Frequency of non-11 personnel for the Packers, Rams and Titans closely correlates to TE usage referenced in post #37 above. I'll leave it at that and let others to do the math. This should be intuitive given the multi-tool role of the TE in most offenses these days: the TE(s) could be in-line, slot, wideout or in the backfield (H-back). It's rare for one player to be able to perform all 4 well.
The Rams TE snap count totaled 110%, or approximatly a 2 TE grouping 10% of the time (adjusted down for the infrequent 3 TE set). Their non-11 personnel sets totaled 7.3% of the time according to FO.
The Packers TE snap count totaled 127%, or approximately 27% 2-TE groupings (adjusted down for infrequent3 3-TE sets). Their non-11 personnel sets totaled 22.7%.
The Titans TE snap count totaled 152%, or approximately 52% 2-TE groupings (adjusted down for infrequent 3-TE sets). Their non-11 personnel totaled 44.6%, indicating more 3-TE sets than the others which is consistent with the characterization of this offense.
Since there's a habit of not reading long posts, I like to break out my takeaways when I think they are especially important, which in this case is as follows:
The most interesting thing in the FO piece as pertains to the 2019 version of the Packers is this:
The Rams used
12 personnel on 14 plays in 14 games with Gurley; 56 times in 2 games with Anderson + Kelly. While, as is obvious, personnel does not tell us positioning, the Rams (like the Titans) threw to TEs infrequently. In these two offenses they were primarily blockers, whether there is one or two on the field.
This Rams switch-up in those last two games goes a long way in reconciling the seeming stark contrast between the Rams (and LaFleur's inner McVay) and what LaFleur did in Tennessee based on deceptive seasonal numbers.
When the Rams had to switch to Anderson + Kelly, suddenly that offense looked a lot like Tennessee's. It was not just personnel differences.
The Rams ran the ball more than pass in those last two games.
That's worth repeating for emphasis--
the Rams ran more than passed in those last two games with lots of 2-TE sets for blocking purposes. If that's not enough, the Rams TEs were targeted only 10 times in those last 2 games among all those TE snaps.
Successful coaches adapt their schemes to the personnel on hand. The 2019 Rams illustrate that; LeFluer made like adjustments (compared to his inner McVay as defined by the first 14 Rams games last season) with the quality of runners and TE blockers on hand compared to that young and underwhelming WR group.
Right here at home, Pettine has repeatedly emphasized that he is less about scheme and more about the players, adapting to the talent on hand.
The most notable example (which was not a little mind-blowing) was the Eagles switching to an RPO-based scheme on the fly with Foles.
I would say McCarthy's problem was less about predictability than lack of adaptability. His emphasis on "process", while having its place, started to look like dogmatism or lack of imagination or risk aversion, pick your poison. If that looks like predictability, so be it.
Should you plug an aging James Jones into Nelson's spot and then have him run Nelson's routes? Should you expect Hundley to run an offense designed around Rodgers (McCarthy's stated approach), an on-the-job training exercise disguised as "winning through process", or should you have college spread and read-option concepts in your back pocket better suited to that player, or at least introduce them when you know this is your guy for weeks to come? Should you run the same offense with a healthy Aaron Jones getting 20 touches vs. Williams when Jones is out, two different styles of runner? I think the answers are obvious.
In conclusion, the evidence would indicate that making assumptions about what LaFleur will run with which players in which roles is premature. It is all guessing or, as Mondio said, a ******* guess.
The more plausible assessment at this point is it will depend on LaFleur's evaluation of the players, what he sees as their strengths and weaknesses, as he works his way through camp and preaseason. And if the injury bug hits key players, as in the Gurley example, I would hope we'd see adaptation. If I am correct in drawing from the evidence, players-over-scheme will be a refreshing approach and a good thing.
