PFT article about the problem with having defense-minded head coaches

[Bangarang]

12 minutes ago, Mrbojanglezs said:

If you have a good OC just pay him more to stay. 

 

They are still likely to make more as a HC and I’m sure all these assistants have dreams of being a HC.

[Alphadawg7]

19 minutes ago, NoSaint said:

 

I don’t know that it’s fair to knock a guy for not winning a playoff game this year due to having secured a bye week. 

 

And yes, he gets some credit for changing the direction of that team.

 

I agree but he also lost when his offense got shut down last year in playoffs.  This is a big game for him and the Rams this weekend.  They have really been spending to win now and have a tough defense waiting for them this weekend.  It’s no gimme game.  

 

God I hope he beats the Cowgirls, I hate them and Rams are my 2nd favorite team.  

[WideNine]

8 hours ago, Albany,n.y. said:

Imagine if the Patriots had an offensive minded head coach instead of a defensive minded head coach: Brady's development never would have been stunted with all the OC changes through the years. 

 

NE is a bit of an anomaly in this evaluation.

 

There was a time that Tom Brady needed a lot of help understanding defenses and having plays called for him.....that was over a decade ago.

 

Like Peyton Manning, there is a point when a savvy veteran QB is like having a second OC - just one that changes the play at the line and handles the football.

 

 

[Wayne Cubed]

11 hours ago, BADOLBILZ said:

There is no doubt it's better to have the offensive mind for the reasons you've mentioned.

 

What teams with defensive minded HC's like McD must do is work HARD to develop young offensive minds in assistant roles behind their OC so they can step in and keep their systems in place.

 

That hasn't been done enough but I expect the focus on that to grow extensively.

 

What I don't get about DCs as head coaches is why they don't take a more active role in the offense? They sit and study offenses week in and week out. They know what works against their own defense and what will beat them. They know their weaknesses. Surely that can help the offense of their own team? Instead most of them stubbornly don't get involved with the offensive game planning because 'they didn't coach that side of the ball'.

 

It's what Belichick has contributed to his team and why it works for the Pats.

[eball]

14 hours ago, BillsVet said:

There's no need to worry about losing Daboll right now because I doubt he winds up with one of the 6 remaining HC jobs.  Whatever happens, happens and it's out of their control.     

 

The real issue is how bad OC's getting hired to be HC's will affect the league.  Everyone's looking for the next McVay, but those guys aren't growing on trees.  I can see some undeserving types getting HC jobs and not being ready and/or not talented enough to handle the gig.   

 

Developing an offense is harder than ever with HC turnover, new schemes to implement, free agency moving players around, and the demand for instant results.  And, they require incredible precision, not to mention an excellent QB. 

 

Right now, there are 6 HC vacancies.  Of installed HCs, 1 who comes from the special teams side, 9 from the defensive side, and 16 offensive.  The supply of great offensive minds will not, as with QBs, keep up with demand.  Something's gotta give eventually.  18 teams have changed HCs since the beginning of the 2017 off-season (BUF, MIA, NYJ, CIN, CLE, IND, TEN, DEN, LAC, OAK, NYG 2x, CHI, DET, GB, TB, AZ 2x, LAR, SF) 

 

 

See -- Kliff Kingsbury, Arizona.

[Trogdor]

IMHO it's more about the staff you hire. You can be a defensive minded coach if you manage to find a good OC. The problem is that most coaches tend to stick with friends and retreads for their staff. I think the perception is that defensive minded coaches also stick to conservative coordinators. Also, once you find a good coordinator, there is a good chance they get a better job and your back to square one. 

[oldmanfan]

7 hours ago, BillsVet said:

 

Better change the rules to reduce PI and RTP calls because defenses are playing not to be flagged.  This has permanently influenced how the game is being played from emphasis on positional value (reducing RB, LB, DT for example) to the rise in passing as part of a team's offense, to coach selection, et al. 

I would suggest the reason the rules change towards offense is that defenses have a way of figuring things out and shutting down offenses.  The cool thing now are the Reid and McVay offenses.  Watch Sunday.  I'm not sure which, but I would bet one of these two teams will get shut down (relatively speaking) and lose to a defense that figures it out.  Just saw that with the Ravens/Chargers game; the Ravens offense got completely flummoxed by Gus Bradley's scheme.

 

This kind of stuff has always been a ping-pong balls, and those in charge of hiring NFL HCs tend to be like monkeys that are attracted to the shiny ball without thinking about anything else.  The nature of the shiny ball always changes.

