Benn And Williams Fit Olson’s Offense
May 9th, 2010
One reason the Bucs selected Arrelious Benn: his style fits within Greg Olson's offense so well.
The Bucs have gushed so much about their two new rookie wide receivers, Arrelious Benn and Mike Williams, Joe, being ever the skeptic, raised his antennae.
Reading from dispatches and talking to observers of the two rookies soothed Joe’s concerns. It seems the duo is the real deal.
One reason Benn and Williams are getting so many rave reviews, and perhaps why the Bucs didn’t draft wide receiver Golden Tate, is that, per the Mad Twitterer of the St. Petersburg Times, Benn and Williams fit so perfectly into Bucs offensive coordinator Greg Olson’s offense.
Benn and Williams are also great after the catch, which is critical in the offense under coordinator Greg Olson. The Bucs run a lot of slants, digs and crossing routes that require yards after the catch for big plays.
One observation: Williams might win a starting job before Benn. But before 2010 is over, both will be running out of the tunnel for pregame introductions. Regardless of the order, the position went from one with no depth to one of the most competitive on the team with Sammie Stroughter, Maurice Stovall, Reggie Brown and Michael Clayton.
This brings up one question, though Joe is confident it won’t be much of a factor but it’s a modest concern nonetheless: If Benn and Williams were drafted, in part, because they fit Olson’s offense so well, what if Olson and the rest of the coaching staff are jettisoned after the season if the Bucs fall on their face in 2010?
Joe’s not saying this will happen or should happen. But in May 2010, how do we know for a fact these coaches will still be here a year from today?
May 9th, 2010 at 1:30 pm
Joe says “what if Olson and the rest of the coaching staff are jettisoned after the season if the Bucs fall on their face in 2010?”
…then they’ll be deemed completely useless!!!! Seriously, Joe, throwing the haters a bone to juice the the page’s stats? How Florio-esque of you…
May 9th, 2010 at 1:31 pm
Being that the FO made such a colossal mistake last year in hiring a DC who ran a scheme unfit for the team’s personnel, you’d have/(hope) to think they wouldn’t make the same mistake twice. If the coaching staff is revamped, (and judging from the Glazers comments it seems doubtful they’ll have a quick hook with this staff), the G-boys would probably look to keep similar systems in place and hire their coaches accordingly.
May 9th, 2010 at 1:47 pm
Can we wait and see how they play in the pros before we lable them “great after the catch” and guaranteed starters? How about we start out with getting open and MAKING the catch first before we get carried away.
How long has this Stroud guy been covering pro football? Guaranteeing anything out of rookies is foolish.
Id be more than happy to take the huge gamble of turning this over to Mr. Cowher, following the 2010 disaster. I am thinking he would figure out how to use talented receivers if they turn out that way.
Not a problem!
May 9th, 2010 at 1:54 pm
Boldin and Marshall are even better after the catch….but apparently they did NOT fit…
May 9th, 2010 at 2:42 pm
neither has dropped a bead of sweat as a professional player….
stop the silly conjectures…
after all last year this time it was …..
“a bust in waiting”
May 9th, 2010 at 2:46 pm
“and perhaps why the Bucs didn’t draft wide receiver Golden Tate, is that…Benn and Williams are also great after the catch, which is critical in the offense”
Funny, I seem to recall Golden Tate being considered one of, if not the best “after-the-catch” WR’s in the draft given his RB background and agility. Tate was considered the more raw route-runner however.
So no, if the reasoning was offensive fit, then I disagree completely. I would say that Tate just wasn’t considered in the same class of WR that the others were and had trouble catching the ball at the combine. His lack of height didn’t help either.
May 9th, 2010 at 3:12 pm
Hosstyle in Tampa:
LOL not at all, but that’s not a bad idea. Joe is in business to drive traffic after all.
No, Joe believes this is an important issue. If Benn and Williams were drafted solely because of how they fit Olson’s offense… how exactly do we know Olson will be here a year from now?
May 9th, 2010 at 5:36 pm
@ Joe
So, you expect them to draft players that don’t necessarily fit the current coach’s scheme because they’re insecure in their job status? How ridiculous. Of course you draft players that fit your current scheme, these coaches don’t care about who will replace them or when, or whether they have players that fit their scheme or not. Only that they get players they can utilize now and maybe save their own jobs.
May 9th, 2010 at 6:35 pm
BamBamBuc:
Joe has a very novel approach: You draft the best players available and then you mold your offense/defense around your players’ talents.
May 9th, 2010 at 6:47 pm
Wouldn’t just about every offense make use of a guy that gets good yardage after the catch?
Hard to imagine anyone frowning upon it.
May 9th, 2010 at 6:57 pm
Don Shula said it best:
Coaches mold there philosophies around there talent. With Czonka and Morris they ran, w/ Marino and the marks brothers they threw.
May 9th, 2010 at 7:04 pm
BTW: this is the 2004 nfl draft report of michael clayton:
“Michael Clayton is an intelligent playmaker who has good height, quickness, agility, and straight-line speed. He has terrific hands, and makes spectacular catches. He’s an explosive deep threat that can be physical when he needs to be.”
Huh? quick, agile, speed, explosive? apparently at the college level. I guess some of these draft projections are 100% trustworthy.
May 9th, 2010 at 7:31 pm
Sounds like Anquan Boldin/BM/Holmes would be the prototype Olsen receivers.
