I don't understand he's a good coach, but there's a defensive problem that he doesn't have much to do with? what does a head coach do, then? there's offense, defense and special teams...when 1 of those is record books bad (haven't looked it up, but have to assume their current run defense, if continued, would go down as one of the worst of all time, with their overall defense being equally bad), that's a problem...and the coach has at least something to do with it. Kubiak should be on as thin of ice as possible. Ultimately, you have to have great players to win. Nonetheless, when it comes to things you can evaluate coaches on - gameplanning, changes at half-time, challenge decisions, clock management, etc., etc. he started at inexperienced, in some cases grew to bad, and in the best of cases never got much better than average. His demeanor has worn so thin it's amazing even he hasn't changed it. At some point wouldn't you, as a person, try a different approach in that regards? Kubiak is an average coach. Nothing he's done so far has convinced me that even if he had some of the best players in the league that he'd be able to lead a team to a Superbowl. We're struggling here to get past 8-8 with too many lackluster performances - even if we get to the playoffs is anyone even remotely confident that Gary would be able to outgameplan and outcoach the opposition??
Parsing things out: Coaching (in general) is not perfect. Coaching (defense) is not terrific, but better than last year(s) The personnel up front and in the secondary is so bad that we're forced into overplaying certain aspects and leaving ourselves vulnerable otherwise. Richard Smith (D Coach) was a Lineman guy that had no grasp of secondary play whatsoever. He refused to deviate from a man coverage scheme, and allowed certain hapless CBs (Faggins, for one) to be burned all game long rather than adjust (see our most recent home games against the Eagles and Bills). He got more from the front 4 on rushing downs, and part of that may have been Travis Johnson's ability to take up space. On passing (or running) downs, he was religiously against blitzing. Bush recognizes the inability of our D-line to push the line backwards. He routinely has the D-line spread out and sends the LBs in to bust the gaps. With Rick Smith, you saw Ryans play sideline to sideline to stop guys after 5+ yd gains. With Bush, we're seeing mob tackles close to the line of scrimmage. Rick Smith allowed teams to waltz up and down the field and many times get away with only a FG result. Bush has largely addressed runs, but severe weak links at CB and safety give way to big play TDs on the occasion that the opposing offense breaks past the front 7. Minus the stupid play where Bennett and Busing sucked in too far and gve up the 60 yd TD, Bush's scheme held MJD to under 3 yds a carry, and no carries over 4 yd until the game slipped away. If you were to use Bush's scheme and insert a hard hitting free roaming safety and a CB that belongs in the NFL, you would have a decent defense. If you inserted those players and stayed with Richard Smith's gameplan, you'd still stink. Bush isn't perfect, but he's disguising a god awful front line like a magician. But it's like basketball - you can play riskier defense when you've got an elite C guarding the basket. If you have a donut team, you're constantly in danger of giving up alley oops. Evan
Same here, well I think he's a better coach than Norv Turner whoever made that call must have been on something good, please pass. Could it have been a different Schottenheimer? Possibly.....
What you're saying is the team doesn't have an elite C guarding the basket yet is playing like it does nonetheless... Frankly, that's stupid (not what you're saying, but that they're playing that way when they don't have the personnel to do so).
this is what has me concerned. and i'm torn trying to figure out who's ultimately responsible. i definitely think we have a group of players unsure of how to take the next step and that a coach should be held accountable for getting them over that hump. at the same time, the players seem to be all talk, no action. i'm growing weary of their soundbites. quotes like this: they've been talking like this for 2 years now. they *all* do it; its tiresome. they seem to have a grasp of the situation from a 1,000-yard perspective (which means the coaches' message is getting thru), they just don't seem to put it into practice. ever. that, i think, is on the players. i don't know. the late 80s/early 90s oilers were always talking, too. they never backed it up, either.
Tony Dungy would be the best bet, if he can be gotten. He would not tear apart what works, namely the offense, and he would fix the defense but I hope we would be better against the run than Indy was/is. I also think he would bring an instant level of respect in the locker room without being a blow hard.
what do you want them to say, Ric?<ul><li>Yes, I suck.</li><li>Well, those other guys get paychecks, too.</li><li>Our coach is a moron. I can't play for that guy.</li><li>Look, I did my job. Fred Bennett sucks. This team will be better when we finally cut that joker.</li></ul>
less. stop talking about what you *need* to do and start doing it. then you can talk about what you've *done*.
Isn't a lot of that a function of media saturation? I'm sure they'd all like to say less. I'm sure they'd like it very much. What do you do when part of your job is to have a mic in your face after your performance? "No comment, man. I'm just too pissed."
It's not like they are volunteering this information. They are being asked questions. Should they just stay silent?
Dungy is intriguing. Can his Tampa-2 work here. Say what ya will . . .the guy CAN COACH DEFENSE [Remember he was the Defensive Coordinator on a 15-1 Minnesota Vikings team] and He can Build a Team [I dunno his role in player selection but he made them get a winning mentality] the Bucs were Craptastic before him and are considered WINNERs and in the thick of things ever since. Mario Williams = Warren Sap? [He maybe more athletic than Warren was] Dunte = Ronde Barber? [Dunte maybe a bigger hitter] His offenses were a bit vanilla - but with those defenses he did not need much. Rocket River Very intriguing choice I had no thought of . . . Kubes should still get the whole year. . .and if he does well . .the next one
I agree with Ric here. I can remember countless cases of so and so being interviewed and just not answering, or flipping out, or saying something that isn't completely 100% "cookie-cutter". The troubling part isn't just that it's cookie-cutter, but it seems to be the message that Kubiak wants them to get. The whole "your teammates are your only family, let's work together, get better day by day, take responsibility for your actions" blah blah blah mentality. It's fine when your team is great, but when they actually suck, and the mentality hasn't changed in 4 years, man does it grow tiring. I don't doubt that these players want to win. I don't doubt that they think they're trying their hardest, that they're getting pumped up for games, etc. But I do doubt that that is what is actually happening. I don't think they're trying their hardest because I don't even think they know how to. The thread starter obviously was just reacting to frustration, but it doesn't take a rocket scientist to see that this team is lackluster...maybe they need more of a JVG back there then a Rick Adelman. I don't know. Still, I contend that even if the team does "turn it around" and make the playoffs, there is no way you go into a playoff game with this coaching staff with any kind of confidence. I just can't right now see them outcoaching an opposing staff.
Maybe so... but we've never seen what this coaching staff can do with actual talent that could even qualify for a playoff game. Seriously--after watching the first three games, does anyone expect, barring significant personnel adjustments in the defense, that this team will even *sniff* coming close to the playoffs? 'Cause I don't.
remember after the buffalo game when dishman said: (paraphrased) we all suck. this is on the whole organization from the top down. those early 90 Oilers were pretty good...i'd love to have 11-5 and 13-3 seasons mixed in for the guys in steel blue and battle red. this talk reminds me more of the Francis-era Rockets. constantly saying the right things about what needs to change...identifying it definitively in the locker room...but never being able to execute it on the court.
Agreed, excepting I guess the point I was trying to make was that this coaching staff doesn't seem to get the most out of what it does have. I'd agree it doesn't have what it needs to be competitive, but I'm just saying I wouldn't be very confident in them (the coaches) even if they did have those players.
