NFL Head Coaches who also were their teams defensive play callers:

[nucci]

4 people who have never been in my kitchen

[MJS]

8 minutes ago, RoyBatty is alive said:

Correct, players also bare responsibility.  I agree on McDermott and Beane, Bill fane expectations now are ridiculously high, SB or you are a failure. 

 

Josh Allen gave the Vikings the game last year, almost single handed, his endzone fumble comic and right there ANY shot at MVVP was gone, imo.

 

I would like to know on all the deep throws  were those on  Dorsey of JAs call, or on both?.  Unfortunately, they often were the "correct" risk adjusted calls with the defensive looks we saw.

I think Josh Allen was making the correct reas on many of those deep throws. If he sees one-on-one coverage, he'll let it rip. Normally that's good, but sometimes we needed higher percentage throws in certain situations, or we needed a chain of short throws to free up some of the deeper stuff. Film watchers claim there were plenty of dump offs and underneath routes open for him to take, but he didn't. That has been a problem at times throughout his entire career. Situational he needs to reign himself in and make the smart play, sometimes.

 

I have no idea what is coming from Dorsey and what is his fault. I am sure he is to blame for some of it. All I can point to definitively is the execution on the field. It is easier to identify when a player messes up compared to a coach. Any complaints about the scheme and playcalling are speculative.

 

Dorsey also deserves credit for the offensive success we had last year too. I think his future is promising, honestly. There is no reason to believe he won't continue to adjust and get better, just like Josh Allen did as a QB or any other player or coach does. It was his first year.

 

There were plenty of complaints about Brian Daboll here too. Now, he is revered by Bills fans like they forgot they used to say nasty things about him.

[Chaos]

4 hours ago, Bob Chandler's Hands said:

You couldn't 'find' Belichick? 

Give us a break...

He was a good talent scout, but a 'scrub' GM. Being a keen observer of talent is quite different from managing the roster and draft capital over time, not to mention the communications and 'political' aspect of the GM role. 

 

 

When did Belichek call defensive plays as head coach? 

[PBF81]

2 hours ago, MJS said:

Well, I am a supporter of Sean McDermott. I credit a lot of the success and building of our current team to him. I don't think we can divorce the success of the team and put it all on Josh Allen. McDermott built it all and we are only in the position we are in today because of him and the team he built, including Beane.

 

The team needs to continue to push for a championship, and that ultimately rests on Sean McDermott's shoulders. I understand that failures to get over the hump reside with him as well, but let's not pretend like he wasn't an integral part of getting us where we are today. And let's not pretend like Josh Allen and many of the players on this team have not been a part of the failures too. They all go together. I love Josh Allen, but Dorsey wasn't holding a gun to his head telling him to throw deep so much or throw bad interceptions. Everyone needs to step up.

 

There is plenty of blame and praise to go around. I'm not anywhere close to giving up on this team or the head coach.

 

Well, that's where we more or less part ways on the issue.  While Allen isn't perfect, he's also the all but sole reason for our success, to whatever extent we've had it.  

 

"Allen being Allen" and "Gunslinger Allen" is the reason why we're good.  

 

I'll cite another example.  I think that we can both agree that McD is not as good as Belichick in crafting Defensive scheming.  If not, then this won't make any sense to you, but assuming that you agree .. 

 

I've said for many years that Belichick has only had the success that he's had because of Brady, and I've had to listen to incorrigible Pats fans lecture contrarily.  To their credit, over the last year or two my several ardent Pats fans now agree with me.  

 

It was my position all along that without Brady, Belichick is an about .500 coach otherwise.  That's actually born itself out in 10 seasons that he's coached, five now with the Pats, where he hasn't had Brady.  In those 10 seasons he's made the playoffs twice, is 1-2 in them, and only beat the Bledsoe-led Pats while he was in Cleveland where he had Testeverde.  As you likely know, Bledsoe was a horrific playoff QB.  Either way, in both of his two losses he was obliterated, once by us two seasons ago in the WC Round, the other time following the game vs. the Pats in the D Round.  

 

At the end of the day, after what, nearly 30 years of head-coaching, without Brady, he's been a perfect 25-25.  McD's not even as good as Belichick, no one would reasonably argue otherwise.  

 

I view it no differently for McD except that I'm not even sure he'd be a .500 coach w/o Allen.  I guess the only we'd ever find that out for certain is if he ends up leaving here and coaches elsewhere.  

 

I see very little indication that on game days McD contributes more than the average coach does towards winning.  

 

 

Edited June 20, 2023 by PBF81

[MJS]

22 minutes ago, PBF81 said:

 

Well, that's where we more or less part ways on the issue.  While Allen isn't perfect, he's also the all but sole reason for our success, to whatever extent we've had it.  