[CSBill]

13 hours ago, matter2003 said:

I dunno...Daboll did pretty well once we got some speed...averaged 24 PPG in the last half of the season...thats not top tier but its not bad for what he had to work with this year.

 

This

[BillsVet]

1 hour ago, oldmanfan said:

I would suggest the reason the rules change towards offense is that defenses have a way of figuring things out and shutting down offenses.  The cool thing now are the Reid and McVay offenses.  Watch Sunday.  I'm not sure which, but I would bet one of these two teams will get shut down (relatively speaking) and lose to a defense that figures it out.  Just saw that with the Ravens/Chargers game; the Ravens offense got completely flummoxed by Gus Bradley's scheme.

 

This kind of stuff has always been a ping-pong balls, and those in charge of hiring NFL HCs tend to be like monkeys that are attracted to the shiny ball without thinking about anything else.  The nature of the shiny ball always changes.

 

One wild card weekend's worth of games does not disprove an entire decade plus worth of regular season play.  Besides, the playoffs isn't representative of what happens during the grind of a 16 game season anyway. It'd be like saying the NHL playoffs is indicative of better defense because goal scoring is down from the regular season.  Of course it is.  There's more being contested AND the teams are better.

 

You don't out-scheme the rules.  It's why league scoring has been steadily rising the past decade from 21.5 points per team per game in 2009 to 23.3 this season.  

 

As for citing the Ravens offense, it's not hard to confuse a rookie QB who's passing skills are extremely raw. 

[EersN'Bills]

Five of the last ten Super Bowl Champions were defensive coaches:

 

• Belichick x2
• Carroll
• Harbaugh
• Tomlin

And some of these coaches lost in Super Bowls too. Not to mention Dan Quinn and Ron Rivera coached in one each.

 

You can still win Super Bowls focusing on defense. Look at the Seahawks and Broncos.  

Edited January 9, 2019 by EersN'Bills

[C.Biscuit97]

14 minutes ago, EersN'Bills said:

Five of the last ten Super Bowl Champions were defensive coaches:

 

• Belichick x2
• Carroll
• Harbaugh
• Tomlin

And some of these coaches lost in Super Bowls too. Not to mention Dan Quinn and Ron Rivera coached in one each.

 

You can still win Super Bowls focusing on defense. Look at the Seahawks and Broncos.  

Minus Harbaugh, they all had HOF qbs.

[bills_fan]

I would just add that Daboll is a Buffalo guy (went to St. Francis HS).  I don't know his personal situation with kids etc., but he may like being in Buffalo and living/coaching in Buffalo.  He may not leave for the first thing that opens up.  If a HC opportunity was a true plum job...sure.  But I could see him being picky and wanting to win a SB with his hometown team as well.

Edited January 9, 2019 by bills_fan

[EersN'Bills]

17 minutes ago, C.Biscuit97 said:

Minus Harbaugh, they all had HOF qbs.

 

Russell Wilson is a HOF QB?

 

But so did McCarthy, Kubiak and Payton. 

 

The point of the article was "it's dumb to hire defensive coaches because they'll have to re-hire OCs if said OCs are any good enough to get hired" which is a flawed argument.

 

It's all about the QB you draft whether you have success in this league. You just need a good coach who can hire good assistants, motivate his players and strategize better than the other team week to week. Doesn't matter the offensive or defensive background.

Edited January 9, 2019 by EersN'Bills

[Ronin]

18 hours ago, BADOLBILZ said:

Except Belichick isn't just a great defensive minded HC.......... he's also in the discussion as the greatest offensive mind of all time.

 

Make no mistake that Patriots team has been offense driven for the past 15 seasons.   That's the one constant.

 

He's just the best coach to ever walk an NFL sideline...........he just carves up other coaches in the film room during the week and then picks the meat off their bones with his in-game management on Sundays.

 

It's interesting tho, doncha think, that Belichick is supposed to be a great defensive mind, but then why have his D's over the past decade ranked 20th or so?  It certainly isn't because he's been in a tough offensive division, he's consistently been in the single easiest division offensively speaking.  

