PBF81

What is it that they say about doing the same thing over and over while expecting different results ... A. How long for that maturation? McD's had 6 seasons now. B. Beane can't hit home-runs or triples on days 1 & 2 of the Drafts to save his life. C. Like clockwork, in the playoffs our Defense goes on vacation. D. In the playoffs and in many regular season games we have to overcome our own coaching blunders and incompetencies to win often. I'm just curious how many more tries, seasons, will correct what even fans know is obvious.

We'll continue to be out-coached, particularly in the playoffs. We've recently had the same fortunes that NE/Brady had for 20 years, a weak division to the extent that the other three teams sucked. But that's gonna change. We're not going anywhere with a defense that routinely allows 30 PPG in the playoffs. We can think and Bill-ieve that we are, but we aren't. If if's and but's were candy and nuts ... McD hasn't improved in 5 seasons, Allen's simply improved, carrying McD's water. And Beane's drafting is hardly any cause for hope either, in fact, to the contrary. At least with Polian there was hope for getting qualified starting talent routinely in the Draft.

The only relevant comparison between this team and that one, is that they both have coaches that are out-coached and outclassed by their best peers, to the extent that it'll be pure luck if we win a Super Bowl with them, but that they're so liked as people that despite their professional incompetencies, they'll be here until the special talent that is Allen is spent. The '90s era team was more a special collection of overall talent and not simply one spectacular player. Also that Beane isn't even close to Polian, who assembled an entire team, not merely lucked out on one player.

Allen's the only QB that I'm aware of that plays at a high level, despite on every play potentially having to overcome coaching/poor-play-calling, highly questionable OL play, and an extreme lack of riding production to support him. Given his situation, it's remarkable what he's done.

It's no accident that THE PROCESS was never clarified or defined. So I guess it's a never-ending project. Just keep trusting, like a stopped clock, at some point it will work out.

LOL, not really my style, but I couldn't resist.

As I said, Milano wasn't very good back then, in fact, his value was purely as a pass-D LB, his run-D skills were among the worst in the league. As to Lorax, yes, but he was on the downside as well. I guess it's possible that they built the roster to only have two competent LBs, although under any circumstances that would seem to be incredibly foolish. It also feeds into why the D is so bad. I'll throw another wrench at you, perhaps it's that way because McD isn't in fact a good coach. He's a former DB, and in coaching a former DB Coach turned average-at-best DC. So it's quite possible we have a Peter Principle in action here.

Well, the only problem with that line of reasoning is that they did play a base 4-3 a couple of years ago, but were forced to abandon it because we had no capable LBs to fill those roles, particularly with Edmunds OJT-ing it and Milano primarily a pass-defending LB until late last and this seasons. Beane's drafting has led to poor day 1 and day 2 results. When you constantly have overlay your prior draft picks with picks at the same positions, you have no choice but to neglect other unit needs.

After all, can't argue with the D's success in the playoffs. Oh, ... wait ... 😏

We don't have three starting caliber LBs to stick into our 4-3, how are we going to find four. If you're going to point to Beane's drafts, good luck with that. The reason for that is that we don't have three LBs of starting caliber. Poor drafting has left us a dearth of talent that needs to be worked around. But Beane's doing a great job. Sure he is.

I suppose. OTOH, if Von Miller plays every bit of his 34 years old, doesn't come back to 100% (very likely), and Rousseau doesn't improve like most of our draftees on the DL haven't, then it's the opposite. That latter one has to do with coaching. We'll see I suppose. Talking about it between us between now and then ain't gonna change the outcome. LOL

😂 Why, for someone that's already irrevocably made up their mind. You obviously don't think that my time is worth much.

McD is very much like Levy except that he doesn't have the overall talent that Levy had. Both will get you into the playoffs, but neither is going to out coach his counterparts deep in the playoffs.

We've regressed offensively for sure. A lot of that had to do with Beasley's absence IMO. But the D, I simply think it was overrated to begin with for whatever reasons. Regardless, in McD's pressers he's trying to be like Belichick but he hasn't earned that. His "explanations" are non-explanations. All very closed and no accountability. I have to think that's by design. It was one example to illustrate the point, there are hundreds. Come on ...

Sounds like excuse making to me.

