For the crowd that thinks that the coordinators/coaching staff were the problem...

[DonBlackmon55]

Re: For the crowd that thinks that the coordinators/coaching staff were the problem..

...or at least more of a problem than the talent drop-off, then I would love for you to explain to me in detail how that Vikings are in the NFC Championship game in spite of having Brad Childress as their coach.

1. Brett Favre (hate him but the guy is a gamer and playing smart this year)
2. Leslie Frazier - D Coord. Vikes have had a monster Defense last few years, especially Run D.
3. Talent.....slice it dice it anyways but the Vikes have drafted very well (Peterson, Rice, K Williams, Harvin, EJ Henderson, etc and good trades as well good pickups in Free agency)


Vikes D has playmakers and the D coordinator uses them to their talent. Their achilles heel was QB, and they solved it for the short term.

 

[Kontradiction]

Re: For the crowd that thinks that the coordinators/coaching staff were the problem..

1. Brett Favre (hate him but the guy is a gamer and playing smart this year)
2. Leslie Frazier - D Coord. Vikes have had a monster Defense last few years, especially Run D.
3. Talent.....slice it dice it anyways but the Vikes have drafted very well (Peterson, Rice, K Williams, Harvin, EJ Henderson, etc and good trades as well good pickups in Free agency)


Vikes D has playmakers and the D coordinator uses them to their talent. Their achilles heel was QB, and they solved it for the short term.

My point is that I doubt Leslie Frazier would be as good of a defensive coordinator without all the talent he has on the team. It's actually rather easy to be a defensive coordinator when a four man pass rush consisting of only the D-Line is constantly getting the the quarterback, enabling you to drop everyone else into coverage.

 

[Badluck]

Re: For the crowd that thinks that the coordinators/coaching staff were the problem..

its about 60-40 in favor of the coaches when it comes to "blame" IMO

 

[Kontradiction]

Re: For the crowd that thinks that the coordinators/coaching staff were the problem..

its about 60-40 in favor of the coaches when it comes to "blame" IMO

So you think that the coaching staff didn't use Gary Guyton to the best of his ability on defense? You think that they could have used Jarvis Green more effectively against both the run and the pass? On offense, you think that it's Bill O'Brien's fault that Sam Aiken wasn't used correctly in the passing game? I'm just asking. If you make statements like that, you should probably do a better job of elaborating on them.

 

[eagle eye]

Re: For the crowd that thinks that the coordinators/coaching staff were the problem..

...or at least more of a problem than the talent drop-off, then I would love for you to explain to me in detail how that Vikings are in the NFC Championship game in spite of having Brad Childress as their coach.

So Childress is a bad coach now. Really? Based on what may I ask?

Is it the fact that his teams record has gotten progressively better every season since he took over?
Is it his drafting to this point?
Is it because he got Brett Favre to join the Vikings and have his best regular season statistically?

Why exactly do you say he is a bad coach?
Enlighten me please?

I didn't have a problem with the Patriot coaching this year, we had huge problems on D and it was a lack of adequate players DE/OLB that was the root cause of this.
I didn't have a problem with our offense either, I fully believe that if your D was up to standard we wouldn't be even discussing BoB as we would have been at least no.2 seeds.

 

[alvinnf]

Re: For the crowd that thinks that the coordinators/coaching staff were the problem..

its about 60-40 in favor of the coaches when it comes to "blame" IMO

I think more like 70/30 coaching staff. What that has to do with the Vikings I don't know.

 

[IcyPatriot]

Re: For the crowd that thinks that the coordinators/coaching staff were the problem..

Because I just have to be a douche as many times as possible. No, but seriously (and this isn't directed at you), but I've seen people say more than a few times that our problems this season had more to do with coaching then talent. There are even people that post here (mav... well, in his case, postED here) who believe that talent had absolutely nothing to do with it and it was all coaching. This thread is more or less meant for those people, not the people who can see that there was a problem with both this year, but that a talent lapse was a bigger part of the team's woes (like you).

So you're tossing aside your posts where you banged on Dean Pees?

Is this thread born of guilt or something :confused3:

 

[Deus Irae]

Re: For the crowd that thinks that the coordinators/coaching staff were the problem..