 

He's also never done anything w/o Brady at QB.  On the Pats he was 5-13 with Bledsoe.  It's not as if he recognized Brady's talent either.  While I was lecturing my Pats fan buddy that they would never wing a SB with Bledsoe at the helm (and for the same reason I didn't want him in Buffalo), the only reason why Brady ended up starting was because of the injury to Belichicik's go-to 5-13 QB.  Otherwise it's quite likely that Brady would have ended up elsewhere just like all the other QBs that have come and gone on his watch.  

 

Belichick's had somewhat better than 20th ranked defensive talent, yet, he hasn't done anything with it.  Brady is his own boss and always has been, Belichick has zero track record of developing QBs, none apart from Brady and it's extremely bold to suggest that he made Brady.  

 

I just hope taht Belichick keeps coaching for another decade, if he even makes it that long before the chants of "his days are over," after Brady's time lapses.  IMO Belichick, while good, is hardly as good as everyone says he is.  Brady runs that offense regardless of who the OC is and always puts up numbers even with second-rate cadres of receivers.  

 

IMO Jimmy Johnson was a better coach, as one example.  

 

It's a tough argument to counter.  

 

Belichick is 52-62 with 0 playoff appearances w/o Brady.   

 

With Brady he's 209-61 with Brady and has made the playoffs in 17 of 18 seasons.  

 

Brady was an accident for Belichick.  Not sure how much credit he deserves for that.  If Bledsoe hadn't gotten hurt I don't think that that "accident" even happens.  How good would Belichick have been had it not?  It's rhetorical, but there cannot be an argument that claims Brady as the GOAT, even arguably, without having that impact how "great" Belichick was, particularly given that Belichick's not even taken care of his end, the D, which has been below average in both regular season as well as playoffs while how far the Pats advance is almost always tied to how well Brady, not even the running game, plays, ... or not, which is when they lose.  

 

Also, the fact that he's been in the single worst/easiest division otherwise throughout the Brady era is sheer and utter luck.  Some will point to the 2008 season under Cassel, but they had the easiest schedule in the league that year and despite that, saw the Dolphins (with a second-rate roster offensively under Pennington) edge them for the divvision title.   Many teams that are mediocre do well with the easiest schedule in the league.  That happened to Jauron too in his 13-3 season that the brass at OBD failed to recognize when they hired him back then.  Jauron's may not have been the easiest, but he didn't beat many if any good teams that season.  He beat a bunch of medocre ones.  Obviously more luck since he was 5-11 before that season and 4-12 after it and 22-42 otherwise in four seasons there.  Clearly schedule had a lot to do with it that one season. 

Edited January 9, 2019 by TaskersGhost

[Over 29 years of fanhood]

18 hours ago, jeremy2020 said:

What is the sun burns itself out tomorrow? Do we have a succession plan in place?

 

Youre suggesting something as inane as a little light in the sky is as important as the second tier of the buffalo bills coaching staff?  

 

The stadium HAS lights you know 

[Logic]

 

[C.Biscuit97]

2 hours ago, bills_fan said:

I would just add that Daboll is a Buffalo guy (went to St. Francis HS).  I don't know his personal situation with kids etc., but he may like being in Buffalo and living/coaching in Buffalo.  He may not leave for the first thing that opens up.  If a HC opportunity was a true plum job...sure.  But I could see him being picky and wanting to win a SB with his hometown team as well.

Haha, no one besides Buffalo fans have Daboll as a head coaching candidate. 

1 hour ago, EersN'Bills said:

 

Russell Wilson is a HOF QB?

 

But so did McCarthy, Kubiak and Payton. 

 

The point of the article was "it's dumb to hire defensive coaches because they'll have to re-hire OCs if said OCs are any good enough to get hired" which is a flawed argument.

 

It's all about the QB you draft whether you have success in this league. You just need a good coach who can hire good assistants, motivate his players and strategize better than the other team week to week. Doesn't matter the offensive or defensive background.

I would bet you a ton of money Russell Wilson makes the Hall of Fame.  

[dave mcbride]

6 hours ago, TaskersGhost said:

 

It's interesting tho, doncha think, that Belichick is supposed to be a great defensive mind, but then why have his D's over the past decade ranked 20th or so?  It certainly isn't because he's been in a tough offensive division, he's consistently been in the single easiest division offensively speaking.  

 

He's also never done anything w/o Brady at QB.  On the Pats he was 5-13 with Bledsoe.  It's not as if he recognized Brady's talent either.  While I was lecturing my Pats fan buddy that they would never wing a SB with Bledsoe at the helm (and for the same reason I didn't want him in Buffalo), the only reason why Brady ended up starting was because of the injury to Belichicik's go-to 5-13 QB.  Otherwise it's quite likely that Brady would have ended up elsewhere just like all the other QBs that have come and gone on his watch.  

