Who should replace Arians? [Merge]

[Gavin]

not sure why everyone is mentioning clyde. has a team ever demoted a coach then promoted the same coach one year later? doesn't seem very realistic to me.

The same team would not be doing that, Pagano and Grigson may favor Clyde more then Caldwell or Dungy and Polian, different GM and HC different thought process

[GoColts8818]

I still wouldn't be shocked if they don't promote Christensen. 

 

Whisenhunt would probably be my first choice though if BA leaves.  He ran the Steelers offense before BA took over and I think him and Christensen would be able to keep the offense close to what it has been under BA.  However it sounds like teams are interested in him for a Head Coaching job. 

 

Mike Miller the out going Cardinals OC might be a dark horse as well for the same reason. 

[BOTT]

The same team would not be doing that, Pagano and Grigson may favor Clyde more then Caldwell or Dungy and Polian, different GM and HC different thought process

it was under the new regime that he was demoted. he was oc when they arrived and they made him qb coach.

[Superman]

it was under the new regime that he was demoted. he was oc when they arrived and they made him qb coach.

 

He was Dungy's coordinator at Tampa during their last two seasons there. 

 

That may or may not be relevant, just pointing it out.

[Gavin]

I'd contact David Shaw, Stanford HC and see if he can be lured away from there to be our OC if Arians leaves, he has had some success in the NFL before

[Superman]

I'd contact David Shaw, Stanford HC and see if he can be lured away from there to be OC for coach, he has had some success in the NFL before

 

He just signed an extension at Stanford; it's reportedly a "long term" extension, and the ink is hardly dry on that thing. Not that that means he can't leave, but it's unlikely, especially to be a coordinator. If he leaves Stanford, I'm sure it will be for a head coaching gig.

 

http://espn.go.com/college-football/story/_/id/8762464/david-shaw-stanford-cardinal-agree-long-term-extension

[GoColts8818]

I'd contact David Shaw, Stanford HC and see if he can be lured away from there to be our OC if Arians leaves, he has had some success in the NFL before

I really doubt he would leave a HC job at a major college program for an OC job in the NFL.  Guys like that just wait for a HC job at the NFL level to come along normally before he leaves.  If you are the HC at say Ball State and a NFL team comes calling for a OC job then maybe but when you are a HC of a top 10 college football program you are probably in a better spot to stay where you are.

[Jason_]

Please not Greg Knapp. Oakland fans really hate him.

 

Steelers fans wanted Arians gone too.  Honestly, considering the coaches he's worked with in the past (George Seiffert, Mike Shanahan, Marc Trestman, Gary Kubiak), I think Greg Knapp would be towards the top of my wish list. 

[Dan]

Steelers fans wanted Arians gone too.  Honestly, considering the coaches he's worked with in the past (George Seiffert, Mike Shanahan, Marc Trestman, Gary Kubiak), I think Greg Knapp would be towards the top of my wish list. 

 

And now a lot of Colts fans want Arians gone - but at least Arians has a track record of success. 

 

Some comments from my Raiders people include that he keeps calling the same play over and over because "it has to work at some point". He refuses to run a blocking scheme that helps their best player (McFadden) because he seems to think McFadden should learn to adapt rather than just to play to what helps him. He believes that every now and then, a bomb downfield into triple coverage is okay because then he has something to show when people call him too conservative. On the games where McFadden is playing as well as we know he can, he neglects to give him the ball, instead opting for the play action every other play. He very rarely calls plays that make the distance on third down, preferring dump off catch and run plays. The only time they get decent offensive plays is when Palmer uses up the whole playclock calling audibles. 

 

But nah, he worked under some good coaches for a while so it's all good. When a collection of Oakland fans all agree he's the worst OC they've ever seen, you know he's got pedigree. 

[Gavin]

And now a lot of Colts fans want Arians gone - but at least Arians has a track record of success. 

 

Some comments from my Raiders people include that he keeps calling the same play over and over because "it has to work at some point". He refuses to run a blocking scheme that helps their best player (McFadden) because he seems to think McFadden should learn to adapt rather than just to play to what helps him. He believes that every now and then, a bomb downfield into triple coverage is okay because then he has something to show when people call him too conservative. On the games where McFadden is playing as well as we know he can, he neglects to give him the ball, instead opting for the play action every other play. He very rarely calls plays that make the distance on third down, preferring dump off catch and run plays. The only time they get decent offensive plays is when Palmer uses up the whole playclock calling audibles. 

 

But nah, he worked under some good coaches for a while so it's all good. When a collection of Oakland fans all agree he's the worst OC they've ever seen, you know he's got pedigree. 

