Mike Martz: Offensive Genius?

[Warner2BruceTD]

The context is pretty clear.

Bottom 1/3 in the League in total offense and points scored.

You wanna quote passing yards along with that? Go ahead. But still, what you have at the end of the day is a below average offense. Closer to the bottom feeders than the contenders.

Next you quoted improvement in DET and SF, which I won't debate. Good for him. He took 2 of the worst offenses in football and made them into groups that finished bottom 1/3, instead of dead last. Nice. Noteworthy???... I guess?!

... I don't care to go round and round about this though. You love him? Great. More power to you. Personally, I think he's the Brett Favre of coordinators. Take away the 90's and what have you got? NOTHIN. And for me, that ain't greatness.

He squeezes every bit of potential out of every offense he runs. What more do you want? Those Lions and 49ers teams were really bad. That's why you need the context of the situations. Saying his offenses finished in the bottom 1/3 misses the point.

 

[Tailback U]

I like Martz. I think he is one of those guys that is underrated and overrated, at the same time.

My only problem with Martz is that he can't tweak his system to get the most out of what he has. When he has the right personnel and is given enough time with the players so that the system becomes second nature to them, his gameplans and play designs are beautiful.

But, if he isn't working with the right personnel, and he isn't given enough time with the players to get comfortable, he isn't able to adjust it accordingly and tailor the scheme to the offensive personnel.

That's not really his fault, though, because teams know what they are going to get by bringing him in.

 

[KINGOFOOTBALL]

Isn't it his job to get the most out of the players on his roster?

You act as if he should get credit for that, when it's his job description.

We are measuring how well he does his job. There not many coaches that can instantly improve a side of the ball without an overhaul of personnel change. Martz has plugged in his system numerous times with pretty immediate results regardless of talent.
Its pretty clear when the talent is there he can build an elite unit.

One would look at offensive ranking and think Jason Garrett is a guru. Even a cursory look at the talent and his playcalling youd see its very misleading.

I don't see how.

Points scored and total yards are THE stats as far as offenses go, wouldn't you say? Points especially?..

Those are THE bottom line stats, and the measuring stick I would use to gauge any offense.

I thought we were gauging the coach.
Gauging the offense alone like mentioned is devoid of context.

Its like ShayDaPains claim against Norv Turner. Every single place hes gone theres a RB with a career year. Who cares if Terry Allen and Lamont Jordan werent in the top 5-10 in yardage. The fact there production increased by a huge percentage then dropped after the coach was gone is what you need to know.

Theres a reason The Romeo Crenells and Manginis of the world struggle and the Rex Ryans succeed.
Looking only at a units ranking is misleading. Few coaches maximize there units potential. Very few.

Martz is one of the guys I would have full faith in squeezing the most out of my offense.

 

[citizenerased]

Josh McDaniels > Mike Martz

The same Josh McDaniels who's offence got outscored by Ron Turner's last season?

:smug:

 

[Spidey]

The facination with the spread offense at lower levels allows guys like Collins to not only stick in the league years after their usefullness should be expired, but also allows them to see relevent action.

Couldn't agree more. I coached the linemen for the freshman football team at my former high school this year. Imagine my shock when I got there and we are running the spread and tons of shotgun sets. My varsity football season was a mere 8 years ago and shotgun/spread were pretty much unheard of for the high schools in our area then.

To top it off, my brother is in 8th grade playing football in the area and I went to one of his games and both his team and the opponent were using it.

I guess I shouldn't be so surprised. Not only is the NFL a copycat league, football in general is a copycat game. I must say, I am not a fan of this trend though. Firm believer in pounding the football down the opponents throat.

 

[Senser81]

Now he goes to Chicago, where again he comes into a situation where the OL is TERRIBLE, they have no viable WR's let alone a true #1 WR, and he has the offense playing at a much higher level than the year before with all of the same lousy parts. Yet here come the critics, blaming Martz dfor the sacks, as if the Bears were protecting the shit out of Cutler at any point last year, either.