 

"Allen being Allen" and "Gunslinger Allen" is the reason why we're good.  

 

I'll cite another example.  I think that we can both agree that McD is not as good as Belichick in crafting Defensive scheming.  If not, then this won't make any sense to you, but assuming that you agree .. 

 

I've said for many years that Belichick has only had the success that he's had because of Brady, and I've had to listen to incorrigible Pats fans lecture contrarily.  To their credit, over the last year or two my several ardent Pats fans now agree with me.  

 

It was my position all along that without Brady, Belichick is an about .500 coach otherwise.  That's actually born itself out in 10 seasons that he's coached, five now with the Pats, where he hasn't had Brady.  In those 10 seasons he's made the playoffs twice, is 1-2 in them, and only beat the Bledsoe-led Pats while he was in Cleveland where he had Testeverde.  As you likely know, Bledsoe was a horrific playoff QB.  Either way, in both of his two losses he was obliterated, once by us two seasons ago in the WC Round, the other time following the game vs. the Pats in the D Round.  

 

At the end of the day, after what, nearly 30 years of head-coaching, without Brady, he's been a perfect 25-25.  McD's not even as good as Belichick, no one would reasonably argue otherwise.  

 

I view it no differently for McD except that I'm not even sure he'd be a .500 coach w/o Allen.  I guess the only we'd ever find that out for certain is if he ends up leaving here and coaches elsewhere.  

 

I see very little indication that on game days McD contributes more than the average coach does towards winning.  

Well, this is a philosophical discussion about who deserves the most credit for winning. Obviously, the QB is a big piece of that. Everyone knows it is the most important position. Behind every great coach there was a great QB, and behind every great QB there was a great coach. It is hard to know where that line is drawn. For you, you lean very hard on the QB, and that has merit. I'm probably not as far as you are, because I still think coaches deserve a lot of credit too.

 

Getting your team to a .500 record is pretty good if you don't have a good QB. McDermott took the Bills to the playoffs his first season without a good QB. You can discount that for whatever reasons you want, but he did it, and he was a big reason why it happened.

 

I think it is clear he is a good coach. Is he a great coach? I don't know. That remains to be seen. To be considered great he would need to win a superbowl. That is what he is lacking. And he has to go through KC, who has a great coach, and a bunch of other good coaches too. That's what is difficult. He has to be better than good to get it done. But I think he can get there. You might not. We'll see who wsd right eventually.

 

He deserves criticism, but not to the level a lot of fans take it, in my opinion.

[John from Riverside]

Wade Phillips was a guy that was dumped by the bills way too soon

 

I wish that would not have happened

[folz]

5 hours ago, PBF81 said:

 

At this point in time, and contrasted with his modern peers that also had QBs of Allen's caliber, McD's closer to those that haven't made it than to the Belichicks and Tomlin's of the world.  That's pretty much indisputable.  I also don't recall Belichick or Tomlin much less some of the others giving away playoff games like McD has either.  Certainly "13 Seconds" ranks up there with the historical worst.  

 

The narrative is that he was some kind of stellar DC in Carolina.  I view him as having been incredibly average.  He also had Keuchly, one of the best MLBs of the modern era and in league history.  

 

Yet, his Scoring defenses ranked 27th, 18th, 2nd 21st, 6th, and 26th and with yardage Ds not ranked much better.  In short, on average patently average.  

 

In his big moments to shine, namely the Super Bowl in the 2015 season, where the Panthers which had allowed an average of 19 PPG that season, lost the Super Bowl to an offense ranked 19th in Scoring (22 PPG) by allowing them to score 24.  Perhaps the most damning element of that is that Denver was led by Peyton Manning at 39, who posted a cataclysmically horrible season throwing for 9 TDs (31st), 17 INTs (31st), and a rating of 67.9. (34th) leaving the Broncos entirely one-dimensional.  

 

Yet, despite allowing an average 19 PPG, McD's Defense allowed 24 points to that team that had averaged 22 PPG.  

 

Now, I'm not saying that this is what we can expect, I'm also not saying that we shouldn't expect "more of the same" as such, but it without any question further fuels the fires surrounding McD's big-game capability and competency.  

 

In the playoffs the year prior, 2014, the Panthers were ousted in the Divisional round also largely fueled by poor defense which allowed 24 points and 348 yards to a team ranked 10th in offense.  Either way, his D definitely did not step it up.  

 

In their only other playoff appearance in the year before that one, 2013, McD's third in Carolina, McD's 2nd ranked Scoring and 2nd ranked Yardage D which had allowed an average of 15 PPG that season, allowed Colin Kaepernick and the Niner's 11th-ranked scoring offense to score 23 for the loss.  