He has that O Line in a Zone Blocking scheme, most seem to think Mcfadden fits a Man Blocking scheme and the numbers back that up the Mcfadde put up in the past, Personally I think Arians would fit better over in Oak because Arians has vertical passing game and  Man Blocking scheme

[southwest1]

josh mcdaniels

I know he would never leave the security of Foxboro, Brady, & Belichick, but I have always respected the no holes barred/ go for the jugular approach McDaniels even had as HC in Denver. He is not afraid to take risks especially on 1st down & I love that...Score first & draw 1st blood...Yes, I know not a realistic pick. 

[FightLikeSin]

I think Norv Turner would be a good fit. Whoever it is, they need to fit our "rebuild/draft" model. We drafted with a certain outlook on how the offense was going to be ran. 

 

Someone that sticks with the 2 tight end sets will be a wise choice with how Allen and Fleener are looking.

[Jason_]

And now a lot of Colts fans want Arians gone - but at least Arians has a track record of success. 

 

Some comments from my Raiders people include that he keeps calling the same play over and over because "it has to work at some point". He refuses to run a blocking scheme that helps their best player (McFadden) because he seems to think McFadden should learn to adapt rather than just to play to what helps him. He believes that every now and then, a bomb downfield into triple coverage is okay because then he has something to show when people call him too conservative. On the games where McFadden is playing as well as we know he can, he neglects to give him the ball, instead opting for the play action every other play. He very rarely calls plays that make the distance on third down, preferring dump off catch and run plays. The only time they get decent offensive plays is when Palmer uses up the whole playclock calling audibles. 

 

But nah, he worked under some good coaches for a while so it's all good. When a collection of Oakland fans all agree he's the worst OC they've ever seen, you know he's got pedigree. 

 

Well, up until the bolded section I was actually appreciating your post.  However I will again say that I could care less what fans of another team says about their coach.  There are fans of every fan base that hate their coach and/or GM for no discernable reason.  I'm sure there is a portion of the NE fan base that hates Bellicheck.  Giants' fans were calling for Coughlin's head on a platter until he took them to and won a SB.  Then they didn't win the SB the following year and fans started calling for his head again, up until he won them a second SB.  I wouldn't be surprised if there were fans now calling for his head again. 

 

Knapp also has a long record of success prior to joining the Raiders.  But hey, the Raiders fans got to see what he could do for a full year so they must be right...right?  See that's my second point.  Of all the fan bases that I might listen to in regards to feedback on Knapp, Oakland is the last on the list.  He was successful in Houston for several years and in SF for many years but he was only given one year in Oakland.  Now I will grant you that he was not the play-caller in Houston nor in SF for his entire tenure but he was the play-caller in SF for several years.  Now maybe he's not the best choice for our offense.  There could be many reasons why we should avoid him.  However, "well Oakland fans say...." is not, imo, one of them.

[Dan]

Well, up until the bolded section I was actually appreciating your post.  However I will again say that I could care less what fans of another team says about their coach.  There are fans of every fan base that hate their coach and/or GM for no discernable reason.  I'm sure there is a portion of the NE fan base that hates Bellicheck.  Giants' fans were calling for Coughlin's head on a platter until he took them to and won a SB.  Then they didn't win the SB the following year and fans started calling for his head again, up until he won them a second SB.  I wouldn't be surprised if there were fans now calling for his head again. 

 

Knapp also has a long record of success prior to joining the Raiders.  But hey, the Raiders fans got to see what he could do for a full year so they must be right...right?  See that's my second point.  Of all the fan bases that I might listen to in regards to feedback on Knapp, Oakland is the last on the list.  He was successful in Houston for several years and in SF for many years but he was only given one year in Oakland.  Now I will grant you that he was not the play-caller in Houston nor in SF for his entire tenure but he was the play-caller in SF for several years.  Now maybe he's not the best choice for our offense.  There could be many reasons why we should avoid him.  However, "well Oakland fans say...." is not, imo, one of them.

 

The bolded bit was meant as a joke, sorry if it was misinterpreted. 

 

I'll just point out that it's not so much a "some Oakland fans somewhere think..." comment, but these are people I know and whose football opinions I trust - while to you that won't make it any more valid, to me it assures me that it's more than some mindless person in the comment section of an nfl.com article. 

 

The main difference between the Oakland fans' view of Knapp and the Giants fans calling for Coughlin's head, is that the Oakland fans I talk to have actually distinguished reasons to be anti-Knapp, whereas Coughlin was based on nothing more than just results, for the most part, which is why a lot of NYG fans didn't want him out - because they knew he was better than just the results showed. I wouldn't base an argument on "well some fans say" if they didn't give solid reasons - the reasons that I pointed out in my post above. 

 

As for time for other teams I can't really comment as I'm not exactly well versed on the 2001 49ers offensive schemes - though looking at offensive rankings of teams he controlled, they finished in very average positions - obviously this isn't enough for me to base an argument on, though. But as everyone says, the NFL is a "what have you done for me lately" league, and lately, Knapp isn't getting himself glowing reviews.

