Will the dual role be too much for McD?

[newcam2012]

On 8/21/2023 at 9:14 AM, Einstein said:

 

I have mentioned this throughout the offseason, but the defense we have witnessed under Frazier for the past several seasons is Sean McDermott's defense.

 

Perhaps it becomes slightly more aggressive, but fans are not going to see the change that many believe is coming.

 

A buddy of mine is  a Panthers fan and told me bluntly not to expect much difference. The defense we had in Buffalo under Frazier is very similar to what they had in Carolina under McDermott.

 

These two pictures say a thousand words. The first is the famous 3rd & 4 from the Bengals game where "Frazier" had our defensive backs play several yards back. The next picture is McDermott's defense from Carolina, in a similar situation, in the redzone, on 3rd and 2. Notice the defense...

 

 

 

 

Agree! Coach McD clearly gave Fraizer his stamp of approval. It certainly was coach McD defense. 

 

However, the little tweeks might be effective. Might be the difference from winning and losing or getting that crucial stop. 

 

Personally, I don't have much faith in McD. I certainly don't see him as a savior or the answer. 

 

Let's see how it plays out. Either way, McD will be front and center. He will get blame or praise based on his performance. Who can bicker about that?

[ToGoGo]

It’s a trade off. Something will be lost as a HC with the time spent as DC. 
 

Will it be enough to negatively affect the season? That’s the real question. 

[dickleyjones]

6 hours ago, PBF81 said:

 

This season will reveal much, including whether or not this unfolds positively.  

 

 

obviously.

 

but there are positives that haven't been discussed much or at all.  i'm interested in discussing those.

 

whether it's net positive we shall see.

[wppete]

He looked a little overwhelmed especially in the Pittsburg game. 

[Andysplaylist]

6 minutes ago, dickleyjones said:

obviously.

 

but there are positives that haven't been discussed much or at all.  i'm interested in discussing those.

 

whether it's net positive we shall see.

I think there could be a positive here - when has McD gotten in trouble as a head coach?

When he is overthinking in big spots, getting too smart for his own good. 13 seconds shell defense a prime example. Conservative offensive play calling in big spots, which I am sure he has a hand in at the end of big games. 

 

If calling defensive plays gets him out of his head and into his gut or even lower regions (going for it on 4th down as much as he can!), this could be a good thing for him and the team in big games. 
 

When this team is aggressive and plays with fire and doesn’t overthink, it’s one of the best in the league. 

[LeGOATski]

7 hours ago, newcam2012 said:

I'm glad he's taking over the defense! He can't hide anymore. He and the fan base can't use Frazier  as the scapegoat. It's put up or shut up time. That's a great thing. 

I bet he wishes he could just coach the team from the safety and comfort of his own basement.

 

That rat-faced coward.

[C.Biscuit97]

I was told that once we lost the DC and MLB of our crappy number 2 defense, everything was going to be fine! 

[Gunsgoodtime]

Come playoff time "The single role" seems to be too much as it is, much less the dual role.

[PBF81]

1 hour ago, dickleyjones said:

obviously.

 

but there are positives that haven't been discussed much or at all.  i'm interested in discussing those.

 

whether it's net positive we shall see.

 

Well, I wouldn't say "obviously" in every instance.  It's amazing how quite often a majority opinion overlooks quite a few things.  I guess I should have clarified a little better, but IMO it's going to be glaringly obvious.  LOL 

 

Without assuming what you're viewing as the 'positives', I'll ask directly, what do you see as "positives" in our MLB situation?  Asking for a friend.   

 

Frankly I'm not sure I see any.  I've been told by some here that the MLB position is going away in the NFL, and not knowing the depth charts of the 31 other teams, I went and looked, and on paper at least, all have either a MLB or ILBs in a 3-4.  So it does not appear to be the case that the position is disappearing.  I also think that that proposition is ridiculous since teams still run the ball, and if the position were to be "going away" in favor of smaller LBs that can cover better than they can play the run, then I'd fully expect teams to run the ball UTM more, which only makes sense at that point.  

 

I've been bringing this up since last season assuming that would not keep Edmunds, which we haven't, and how we'd better get on the stick in terms of planning a replacement after his departure.  That obviously hasn't happened.  

