Tampa fires Jim Bates

[Fritz]

They didn't call him V-Bob for nuthin'.

[Lurker64]

We should bring him in for a look, kick the tires, see if there is still gas in the tank, though he is getting long in the tooth.

Coordinators are rarely fired midseason. Bates now has been demoted midseason at one team, resigned, and then fired midseason at his next.

Bates' scheme is a relic from a bygone era, that he didn't even invent (just felt dirty running the Dallas Cowboys dynasty defensive scheme, Jimmy Johnson's invention). The Manning rules rendered Bates' scheme obsolete. At its core it needed shutdown corners, the Manning rules made the concept of a shutdown corner a thing of the past.

The only time that style defense got on it's back legs and howled is when the Dolphins had the brilliant Patrick Surtain and Sam Madison at the corners, Zach Thomas at Mike and Jason Taylor at RDE. It just about takes that level of talent to fuel that D.

I've been noticing this a little bit in my research of NFL defensive strategies through the ages, and it seems like there are a whole lot of defenses that are successful because they're used by teams who have exceptional talents to make it work, and are significantly less successful when implemented with less talent, and gradually go away when you lose the players who made it successful in the first place.

I mean, the Tampa 2 is on its way out because the LBs you need to make it work (guys like Brian Urlacher and Derrick Brooks); guys who hit like LBs but run like DBs are significantly harder to come by than the TEs who can attack the seam. Also, the system's priority on fast DBs who can tackle like LBs and reliance on a front four that can get pressure by itself means that we're unlikely to see a resurgence.

The 46 defense is a historical curiosity which I swear really only worked because the 1980s Bears had some of the best defensive front 7s available in football.

The Bates defense appears obsolete, in part because of the Manning rules, and in part because the economics have changed and keeping two CBs of the magnitude you need to really make it work is difficult and prohibitively expensive.

[Fritz]

I think if you have the level of talent on the front 7 that the Bears did and the Giants did back in the LT days you can run any defense you want, or no organized defense at all, and you'd be okay.

[Tyrone Bigguns]

I think if you have the level of talent on the front 7 that the Bears did and the Giants did back in the LT days you can run any defense you want, or no organized defense at all, and you'd be okay.

QFT

[Waldo]

The 46 defense is a historical curiosity which I swear really only worked because the 1980s Bears had some of the best defensive front 7s available in football.

Interestingly though, as a base it is dead, as a sub package it is still alive.

Rex Ryan and Jeff Fisher use a pure form of it here and there. Lebeau uses a variant, the guys are in the same place, but it is done with the nickel defense, the Will replaced by the SS. It works quite well, for the application, a better alignment when a run is a good possibility, and the TE is on the field, yet you still want the pass rushers and good cover guys out there. I think that I've seen Capers run a play of it, vs. Cleveland I believe.

[SnakeLH2006]

Bates was pretty good here, but either way, I'd rather have Caper's fresh 3-4 LB-heavy scheme any day. As long as Capers comes back (pending McFatty's status possibly) this 3-4 scheme only gets better in 2010. Even rookie Brad Jones made some nice hustle plays last week on D....Those LB's are deep/DL is not deep....not a good fit for Bates. But it would be nice to see him run the Defensive Line as a DL coach, perhaps.