 

Despite what some want to see, there's an extended history by McD of underachievement and choking in the playoffs.  

 

Care to discuss?   

 

And BTW, I didn't cherry-pick anything there, that's McD's history as a DC in Carolina and in every final playoff game of the three seasons that the Panthers made the playoffs.  

 

 

 

You throw a lot things out there with absolutely no context or awareness of what actually happened and why. You just look at point totals and make broad, sweeping judgements that aren't accurate.

 

First of all, no one is comparing McD to Belichick. You really can't compare anyone to Belichick. The only reason that Belichick is in the conversation is that the OP was trying to make a case that any defensive head coach who called their own plays was not successful. They (Belichick, Carroll, and Tomlin) were brought up to show that the premise is incorrect. There have been defensive head coaches who called their own plays who were successful. None were meant to be direct comparisons to McD though.

 

But since you brought up comparisons of contemporary coaches with good QBs: in recent posts, I showed that Sean Payton (who is considered a great coach, albeit offensive rather than defensive) only made one Super Bowl in 14 years with HOF QB Drew Brees. They missed the playoffs 5 times during that run too. And after winning a Super Bowl, Mike Tomlin went 13 years without another appearance with Ben Rothlisberger as his QB. In Tomlin's last 10 years, he has had 4 top 10 defensive finishes (by yards) with a 24th, 21st, and 18th place defensive finish in there too. In the last 6 years, McDermott's defense has 4 top 10 defensive rankings. So, some comparisons might be closer than you think (not quite so indisputable).

 

Secondly, if you think "13 seconds" is one of the worst coaching blunders ever, then all I have to say is you must be very young and/or have not really watched that much football.

 

And as others have pointed out in other threads, yards is a much better stat to judge a DC rather than points, as total points do not account for field position, defensive and special teams points, etc (as you'll see below). But you keep using points only because it fits your argument better.

 

McDermott's defensive rankings by yards in Carolina (2011-2016) were: 28, 10, 2, 10, 6, 21. That is four top ten finishes in 6 years. Even counting the two down years, that equates to a 12.83 average placing.

 

You do also realize that in 2010, the Carolina Panthers were the worst team in the league. So, Sean and Ron Rivera were coming into a total rebuild that first year. The Panthers drafted Cam Newton in the first round and traded away their second round pick. They didn't give the defense much help that first year. Also, Luke Kuechly wasn't drafted until 2012, so McD did not have him the first two years in Carolina. And you could also say that McD helped Kuechly become the player he was, so there's that too. McD's defense also revived Thomas Davis' career (Davis played 15 years and 5 of his 7 best seasons were under McD). What about Josh Norman? He had an All-Pro season under McD's development after being a late 5th round draft pick. As far as player development, you have to give McD some credit (Hyde, Poyer, Milano, Tre, Tauron, Dane, etc.).

 

So, McDermott's two down years in Carolina were his first year, 2011, when he was coming into the worst team in the league at that time. And his last year, 2016.

Let's look at the 2016 Panthers. They were coming off of losing the Super Bowl (SB hangover perhaps?). The team lost both starting CBs (Josh Norman---contract issue, and Charles Tillman---retirement). McDermott had to start two rookie CBs all year. The team also lost Safety Roman Harper, DT Dwan Edwards, and DE Jared Allen. He lost 3/4 of his secondary before the season started and they were not replaced with top-end players. Also, Kuechly missed 6 games that year, Newton missed 4 games, his rookie corners missed 6 games combined, Mario Addison missed 4 games, the O-line was plagued with injuries, etc. That team was decimated by injuries on top of their off-season losses.

 

As to the Super Bowl, you do realize that the #1 Carolina offense committed 4 turnovers and only scored 10 points right? One turnover was a sack-strip fumble by Newton that was returned by Denver for a TD (do those 7 points go against McD's defense?). Another turnover was a second sack-strip fumble that Denver recovered on Carolina's 4-yard line. The Panthers special teams also gave up a 61-yard punt return. So, for 18 of Denver's 24 points, the Broncos offense needed to gain a total of 18 yards. But no, you're right, it was all McDermott's fault, choking in the post season again. Basically, McD's defense gave up 6 points and the Carolina offense and special teams gave up 18 points. Do you see why point total is not the best stat to use when looking at a defense? Also, in the previous game, the NFC Championship, Carolina held Arizona to 15 points.

 

Besides, since 1990, 26 of 34 Super Bowl winning teams scored 24 points or more. In the last 10 years, only 1 Super Bowl winning team was held under 23 points. So, 24 points isn't some massive defensive failure, when going up against playoff/Super Bowl caliber teams,  even if the points had all been on the defense.

