McCarthy and Assistants Speak, Troll Wist

[pbmax]

It was said that Lombardi was such an offensive mind that he would destroy zone defenses. He thought it was so easy that D coordinators damn near would lie to him when running zone because he would get pissed. I guess my point is that I disagree with your statement at its core. Defensive coaches have the best philosophy on running a defense, not offensive coaches.

That is a great point. Because you have designed an offense to abuse zones, doesn't mean it doesn't fit elsewhere. And there is always a team that has the personnel to make the zone work regardless of your offensive design.

Rex Ryan gets into trouble in a different way. He seems game plans and plays that are tough to defend and he tries to adopt that offense or graft the gimmick onto his team. The exact reverse of a sensible construction of an offense.

If McCarthy is setting goals (percentage of big plays allowed, first down rush D) then I have no problem. There used to be an entire Capers playbook floating around on the internet and in the statement of purpose, preventing big plays came right after stopping the run (which was Job 1).

[3irty1]

It was said that Lombardi was such an offensive mind that he would destroy zone defenses. He thought it was so easy that D coordinators damn near would lie to him when running zone because he would get pissed. I guess my point is that I disagree with your statement at its core. Defensive coaches have the best philosophy on running a defense, not offensive coaches.

Seems like you misunderstood me. I'm saying that at the NFL level you've got to have a deep understanding of both sides of the ball because neither exists in a vacuum. I'm also stating that you don't just pick a offensive and defensive philosophy independent of each other because the phases of the game are more coupled than that and I trust McCarthy to be that central planner.

An example might be that I'm head coach of a crappy college team that looks to be the underdog for most of the schedule. I might install a triple option offense because its both a high-variance strategy that provides some big plays as well as a game shortening strategy that eats clock.... giving the better team less chances to demonstrate its superiority and maximizing my chances at an upset. I can install a defense that will aid this strategy too. A bend-but-dont-break defense that forces my opponent to march down the field also shortens the game. Combined with some high-variance stunts in critical situations and I maximize my chances for the ball to bounce my way while reducing the total amount of times I'll need it to bounce my way in order to win. Obviously this is not an NFL example, but I do think there is value in engineering all phases of a team to meet a common strategy rather than treating the offense and defense as two separate football teams.

[bobblehead]

Seems like you misunderstood me. I'm saying that at the NFL level you've got to have a deep understanding of both sides of the ball because neither exists in a vacuum. I'm also stating that you don't just pick a offensive and defensive philosophy independent of each other because the phases of the game are more coupled than that and I trust McCarthy to be that central planner.

An example might be that I'm head coach of a crappy college team that looks to be the underdog for most of the schedule. I might install a triple option offense because its both a high-variance strategy that provides some big plays as well as a game shortening strategy that eats clock.... giving the better team less chances to demonstrate its superiority and maximizing my chances at an upset. I can install a defense that will aid this strategy too. A bend-but-dont-break defense that forces my opponent to march down the field also shortens the game. Combined with some high-variance stunts in critical situations and I maximize my chances for the ball to bounce my way while reducing the total amount of times I'll need it to bounce my way in order to win. Obviously this is not an NFL example, but I do think there is value in engineering all phases of a team to meet a common strategy rather than treating the offense and defense as two separate football teams.

Good points. And if I never mentioned it I love your sig...I being a huge Al Harris fan.

[Zool]

Get your facts right before you try poking me in the eye... the Packers in 2011 set an NFL record for pass defense futility - 299.8 yds/gm. New England was almost as abysmal at 293.9 yds/gm.

The league average was 229.7 yds/gm.

That said, what New England does, or doesn't do, is none of my concern. I don't like their team, their organization, or Belichick.

Someone on this board actually did some leg work and provided statistical proof that Capers plays more 2-4 than any other team in the league. Am I letting the cat out of the bag by saying that our defense has sucked - seriously sucked - the past few years?? Is this news to you??

Welp, you were right. The Packers were a couple yards worse than NE. My point was, that maybe you're wrong about the 2-4 or maybe people considered professionals in their chosen fields are wrong. Bellichick is often considered the best in the business.

The Packers safeties have been ridiculously awful. That falls on many people. Maybe it's partly Capers fault for not changing his style. Maybe it's on Thompson for not getting better safeties. The Packers passing D in 2010 was 4th in the league. Collins goes out that they drop to 32st.

Maybe....just maybe...it's not all on the coaching. Maybe it's a cumulative effect. The problem is none of us (not even you) knows the answer. But that's why were here I guess. To pretend we're super duper football smart.

[mraynrand]

Welp, you were right. The Packers were a couple yards worse than NE. My point was, that maybe you're wrong about the 2-4 or maybe people considered professionals in their chosen fields are wrong. Bellichick is often considered the best in the business.

The Packers safeties have been ridiculously awful. That falls on many people. Maybe it's partly Capers fault for not changing his style. Maybe it's on Thompson for not getting better safeties. The Packers passing D in 2010 was 4th in the league. Collins goes out that they drop to 32st.

Maybe....just maybe...it's not all on the coaching. Maybe it's a cumulative effect. The problem is none of us (not even you) knows the answer. But that's why were here I guess. To pretend we're super duper football smart.

Ha! I think you're both right. Zool, you are right because Collins and Woodson are gone - and there are the injuries of course. Three years ago, Collins, Woodson, Mathews and Raji were a force in the playoffs! This year - ouch. And Wist is right that perhaps Dom can't run his beloved 2-4 without the creatures to run it. The question for Wist is, really - if the 'perfect' scheme were in place, would the injury and personnel depleted defensive roster do any better? And who is to blame? I'm sticking with blaming Apollo - until he kills me with a lightning strike!