 

Also I'll just point out that Oakland fans have had three seasons of him - he was OC in 2007 and 2008, and they said he was appalling then, too, but I'm willing to give him the benefit of the doubt because working with JaMarcus Russell isn't exactly an easy task. 

[MadsKabell]

Realistically these possibilities makes the most sense: Tom Moore, Norval Eugene Turner, Clyde Christensen.

 

Tom Moore would be my favourite. Rumor has it he is on top of the Titans OC shortlist, so why not ours? has had a lot of success in the past, and he likes to give his QB alot of freedom at the line of scrimmage, and he has a fairly balanced passing attack.

 

Norv Turner is a living legend as OC, would be awesome, he does however have a love for the vertical passing game, and i would prefer a more balanced passing attack

 

Clyde Christensen would be okay, not great. He didn't have alot of success last time, but he would provide some continuity, which could be important for a rookie QB. In his case it depends on his relationship with Luck, IMO.

 

The upside with all three is that it would be highly unlikely for any of them to get HC consideration, which would provide continuity.

[FireJimCaldwell]

Realistically these possibilities makes the most sense: Tom Moore, Norval Eugene Turner, Clyde Christensen.

 

Tom Moore would be my favourite. Rumor has it he is on top of the Titans OC shortlist, so why not ours? has had a lot of success in the past, and he likes to give his QB alot of freedom at the line of scrimmage, and he has a fairly balanced passing attack.

 

Norv Turner is a living legend as OC, would be awesome, he does however have a love for the vertical passing game, and i would prefer a more balanced passing attack

 

Clyde Christensen would be okay, not great. He didn't have alot of success last time, but he would provide some continuity, which could be important for a rookie QB. In his case it depends on his relationship with Luck, IMO.

 

The upside with all three is that it would be highly unlikely for any of them to get HC consideration, which would provide continuity.

Out of your three choices, the only one I would consider is Tom Moore, but I doubt Mr. Moore signs anywhere until the OC in Denver makes a decision. If he leaves as a HC, then I look for Moore to join Manning in Denver. I've seen reports that he does want to return to the sideline.

 

I want no part of Norv Turner as OC, IHC, or at the local CC.  With that said I'd glady take Turner over Christensen, which I believe would be a huge mistake. 

[MadsKabell]

Norv might not be a very good HC, but he's a very good OC. There's a reason he was hired as HC three times, and there's a reason he received a lot of credit for his work with the cowboys in the 90's, where he made Troy Aikman, Michael Irvin and Emmit Smith HOFs.

 

He's a terrible HC, but you can't deny he's one hell of an OC.

[PrincetonTiger]

Remember this is a big "if"

[FireJimCaldwell]

Norv might not be a very good HC, but he's a very good OC. There's a reason he was hired as HC three times, and there's a reason he received a lot of credit for his work with the cowboys in the 90's, where he made Troy Aikman, Michael Irvin and Emmit Smith HOFs.

 

He's a terrible HC, but you can't deny he's one hell of an OC.

He's a much better OC. I'll give him that. There is no doubt. I'm just looking at the big picture and unfortunately that takes into any future health scares of Chuck Pagano. If Turner was the OC, and an issue presented itself, he would likely be the one turned to as the Interim Head Coach.

 

Even if you remove that from the equation,  With the current group of players, I'm not sold on a vertical passing game as much as I am a WCO which is much better suited to the group of players currently employed and the group of players that will likely be on the roster moving forward over the next 3-5 years.

[MadsKabell]

He's a much better OC. I'll give him that. There is no doubt. I'm just looking at the big picture and unfortunately that takes into any future health scares of Chuck Pagano. If Turner was the OC, and an issue presented itself, he would likely be the one turned to as the Interim Head Coach.

 

Even if you remove that from the equation,  With the current group of players, I'm not sold on a vertical passing game as much as I am a WCO which is much better suited to the group of players currently employed and the group of players that will likely be on the roster moving forward over the next 3-5 years.

I think we agree, don't like the vertical either.

[FireJimCaldwell]

I think we agree, don't like the vertical either.

If there were studs in each of the 5 OL positions then it is fine. To me it's just not a good fit for a team that has the OL penciled in as a weakness. 

[MadsKabell]

Even if we had a great OL, i wouldn't like it. I miss alot of play action, and checkdowns, and some shorter routes. Luck played WCO in College, and he is amazing on short-intermediate throws, and although he has done allright on the deep throws, he hasn't excelled, and he has taken a beating. 

[YOUR GM]

He has that O Line in a Zone Blocking scheme, most seem to think Mcfadden fits a Man Blocking scheme and the numbers back that up the Mcfadde put up in the past, Personally I think Arians would fit better over in Oak because Arians has vertical passing game and  Man Blocking scheme

 

You keep saying Arians runs an exclusively man blocking scheme, but that's not true. One thing I'll give Bruce credit for is, he uses the power runs (man blocking) where he should and he uses zone where he should. A lot of successful offenses mix man and zone concepts (Saints immediately come to mind) and aren't exclusive to one or the other. That draw stretch play that we run every game where Luck runs to RB and then hands it off, out of shotgun, is a zone run. We've been using that play since Peyton was here.