I'm sure Belichick is not worried about appearances. He's more worried about winning.

Appearances have nothing to do with either point I made.

 

[DonBlackmon55]

Re: For the crowd that thinks that the coordinators/coaching staff were the problem..

My point is that I doubt Leslie Frazier would be as good of a defensive coordinator without all the talent he has on the team. It's actually rather easy to be a defensive coordinator when a four man pass rush consisting of only the D-Line is constantly getting the the quarterback, enabling you to drop everyone else into coverage.

Drafting Talent + Coaching + Coaching up the Talent + little bit of Luck = Success

Your assessment can be applied to every team. Teams like Colts, Steelers, Eagles, GB, Pats, Chargers etc have been able to mesh all 3 to varying levels. On the other hand teams like Redskins, Cowboys, Lions have splashed in FA or drafted high for years but still can't get over the hump. So, just b/c teams have talent does not mean they will be sucessful. However, having talent does allow good coaches to put them in position to succeed.

BB had plenty of talent with Cleveland Browns, but he stunk at coaching them up as a HC. Light bulb went on when he got his 2nd shot, though he was lucky too by finding a gem in Brady.

 

[upstater1]

Re: For the crowd that thinks that the coordinators/coaching staff were the problem..

So you think that the coaching staff didn't use Gary Guyton to the best of his ability on defense? You think that they could have used Jarvis Green more effectively against both the run and the pass? On offense, you think that it's Bill O'Brien's fault that Sam Aiken wasn't used correctly in the passing game? I'm just asking. If you make statements like that, you should probably do a better job of elaborating on them.

It's as mix of coaches and players. I mean, look at San Diego. They will go nowhere with Norv.

As for the Patriots, BO'B ran the ball when Maroney was back there and passed it from an empty backfield (of course, what else could he do!!) thereby telegraphing his plays. I think it's a valid criticism to say the offense was predictable. That makes them less effective no matter who you have out there. That being said, it was his first year at the helm and he likely deserves another chance--unless BB just thinks he isn't cut out for it. As for BB, he knows a lot about offense, but it isn't his forte. Weis's offense was the diverse one that he brought over from the Jets, and Weis made a big difference. I bet anything that it's going to be like night and day next year for the KC offense.

I also think that if Belichick were the DC, he would have done a better job with Guyton and Green. Have a look at the guys Belichick coached in 1996, and the plays they made. Maybe he thinks Patricia will do a better job than Pees. It doesn't mean they will suddenly have the best D in the league. Heck, they didn't have a lights out D during the 2 back-to-back Super Bowl wins. They gave up 300+ passing yards and 29 points in 32 minutes to the Panthers.

You need talent, and you need coaching. You need both, and I suspect that a lot of Childress's success (I do agree with you on Childress) is Frazier and the talent of the defense.

When I look at the Patriots' D, I see a lot of pieces there. They need to bring in DE and OLB draftees and free agents, and they'll be fine. You add, say, Dansby and a first round DE to this team, and a later OLB like Eric Norwood, and I would not be surprised at all to see them play better than our past defenses. That's the talent part. And it only takes 2 players to make that difference, but coaching figures into it a lot as well.

 

[Jangles]

Re: For the crowd that thinks that the coordinators/coaching staff were the problem..

Brett Favre runs the Vikings

don't you watch ESPN?

 

[Patspsycho]

Re: For the crowd that thinks that the coordinators/coaching staff were the problem..

His record as a coach has improved along with the talent on the team. Prime example, they went to the playoffs and got knocked out in the first round last year with Tarvaris Jackson in at QB. This year, they got a Pro Bowler and have seen their record improve and have advanced to the championship. Brad Childress is a bad coach. The only reason his team is where they are now is due to talent. Talent overrides coaching, which was my original point. The fact that you have pointed out the Vikings' record in his first year of coaching and how it has gotten steadily better (along with the talent level) further cements my original point.

IMO, I think you have failed to properly understand what that original point was.

My understanding was that you did not have a point, originally, but asked the question of whether a team's success is due to coaching or to talent.

My argument was that in Childress's case it appears to be largely his coaching, because of the steady gain in wins over those four years. That represents a consistency of some sort whereas talent varies wildly from year to year. There's always some change, every year.

