The Packers, Rams, Titans, 49ers all under performed Sunday.

They all run versions of the Shanahan offense....has the league caught up with the offense and its schemes?

Perhaps it is an unfair comparison as the Vikings' Jefferson was running wide open most of the first half, but we did not exactly have many wide open guys (other than the first play, ug)


Perhaps the league is catching up to this style of offence and/or perhaps MLF and our new OC Adam Stenavich need to be more creative in the passing game.
Martha

Martha Careful;453193The Packers, Rams, Titans, 49ers all under performed Sunday.

They all run versions of the Shanahan offense....has the league caught up with the offense and its schemes?

Depends, by caught up, do you mean copied it? If so then yes...

Because you also left out the fact that the Vikings, Bears, Falcons, Bengals Seahawks and Browns all run it as well...

That's AT LEAST (because I could be forgetting some) that's 10 of the 32 teams (31.25%) of teams are now running the wide zone scheme.

Edit... I forgot Dolphins, Broncos and Jets too.... so 13 of 32... (40.625%) of teams run that scheme, and again that's assuming I'm not forgetting or missing out on some team.

The scheme is good and very tough on the defense, nothing is wrong with the scheme...

First off week 1s are weird... like Packers and Colts often make the playoffs but usually lose week 1.

As for the Packers, they were playing without their top 3 WRs from last year and their top 2 OL.

Titans lacked WRs to start with and got rid of their top 2 WRs.

49ers are working with a new QB, as the Bears CB said, they beat the 49ers by making the new mobile QB actually play QB (meaning stay in the pocket and throw it).

Rams got beat by the Super Bowl favorites.

Mr. Beast wrote:

Because you also left out the fact that the Vikings, Bears, Falcons, Bengals Seahawks and Browns all run it as well...

Mr. Beast, I always appreciate your well thought out posts, but on this one, I have to disagree.

Perhaps as a base run scheme, they run similar schemes.


However in the passing game, none of them had the route predictability that the 49ers, Rams, Packers, and Titans had...very few guys open.
Minnesota has guys running wide open, not just Jefferson, and their passing schemes looked nothing like the Packers
There was a lot more creativity and diversity of routes in other offenses.


So they may run the same base systems for the run game, but there is clearly a design difference in the passing game

Martha Careful;453227Mr. Beast wrote:
Mr. Beast, I always appreciate your well thought out posts, but on this one, I have to disagree.

Perhaps as a base run scheme, they run similar schemes.


However in the passing game, none of them had the route predictability that the 49ers, Rams, Packers, and Titans had...very few guys open.
Minnesota has guys running wide open, not just Jefferson, and their passing schemes looked nothing like the Packers
There was a lot more creativity and diversity of routes in other offenses.


So they may run the same base systems for the run game, but there is clearly a design difference in the passing game

Nope... I don't think so, I think the difference was the execution and the results, not the scheme.

Vikings, Bengals and Seahawks coaches all came from the Rams and run very similar to McVay scheme...

Bears and Falcons came from guys that were under LaFleur


You are right about the Browns though, they come from the Kubiak side of the Wide Zone and the passing game is a bit more basic in that one.