 

I don't think Arians is exclusive to one or the other, but I agree with his mindset that you should run north and south when you run inside the 10, in short yardage situations and to run the clock out. That mentally has sealed at least 2 or 3 close wins for us this year. The most recent one being just last week against the Texans. 

[pacolts56]

He's a much better OC. I'll give him that. There is no doubt. I'm just looking at the big picture and unfortunately that takes into any future health scares of Chuck Pagano. If Turner was the OC, and an issue presented itself, he would likely be the one turned to as the Interim Head Coach.

 

Even if you remove that from the equation,  With the current group of players, I'm not sold on a vertical passing game as much as I am a WCO which is much better suited to the group of players currently employed and the group of players that will likely be on the roster moving forward over the next 3-5 years.

 

 

Even if we had a great OL, i wouldn't like it. I miss alot of play action, and checkdowns, and some shorter routes. Luck played WCO in College, and he is amazing on short-intermediate throws, and although he has done allright on the deep throws, he hasn't excelled, and he has taken a beating. 

Just curious....what kind of offense does Pat Shurmur run....is it a WCO?

 

We haven't heard his name yet and Cleveland cut him loose. He also strikes me as a guy who wouldn't necessarily be courted as a Head Coach...at least for a while.

[SolomonThomasFanAccount]

bruce arians, , any one with a neckbeard, peyton when he retires or jay gruden.

[FireJimCaldwell]

Even if we had a great OL, i wouldn't like it. I miss alot of play action, and checkdowns, and some shorter routes. Luck played WCO in College, and he is amazing on short-intermediate throws, and although he has done allright on the deep throws, he hasn't excelled, and he has taken a beating. 

The PAP can easily be included in a vertical passing game. It just helps to have the solid run game to help sell it. 

 

When the changes were made in the off-season my preference was for a WCO just so that the transition would be easier.  The deep game is risk/reward. He's got the arm for it, but the touch/precision isn't there and it is hard for precision to be there..

 

He has taken a beating, which I still put equally on him/scheme/ol.

[FireJimCaldwell]

Just curious....what kind of offense does Pat Shurmur run....is it a WCO?

 

We haven't heard his name yet and Cleveland cut him loose. He also strikes me as a guy who wouldn't necessarily be courted as a Head Coach...at least for a while.

Shurmur is from the Holmgren/Reid WCO  school of thought. I don't see him getting any HC looks anytime soon. He could possibly join Reid wherever he winds up.

 

He would be a decent option.

[YOUR GM]

I know he would never leave the security of Foxboro, Brady, & Belichick, but I have always respected the no holes barred/ go for the jugular approach McDaniels even had as HC in Denver. He is not afraid to take risks especially on 1st down & I love that...Score first & draw 1st blood...Yes, I know not a realistic pick. 

 

To be fair, Bruce has a little of that in him as well. McDaniel's seems to be more controlled and calculated as a play caller when he does it, however

[lollygagger8]

Just pay Arians whatever he wants so this is a moot point.

 

Everyone is going to question some play calling from any OC, and I have questioned BA sometimes, but I really want to see this offense (and rookies) in their 2nd year running it. That coupled with a new O-Line, and this offense will be very dangerous.

[BrentMc11]

Just pay Arians whatever he wants so this is a moot point.

 

Everyone is going to question some play calling from any OC, and I have questioned BA sometimes, but I really want to see this offense (and rookies) in their 2nd year running it. That coupled with a new O-Line, and this offense will be very dangerous.

And Telesco IMO.......$$$$ talks

[Jason_]

The bolded bit was meant as a joke, sorry if it was misinterpreted. 

 

I'll just point out that it's not so much a "some Oakland fans somewhere think..." comment, but these are people I know and whose football opinions I trust - while to you that won't make it any more valid, to me it assures me that it's more than some mindless person in the comment section of an nfl.com article. 

 

The main difference between the Oakland fans' view of Knapp and the Giants fans calling for Coughlin's head, is that the Oakland fans I talk to have actually distinguished reasons to be anti-Knapp, whereas Coughlin was based on nothing more than just results, for the most part, which is why a lot of NYG fans didn't want him out - because they knew he was better than just the results showed. I wouldn't base an argument on "well some fans say" if they didn't give solid reasons - the reasons that I pointed out in my post above. 

 

As for time for other teams I can't really comment as I'm not exactly well versed on the 2001 49ers offensive schemes - though looking at offensive rankings of teams he controlled, they finished in very average positions - obviously this isn't enough for me to base an argument on, though. But as everyone says, the NFL is a "what have you done for me lately" league, and lately, Knapp isn't getting himself glowing reviews.

