Chip Shot in New England?
- Thread starter RedOctober3829
- Start date
I think lots of people in this thread have articulated the concern. You may not share it, or discount it, but it's been articulated. So read the thread, but it has nothing to do with BB having "conversations" with someone.
They both had some innovative tactics on offense, but it was Socrates who really knew how to handle tight ends.
Oh man, I'd rather another dozen deflategate jokes than having to hear that junior high gay joke dusted off here.
What is the concern then, even about meetings? That Kelly exudes some kind of rub-offable stink? That he'd stage a mutiny? Replace game film with porn? Chip Kelly -- like Martz, Norv Turner, Chan Gailey, to name a few -- is pretty clearly a smart football guy especially on offense, but may not be head coach material. Whether its providing intel on other teams, or insights into Patriots tendencies, there is literally no *conceivable* downside to this. There are many *inconceivable* ones, though.
Look, you are typically a thoughtful Pats poster and obviously, I have read the thread. Doing so, and thinking about where an impact on the Pats would come from, is exactly why I asked the question I did.
You might note a couple of us making the same basic point---perhaps you'd do well to consider why. Then again, the choice between "this is what I think, I don't want to hear anything else" and "how can I get better by hearing more perspectives" is kind of the point here anyway, isn't it?
Why not bring him in? As many have stated, he's only an extra set of eyes at worst. If he can find one or two tiny wrinkles that BB and Josh can add to the offense then it's a plus, even if it only gets us 1 extra yard on one play
I think the short answer as to why not just bring him in is, "chemistry".
Chip may be an awesome football guy, and may bring a unique perspective but is the upside he brings to a 14-2 team which appears on a roll, really worth the potential downside to fucking with chemistry, or muddying lines of communication, this late in the season?
Depending on his role (assistant coach versus advisor or consultant) I don't think the risk/reward is favorable.
Chip may be an awesome football guy, and may bring a unique perspective but is the upside he brings to a 14-2 team which appears on a roll, really worth the potential downside to fucking with chemistry, or muddying lines of communication, this late in the season?
Depending on his role (assistant coach versus advisor or consultant) I don't think the risk/reward is favorable.
Does an offensive consultant really get enough time with a team/players where he can disrupt chemistry? Seems like he'd meet with staff and review film, etc.
I'm not even taking sides here. I'm just saying, for those concerned about Kelly being brought in at this point it extends beyond BB having "conversations" with people he respects, which is how you framed your initial post in this thread.
Again, you can disagree with people who have articulated concern over what Kelly might bring to the table, but those opposed to it have laid out their concerns in this thread.
I'm talking more of the input and communication that would flow from current staff to BB.Adding another presumably senior guy like Chip would seem to me as blurring the normal lines of communication.
Now if this were mid-season, and we had several regular season games and there was a need for an additional senior guy, sure bring him in. But as we are now in "win or go home" land, a potential disruption of normal communications doesn't seem wise.
Ill go w my stock "In BB I Trust" answer here, but generally agree w the sentiment that he won't hurt, and a fresh self scouting look can't do any harm either.
Gotcha.
And this isn't a "In Bill we trust" response, but he has done this before (with McDaniels) so I would assume the protocol wouldn't be an issue.
All that said, this hasn't really broken out anywhere yet outside of the suggestion in the opening post...might not be anything to it.
There are several of us who have made the same point, and asked the same question, which suggests that others share my conclusion about what's been said thus far. If you want to engage in the substantive discussion, feel free...otherwise, I do not think you're helping.
Why would one assume they'd set up his role that way, though? That is not what McDaniels did, for example, when he came back. It's now how Weis has interacted with them when he's been at games or at practices since leaving.
I'm not assuming anything other than bringing in a senior guy like Chip Kelly would by definition change the nature of normal communications that existed between current staff and BB.
If it did not, then why bring him in?
But as I'm not privy to the dotted and undotted lines that exist in BB's communications infrastructure with his coaching staff, I'd be more than happy to hear your input.
people are making this way too complicated. Yes, if Chip becomes Assistant Head Coach or some such, then worry about chemistry and all this other stuff. But bringing him in as an assistant/consultant type -- on the McD model from a few years back -- has zero to do with lines of communication etc. He'll talk to BB and McD to give his input and they'll make of that what they want. That's all.
Not that I think this is the best idea in history. But should it happen I'm quite certain it has next to zero chance of ruining chemistry/bluring lines of communication. It would be an extra set of (very informed/very smart) eyes. That. Is. All.
Not that I think this is the best idea in history. But should it happen I'm quite certain it has next to zero chance of ruining chemistry/bluring lines of communication. It would be an extra set of (very informed/very smart) eyes. That. Is. All.