 

Belichick's had somewhat better than 20th ranked defensive talent, yet, he hasn't done anything with it.  Brady is his own boss and always has been, Belichick has zero track record of developing QBs, none apart from Brady and it's extremely bold to suggest that he made Brady.  

 

I just hope taht Belichick keeps coaching for another decade, if he even makes it that long before the chants of "his days are over," after Brady's time lapses.  IMO Belichick, while good, is hardly as good as everyone says he is.  Brady runs that offense regardless of who the OC is and always puts up numbers even with second-rate cadres of receivers.  

 

IMO Jimmy Johnson was a better coach, as one example.  

 

It's a tough argument to counter.  

 

Belichick is 52-62 with 0 playoff appearances w/o Brady.   

 

With Brady he's 209-61 with Brady and has made the playoffs in 17 of 18 seasons.  

 

Brady was an accident for Belichick.  Not sure how much credit he deserves for that.  If Bledsoe hadn't gotten hurt I don't think that that "accident" even happens.  How good would Belichick have been had it not?  It's rhetorical, but there cannot be an argument that claims Brady as the GOAT, even arguably, without having that impact how "great" Belichick was, particularly given that Belichick's not even taken care of his end, the D, which has been below average in both regular season as well as playoffs while how far the Pats advance is almost always tied to how well Brady, not even the running game, plays, ... or not, which is when they lose.  

 

Also, the fact that he's been in the single worst/easiest division otherwise throughout the Brady era is sheer and utter luck.  Some will point to the 2008 season under Cassel, but they had the easiest schedule in the league that year and despite that, saw the Dolphins (with a second-rate roster offensively under Pennington) edge them for the divvision title.   Many teams that are mediocre do well with the easiest schedule in the league.  That happened to Jauron too in his 13-3 season that the brass at OBD failed to recognize when they hired him back then.  Jauron's may not have been the easiest, but he didn't beat many if any good teams that season.  He beat a bunch of medocre ones.  Obviously more luck since he was 5-11 before that season and 4-12 after it and 22-42 otherwise in four seasons there.  Clearly schedule had a lot to do with it that one season. 

??? - in the past 18 years, they have finished in the top 10 in points allowed 13 times and the top 10 in yards surrendered 7 times.  Christ, they were first in points allowed and 8th in yards allowed a mere 2 years ago! (2016)

Also, with regard to winning percentage and competition level, he is in fact 27-10 in the postseason with the Pats. 

 

He is the greatest coach of all time. There's really no argument to be had about that. And lest we forget, that 1994 Browns team (11-5; 1st in D) was a team on the up and up that got derailed by the Modell-created chaos in Cleveland the next season. And he was one of the greatest DCs of the modern era before all of this. By the numbers, the Giants was utterly dominant when he was the DC there from 1985-1990. 

Edited January 9, 2019 by dave mcbride

[Straight Hucklebuck]

You have to have players. 

 

The Bills would be better if they drafted well. 

 

There are virtually no legacy players that the Bills drafted throughout the Drought other than Kyle Williams and Eric Wood. 

 

Multiple drafts in the Drought yielded nothing - 2005 nothing, 2006 Kyle Williams and nothing else, 2007 (Lynch gone after 3 years), 2008, 2010, 2011 (got Dareus at #3 and maybe Aaron Williams who really only had one good year), 2012 (Gilmore and Glenn are both gone), 2013 (Woods gone), 2014 (Watkins is a bust), 2015 (Darby gone), 2016 (Lawson is a rotational piece), 2017 finally a good player White. 

 

While I think there is value in offensive minded head coaching, I wish these analysts would LOOK at how Playoff games actually play out. The scoring comes down (defense matters) and it really hinges on your QB's ability to make plays. 

 

I think people overrate Coaching to SOME degree and continually undervalue the power of drafting well. 

[Mat68]

What's the answer to All these offenses that make their money off hitting on their scheme beaters?  Creative defensive Co Ordinators who adjust their coverages week to week. McDermott is one of the better defense minds in the sports.  The defense is simple but also multiple.  Of all the hired coaches the one I'm most concerned about and who I think will be the best of the bunch is Kris Richards in Miami.  He is another modern defensive coach who has a simple scheme but is team specific.