Oh well. I hope he new guys do not cause INT’s, u know how the bucs hate that
Good point on Shula. He was a coach.
Interesting we are back to tampa-2 and West Coast Offense.
Seems like we have seen that before.
May 9th, 2010 at 8:59 pm
I can agree with drafting the best talent available. However, I believe Benn was rated one of the top 3 or 4 WRs in the draft (oh yeah, and he fits the type of WR Olsen likes for his offense) and Williams stock dropped due to “character concerns”, but would have been MUCH higher otherwise (oh yeah, and he kind of fits the scheme the team would like to run).
I think they got two talented WRs at good value spots in the draft. I’m not sure we needed to give up the 5th rounder to move up, but the team hopefully had better “intel” on that as to who might take him before he fell to us. The draft should be a combination of best available player, team need, and value at the pick. Both players seem to meet those criteria.
Whether or not they fit one scheme better than another is moot. They got talented players at value picks at positions of need. I’m not going to second guess them until they succeed/fail in the system. If another regime takes over next year, it will be their responsibility to utilize the talent the team has in place and mold their system around that.
That was probably the biggest mistake made last year. The team chose schemes that didn’t fit talent to begin with, the realized they needed to switch back to utilize the talent they had and mold the scheme around them.
May 9th, 2010 at 9:30 pm
Good recievers are good recievers. They don’t just fit a certain system.
Also, the whole notion that they didn’t want Tate because they want YAC is nonsense. Tate’s strongest asset is his ability to rack up YAC.
May 9th, 2010 at 9:33 pm
“…then they’ll be deemed completely useless!!!! Seriously, Joe, throwing the haters a bone to juice the the page’s stats? How Florio-esque of you…”
Are you new here Hosstyle? If it wasn’t for haters, this site wouldn’t exist.
May 9th, 2010 at 9:34 pm
Funny. I thought slow stone-handed recievers who do nothing well besides block were who fit our “system”…
May 9th, 2010 at 9:55 pm
Hoping the Bucs will someday soon have an excellent head coach and GM is hardly “hateful”.
Rather, it is a position of “love” for our beloved team and all of bucdom, including the delusional masses taken in by the current pitiful, hopeless and incompetent regime.
May 9th, 2010 at 10:28 pm
@ Eric
Just curious really. If the current regime were to turn the franchise around and be a playoff contender and push for Super Bowls in 2011 and beyond, would you change your tune about the administration? I understand you don’t like them now, as they haven’t done anything to earn it yet (by your standards anyway).
I just know some people didn’t like Dungy because he couldn’t “put us over the top”, yet he did build the team that got there. I know others that loved the Gruden regime because they got us there, but the team deteriorated every subsequent year. If Rah and Dom build the team that another coach “pushes over the top”, would you still say they were pitiful, hopeless and incompetent?
They’ve had one year. People are saying we shouldn’t put all this pressure to turn the team around this year on the “rookies”, yet the coach and GM were rookies last year. Why are we not giving them the same chance as the players? Or is it the same with coaches as many feel with players… that only big name free agent coaches that get paid $10M per year will ever be any good?
May 9th, 2010 at 10:38 pm
@BamBamBuc
Ok sir, fair enough, if they turn it around as you suggest I will surely will be totally wrong and will freely admit it.
However, if we have another 3-13 season is that acceptable to you or would u agree a change would be needed?
May 10th, 2010 at 12:04 am
Joe, if YAC was a big factor to select WRs, wouldn’t Tate have been the best fit?
May 10th, 2010 at 12:47 am
@ Eric
Absolutely. If the team goes 3-13 again, I would have to assume that no progress is being shown in player growth or coaching scheme. Both I would attribute to the coaching and deem a change is needed. I’m not so sure I’d give up on Dom as quickly, as it appears the correct talent is being drafted, just not coached very well, or the scheme is failing.
May 10th, 2010 at 12:54 am
For those that think Tate was the better fit if YAC was the criteria….
I believe Tate is very good at YAC, but he’s too small. When running slants, quick outs, etc. you need big tall WRs or the ball will get picked off or tipped a lot. Tate would make a good slot WR, like Stroughter. He could also be effective in a deep cross offense, similar to Philly.
That’s not saying Benn or Williams would not be effective in the deep cross routes, but they don’t tend to get “lost” in coverages like Tate does. They should still have the ability to go up for the ball at it’s highest point to make catches on most routes. My only concern with either of them is with Benn, as he seems to have more difficulty holding on to the ball according to some “experts”. What I’ve seen on film is he makes good adjustments to the ball, but many passes got into his body because of the adjustments. More accurate passes could help with that. I’d hate to have Clayton 2.0 on our hands.
May 10th, 2010 at 7:59 am
Jonny:
Maybe, maybe not. Jury is still out.
Look, Joe’s not going to bag on this draft. Hardly. On paper — hey phrase there — it appears Dominik hit a home run. Just found Mad Twitterer’s inference that part of the reason Benn and Williams were picked were because they fit so well into Olson’s offense. Joe never knew Olson had so much job security.
To the point, Joe was hoping coaches would “fit” themselves around the players, not vice-versa (Jim Bates).
May 10th, 2010 at 8:34 am
@Joe. Have to agree with you. May be the Bucs staff wanted a combination of size and physicality apart from elusiveness.