Agreed with this, and echo others' opinion that it theoretically gives BB a chance to see whether Chip is a potential McDaniels replacement if Josh leaves in 6 weeks. Given that Bill running the show & Brady at QB seriously limits the potential that any new offensive coordinator could really rock the boat, I'm fine entertaining the possibility that there's potential future upside.
Bringing him in to help until the end of the season, I don't see the downside others do. I don't think anyone is going to let him come in and be a big swinging dick and fuck with the system. The guy may not be a head coach - and I think the jury is still out on that; I don't think he failed as bad in Philly as portrayed and he got fucked royally by SF (albeit partly his own fault for even taking it so quickly) - but he knows football, he knows offense and BB has consulted with him in the past, so he obviously respects his mind. He's another set of eyes and as long as Josh is okay with it, I think they should do it. Just last week, BB was asked about Brissett spending extra time with Floyd to get him up to speed and BB made the comment that the coaches don't often have the time to do it, as they have other responsibilities. If someone like Chip is available to back fill some jobs, scout potential opponents, offer his insight and expertise I think you jump at that. I'd be willing to bet he has knowledge of the system, even if it's not one he ran. Outside of terminology I don't think the transition is the same when considering players and coaches.
End of day, I don't think BB is going to do anything that would cause a distraction. That's pretty much bullet points 1.A through 1.Z on his list. Guess it's a ready made scape goat if he does it and we don't win the super bowl, so there's that.
As to Chip long term as OC if Josh leaves, I don't think Josh will leave, but that's partly wishful thinking as I think he's being groomed as heir apparent. But who knows. Even if he does leave, i don't see Chip replacing him. As others have stated, they promote from within and bringing him into that role, yeah, then I can see it being a distraction or detrimental. I think O'Shea is the guy that ends up moving up the ladder in that scenario.
But if they want to bring him in as another set of eyes and a scouting presence, by all means. He loves about a mile from me, I assume he's back home, I'll go ask him personally, I've spent some time with him.
End of day, I don't think BB is going to do anything that would cause a distraction. That's pretty much bullet points 1.A through 1.Z on his list. Guess it's a ready made scape goat if he does it and we don't win the super bowl, so there's that.
As to Chip long term as OC if Josh leaves, I don't think Josh will leave, but that's partly wishful thinking as I think he's being groomed as heir apparent. But who knows. Even if he does leave, i don't see Chip replacing him. As others have stated, they promote from within and bringing him into that role, yeah, then I can see it being a distraction or detrimental. I think O'Shea is the guy that ends up moving up the ladder in that scenario.
But if they want to bring him in as another set of eyes and a scouting presence, by all means. He loves about a mile from me, I assume he's back home, I'll go ask him personally, I've spent some time with him.
This is where I'm at. I would think he would be an office guy reviewing film and giving Josh McD some hints at how to expose opposing defenses. I wouldn't expect him to be on the field at practice showing players how to do their jobs.
That Kelly is unlikely to screw things up is well taken. So is Bill's ability to manage the situation. And if they brought Kelly in, I don't think many here would lose much sleep.
That said, I still live with "if it ain't at all broke, no need to inject something that MIGHT have a negative affect" way of thinking. I just see some potential for downside and don't see that much benefit from getting Kelly's perspective. To me, it's much more down to execution than design with this offense. And Kelly's supposed superior knowledge of other teams doesn't move me that much. The Pats are pretty good at analyzing the tapes and it's not as if we are living before the 22 view and other plentiful scoring options were readily available.
PS: no lame SpyGate reference was intended there.
That said, I still live with "if it ain't at all broke, no need to inject something that MIGHT have a negative affect" way of thinking. I just see some potential for downside and don't see that much benefit from getting Kelly's perspective. To me, it's much more down to execution than design with this offense. And Kelly's supposed superior knowledge of other teams doesn't move me that much. The Pats are pretty good at analyzing the tapes and it's not as if we are living before the 22 view and other plentiful scoring options were readily available.
PS: no lame SpyGate reference was intended there.
If you taken out Shady McCoy and just called them LeSean Jackson, this post would have been better. Low bar, but still.
Pretty clear from past comments that BB has a lot of respect for Kelly.
I honestly dont even know how to opine on this from a messageboard poster vantage point. Whatever BB decides is almost certainly the right move here and its almost certainly going to be a super marginal decision.
I honestly dont even know how to opine on this from a messageboard poster vantage point. Whatever BB decides is almost certainly the right move here and its almost certainly going to be a super marginal decision.
He wouldn't be making roster decisions so I fail to see how those moves are at all relevant.
If they do bring him aboard, all of those "WTF is McDaniels doing?" hot takes can be replaced by "WTF is Kelly making McDaniels do?" hot takes.
Disagree. Bringing in Chip Kelly is obviously step 1 in a master plan that will see Tom Brady benched, Malcolm Butler cut, and the Pats implementing a run and shoot offense, all before for AFC championship game. /hot take
Well.. he is willing to earn his HC Hat back by being an NFL OC somewhere.....
