A Little Love For Dan "The Man" Henning

"Southbeach wrote:

I'm just guessing that he pretty much has control of the O. How would you like to be a fly on the wall on game planning between this group?

"This will work." "Well, it did not back in 82." "Yeah but, it did in 99 and again in 09." "Teams were different, and most forgot about it."

You get my drift. LOL

Well, he's doing something right because he's been successful wherever he's been (as a coordinator). His offenses generally do very well. I don't think it would ever get to him telling Tony, "Hey, it worked in '82, so I want to do it again", but there is some theme that it keeps coming back and working 'again'....at any rate, my guess is that Sparano has a tight reign because that's the way he wants it....not because it did or did not work....Conversely, some of these off the wall calls, IMHO, just might be coming from Sparano...not Henning...

Henning is no different then any other successful OC, his offense is good IF you have the right people to run it. The team wins ballgames, OC looks like a success, a team goes 7-9 ? is that called success ? IMO , Henning ? Meh,

I'm suspending judgement until Buffalo. I'll let him have it for flat out stupid playcalling in the 2 min. periods.

Don't think I don't appreciate Henning. I understand that he is tailoring this offense to it's strengths.

"Southbeach wrote:

Yeah, that one was tuff to take. It was a good call, which Ricky said he completes 9 out of 10 times but, we were running over them.

Actually it was one of the worst calls EVER.

"Larryfinfan wrote:

Well, he's doing something right because he's been successful wherever he's been (as a coordinator). His offenses generally do very well. I don't think it would ever get to him telling Tony, "Hey, it worked in '82, so I want to do it again", but there is some theme that it keeps coming back and working 'again'....at any rate, my guess is that Sparano has a tight reign because that's the way he wants it....not because it did or did not work....Conversely, some of these off the wall calls, IMHO, just might be coming from Sparano...not Henning...

Just playing and having some fun. :)

Seriously, Henning has done one hell of a job with little to work with, and I am VERY glad he is our OC, regardless of what some may think.

"Southbeach wrote:

Yeah, that one was tuff to take. It was a good call, which Ricky said he completes 9 out of 10 times but, we were running over them.

No, it wasn't. Completely unnecessary. If you play out the risk / reward scenarios of throwing the ball, vs. running it in against a patchwork front 7, the answer should have been clear. Pound it in. Horrible play call that lost us that game, IMHO. Completely woke up a slumbering Bills crowd which energized the team.

He hasn't had "little to work with". A veteran QB in 2008. More than capable WR's (insert Ginn joke here) and TE's both years, with two of the top RB's in the game and one of the best offensive lines. That "little to work with" argument holds no ground.

"Pandarilla wrote:

I'm suspending judgement until Buffalo. I'll let him have it for flat out stupid playcalling in the 2 min. periods.

Don't think I don't appreciate Henning. I understand that he is tailoring this offense to it's strengths.

Agreed. He did not have a whole lot of strengths to work with off the expansion-type 1-15.

"Merauder wrote:

He hasn't had "little to work with". A veteran QB in 2008. More than capable WR's (insert Ginn joke here) and TE's both years, with two of the top RB's in the game and one of the best offensive lines. That "little to work with" argument holds no ground.

WOW! You are absolutely right. I cannot believe we lost a game with all that talent. It was MUCH better than Indy, SD, NE, and the rest of the playoffs teams. What the hell was I thinking?

I have been known as a sarcastic SOB on occasion. This is one. LOL!

"Dol-Fan Dupree wrote:

Doing well on 3rd and short doesn't skew the statistic. The offense did need a playmaker, however that doesn't take away from them doing well on third downs or from Dan Henning's play calling. An offense still has to make it to "third and short".

It does when people are claiming our offense was fine last year. The offense was as fine as our defense was when it was the 4th best in the league at stopping 3rd down conversions.

Now, I don't blame Henning for that. I thought he did well enough with what he had. You haven't seen me complaining about Henning or the play calling. There are always differences in what I may have done on this play or that but overall I don't see his play calling as a problem.