The Bears are actually scoring fewer points per game this year than last year. Other than the Dallas game, the Bears offense has looked bad. Martz even has the advantage of having a healthy Matt Forte (who has looked really good this year when given the ball) and Chester Taylor. One would expect the Bears offense to be much improved with the return of Forte and the addition of Taylor, yet Martz has made the offense worse by not utilizing two of the best players on the team.

The reason the Bears are 4-1 is because of the addition of Peppers, a healthy Urlacher, and improved special teams play. Not one of those factors has anything to do with Martz.

I like Martz, I think he's good for the league, and I think he proved himself in Detroit and San Fran....but I also think he's done a bad job in Chicago.

 

[Senser81]

his system/ ideas/Coryell imitations, are genius. the problem is getting the pieces to execute them.

While Martz has many similarities to Coryell, Coryell differed in pass protection and the run game.

Pass Protection
If you look at Coryell's teams with St. Louis and San Diego, you'll see that even though they usually led the league in pass attempts, they would also lead the league in fewest sacks allowed. Coryell developed cohesive offensive lines, used two-TE formations, and had a philosophy of the QB throwing the ball within 3 seconds. This is almost the opposite of Martz, who has rotated his linemen in Chicago, refuses to use his TEs to block, and has every WR running routes that take more than 3 seconds to develop.

Run Game
Coryell almost always had good running games. And he always had a power back who could either bludgeon the defense if they became too reliant on nickel and dime packages, or just run out the clock after the team got the lead. In St. Louis Coryell had Jim Otis, in San Diego Coryell had Chuck Muncie and John Cappelletti. Martz's teams will go long stretches of time without having their RB's even touch the ball.

 

[jeffx]

Run Game
Coryell almost always had good running games. And he always had a power back who could either bludgeon the defense if they became too reliant on nickel and dime packages, or just run out the clock after the team got the lead. In St. Louis Coryell had Jim Otis, in San Diego Coryell had Chuck Muncie and John Cappelletti. Martz's teams will go long stretches of time without having their RB's even touch the ball.

...and don't forget James Brooks.

 

[f16harm]

Think of what Mike Martz would be today if he had Bucky Pope.....

 

[Senser81]

Think of what Mike Martz would be today if he had Bucky Pope.....

No doubt. 25 catches, 786 yards, 31.4 average, 10 TDs....who wouldn't want that in their offense?

 

[Senser81]

...and don't forget James Brooks.

James Brooks was one of my favorite players of all-time. He was really tough for a small guy. I remember a long run he had for the Bengals where he held up the #1 sign for the last 50 yards of his run. Bad ass.

 

[Warner2BruceTD]

I had a computer game for the Apple II back in the day, I have no idea what it was called, but it was based off of the 1982 season If I recall. It was not a NFL endorsed product, it was one of those early 80's hackjobs that made the rounds. You would call the plays, make the subs, and little x's and o's would simulate the plays. Anyway, I always used the Chargers. Lionel "Little Train" James was unstoppable, total cheese. Dan Fouts would always get injured, and Wes Chandler would average like 40 yards per catch. I'd play the shit out of that game for hours, I doubt it could hold my attention for 10 minutes now.

 

[jeffx]

James Brooks was one of my favorite players of all-time. He was really tough for a small guy. I remember a long run he had for the Bengals where he held up the #1 sign for the last 50 yards of his run. Bad ass.

Oh yeah, one of the fastest mfers I've seen on a football field. Funny, he was only with San Diego from '81-'83.

Air Coryell was fun to watch, but damn, they had three straight sickening playoff losses. In '79 they lost to a Houston team(without Pastorini or Campbell), '80 they lost to the eventual champion Raiders, and '81 they lost the brutal cold-weather game to Cincinnati(after playing a classic OT game against Miami the week before).

 

[Senser81]

Another awesome performance by the Bears offense. I'm thinking the Bears might finish the year 4-12. I don't understand why the Bears don't use Forte and Taylor more, because they are the two best players on offense. It looks like the Bears wasted a lot of money signing Taylor, because he rarely sees the field. He actually got more PT in Minnesota.

Two things I heard after the Bears game...first, the Bears have yet to convert a 3rd down in the month of October. Second, the names of the plays in Martz's offense are so long that it prevents the Bears from using audibles, because it would take too long to call a new play. This is perhaps the dumbest thing I've heard (if true), and is yet another huge difference between Martz and Coryell. Coryell's offense was very simple...numbers corresponded to pass routes and it was very easy to call plays.