 

Also I'll just point out that Oakland fans have had three seasons of him - he was OC in 2007 and 2008, and they said he was appalling then, too, but I'm willing to give him the benefit of the doubt because working with JaMarcus Russell isn't exactly an easy task. 

 

 

Very fair and thank you for the further explanation.  I did misread the bolded part of your first reply and did not take it as a joke.  Unfortunately, as we all know, the context and tone of written communication can often be misinterpreted and this definitely is one of those cases.  I also apologize for

But hey, the Raiders fans got to see what he could do for a full year so they must be right...right?

in my reply to you. 

 

I also appreciate the additional explanation of the Oakland fans you were referring to and it does make some difference that you're talking about people you know that also are Raiders' fans and not just "Raider fans" in general.  I would still say that I would at the very least bring Knapp in for an interview and would probably still be willing to give him a chance.  I like the systems that he's come from but there isn't a lot of proven ability from a play-caller perspective.  The majority of the time he spent in San Fran was as a Quality control or positional coach but he was the OC and likely the play-caller from 2001-2003. 

 

In 2001 he had Jeff Garcia as QB.  Garcia's numbers that year were pretty good...not eye-popping but good.  316/504 for 62.7% completion percentage and 3445 yds with 32 TD vs 12 INT.  Their 2 primary RB's were Garrison Hearst and Kevan Barlow.  As a team they averaged 4.4 yards per carry and rushed for 2244 yards.  The team was 12-4 in '01.

 

In 2002 he again had Garcia, Hearst and Barlow.  Garcia was 328/528 for 62.1% for 3344 yds with 21 TD to 10 INT.  As a team they rushed for 2244 yards with a 4.6 ypc average and the team went 10-6.

 

In 2003, HC Steve Mariucci was replaced with Dennis Erickson.  They still had Garcia at QB with Barlow and Hearst as the primary RB's.  Garcia was 225/392 for 57.4% and 2704 yards with 18 TDs to 13 INTs.  Tim Rattay appears to have played quite a bit, probably due to injuries to Garcia.  Rattay was 73/118 for 61.9% and 856 yards with 7 TD and 2 INT.  As a team they rushed for 2279 yards with a 4.6 ypc average.

 

Numbers were very similar during Knapp's time in Atlanta though the rushing numbers were even higher because that was when they had Vick.  Vick's passing numbers weren't as good as Garcia's but they weren't terrible.  That's kind of hard to gauge because Vick never has been the best passer in the world.  However, I think Knapp was probably largely involved in the development of Matt Schaub.

 

I'm now looking at Knapp's first stint in Oakland.  The first year there, 2007, he had Josh McCown, Daunte Culpepper and JaMarcus Russell at QB and got very pedestrian production from these guys.  However their running game was still potent.  As a team that year they still rushed for 2086 yards with a 4.1 ypc average.  In 2008 it was primarily Russell at QB but Oakland still rushed for 1987 yards with a 4.3 ypc average. 

 

After that Knapp was only in Seattle for a year before going to Houston.  My biggest take away from all that is that every where Knapp has been, they've had a solid rushing attack, which is something we really need to improve on.  There have been strides made this year to improve, but the running game being effective would make the passing game much better.  Sure, I like to see a high-flying passing attack but having a potent running game to go along with it would make our offense near unstoppable.  If a guy like Knapp could come in and give us that type of running game, and have a QB with Luck's talent to work with then I think we could see great things from our offense over the next several years. 

 

So, that's why I'd like to see him at least be given consideration should Arians move on, which I am leaning towards thinking that he will wind up a HC somewhere next year.

[Dan]

Very fair and thank you for the further explanation.  I did misread the bolded part of your first reply and did not take it as a joke.  Unfortunately, as we all know, the context and tone of written communication can often be misinterpreted and this definitely is one of those cases.  I also apologize for in my reply to you. 

 

I also appreciate the additional explanation of the Oakland fans you were referring to and it does make some difference that you're talking about people you know that also are Raiders' fans and not just "Raider fans" in general.  I would still say that I would at the very least bring Knapp in for an interview and would probably still be willing to give him a chance.  I like the systems that he's come from but there isn't a lot of proven ability from a play-caller perspective.  The majority of the time he spent in San Fran was as a Quality control or positional coach but he was the OC and likely the play-caller from 2001-2003. 

 

In 2001 he had Jeff Garcia as QB.  Garcia's numbers that year were pretty good...not eye-popping but good.  316/504 for 62.7% completion percentage and 3445 yds with 32 TD vs 12 INT.  Their 2 primary RB's were Garrison Hearst and Kevan Barlow.  As a team they averaged 4.4 yards per carry and rushed for 2244 yards.  The team was 12-4 in '01.

 

In 2002 he again had Garcia, Hearst and Barlow.  Garcia was 328/528 for 62.1% for 3344 yds with 21 TD to 10 INT.  As a team they rushed for 2244 yards with a 4.6 ypc average and the team went 10-6.

