Welcome! Log In Create A New Profile

Advanced

Re: Brett Kollmann analysis of Matt Stafford from 2017

February 03, 2021 05:03AM
This is the best analysis I've seen that contrasts Goff v Stafford (without any direct comparison).

The greatest difference is what happens when a play breaks down. Stafford understands defenses well enough to have a plan when the protection fails. Having no running game means he's had plenty practice doing so. The Lions are the NFL equivalent to Arena League football. We all know how that experience prepped Warner for success.

The other factor involved is how McVay can trust Stafford to lead the offense with little explanation BECAUSE Stafford has the experience to be the coach on the field. All Sean has to do is convey concepts and Matt can execute them instinctively. We will see a considerable difference in a two minute offense under Stafford.

I believe Goff was growing in the system but not quickly enough for McVay. The ceiling here is a mind meld between coach and QB like Walsh had with Montana that LeFluer wanted with the too stubborn Rodgers. Again, the reason McVay chose Staley for DC centered on their banter of football concepts and how the two could challenge and channel each other's thoughts. THIS is what excites McVay about Stafford. Instead of teaching Jared the game, Sean gets to play with ideas in a partnership of football acumen with Matt. Throw in the contributions of Kromer on the running game and this can become the most multiple offense in the NFL.

Sadly, the success of this dream depends largely on the development of the offensive line. Stats be damned, the line held this offense up even more than Jared. I wonder if the league's reticence to call offensive holding will convince McVay and Kromer to pivot to the style Green Bay executes with impunity. If they upgrade the center position physically from Blythe, his replacement had better be one cerebral SOB as well.

Finally, adding Marvin Jones Jr could be a boon but many forget that Woods and Kupp were more downfield threats in 17 and 18 and are both capable of doing so again. The difference was really the fact that the line could no longer be trusted to hold the longer protections.
SubjectAuthorViewsPosted

  Brett Kollmann analysis of Matt Stafford from 2017

NorCalRamFan421February 02, 2021 11:05AM

  Re: Brett Kollmann analysis of Matt Stafford from 2017

Leoram197February 03, 2021 05:03AM

  agree on Woods and Kupp

21Dog169February 03, 2021 06:05AM