 

[upstater1]

Re: For the crowd that thinks that the coordinators/coaching staff were the problem..

Appearances have nothing to do with either point I made.

What was your point again? And can we please lay off the business analogies since clearly I am too dumb to understand your incredible metaphors.

 

[Nikolai]

Re: For the crowd that thinks that the coordinators/coaching staff were the problem..

Superior talent doesn't always trump bad/mediocre coaching. I present the 2005-2009 Cowboys and 2007-2009 Chargers as the examples. The talent on these two clubs would have ensured something more than the 3-6 playoff record for those teams in the last few years, but bad coaching has done them in.

Childress won't be mistaken for Vince Lombardi anytime soon, but he apparently knows how to manage talent. He's not a total wash, nor is he necessarily some sort of genius. He's probably something a little better than mediocre. Does that mean I consider him good? Maybe. There are a lot of things about him I don't like, so it's hard for me to call him good, but he just might be.

Also, I find it hilarious that a lot of the earlier posts consisted of someone asking someone else to do research ("show me this", "get me that", etc.).

 

[emoney_33]

Re: For the crowd that thinks that the coordinators/coaching staff were the problem..

As for the Patriots, BO'B ran the ball when Maroney was back there and passed it from an empty backfield (of course, what else could he do!!) thereby telegraphing his plays.

I'm going to go out on a limb here and say that your eyes are exaggerating a lot.

 

[IcyPatriot]

Re: For the crowd that thinks that the coordinators/coaching staff were the problem..

In the end 31 teams will have problems ... 1 will have perhaps a few problems.

31 offensive coordinators will be predictable.

31 defensive coordinators will not have made the right adjustments.

31 teams need a better running game.

31 teams need a better pass rush.

31 teams need an OLB, OT, DE, RB, OG, DT, CB in the draft.

31 teams need to resign their guys while they sign new guys at the same time.

1 team ... just 1
... will escape endless inane threads about what they need for now ... just for now.

 

[upstater1]

Re: For the crowd that thinks that the coordinators/coaching staff were the problem..

I'm going to go out on a limb here and say that your eyes are exaggerating a lot.

You get the point, no? Err, uh, empty backfield, right? We didn't run the ball from the empty backfield.

Or did we?

Oh, Maroney's in. Must be a running play.

From Mike Reiss's logs, I checked how much Maroney played in the last few games:

Game 15: 5 runs on his 8 plays in the game
Game 14: 23 of 29
Game 13: 22 of 24
Game 12: 15 of 23

65 of 84 plays

In the last 4 games he played, the Patriots gave the ball to Maroney 77% of the time that he was in the game.

Isn't their pass to run ratio something like 55/45? I don't know, I'm asking. I also don't know how unusual it is for a player to get the ball 77% of the time he's in a game, because many 1st and 2nd down guys go out on 3rd down, and obviously teams run more on 1st and 2nd. Something tells me though that 77% is pretty high. Let's ask Ernie Adams because I'm sure he's the only one tracking this stuff.

 

[emoney_33]

Re: For the crowd that thinks that the coordinators/coaching staff were the problem..

You get the point, no? Err, uh, empty backfield, right? We didn't run the ball from the empty backfield.

Sorry I took it to mean we -only- passed from empty backfield, I see where I misinterpreted that now.

Game 15: 5 runs on his 8 plays in the game

Well hey, 1 away form 50%

Game 14: 23 of 29
Game 13: 22 of 24
Game 12: 15 of 23

13 & 14 are really OUCH However, giving the benefit of the doubt to such egregious obvious telegraphs, I gotta think that it's providing data to set up a team down the road. (Obviously we couldn't do that against the Ravens being down 24-0 they aren't respecting the run at that point no matter what).

65 of 84 plays

In the last 4 games he played, the Patriots gave the ball to Maroney 77% of the time that he was in the game.

Isn't their pass to run ratio something like 55/45? I don't know, I'm asking. I also don't know how unusual it is for a player to get the ball 77% of the time he's in a game, because many 1st and 2nd down guys go out on 3rd down, and obviously teams run more on 1st and 2nd. Something tells me though that 77% is pretty high. Let's ask Ernie Adams because I'm sure he's the only one tracking this stuff.