 

In 2003, HC Steve Mariucci was replaced with Dennis Erickson.  They still had Garcia at QB with Barlow and Hearst as the primary RB's.  Garcia was 225/392 for 57.4% and 2704 yards with 18 TDs to 13 INTs.  Tim Rattay appears to have played quite a bit, probably due to injuries to Garcia.  Rattay was 73/118 for 61.9% and 856 yards with 7 TD and 2 INT.  As a team they rushed for 2279 yards with a 4.6 ypc average.

 

Numbers were very similar during Knapp's time in Atlanta though the rushing numbers were even higher because that was when they had Vick.  Vick's passing numbers weren't as good as Garcia's but they weren't terrible.  That's kind of hard to gauge because Vick never has been the best passer in the world.  However, I think Knapp was probably largely involved in the development of Matt Schaub.

 

I'm now looking at Knapp's first stint in Oakland.  The first year there, 2007, he had Josh McCown, Daunte Culpepper and JaMarcus Russell at QB and got very pedestrian production from these guys.  However their running game was still potent.  As a team that year they still rushed for 2086 yards with a 4.1 ypc average.  In 2008 it was primarily Russell at QB but Oakland still rushed for 1987 yards with a 4.3 ypc average. 

 

After that Knapp was only in Seattle for a year before going to Houston.  My biggest take away from all that is that every where Knapp has been, they've had a solid rushing attack, which is something we really need to improve on.  There have been strides made this year to improve, but the running game being effective would make the passing game much better.  Sure, I like to see a high-flying passing attack but having a potent running game to go along with it would make our offense near unstoppable.  If a guy like Knapp could come in and give us that type of running game, and have a QB with Luck's talent to work with then I think we could see great things from our offense over the next several years. 

 

So, that's why I'd like to see him at least be given consideration should Arians move on, which I am leaning towards thinking that he will wind up a HC somewhere next year.

 

Very informative post, perhaps there's more to him than I gave him credit for. I notice Garcia made the Pro Bowl on two of his San Fran years - I wonder if Knapp deserves credit for that, because Garcia hasn't exactly had a long illustrious career. 

 

I've decided to have a look at some stats myself, just to see if I can squeeze any information out. The first thing I notice is quite telling - in 2003, 49ers were ranked 5th in offensive yards, 9th in points. In 2004, the first year on from Knapp, they were 26th in yards, 30th in points. While obviously stats never tell the whole story, that's a telling enough difference for me to have to consider Knapp leaving had some influence in that. It may have been Garcia leaving and the QB role being shared between Rattay and Dorsey, who were both poor. However Kevan Barlow was less productive (1024 yrd 5.1 ypc, to 822 yrd 3.8 ypc), which may well be Knapp's influence - obviously you can't tell, but it's a major dropoff. 

 

Also without posting specific numbers, Atlanta's offence improved between 2003 and 2004, and then dropped off between 2006 and 2007 when Knapp left. Seattle stayed very similar before, during and after he was there, but then, he did only have one year. 

 

Either way, despite improvements and the like, he's never exactly had a very good offence, always around the middle of the league or lower (except for a very good 2003 with 49ers). As you point out, they've had a solid rushing attack, that may be because of Knapp or because they just have talented rushers - from what I've learnt from the Oakland fans, I'm inclined to lean towards the talented rushers option - the deterioration of McFadden this year needs to be for some reason. 

 

I'm less averse to the idea as I was because of your explanation, though I must admit I'm still not convinced. However, if we do interview him and decide he's the man for the job, I'll trust Grigson, Pagano and the lot. They know more than I do! 

[Jason_]

Very informative post, perhaps there's more to him than I gave him credit for. I notice Garcia made the Pro Bowl on two of his San Fran years - I wonder if Knapp deserves credit for that, because Garcia hasn't exactly had a long illustrious career. 

 

I've decided to have a look at some stats myself, just to see if I can squeeze any information out. The first thing I notice is quite telling - in 2003, 49ers were ranked 5th in offensive yards, 9th in points. In 2004, the first year on from Knapp, they were 26th in yards, 30th in points. While obviously stats never tell the whole story, that's a telling enough difference for me to have to consider Knapp leaving had some influence in that. It may have been Garcia leaving and the QB role being shared between Rattay and Dorsey, who were both poor. However Kevan Barlow was less productive (1024 yrd 5.1 ypc, to 822 yrd 3.8 ypc), which may well be Knapp's influence - obviously you can't tell, but it's a major dropoff. 

 

Also without posting specific numbers, Atlanta's offence improved between 2003 and 2004, and then dropped off between 2006 and 2007 when Knapp left. Seattle stayed very similar before, during and after he was there, but then, he did only have one year. 