 

And guess what, in that 2013 playoff loss, the Panther's offense also only scored 10 points. Newton had two interceptions and the Panthers turned the ball over on downs once.

 

In the 2014 playoffs, the Panthers held Arizona to 16 points in the Wild Card round, then lost to Seattle 31-17. The first three offensive possessions for the Panthers in the first half of that game were a punt, a Newton interception near mid-field, and then a Newton fumble on their own 28-yard line. Carolina's first three possessions of the 2nd half were a punt, punt, Newton interception returned 90 yards for a TD. Hardly seems like you can put that game on the defense either.

 

You always need context when looking at stats. McDermott's time in Carolina was actually very successful, proven by him being a top HC candidate in 2017---because the people who hire head coaches obviously look a lot deeper than points against.

[PBF81]

17 minutes ago, folz said:

 

You throw a lot things out there with absolutely no context or awareness of what actually happened and why. You just look at point totals and make broad, sweeping judgements that aren't accurate.

 

First of all, no one is comparing McD to Belichick. You really can't compare anyone to Belichick. The only reason that Belichick is in the conversation is that the OP was trying to make a case that any defensive head coach who called their own plays was not successful. They (Belichick, Carroll, and Tomlin) were brought up to show that the premise is incorrect. There have been defensive head coaches who called their own plays who were successful. None were meant to be direct comparisons to McD though.

 

But since you brought up comparisons of contemporary coaches with good QBs: in recent posts, I showed that Sean Payton (who is considered a great coach, albeit offensive rather than defensive) only made one Super Bowl in 14 years with HOF QB Drew Brees. They missed the playoffs 5 times during that run too. And after winning a Super Bowl, Mike Tomlin went 13 years without another appearance with Ben Rothlisberger as his QB. In Tomlin's last 10 years, he has had 4 top 10 defensive finishes (by yards) with a 24th, 21st, and 18th place defensive finish in there too. In the last 6 years, McDermott's defense has 4 top 10 defensive rankings. So, some comparisons might be closer than you think (not quite so indisputable).

 

Secondly, if you think "13 seconds" is one of the worst coaching blunders ever, then all I have to say is you must be very young and/or have not really watched that much football.

 

And as others have pointed out in other threads, yards is a much better stat to judge a DC rather than points, as total points do not account for field position, defensive and special teams points, etc (as you'll see below). But you keep using points only because it fits your argument better.

 

McDermott's defensive rankings by yards in Carolina (2011-2016) were: 28, 10, 2, 10, 6, 21. That is four top ten finishes in 6 years. Even counting the two down years, that equates to a 12.83 average placing.

 

You do also realize that in 2010, the Carolina Panthers were the worst team in the league. So, Sean and Ron Rivera were coming into a total rebuild that first year. The Panthers drafted Cam Newton in the first round and traded away their second round pick. They didn't give the defense much help that first year. Also, Luke Kuechly wasn't drafted until 2012, so McD did not have him the first two years in Carolina. And you could also say that McD helped Kuechly become the player he was, so there's that too. McD's defense also revived Thomas Davis' career (Davis played 15 years and 5 of his 7 best seasons were under McD). What about Josh Norman? He had an All-Pro season under McD's development after being a late 5th round draft pick. As far as player development, you have to give McD some credit (Hyde, Poyer, Milano, Tre, Tauron, Dane, etc.).

 

So, McDermott's two down years in Carolina were his first year, 2011, when he was coming into the worst team in the league at that time. And his last year, 2016.

Let's look at the 2016 Panthers. They were coming off of losing the Super Bowl (SB hangover perhaps?). The team lost both starting CBs (Josh Norman---contract issue, and Charles Tillman---retirement). McDermott had to start two rookie CBs all year. The team also lost Safety Roman Harper, DT Dwan Edwards, and DE Jared Allen. He lost 3/4 of his secondary before the season started and they were not replaced with top-end players. Also, Kuechly missed 6 games that year, Newton missed 4 games, his rookie corners missed 6 games combined, Mario Addison missed 4 games, the O-line was plagued with injuries, etc. That team was decimated by injuries on top of their off-season losses.

 

As to the Super Bowl, you do realize that the #1 Carolina offense committed 4 turnovers and only scored 10 points right? One turnover was a sack-strip fumble by Newton that was returned by Denver for a TD (do those 7 points go against McD's defense?). Another turnover was a second sack-strip fumble that Denver recovered on Carolina's 4-yard line. The Panthers special teams also gave up a 61-yard punt return. So, for 18 of Denver's 24 points, the Broncos offense needed to gain a total of 18 yards. But no, you're right, it was all McDermott's fault, choking in the post season again. Basically, McD's defense gave up 6 points and the Carolina offense and special teams gave up 18 points. Do you see why point total is not the best stat to use when looking at a defense? Also, in the previous game, the NFC Championship, Carolina held Arizona to 15 points.