Per PFT:
"“I’ll go be an offensive coordinator somewhere,” Kelly told Glazer."
http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2017/01/03/chip-kelly-trent-baalke-undermined-me-ill-be-an-assistant-coach/
Per PFT:
"“I’ll go be an offensive coordinator somewhere,” Kelly told Glazer."
http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2017/01/03/chip-kelly-trent-baalke-undermined-me-ill-be-an-assistant-coach/
I agree with this, and am baffled by the concerns of some others. Belichick runs the tightest ship in professional sports, and has for 16 years. The idea that any one person could -- or would be allowed to -- disrupt it is nonsense, whether that's an on-field presence like Randy Moss (or Jamie Collins, perhaps) or an off-field coach.
As for hiring from outside, I don't understand this concern either. McDaniels and Daboll both left the organization to work for other teams and eventually were welcomed back with open arms. At the same time, the team has hired a few coaches and front office folks from other organizations (Dom Capers, Dave DeGuglilmo, Floyd Reese,etc.) and whatever you may think of those individual results, the Patriots remained successful during and after their tenures.
As others have said, Belichick is the greatest coach of all time in the midst of one of the greatest runs in professional sports history. He's earned the benefit of the doubt.
BB has always been a "one game at a time" guy publicly, but I think it would be naïve to think that there is no one on the staff that's doing any advance work. I think that if he's brought aboard, Kelly becomes one of those guys.
When Chip Kelly was dumped by the San Francisco 49ers after one season as head coach, word was that he indeed preferred to stay in the NFL as opposed to returning to the college game.
If that is true -- and it does appear to be right now -- there would be a logical landing spot: the New England Patriots. That's because the friendship between Kelly and Patriots coach Bill Belichick is no secret. They have exchanged football concepts since Kelly's fast-tempo offense became the rage at Oregon.
The Jaguars were serious in their courtship of Kelly as the offensive coordinator for Doug Marrone, who was named the head coach last week. Marrone was urged by Tom Coughlin, the Jaguars' new executive vice president of football operations, to explore adding Kelly to the staff as an offensive coordinator or in another capacity.
As for Kelly, a league source said he was headed to New England to meet with Belichick once the Jaguars decided to go with Hackett. What that means is anybody's guess for now. Kelly's knowledge goes well beyond offense. His command of the science of football is highly regarded in enough circles to be an asset in more than one way.
http://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/18510320/nfl-2016-chris-mortensen-adam-schefter-championship-round-notebook-chip-kelly-bill-belichick-kirk-cousins-antonio-brown-more
If that is true -- and it does appear to be right now -- there would be a logical landing spot: the New England Patriots. That's because the friendship between Kelly and Patriots coach Bill Belichick is no secret. They have exchanged football concepts since Kelly's fast-tempo offense became the rage at Oregon.
The Jaguars were serious in their courtship of Kelly as the offensive coordinator for Doug Marrone, who was named the head coach last week. Marrone was urged by Tom Coughlin, the Jaguars' new executive vice president of football operations, to explore adding Kelly to the staff as an offensive coordinator or in another capacity.
As for Kelly, a league source said he was headed to New England to meet with Belichick once the Jaguars decided to go with Hackett. What that means is anybody's guess for now. Kelly's knowledge goes well beyond offense. His command of the science of football is highly regarded in enough circles to be an asset in more than one way.
http://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/18510320/nfl-2016-chris-mortensen-adam-schefter-championship-round-notebook-chip-kelly-bill-belichick-kirk-cousins-antonio-brown-more
The revival of the Kelly-to-lend-a-hand-in-NE story on the same day as Grigson is bounced in Indianapolis could raise an eyebrow.
I know everyone's saying Pagano is safe, but maybe Bill's lining up a back-up plan, just in case?
I know everyone's saying Pagano is safe, but maybe Bill's lining up a back-up plan, just in case?
Chip Kelly is great at offensive play schemes, it is just the pace and management that has always been his downfall.
Where he excels is the initial gameplan. Kelly is incredibly creative at getting mismatches in space to get his players open. The 49ers had 14-0 leads this year to start the game against the Los Angeles Rams, Dallas Cowboys, Tampa Bay Buccaneers, and the New York Jets.
However, the only game they won was a shutout against the Rams. Kelly always runs the shotgun, and refuses to allow quarterbacks to audible or even alter how the play is called. Maybe it has happened, but I don't remember a Chip Kelly coached team try to draw the defense offsides by cadence?
That said, New England can be a fantastic fit for him. Kelly doesn't have to worry about roster management, or the rigidity he has had in the NFL in marrying his scheme with tempo. He can add his creativity to Belichick and McDaniels to the intiial gameplan, and they remain strong voices to make adjustment in-game.