 

Either way, despite improvements and the like, he's never exactly had a very good offence, always around the middle of the league or lower (except for a very good 2003 with 49ers). As you point out, they've had a solid rushing attack, that may be because of Knapp or because they just have talented rushers - from what I've learnt from the Oakland fans, I'm inclined to lean towards the talented rushers option - the deterioration of McFadden this year needs to be for some reason. 

 

I'm less averse to the idea as I was because of your explanation, though I must admit I'm still not convinced. However, if we do interview him and decide he's the man for the job, I'll trust Grigson, Pagano and the lot. They know more than I do! 

 

 

Another thing too to consider about him not ever having a super offense is that he also never really had a highly talented QB.  He got very good production from Garcia and even above average production from Rattay.  One year he even got somewhat reliable production from JaMarcus Russell in regards to completion percentage and TD/INT ratio.  That's the other reason I think he could do great things here because I don't think he's ever had a QB to work with that's even close to the raw talent that Luck has. 

 

I also do agree with you though that the drop in production from McFadden is concerning and I'd love to know more about why that is.  It could be that McFadden doesn't run well in zone blocking schemes.  It could be that McFadden just didn't have enough time to properly get used to the new scheme.  It could also be that the OL didn't adjust as well or as quickly as they'd hoped in the new blocking schemes.  It's hard to say why it happened but it is still concerning that it did happen with a talented runner like McFadden.  Of course that's also assuming that McFadden was in 100% health all year which is unlikely considering his injury history.

 

I will say though that this past year does appear to be the only year that the running game was below average under Knapp's tutelage.  I just think that a WCO similar to what Houston runs and what teams have run under Knapp with a solid running game would make our offense great with a QB like Luck.  I'd prefer that type of offense to a high powered aerial attack with an average or below average running game.  We could still obviously take our shots down the field but our entire offense wouldn't be built around the vertical passing attack.  I like and want a type of offense that can travel into cold weather stadiums in the playoffs and still be productive. 

 

Ultimately I'm with you though.  I love what Pagano and Grigson have done so far and would trust what decisions they make.

 

**edit, it may also be worth noting that, under Knapp, Elvis Grbac was relatively productive, enough that the Chiefs decided to take a flyer on him as their starter, and for the rest of Grbac's career, after leaving Knapp, his numbers dropped considerably.

[MrNLM]

Norv. I think he could open up our run game quite nicely. That's all I want as Luck continues to progress.

[ColtsBlueFL]

Norv uses twists to the Air Coryell that needs tall receivers that can go up after the ball (IE: Vincent Jackson, etc...)  Having Rivers, LaDanian and Gates never hurt either, but never made it to the top with the Bolts  And Aikmen, E. Smith, and Irvin speak for themselves.  Jay Novacek and Alvin Harper were no dogs either.  Could he do that with Luck, Ballard Allen, and .... who- Fleener?  Wayne? Avery? T.Y. Hilton?

[coltsguy510]

Brad Childress?

[Dan]

Another thing too to consider about him not ever having a super offense is that he also never really had a highly talented QB.  He got very good production from Garcia and even above average production from Rattay.  One year he even got somewhat reliable production from JaMarcus Russell in regards to completion percentage and TD/INT ratio.  That's the other reason I think he could do great things here because I don't think he's ever had a QB to work with that's even close to the raw talent that Luck has. 

 

I also do agree with you though that the drop in production from McFadden is concerning and I'd love to know more about why that is.  It could be that McFadden doesn't run well in zone blocking schemes.  It could be that McFadden just didn't have enough time to properly get used to the new scheme.  It could also be that the OL didn't adjust as well or as quickly as they'd hoped in the new blocking schemes.  It's hard to say why it happened but it is still concerning that it did happen with a talented runner like McFadden.  Of course that's also assuming that McFadden was in 100% health all year which is unlikely considering his injury history.

 

I will say though that this past year does appear to be the only year that the running game was below average under Knapp's tutelage.  I just think that a WCO similar to what Houston runs and what teams have run under Knapp with a solid running game would make our offense great with a QB like Luck.  I'd prefer that type of offense to a high powered aerial attack with an average or below average running game.  We could still obviously take our shots down the field but our entire offense wouldn't be built around the vertical passing attack.  I like and want a type of offense that can travel into cold weather stadiums in the playoffs and still be productive. 

 

Ultimately I'm with you though.  I love what Pagano and Grigson have done so far and would trust what decisions they make.

 

**edit, it may also be worth noting that, under Knapp, Elvis Grbac was relatively productive, enough that the Chiefs decided to take a flyer on him as their starter, and for the rest of Grbac's career, after leaving Knapp, his numbers dropped considerably.

 

Yeah it's true that he's never really had a very good QB. Garcia going to two pro bowls under him - and then eventually tumbling into the UFL - could be a definite plus mark to Knapp. Carson Palmer looked better this year than he had for a while in Cincy, too, though like I said a while back that may be because he just started calling his own plays. No way to know - though as you point out, the Grbac case is an interesting one in Knapp's favour.