 

Besides, since 1990, 26 of 34 Super Bowl winning teams scored 24 points or more. In the last 10 years, only 1 Super Bowl winning team was held under 23 points. So, 24 points isn't some massive defensive failure, when going up against playoff/Super Bowl caliber teams,  even if the points had all been on the defense.

 

And guess what, in that 2013 playoff loss, the Panther's offense also only scored 10 points. Newton had two interceptions and the Panthers turned the ball over on downs once.

 

In the 2014 playoffs, the Panthers held Arizona to 16 points in the Wild Card round, then lost to Seattle 31-17. The first three offensive possessions for the Panthers in the first half of that game were a punt, a Newton interception near mid-field, and then a Newton fumble on their own 28-yard line. Carolina's first three possessions of the 2nd half were a punt, punt, Newton interception returned 90 yards for a TD. Hardly seems like you can put that game on the defense either.

 

You always need context when looking at stats. McDermott's time in Carolina was actually very successful, proven by him being a top HC candidate in 2017---because the people who hire head coaches obviously look a lot deeper than points against.

 

And naturally the contexts only favor your argument.  

 

 

 

 

[Bob Chandler's Hands]

5 hours ago, Chaos said:

When did Belichek call defensive plays as head coach? 

https://www.nbcsportsboston.com/nfl/new-england-patriots/how-have-the-patriots-fared-with-bill-belichick-calling-defensive-plays/383667/

 

[HardyBoy]

6 hours ago, PBF81 said:

 

Well, that's where we more or less part ways on the issue.  While Allen isn't perfect, he's also the all but sole reason for our success, to whatever extent we've had it.  

 

"Allen being Allen" and "Gunslinger Allen" is the reason why we're good.  

 

I'll cite another example.  I think that we can both agree that McD is not as good as Belichick in crafting Defensive scheming.  If not, then this won't make any sense to you, but assuming that you agree .. 

 

I've said for many years that Belichick has only had the success that he's had because of Brady, and I've had to listen to incorrigible Pats fans lecture contrarily.  To their credit, over the last year or two my several ardent Pats fans now agree with me.  

 

It was my position all along that without Brady, Belichick is an about .500 coach otherwise.  That's actually born itself out in 10 seasons that he's coached, five now with the Pats, where he hasn't had Brady.  In those 10 seasons he's made the playoffs twice, is 1-2 in them, and only beat the Bledsoe-led Pats while he was in Cleveland where he had Testeverde.  As you likely know, Bledsoe was a horrific playoff QB.  Either way, in both of his two losses he was obliterated, once by us two seasons ago in the WC Round, the other time following the game vs. the Pats in the D Round.  

 

At the end of the day, after what, nearly 30 years of head-coaching, without Brady, he's been a perfect 25-25.  McD's not even as good as Belichick, no one would reasonably argue otherwise.  

 

I view it no differently for McD except that I'm not even sure he'd be a .500 coach w/o Allen.  I guess the only we'd ever find that out for certain is if he ends up leaving here and coaches elsewhere.  

 

I see very little indication that on game days McD contributes more than the average coach does towards winning.  

 

 

 

I'm genuinely loving the long posts and deep well thought out back and forth! 

 

That said, first I disagree that giving up no more than 24 points in playoff losses is a huge problem, let alone a problem (potentially).

 

I don't have stats to look at, and I know the league was different 10 years ago, but I think teams play strategically a lot to get and keep a 10 point lead with a chance to be one play from a 17 point lead and that's what they're trying to do.

 

Second, the problem isn't Josh Allen reading defenses wrong when he throws deep, but that he's falling into the trap of doing what the other team is baiting him into doing...it's their only chance of winning...they lose if he hits those deep balls and they lose if he spreads the ball around to the sure gains and moves the chains.

 

You can combine those two points into a third point of how elevated scores aren't necessarily a function of bad defense, but a better team going for high reward low chance plays, missing a few times, the other team scores and now they're playing catchup and the team that's down starts playing to keep that 10 point lead and snag a shot to make it a the score game... that's basically what happened in the Bengals game. The bills seemed to play a good number of defenses that were really good at succeeding in low percentage situations... the bills defense has not been successful compared to the likelihood of success...these aren't one off plays like 13 seconds...third and long is consistently picked up going back years.