Well, we know that something's causing our defense to play like crap in the playoffs, they should correct it, whatever it is. HINT: It wasn't the Safeties coach. You raise a good point by implication. Good coaches figure things out on their own, they don't have to try to reinvent what they've seen elsewhere. Every team is different, if you try and coach it the same way that you coached another team, that's a mistake. McD apparently cannot do that. In other words, a good coach takes the talent that he has, and maximizes it. I don't think that there are too many people out there, including McD apologists, that would strongly suggest that he's gotten the most out of this roster, ... that he contributed to building by the way. In fact, come playoff time he gets less out of it defensively.

Last year's SB winner allowed an average of 18.75 PPG in the playoffs, a max of 27 2020 Season: 19.5, max of 26 2019 Season: 25, max of 31 2018 Season: 20.7, max of 31 2017 Season: 16.7, max of 33 2016 Season: 20.3, max of 28 2015 Season: 20.7, max of 31 2014 Season: 13.3, max of 17 2013 Season: 22, max of 35 2012 Season: 14, max of 20 The average of those averages is 19.9. Us over the past five playoff games: 29.8, with games allowing 31, 36, and 38. Here are some additional arguments. In 2020, we allowed the Chiefs to score 38. The Browns held them to 22 that season, and the Bucs to 9. Last season, of "13 Seconds" fame, we allowed 36 points to the Chiefs in regulation. We had the 1st-ranked scoring D. Pitt, with the 20th-ranked scoring D allowed 42, while Cinci and it's 17th-ranked D allowed 24. This season, our 2nd-ranked scoring D allowed 27 points to Cinci. The Chiefs' 16th-ranked scoring D allowed only 20 to Cinci. It just doesn't seem as if playoff football is McD's gig.

31 points would have won 8 of the last 13 Super Bowls. One could argue that you are ignoring numbers to make a point.

That feeds into what we're discussing. As QB Bills said above, it depends upon how big one dreams. I'll relate it to entrepreneurship. If someone starts a business, but never takes any chances, that business isn't likely to grow and become what it could have been. Many of us see that it's pretty obvious, and you seem to imply the same, that we're only going so far with McD, and that distance does not include a championship. You seem to be content with it while others are not. Am I willing to risk possible regression in the hopes of winning the big prize? Sure I am. You are not, seemingly. So it really depends upon one's perspectives and goals. Nothing wrong from a fan perspective simply wanting to go to and enjoy games, or enjoy them on TV. Many fans have loftier goals tho, and upon realizing that those goals won't be met, they insist upon changes. McD "made the playoffs" with Taylor in 2017. So why did we go get a QB? (Allen) That's easy, to upgrade. Many felt that Taylor wasn't adequate to win us a Super Bowl. They were likely correct. But we upgraded because he wasn't cutting the Webers. Are we not to try to upgrade our coaching, wherever therein the issue lies? Teams move on from good QBs constantly. Look at Cousins. Washington cast him off for that reason. As merely one example. The question should be, why is coaching exempt. Look at it this way, before we had oscar meyer hot dogs. Now we've upgraded to hebrew national, an improvement. But neither are Sahlens or Zweigle's.

That's it right there, some need to dream bigger. Imagine if Kurt Warner had come into the league from stocking shelves at a supermarket as he was, and had been satisfied with a backup QB job. ... for example. Again, what's the goal, a championship, or to simply outperform the team that averaged 6.6 wins/season from our last playoff appearance to when they got here. Some people appear to be satisfied with that. As long as we have well ranked offenses and defenses, simply make the playoffs despite never advancing to a Super Bowl, and have Allen, I guess their goals are met. Which is fine I suppose, it's just not our goals.

Agreed. And that's the question that everyone needs to ask themselves, what is the standard, the level of expectation. If it's simply to outplay our 6.6 wins/season since our last playoff appearance before they got here, that's one thing. They've done that and continue to do it. But for many of us that's not what it's all about, it's about winning a championship. Which they haven't even sniffed. The shortcomings have been discussed here ad nauseum. But here's the thing, fan pressure often helps initiate changes. Allen's not getting any younger and his style of play isn't going to go far into his 30s. We're already eyeing a rebuild of sorts with some of our better players leaving, best in one case with Poyer. Oliver and Edmunds could be gone, neither is stellar, but they're among our better players. While more and more fans will realize this, by the time that they do, Allen may be spent. And when will they realize it if we keep "making the playoffs," in what to date has been poor division during their tenure. During McD's time here, the Jets haven't made the playoffs at all. Miami once, and they nearly beat us with Skylar Thompson, in our house, and over the past four seasons without Brady NE has made it twice, being ousted in the WC round twice, getting hammered by us and getting beaten by a mediocre Titans team. We can speculate as to how long Allen can keep this pace up playing superman ball, but at the same time he's always one good hit away from who knows what. He takes a whole lot more pounding than most if not all QBs.