I also see the best success for the New England offense being Blount on the ground again. Pittsburgh has an incredibly athletic back seven, and they did a great job of shutting down Kelce and Hill last week. Kelly would be a tremendous asset in finding space to get players open, or just draw off a safety so Edelman can shred underneath.
Where he excels is the initial gameplan. Kelly is incredibly creative at getting mismatches in space to get his players open. The 49ers had 14-0 leads this year to start the game against the Los Angeles Rams, Dallas Cowboys, Tampa Bay Buccaneers, and the New York Jets.
However, the only game they won was a shutout against the Rams. Kelly always runs the shotgun, and refuses to allow quarterbacks to audible or even alter how the play is called. Maybe it has happened, but I don't remember a Chip Kelly coached team try to draw the defense offsides by cadence?
That said, New England can be a fantastic fit for him. Kelly doesn't have to worry about roster management, or the rigidity he has had in the NFL in marrying his scheme with tempo. He can add his creativity to Belichick and McDaniels to the intiial gameplan, and they remain strong voices to make adjustment in-game.
I also see the best success for the New England offense being Blount on the ground again. Pittsburgh has an incredibly athletic back seven, and they did a great job of shutting down Kelce and Hill last week. Kelly would be a tremendous asset in finding space to get players open, or just draw off a safety so Edelman can shred underneath.
I think Jay Glazer said Shanahan wants to talk to Chip about being his OC in SF. Sounds totally nuts.
Any correlation between Chip's appearance at practice this week and the return of the hurry-up that looked so effective in the first two scoring drives?
Chips teams Have played the Falcons in 2015 (vs Philly) and 2016 (vs 49ers).
With Philly he actually held the ATL passing offense relatively in check (298 yds, 2tds and 2 int) Atl ran for 105 (3yds per rush) and no TDs. They lost a close one 26-24.
With the 49ers he again did "ok" against the pass (300yds for 2 TDs) but his run defense was gashed for 248 yards (6 per) and 3 TDs. 9ers were crushed 41-13.
What does this say? I dont know...as other then Ryan, Coleman and Freeman there was alot of offensive turnover between the years. But 120+ hours of recent study of your opponent plus whatever postmortem (lessons learned from the 2 losses) he can add is worth something.
With Philly he actually held the ATL passing offense relatively in check (298 yds, 2tds and 2 int) Atl ran for 105 (3yds per rush) and no TDs. They lost a close one 26-24.
With the 49ers he again did "ok" against the pass (300yds for 2 TDs) but his run defense was gashed for 248 yards (6 per) and 3 TDs. 9ers were crushed 41-13.
What does this say? I dont know...as other then Ryan, Coleman and Freeman there was alot of offensive turnover between the years. But 120+ hours of recent study of your opponent plus whatever postmortem (lessons learned from the 2 losses) he can add is worth something.
Probably? The 27-yard pass to Hogan with about five minutes left in the first quarter looked like an audible into a Chip Kelly play. Brady sent Edelman in motion, and Mike Mitchell came down to the line of scrimmage and Sean Davis rotated to that side of the field. Once Mitchell was at the line of scrimmage, Brady audibled into "Jordan," which was an empty backfield. Chris Hogan looked prepared and knew what was coming, even directing Blount into position, while Artie Burns(rookie corner) looked for help, Sean Davis(rookie safety) was out of position, and James Harrison was left in no-man's land underneath covering Hogan or Blount short. It was all vertical routes, and Hogan was looking for it the whole time past Harrison and before Davis/Burns.
Beautiful play and recognition for the audible, regardless if there was Chip Kelly influence or not. He would be great as an offensive coordinator if he allowed a QB to audible like this, if that is what happened.
Jordan means 23 (2 left, 3 right in a five wide audible). Great adjustment to coverage in what was checkers vs chess.
One of the problems I think people are having is understanding how the Patriots do things. They always are looking at new stuff--whether that's the coordinators, BB, Ernie Adams. They added hurry-up and pace stuff after watching Kelly's Oregon team; they added the ineligible player stuff after watching college teams do it., etc. The idea that there is a 'stable, inflexible, Patriots way' in terms of concepts that Kelly could disrupt is simply not how they have ever operated.
I have no idea what cooties or virus people think talking to Chip Kelly would expose them to, but it is completely clear that for 16 years Belichick has not been worried about such 'exposure' to new ideas and I can't imagine why anyone would think that--or their ability to successfully interact with those new ideas--would change now.
I have no idea what cooties or virus people think talking to Chip Kelly would expose them to, but it is completely clear that for 16 years Belichick has not been worried about such 'exposure' to new ideas and I can't imagine why anyone would think that--or their ability to successfully interact with those new ideas--would change now.