Good points and questions. It was 55/45 this season and 77% is pretty damn high. I'm guessing it wasn't like that all season, and maybe I'm just being naive but I think there just has to be more to it than O'Brien just being oblivious to it.

 

[VJCPatriot]

Re: For the crowd that thinks that the coordinators/coaching staff were the problem..

I should have made it more obvious that I was talking about this year. If anything, the fact that he went 6-10 in his first year as a coach with an undertalented team only puts an exclamation point on my original post/point.

But his team improved each year and is now playing in the NFCCG? IF his coaching was so terrible, wouldn't his team not be doing so well and not be showing signs of improvement each year?

You want to talk about crappy coaching performance with plenty of talent on the roster, just look at what Pete Carroll and Bobby Grier did to the Pats in their tenure. Took a team that went to the Superbowl in 96 and ran it into the ground in a matter of years with a combination of bad coaching and bad drafting.

Maybe you have a personal bone to pick with the Vikings head coach, but I'm honestly puzzled why you are crapping all over him for a 12-4 season and a successful playoff run thus far?

Childress is a good coach - as a Head Coach he's been average and sometimes hilarious in a train wreck sort of way, and a coach whom I can cheerfully despise. His team is in the NFCCG, talent certainly got him there - as we were somewhat painfully reminded of this season - I still cheerfully despise him, but he's not a "bad" coach by definition, just a limp richard at whom we can sneer.

Sorry but he'll never be as BAD as Norv Turner. That man continually blows playoffs games with one of the most talented/stacked teams in the AFC every single season! That is a case of Talent NOT overcoming the Coaching! Can we at least concede that point? The terrible part is that the Chargers are a playoff team each year so they refuse to ditch Turner. It's a vicious cycle! A trainwreck every postseason... but his team went 13-3! LOL.

Oh and this is hilarious... Turner just got a 3 year extension after his team self-imploded vs the Jets! You can NOT make this stuff up... Real life is more bizarre than fantasy.
http://bleacherreport.com/articles/...turner-gets-3-year-extension-with-sd-chargers

You get the point, no? Err, uh, empty backfield, right? We didn't run the ball from the empty backfield.

Or did we?

Oh, Maroney's in. Must be a running play.

From Mike Reiss's logs, I checked how much Maroney played in the last few games:

Game 15: 5 runs on his 8 plays in the game
Game 14: 23 of 29
Game 13: 22 of 24
Game 12: 15 of 23

65 of 84 plays

In the last 4 games he played, the Patriots gave the ball to Maroney 77% of the time that he was in the game.

Isn't their pass to run ratio something like 55/45? I don't know, I'm asking. I also don't know how unusual it is for a player to get the ball 77% of the time he's in a game, because many 1st and 2nd down guys go out on 3rd down, and obviously teams run more on 1st and 2nd. Something tells me though that 77% is pretty high. Let's ask Ernie Adams because I'm sure he's the only one tracking this stuff.

It became pretty damn obvious that if Maroney was in the Pats would run the football. There wasn't even any attempt to disguise it. So much for keeping the defense guessing. Hey guys, Maroney is in, yeah, let's stack the box, here comes the run. In the coaching staff's slight defense, Maroney's pass blocking is terrible so I can see why they don't want to use him in that respect when Faulk does a much better job at it. But still, not even an attempt at pretense?? Can we say "predictable offense?" Because that's what we ran in 2009. Empty backfield = no chance of defense to fear the run, they all primed for the pass. Maroney in = almost zero chance of pass, defense crowds LOS and stuffs him for loss when he dances. Obviously we need better blocking too, but the playcalling was dreadfully obvious and had no hint of disguise or trickery!

 

[NovaScotiaPatsFan]

Re: For the crowd that thinks that the coordinators/coaching staff were the problem..

...or at least more of a problem than the talent drop-off, then I would love for you to explain to me in detail how that Vikings are in the NFC Championship game in spite of having Brad Childress as their coach.

??? The Vikings coach isn't named Brad Childress, his name is Brett Favre.

Anyway, I don't think the Coordinators were the problem, as in we just swap them out and we're cool, but I do think that they were one of the problems.