 

McD talks about dictating to the offense (I'm so pumped for this defense!)...well Josh Allen allowed other defensive coordinators to dictate to him...not because they didn't think he could hit it, but because him missing was the only real chance they had to upset the Bills. Josh Allen was throwing haymakers to early and exposing the team to big body shots...that's not a knock on Allen, he'll learn...they used Allen's insane recall and processing against him.

 

I do wonder if that's what Diggs got mad...they locked the routes but the receivers knew they had to not run deep to prevent Allen from taking the cheese and they lost a ton of say dynamically in the offense as a result.

 

[Richard Noggin]

17 hours ago, boyst said:

i started to make my mind up quick about mcdermoot. his schtick of waking up early to study MMA at 40something years old and that he held it in high regard he took it seriously beyond a fitness routine was a clown statement. mma is for kids who want to compete or adults whowant something different from fitness. not something you brag about - this is from someone who trains hard in crossfit knowing it's a hilarious joke and the whole schtick of the average stereotype being accurate.

 

fair or not i make my mind up pretty quick or not and to me mcdermoot has always been a clown.

i don't believe you are old enough to make this statement. i would bet money that you're mid 30's at most and/or did not realize what byrd was doing.

 

in getting his interceptions and playing in his prime/best window he was not sacrificing his coverage or scheme to get the ball. he was a genuine ballhawk and broke at the absolute critical time to make the play. it was one of the most amazing levels of play a safety can have, even if a brief window. byrd had one of the best 1 or 2 seasons of any Bill in the last 30 years - matched by Allens 2020 season (maybe it was 21, i forgot), and jacksons all heart season, and thomas's collective few seasons, and bruce smiths won't quit season, and just a few others.

 

You're self-identifying as a rash, emotional decision maker in the first two paragraphs, so I should probably not laugh so hard at the bolded portion. I appreciate your candor. Truly. But...Jairus Byrd, who I REALLY liked at the time, had one of the flukiest/luckiest seasons as a rookie that he predictably never reproduced. Your take on him is REALLY misguided. His stats are crazy in 2009 (and decent in 2012). That's it.

 

His actual on-field impact was similar to Kiko Alonzo's unlikely, and also unreproducible, early turnover fortune. Flashy, but fleeting. Byrd was probably a better/smarter player than Alonzo, but marginal athleticism and contractual injuries capped his career beyond that rookie season. 

[Doc Brown]

5 hours ago, PBF81 said:

 

And naturally the contexts only favor your argument.  

 

 

 

 

At least he provides some.

[PBF81]

7 hours ago, Doc Brown said:

At least he provides some.

 

While whistling as he steps over the trend & pattern of the straight facts.  

 

Sure.  

 

 

[PBF81]

13 hours ago, HardyBoy said:

That said, first I disagree that giving up no more than 24 points in playoff losses is a huge problem, let alone a problem (potentially).  

 

Presumably you're referring to the Indy WC round game in the 2020 playoffs.  It isn't in and of itself, but when you have a D that allowed a 10th ranked offense to log more yards, more 1st-Downs, their 3rd-most Rushing & 3rd-most Passing yards than they had all season, while allowing well over 5 YPC, and in the case of the 3rd's, only worse against a 1-15 team and both teams having bottom ranked Defenses, it's hardly a feather in the cap of coaching, especially when you barely win and the game goes down to the wire.  There's no way to spin that other than to say that it was a significant underachievement defensively speaking.  

 

For us, we allowed the 2nd most yards that we did all season and 4th most 1st-Downs on defense too.  Indy's offense was good, it wasn't that good.  IMO Reich gets a lot of credit for that, more than McD.  Then Philip Rivers in his last game in the league at 39.  Hardly impressive.  

 

I wouldn't use that game as a strong example in support of coaching.  Why would anyone use such an underachieving game as evidence of great coaching?  That makes no sense.  Our offense in that game was good, but it was a very average offensive outing for us on the season.  So the coaching didn't step up there either.  

 

Otherwise, it would depend upon the team and circumstances.  Giving up 24 to a team that averaged less than that, particularly using a starting QB that wasn't on the field when you played them, would seem to likewise indicate defensive underachievement.  No?  I mean what would have happened had Tua played in that playoff game last season, do you think we still would have won?  To me it's doubtful and if it were the case, the narrative and ensuing discussions would have been a lot different now.  

 

We allowed 31 points, at home, to a team that didn't average within a TD (7 points) of that during the regular season with their starter at QB, but allowed 31 at home in the playoffs, to a QB whose only other NFL start, at home in Miami, led to three straight drives averaging 25 ypd, all resulting in punts, against the Vikings, who had the 28th Scoring Defense and 31st Yardage Defense, ... before getting yanked in favor of Bridgewater.  (Ouch!)  Our big-bad 2nd-ranked Scoring and 6th-ranked Yardage Defense shouldn't have allowed more than 20 if even that under those circumstances.  That's hardly a good game to cite in defense of McD, a defensively-oriented coach, being good.  

