has gotten more dialed in on Doug's playbook + Trevor's tendencies and that's hindering the passing game to an extent as well. 

The big question I have is how did they come into the September slate looking so woefully unprepared to execute the playbook offensively? 
And most importantly now, what are the staff doing to fix that and prepare a more diverse gameplan to adjust moving forward?

---