 

[Tailback U]

Another awesome performance by the Bears offense. I'm thinking the Bears might finish the year 4-12. I don't understand why the Bears don't use Forte and Taylor more, because they are the two best players on offense. It looks like the Bears wasted a lot of money signing Taylor, because he rarely sees the field. He actually got more PT in Minnesota.

Two things I heard after the Bears game...first, the Bears have yet to convert a 3rd down in the month of October. Second, the names of the plays in Martz's offense are so long that it prevents the Bears from using audibles, because it would take too long to call a new play. This is perhaps the dumbest thing I've heard (if true), and is yet another huge difference between Martz and Coryell. Coryell's offense was very simple...numbers corresponded to pass routes and it was very easy to call plays.

Bears are 29th in total yards per game (285 per game), 28th in 1st downs per game (14.8), 21st in PPG (18.7).

What's funny is that they are +2 in the turnover category.

Have to disagree with everyone saying the Bears are going to make the playoffs just because of their division. I see GB beating them at Lambeau in week 17 and the Vikings sweeping them and Detroit getting them as well.

Here's my prediction for the rest of the Bears season:

@ Wash - Loss
@ Buf - Win
Vs. Min - Loss
Vs. Phi - Loss
@ Det - Loss
Vs. NE - Loss
@ Min - Loss
Vs. NYJ - Loss
@ GB - Loss

 

[Warner2BruceTD]

The most disturbing thinng about Sunday was the fact that Seattle hadn't gotten to the QB all year.

I also go back to the puzzling decision to add nothing to the offense in the offseason aside from a backup RB. I've posted many times that there were no less than 6 former Martz WR's available in free agency. Its a hard system for WR's to learn and the Bears group is weak to begin with. Also, allowing Jay Cutler to play GM and nix bringing in Marc Bulger was an obvious mistake when you watch Todd Collins attempt to play QB these days. Iim not sure what Cutler was so inseecure about, because Bulger isn't taking anyones job in 2010, but he's a massive upgrade from what they have on the bench. The Bears literally have no backup QB.

 

[Senser81]

I also go back to the puzzling decision to add nothing to the offense in the offseason aside from a backup RB.

From what I remember, the Bears were concerned that Forte wouldn't be able to return from injury 100%, so they brought in Taylor expecting Taylor to be the starter. But when Forte actually looked really good in camp and preseason, the Bears were kind of stuck with Taylor. Not that it really matters, because Martz has yet to find a way to utilize Forte so I think Taylor would have been a waste of money even if he were the starting RB.

 

[Hasselbeck]

Another awesome performance by the Bears offense. I'm thinking the Bears might finish the year 4-12. I don't understand why the Bears don't use Forte and Taylor more, because they are the two best players on offense. It looks like the Bears wasted a lot of money signing Taylor, because he rarely sees the field. He actually got more PT in Minnesota.

Two things I heard after the Bears game...first, the Bears have yet to convert a 3rd down in the month of October. Second, the names of the plays in Martz's offense are so long that it prevents the Bears from using audibles, because it would take too long to call a new play. This is perhaps the dumbest thing I've heard (if true), and is yet another huge difference between Martz and Coryell. Coryell's offense was very simple...numbers corresponded to pass routes and it was very easy to call plays.

The play of the week was Martz dialing up a 7-step drop on the Bears own 5 yard line leading to a Seattle safety (and nearly a defensive TD as the fumble had the luckiest bounce in the world).

I think Mike Martz is the only person in the free world that believes the Bears OL is good.

 

[Rush]

Todd Collins w/ Martz = 6 completions to Bears, 4 completions to Panthers, 32 yards, sacked twice.

Shaun Hill w/o Martz = 227 yards, 3 TDs, 117 rating

Alex Smith w/o Martz = 309 yards, 3 TDs, 92 rating


Hmm....

Caleb Hanie should have been in that role. Bears were hoping for a '07 Collins from Washington and they got a postmortem Chris Chandler.

 

[mgoblue2290]

You need to get back to the glory days.