 

 

[dickleyjones]

15 hours ago, PBF81 said:

 

Well, I wouldn't say "obviously" in every instance.  It's amazing how quite often a majority opinion overlooks quite a few things.  I guess I should have clarified a little better, but IMO it's going to be glaringly obvious.  LOL 

 

Without assuming what you're viewing as the 'positives', I'll ask directly, what do you see as "positives" in our MLB situation?  Asking for a friend.   

 

Frankly I'm not sure I see any.  I've been told by some here that the MLB position is going away in the NFL, and not knowing the depth charts of the 31 other teams, I went and looked, and on paper at least, all have either a MLB or ILBs in a 3-4.  So it does not appear to be the case that the position is disappearing.  I also think that that proposition is ridiculous since teams still run the ball, and if the position were to be "going away" in favor of smaller LBs that can cover better than they can play the run, then I'd fully expect teams to run the ball UTM more, which only makes sense at that point.  

 

I've been bringing this up since last season assuming that would not keep Edmunds, which we haven't, and how we'd better get on the stick in terms of planning a replacement after his departure.  That obviously hasn't happened.  

 

 

Oh i see very little positive in the MLB situation, only that given where we are at i'm glad we have a relatively competent defensive mind to help mask that weakness.

 

But this thread is about mcd being dc and hc. I already listed some positives i can think of. Andysplaylist has another thought which is interesting.

 

There must be a reason why some very good head coaches have done the same (or in reid's case hc and oc but you get the idea). They won the superbowl multiple times doing so, if being hc and dc/oc was so full of negatives it likely wouldn't have worked out that way.

 

 

 

 

[DaBillsFanSince1973]

17 hours ago, LeGOATski said:

I bet he wishes he could just coach the team from the safety and comfort of his own basement.

 

That rat-faced coward.

the resident llort obviously didn't get the sarcasm in your post.

 

 

 

[PBF81]

2 hours ago, dickleyjones said:

Oh i see very little positive in the MLB situation, only that given where we are at i'm glad we have a relatively competent defensive mind to help mask that weakness.

 

But this thread is about mcd being dc and hc. I already listed some positives i can think of. Andysplaylist has another thought which is interesting.

 

There must be a reason why some very good head coaches have done the same (or in reid's case hc and oc but you get the idea). They won the superbowl multiple times doing so, if being hc and dc/oc was so full of negatives it likely wouldn't have worked out that way.

 

Andysplaylist's thought is interesting, but here's the issue that I have with it.  If that's true, it's suggesting that distractions will bring out competence, which is a stretch.  LOL  The other part of it is that McD has never come out and taken credit for it.  Quite the opposite in fact, it's been implied, at least as I see it, based on veiled statements and press comments, that it was not his fault.  Either way, we don't really know who made those decisions.  

 

The other thing I have an issue with is comparing McD to Reid, and more specifically when you said "relatively competent defensive mind."   I'd ask for a definition of that before I comment further, but there's been a very inaccurate narrative since McD was hired, that somehow he was ever anything but a very average DC, which the data strongly suggests is the case.  

 

I recently made a post detailing that, I forget which thread I posted it in, but I'm happy to post it again.  It paints the opposite picture, which I've maintained all along.  There was never anything special about Carolina's D, and the talent he had there is comparable to what he's got to work with here, perhaps even a little better there.  I mean when you have Kuechly anchoring your D ...

 

IMO we're headed for a similar very average D ranked season here.  I am expecting the offense to be the best Bills offense ever however, and IMO that's far more important in today's NFL.  If this were the '80s or '90s I'd disagree, but in today's pass-happy offensively skewed league, much better to have a top-ranked O and an average D than the other way around.  

 

 

[schoolhouserock]

I think it is entirely fair to speculate that McD felt he himself was the team’s best option at D coordinator. He had been successful in that roll before and, as a person with a lot of self confidence, that belief is natural.

 

However, I wonder at the possibility that the true nexus for McD’s decision to take on defensive play calling was something a little more base. It is not unusual to miss some of the ‘grunt work’ as one progresses to higher level positions. That ‘grunt work’ can seem more pure, more fun. I wonder if McD feels he has lost a bit of the enjoyment he may have once known in earlier coaching gigs. This may all simply be a bid to recapture a bit of that mojo.

 

The dual role for McD may be too much for him from the team’s perspective, but it could also be just right from his own point of view.
 

From my point of view, it’s a gamble. Even so, I tend to like people that gamble on themselves.