"rafael wrote:

It does when people are claiming our offense was fine last year. The offense was as fine as our defense was when it was the 4th best in the league at stopping 3rd down conversions.

Now, I don't blame Henning for that. I thought he did well enough with what he had. You haven't seen me complaining about Henning or the play calling. There are always differences in what I may have done on this play or that but overall I don't see his play calling as a problem.

No one was claiming our O was fine last year, just that Henning did a good job.

I know Henning's references are. What are yours?

Do NOT misunderstand. I do respect your opinion, same as all here. Do you believe yourself to be a better OC than Henning?

"Southbeach wrote:

No one was claiming our O was fine last year, just that Henning did a good job.

I know Henning's references are. What are yours?

Do NOT misunderstand. I do respect your opinion, same as all here. Do you believe yourself to be a better OC than Henning?

Where would you even get the impression that I'm questioning Henning much less saying that I'm better than him as an OC? Are you reading somebody else's post, or have me confused with somebody else? This is what I said:

Now, I don't blame Henning for that. I thought he did well enough with what he had. You haven't seen me complaining about Henning or the play calling. There are always differences in what I may have done on this play or that but overall I don't see his play calling as a problem.

In case you're misunderstanding, that means that I don't blame Henning and that I think he did fine. See, where I said "I don't blame Henning" and where I said "I don't see his play calling as a problem"? Or where I said "You haven't seen me complaining about Henning or the play calling"?

"rafael wrote:

It does when people are claiming our offense was fine last year. The offense was as fine as our defense was when it was the 4th best in the league at stopping 3rd down conversions.

Now, I don't blame Henning for that. I thought he did well enough with what he had. You haven't seen me complaining about Henning or the play calling. There are always differences in what I may have done on this play or that but overall I don't see his play calling as a problem.

Then why bring it up in a conversation about Henning?

"Dol-Fan Dupree wrote:

Then why bring it up in a conversation about Henning?

I'm just tired of seeing that stat brought up every time somebody wants to claim our offense was good. It's no more indicative than the same stat being used to claim our defensive play calling was good. I didn't disagree with the opinion about Henning. I just disagreed with what was claimed support the opinion.

"rafael wrote:

I'm just tired of seeing that stat brought up every time somebody wants to claim our offense was good. It's no more indicative than the same stat being used to claim our defensive play calling was good. I didn't disagree with the opinion about Henning. I just disagreed with what was claimed support the opinion.

Then I disagree with your disagreement because it did show that Henning did do a good job with what he had.

Henning is not an awful OC because he has good experience. That being said, he is/has been holding up our offense from being top 10 in the league with some of his ridiculous play calls. He was great for two years of a new head coach and "rebuilding" from a 1-15 season. Its time to move on. Just my opinion though.

"FinsAreLife wrote:

Henning is not an awful OC because he has good experience. That being said, he is/has been holding up our offense from being top 10 in the league with some of his ridiculous play calls. He was great for two years of a new head coach and "rebuilding" from a 1-15 season. Its time to move on. Just my opinion though.

I do not agree with that at all.

For every "weird play call" that doesn't work there are at least 5 regular run of the mill play calls that do not work.

excellent read & offensive coordinator

"rafael wrote:

Where would you even get the impression that I'm questioning Henning much less saying that I'm better than him as an OC? Are you reading somebody else's post, or have me confused with somebody else? This is what I said:

Now, I don't blame Henning for that. I thought he did well enough with what he had. You haven't seen me complaining about Henning or the play calling. There are always differences in what I may have done on this play or that but overall I don't see his play calling as a problem.

In case you're misunderstanding, that means that I don't blame Henning and that I think he did fine. See, where I said "I don't blame Henning" and where I said "I don't see his play calling as a problem"? Or where I said "You haven't seen me complaining about Henning or the play calling"?

Rafael,

My sincere apology, got a bit caught up in the discussion while making an attempt to work. You were in no way, shape, or form taking a shot at Henning. Your posts are the voice of reason, and I do appreciate reading them.

Henning is a proven commodity