- Jun 13, 2014
- 845
- 2,080
Founding Member
He just needs to fire the defensive staff
- Thread starter Swamp Donkey
- Start date
- Jun 9, 2014
- 78,461
- 110,854
Founding Member
Good luck. we play like a Mac team trying to confuse the other team and as if we're always facing superior talent thus need the gimmicky stuff too offset the talent gap.
- Jun 12, 2014
- 16,328
- 14,781
Founding Member
This that has been getting said is the complete opposite of what was said during the Muschamp years... if we just revamped the offensive staff. He did that three times at least at Coordinator, doesn't mean schit if the CEO is the same. At this point we are year 4, this is the team and staff that Mullen wants. Like Butters he is too stubborn to really fire the defensive staff. Mullen while a better Xs and Os guy than the previous two, holds both of the other two's worst quanlities at CEO.
- Dec 31, 2018
- 14,915
- 28,207
- Jun 12, 2014
- 772
- 897
Founding Member
On offense, I would say only Brewster and possibly Billy G. Dan needs to fire the entire staff except those two and, I would not be opposed to Billy G. getting fired. Brewster is the only recruiter on the whole staff and he seems like a solid TE coach...
- Jun 9, 2014
- 78,461
- 110,854
Founding Member
yeah... I probably agree but he is a fuchsing Clown. I will swallow it for now, bc I have to. It is a sad state of affairs though.
Billy G.... cant recruit elite receivers and cant teach route running or wide receivers skills. Apparently good at teaching blocking. Most places dont consider that a WR coach but I guess for us it is good enough.
- Aug 30, 2014
- 1,131
- 3,065
There is not a single elite coach, or recruiter, on either side of the ball on this staff. Period.
And this is not Grantham’s defense. This is year 4. This is Dan’s defense.
And this is not Grantham’s defense. This is year 4. This is Dan’s defense.
- Jun 9, 2014
- 78,461
- 110,854
Founding Member
- Sep 4, 2014
- 21,346
- 79,736
Let's go a step further. While I freely admit I'm no coach and don't always understand the schematic nature of things, can someone please tell me how one guy blitzing instead of another who happens to be the same depth and what appears to be only about 3 yards to the left, somehow makes this exotic or confusing for an opposing QB. I get stunts and having DE's drop into coverage while a DB/S pressures. Those things seem unexpected. But how would the guy on the right blitzing be any less(or more) effective than the the one on the left? The only difference I see is that it puts that LB at a significant disadvantage in coverage. What am I missing?
- Jun 9, 2014
- 78,461
- 110,854
Founding Member
Nothing. You just arent a dumb fat dwag.
Beyond that, as discussed by the analyst, you are bringing this delayed LB blitz into the side youd expect the OL to respond in response to the threatened blitz.
- Jun 9, 2014
- 78,461
- 110,854
Founding Member
Im actually trying to imagine some valid reason to do this.
Maybe they had film studies that suggested wiLLLLLLLLLLie would like run a slant or a crossing route out of that formation down and distance.
But that still doesnt really work because the right ILB coming from that far B gap still cant cover that. Sneaking a safety into the box and rotating the LBs might but not trying to cover it with the right side LB especially coming from out of position from that fake blitz position. Maybe they quick snapped and caught 11 up on the line.
No.... I cant make it make sense. I quit.
Maybe they had film studies that suggested wiLLLLLLLLLLie would like run a slant or a crossing route out of that formation down and distance.
But that still doesnt really work because the right ILB coming from that far B gap still cant cover that. Sneaking a safety into the box and rotating the LBs might but not trying to cover it with the right side LB especially coming from out of position from that fake blitz position. Maybe they quick snapped and caught 11 up on the line.
No.... I cant make it make sense. I quit.
- Sep 4, 2014
- 21,346
- 79,736
So the unexpected element is that we're using one guy who has no chance to make to the QB in time to blitz, while using another who has no chance of getting to the WR in time to cover, and they feel no one in their right mind would do that?
Basically they're thinking there's no way we'd be staying, not hitting, if we didn't have a really good hand. Then we confidently lay down the 2 and 5 we have.
- Oct 15, 2018
- 6,085
- 16,195
- Jun 19, 2014
- 21,482
- 48,118
Founding Member
what you fail to acknowledge in this post, is that while we are in fact doing the opposite of what makes sense, we are doing it with 3*s which is what truly makes Todd... wait for it... Exotic.
- Oct 8, 2017
- 2,169
- 5,581
While I’d hate to pile on the brilliant Todd, it’s even worse because the RB is aligned to and releases to the blitzing backer, further eroding our numbers to that side.