 

 

13 hours ago, HardyBoy said:

I don't have stats to look at, and I know the league was different 10 years ago, but I think teams play strategically a lot to get and keep a 10 point lead with a chance to be one play from a 17 point lead and that's what they're trying to do.

 

Second, the problem isn't Josh Allen reading defenses wrong when he throws deep, but that he's falling into the trap of doing what the other team is baiting him into doing...it's their only chance of winning...they lose if he hits those deep balls and they lose if he spreads the ball around to the sure gains and moves the chains.

 

You can combine those two points into a third point of how elevated scores aren't necessarily a function of bad defense, but a better team going for high reward low chance plays, missing a few times, the other team scores and now they're playing catchup and the team that's down starts playing to keep that 10 point lead and snag a shot to make it a the score game... that's basically what happened in the Bengals game. The bills seemed to play a good number of defenses that were really good at succeeding in low percentage situations... the bills defense has not been successful compared to the likelihood of success...these aren't one off plays like 13 seconds...third and long is consistently picked up going back years.

 

McD talks about dictating to the offense (I'm so pumped for this defense!)...well Josh Allen allowed other defensive coordinators to dictate to him...not because they didn't think he could hit it, but because him missing was the only real chance they had to upset the Bills. Josh Allen was throwing haymakers to early and exposing the team to big body shots...that's not a knock on Allen, he'll learn...they used Allen's insane recall and processing against him.

 

I do wonder if that's what Diggs got mad...they locked the routes but the receivers knew they had to not run deep to prevent Allen from taking the cheese and they lost a ton of say dynamically in the offense as a result.

 

 

You said some interesting things there and made some good points.  Some of it is nits though and we can pick those apart forever down to the cleats and the playing surface.  (largely joking, but to the point)  

 

In addressing the bolded part of your post, wouldn't that seem to be incumbent upon coaching to figure out?  It seems as if that's your implication, just reinforcing it.  That's what coaches get paid to do, figure out what the opponent does best, and craft a game-plan around them being able to do that.  We haven't seen that yet in any even remotely sustained manner by McD.  Just sayin'.  

 

McD talks about a lot of things.   To date I challenge anyone to actually define what this elusive "Process" is.  It's a mystery.  LOL  

 

We'll see what happens this season, but the excuses seem to be wearing thin amongst both fans and media alike.  We cannot every season say, "he finally has the pieces in place," then after the season talk about all the holes.  LOL  But that's what's been happening.  

 

I see some holes this season too, not least concerning that of MLB/ILB.  AJ Klein ain't gonna cut it.  I'll be suprised if he even makes the team.  Will the rookie Williams?  Bernard?  

 

In the meantime, GO BILLS!!!  

 

The season approaches, let's hope for the best!  No sense in wallowing in the past right now.  It's far too late to make any major changes in pretty much anything  

 

 

Edited June 21, 2023 by PBF81

[HardyBoy]

1 hour ago, PBF81 said:

 

Presumably you're referring to the Indy WC round game in the 2020 playoffs.  It isn't in and of itself, but when you have a D that allowed a 10th ranked offense to log more yards, more 1st-Downs, their 3rd-most Rushing & 3rd-most Passing yards than they had all season, while allowing well over 5 YPC, and in the case of the 3rd's, only worse against a 1-15 team and both teams having bottom ranked Defenses, it's hardly a feather in the cap of coaching, especially when you barely win and the game goes down to the wire.  There's no way to spin that other than to say that it was a significant underachievement defensively speaking.  

 

For us, we allowed the 2nd most yards that we did all season and 4th most 1st-Downs on defense too.  Indy's offense was good, it wasn't that good.  IMO Reich gets a lot of credit for that, more than McD.  Then Philip Rivers in his last game in the league at 39.  Hardly impressive.  

 

I wouldn't use that game as a strong example in support of coaching.  Why would anyone use such an underachieving game as evidence of great coaching?  That makes no sense.  Our offense in that game was good, but it was a very average offensive outing for us on the season.  So the coaching didn't step up there either.  

 

Otherwise, it would depend upon the team and circumstances.  Giving up 24 to a team that averaged less than that, particularly using a starting QB that wasn't on the field when you played them, would seem to likewise indicate defensive underachievement.  No?  I mean what would have happened had Tua played in that playoff game last season, do you think we still would have won?  To me it's doubtful and if it were the case, the narrative and ensuing discussions would have been a lot different now.  