 

My main worry from talking to Raiders fans was that they tended to think he ignored building to the strengths of the players he had, preferring to insist on them to run it his way, even if they weren't especially able to. That's a concern many people have with Arians - that despite one of the worst O-lines in the league, he insists on running very vertical plays that take time to develop. I worry that attitudes like this stunt development, and with so many players who need to make the most of their development time (Luck, Hilton, Allen, Fleener, Ballard etc etc) driving them painfully to fit an unsuitable mould could damage their potential. If Knapp were to do similar here (I'm not talking about a vertical style but ignoring weaknesses and strengths and sticking to the same playing style) then I'd be upset. 

 

Thanks for taking the time to post all of that, though, it's certainly an interesting insight onto a man I'd previously written off. Will perhaps teach me to stay away from snap judgements!

 

Out of interest, what do you make of Norv Turner as a coordinator? 

[Mameluc]

why Clyde? seriously what has he done to make him a viable candidate? honest question.

Also, Norv, i think we drafted a specific set of players and i dont think any of those draft decitions/philosophy fit with what Norv likes in any way. I like him, but does he fit?

[Jason_]

 

My main worry from talking to Raiders fans was that they tended to think he ignored building to the strengths of the players he had, preferring to insist on them to run it his way, even if they weren't especially able to. That's a concern many people have with Arians - that despite one of the worst O-lines in the league, he insists on running very vertical plays that take time to develop. I worry that attitudes like this stunt development, and with so many players who need to make the most of their development time (Luck, Hilton, Allen, Fleener, Ballard etc etc) driving them painfully to fit an unsuitable mould could damage their potential. If Knapp were to do similar here (I'm not talking about a vertical style but ignoring weaknesses and strengths and sticking to the same playing style) then I'd be upset. 

 

 

I very much agree.  IMO the best coaches are the ones who cater their offense to the players and not the other way around.  That's why I've always liked Brian Billick, and I currently like guys like Rod Chudzinski and Mike McCoy.  I know a lot of people are down on Billick because of the lack of offensive success he had in Baltimore, but much like Knapp, he never had a very good QB to work with.  He was able to get to and win a SB with Trent Dilfer as QB though.  Now granted, that SB was won on the back of the defense and their running game, but he did tweak the offense to the point that it was successful enough to still win the SB.  Plus, that offense was the polar opposite of the type of offenses he ran in Minnesota, where he lead successful offenses with QB's Jim McMahon, Warren Moon, Brad Johnson and Randall Cunningham.  These guys were all very different types of QB but Billick was able to make the offense not only successful but the Moon and Cunningham offenses set records.

 

As for Turner....he wouldn't be my first choice but I'd rather have him than anyone from the Andy Reid tree.  At least Turner still tries to keep a balance to the offense by continuing to incorporate the running game unlike Reid.  It's hard to say about Morninghweg because Reid was always the play-caller as far as I know, but considering he worked for so long with Reid I am skeptical.  Turner did great work in Dallas but he also had some great talent to work with. 

 

From 1994 to 2000, the Redskins offense appeared to only have one really good year.  In 2001 in San Diego, the offense looked pretty bad.  They rushed for 1695 yds with only a 3.9 avg. with Ladanian Tomlinson.  Doug Flutie was the QB with very poor numbers.  Only 56.4% completions and 15 TD to 18 INTs.  In Miami in 2002, their offense gained 2502 yds with a 4.7 ypc average with Ricky Williams.  Jay Fiedler was the primary QB with a 61.3% completion percentage and 14 TD to 9 INT.  In 2003, Miami's offense got worse with Fielder having a 57% completion % and 11 TD to 13 INT.  Ricky Williams' numbers went down too.  He had a 3.5 ypc average and the team only gained 3.7 ypc.  Then Norv went to Oakland as HC in 2004.  Kerry Collins was the QB with 56.3% and 21 TD to 20 INT.  Running game was bad.  They had a 4.0 ypc average but only 1295 total yards.  In 2005, Oakland gained 1369 yards rushing with a 3.8 ypc average and Collins had a 53.5% with 20 TD to 12 INT.  In 2006, Turner went to San Fran as OC.  Alex Smith had a 58.1% with 16 TD to 16 INT but the running game got 2172 yards with a 5.0 ypc average with Frank Gore.  Granted Turner was only there for 1 year but Jim Harbaugh did a lot more with Smith in 1 year than Turner did.  So honestly, after looking at all this, I don't care for Turner as much as I did prior to doing this digging.  Looks like the bulk of his reputation is from the couple of years he was with Dallas.  Doesn't look like he's done all that much since then.

[ColtsBlueFL]

   ^ ^ This ^ ^

 

I'm not fond of the twists Norv employs on the Air Coryell scheme, either.  I wonder if a guy like Jope Lombardi is ready yet?  Besides, he has the ultimate name!  LOL