Well, here's the problem with that. We were just talking about our highly ranked defense. #1 for much of the season, #2 in the final analysis. How come we're so good during the season, but for the last three seasons, in the postseaon, our D no-shows? Once again, from my post above, here are the points allowed this post-season by the teams considered to be contenders, and it's the contenders that we need to beat. Us: 29 PPG in Playoffs Cinci: 13.5 PPG in Playoffs KC: 20 PPG in Playoffs Philly: 7 PPG in Playoffs Niners: 17.5 PPG in Playoffs Are they all really that much better than us? I don't think that KC is 9 PPG better than us for example. The others might be, but 15.5 PPG different (Cinci), 22 (Eagles), 11.5 (Niners)? And for the sake of argument, say that your argument is true at face value. Whose fault is that then? Because at some point this must then come around to Beane. Instead, we get this circular method of reasoning with apologists pointing to McD, those pointing to Frasier, those pointing to Beane, and they just keep fingerpointing at others. That's not going to correct things, ... neither is firing the Safeties Coach, the one coach whose two starters were missing much of the season, one all of it, the other some of it while playing injured the rest of the time, but when they did play healthy they were tops and his only starting S was regarded as the best at his position. Just sayin'.

I'm not sure that the discussion revolves around correcting it at this point. But to your point, before you correct it, you have to know why it's not working. There's an inexplicable (or explicable depending upon one's viewpoint) reason for why we have the 2nd-ranked scoring D in the league during the regular season, but for the past couple seasons it plays to dead last standards in the playoffs by the same regular season standards. ... and worse than any other serious championship contender. Remember, we were favored this season to win it all. Us: 29 PPG in Playoffs Cinci: 13.5 PPG in Playoffs KC: 20 PPG in Playoffs Philly: 7 PPG in Playoffs Niners: 17.5 PPG in Playoffs Someone responded that teams crank up their offense in the postseason. The reality is that they crank up their D too. So why couldn't we, but the rest of the contenders could? That's a discrepancy that really needs to be accounted for. My argument is that since the players didn't change, and other than for Miller we essentially had all of our guys back for the playoffs, it shouldn't be the players. It can only be one other thing. McD has a lot of power here apparently, which should have been obvious when they hired him and let him choose his own GM essentially. He is defensive minded, but people posting here seem to be split as to whether it's a Frazier-controlled offense or a McD-controlled offense. But shrouding that status in mystery, by McD, also points to a coaching issue in the form of a cover-up of sorts, and to be frank, a lack of accountability. I mean how many times can coaches state the obvious, "we just need to do better," when using it as an excuse for a loss. I mean, yeah, duh! What, we as fans didn't know that. Yet, that's the rote response of McD's. He himself says that Frasier's running the D. So which is it coach? And to be straight here, who cares if we have the #1 D all season but then come into the playoffs and play like we have the last ranked D. Frankly, I'd rather rest our defensive players some during the season, let the offense win the games, even if we finish 10-7 and make the playoffs, who cares if then we crank the D up. I'd rather have that. Regular season rankings in and of themselves don't win games. At times I get the impression that our team seems to think that once our D steps onto the field that for some other inexplicable reason the opposing offense is just going to mentally collapse and cash it in because our D is ranked so highly and due to that stigma. That seems how we play sometimes. If the choice were finishing with the #1 ranked offense and defense and losing the AFC CG or in the D round, or limping into the playoffs at 10-7, hell, or even 9-8, tightening things up, then winning the Super Bowl, I'd choose the latter. That's just me tho.

That's how forums and fans are. In five more seasons that "state-run blind McDermott support" sentiment as you state it, will turn to what we're saying now. Some people catch on sooner than others. Coaching held us back during our SB years too. Can you imagine if we'd had Parcells or Johnson. We'd have won a championship or two.