 

We allowed 31 points, at home, to a team that didn't average within a TD (7 points) of that during the regular season with their starter at QB, but allowed 31 at home in the playoffs, to a QB whose only other NFL start, at home in Miami, led to three straight drives averaging 25 ypd, all resulting in punts, against the Vikings, who had the 28th Scoring Defense and 31st Yardage Defense, ... before getting yanked in favor of Bridgewater.  (Ouch!)  Our big-bad 2nd-ranked Scoring and 6th-ranked Yardage Defense shouldn't have allowed more than 20 if even that under those circumstances.  That's hardly a good game to cite in defense of McD, a defensively-oriented coach, being good.  

 

 

 

You said some interesting things there and made some good points.  Some of it is nits though and we can pick those apart forever down to the cleats and the playing surface.  (largely joking, but to the point)  

 

In addressing the bolded part of your post, wouldn't that seem to be incumbent upon coaching to figure out?  It seems as if that's your implication, just reinforcing it.  That's what coaches get paid to do, figure out what the opponent does best, and craft a game-plan around them being able to do that.  We haven't seen that yet in any even remotely sustained manner by McD.  Just sayin'.  

 

McD talks about a lot of things.   To date I challenge anyone to actually define what this elusive "Process" is.  It's a mystery.  LOL  

 

We'll see what happens this season, but the excuses seem to be wearing thin amongst both fans and media alike.  We cannot every season say, "he finally has the pieces in place," then after the season talk about all the holes.  LOL  But that's what's been happening.  

 

I see some holes this season too, not least concerning that of MLB/ILB.  AJ Klein ain't gonna cut it.  I'll be suprised if he even makes the team.  Will the rookie Williams?  Bernard?  

 

In the meantime, GO BILLS!!!  

 

The season approaches, let's hope for the best!  No sense in wallowing in the past right now.  It's far too late to make any major changes in pretty much anything  

 

 

 

I was talking about McDs Carolina teams which you had referenced.

 

Yes, I am more so reinforcing what I think had been happening and I think McD evaluated and identified the issue and is going to be adjusting this year as a result. When Alexander was here they actually did used to dictate and disguise where pressure came from. I don't think Klein will be in the running for a middle linebacker spot. I think they brought him back for MLB insurance, but more that Lorenzo Alexander role and teaching the young lbs how to be pros.

 

I think Klein (if he makes the team) would be an on ball linebacker dropping into coverage he's actually good at (I'm sure there are spots on the field he can actually defend like the flat...and him and Rapp will have some type of rotation.

[PBF81]

17 minutes ago, HardyBoy said:

Yes, I am more so reinforcing what I think had been happening and I think McD evaluated and identified the issue and is going to be adjusting this year as a result. When Alexander was here they actually did used to dictate and disguise where pressure came from. I don't think Klein will be in the running for a middle linebacker spot. I think they brought him back for MLB insurance, but more that Lorenzo Alexander role and teaching the young lbs how to be pros.

 

I think Klein (if he makes the team) would be an on ball linebacker dropping into coverage he's actually good at (I'm sure there are spots on the field he can actually defend like the flat...and him and Rapp will have some type of rotation.

 

Well, we're what, a little over two months away from starting to find out.  

 

I'm incredibly concerned about the coaching staff this season.  Not one of the top guys, McD himself, Dorsey Washington, Shula, or Holcomb have any significant accolades that spawn inspiration in that way other than that they've coached with or under McD.    

 

 

[Chaos]

17 hours ago, Bob Chandler's Hands said:

https://www.nbcsportsboston.com/nfl/new-england-patriots/how-have-the-patriots-fared-with-bill-belichick-calling-defensive-plays/383667/

 

Greatest of coach of all time did ok, in the rare few times he called the plays. His teams managed to win super bowls with other DCs too.  

[RoyBatty is alive]

4 minutes ago, Chaos said:

Greatest of coach of all time did ok, in the rare few times he called the plays. His teams managed to win super bowls with other DCs too.  

Why are you here Chaos? Seriuosly?

 

Do you think have Brady on a hometown discount for two decades had anything to do with the genius of Bliichek?

[Chaos]

Just now, RoyBatty is alive said:

Why are you here Chaos? Seriuosly?

 

Do you think have Brady on a hometown discount for two decades had anything to do with the genius of Bliichek?

What is your point? That Bellichek is not considered the greatest coach of all time? or something else? 

[RoyBatty is alive]

Just now, Chaos said:

What is your point? That Bellichek is not considered the greatest coach of all time? or something else? 

Expose another sophomoric attempt at a veiled dump on McDermott thread, that is your point/your thread.

 

i think we got it.