The New Staff Is Really Coming Together - New Coaching Hires Merge

[wegotchucky]

2009 was good but what happened last year? I work with a Steelers fan and he's ecstatic that Arians is gone and made a point to voice his concern about our new OC.

Yeah, but in all honesty Steeler fans love the run game, and really love tradition. Rooney saw the team was getting away from traditional Steeler ways and so he let Arians go. The fact that players are dissapointed in his release is what sticks out in my head.

[Coffeedrinker]

Oh yeah, his D was the worst on 3rd downs, but need I remind people that the Chargers have only one real pass rusher, and he was injured for four and a half games this last season. I see him cominng to the Colts and opening up our playbook. Schemes for third downs can only do so much with talent that was more predicated to stopping the run (Chargers). He'll be a lot better for us than that rediculous Tampa Two.

Here's another thing to consider.

When the 9ers fired Nolan they gave the HC job, not to their DC, but to their linebackers coach, which, IMO, indicates that the 49ers felt Singletary was more responsible for the defensive success than the DC.

[LaughingAtIrsay]

First thing he needs to tell Joe Lefedge is if the kick is really deep you take a knee and live to make yourself a fool next return.

Not what I was thinking..

Nope. First thing he should tell Lefeged is "You are no longer going to be returning kicks."

Exactly what I was thinking!

[NM_Colts]

Yeah, but in all honesty Steeler fans love the run game, and really love tradition. Rooney saw the team was getting away from traditional Steeler ways and so he let Arians go. The fact that players are dissapointed in his release is what sticks out in my head.

That's a good point and makes me feel a little better.

[Superman]

Here's another thing to consider.

When the 9ers fired Nolan they gave the HC job, not to their DC, but to their linebackers coach, which, IMO, indicates that the 49ers felt Singletary was more responsible for the defensive success than the DC.

That's like saying the fact that the Colts promoted Jim Caldwell instead of Tom Moore means they felt Caldwell was more responsible for the offensive success. I don't agree with that reasoning at all.

[LaughingAtIrsay]

Yes it can. The only defense that was worse on 3rd down than the Colts.... The 3-4 defense ran by Greg Manusky. They allowed 49% 3rd down conversion. Not only was that the worst 3rd down percentage allowed in 2011.... it's the worst 3rd down percentage this century (and perhaps longer, I only looked back to 2000).

We must allowed 72% then because our Defense stayed on the field the whole year.

[BProland85]

I could see hiring him as a position coach- but the D in SF was always average at best, and last year w/ SD, the defense regressed bad..see the above quote.. so why our DC??? He has not been known for playing an aggressive style. Not sure what they see in him, will be interested to hear what Pagano has to say about the guy and what in the world motivated them to hire him as DC.

Maybe Greg was brought in to be more of a positions coach although his title says DC. I could see Pagano wanting to run the bulk of the defensive calls so Greg may have been hired just to be an assistant defensive mind specializing in the LB play.

[Coffeedrinker]

That's like saying the fact that the Colts promoted Jim Caldwell instead of Tom Moore means they felt Caldwell was more responsible for the offensive success. I don't agree with that reasoning at all.

A few differences.

One Caldwell was the Asst HC for three years before becoming the HC, so he was the next in line for the HC spot.

Two: Moore stated on more than one occassion that he had no desire to be a HC.

[Coffeedrinker]

We must allowed 72% then because our Defense stayed on the field the whole year.

That's what happens when people make comments on assumptions and perceptions rather than facts.

[Superman]

Maybe Greg was brought in to be more of a positions coach although his title says DC. I could see Pagano wanting to run the bulk of the defensive calls so Greg may have been hired just to be an assistant defensive mind specializing in the LB play.

That, I DON'T like. I don't like the idea of the head coach calling the plays. It works sometimes, but it bombs other times. I like having my head coach running the team, with the coordinators calling the plays. JMO

[Superman]

A few differences.

One Caldwell was the Asst HC for three years before becoming the HC, so he was the next in line for the HC spot.

Two: Moore stated on more than one occassion that he had no desire to be a HC.

Singletary left Baltimore to be the assistant head coach / linebackers coach. It wasn't a lateral move, so he was obviously on his way up. And he went to the Niners a year before Manusky did. And yet, Manusky was hired away from the Chargers where he was the linebackers coach to be the Niners defensive coordinator, rather than just promoting Singletary who was already there.

There are facts associated with every scenario. That's why I don't think your conclusion is reasonable or fair.

[Coffeedrinker]

Singletary left Baltimore to be the assistant head coach / linebackers coach.

Ahh see, I did not know that, everything I saw just labeled Singletary as LB coach... my mistake.

EVERYONE PLEASE DISREGARD MY COMMENT ABOUT THE 9ERS PICKING SINGLETARY OVER THE DC WAS A MISTAKE ON MY PART.

There are facts associated with every scenario. That's why I don't think your conclusion is reasonable or fair.

IN light of the new information, I would agree with you.

[Superman]

Ahh see, I did not know that, everything I saw just labeled Singletary as LB coach... my mistake.

EVERYONE PLEASE DISREGARD MY COMMENT ABOUT THE 9ERS PICKING SINGLETARY OVER THE DC WAS A MISTAKE ON MY PART.

IN light of the new information, I would agree with you.

http://www.usatoday.com/sports/football/nfl/niners/2005-01-21-singletary_x.htm?POE=SPOISVA

I'm not really aware of what the difference would be in his duties, but I am pretty sure it was considered a move up the ladder, not sideways.

[Fatboyslim11]

Manusky was coordinator first for a head coach who wanted a stiff 3-4, even though they still had personnel issues. And they still did pretty good, overall.

I know he's pretty much a 3-4 guy, but he's worked with a lot of players. And with Pagano's defensive background, I get the feeling those two are going to put their heads together and come up with a pretty good defensive gameplan every week. I'm not excited about the hire, but I excited about the possibilities.

Could we have done better in selecting a DC. Who the heck knows - only time will tell but I am hopeful. Just having a basic, flexible defensive game plan would be a huge improvement over Meeks and Coyer defenses. We have a history of bad defenses and even worse DCs. In our SB winning year in 2006, Things got so bad that Dungy took over the defensive calls on several occasions and we all know how silly and simple the schemes were under Coyer. I believe we will see a marked improvement just going from a passive to an aggressive, physical style of defense with much improved tackling.

[Superman]

Could we have done better in selecting a DC. Who the heck knows - only time will tell but I am hopeful. Just having a basic, flexible defensive game plan would be a huge improvement over Meeks and Coyer defenses. We have a history of bad defenses and even worse DCs. In our SB winning year in 2006, Things got so bad that Dungy took over the defensive calls on several occasions and we all know how silly and simple the schemes were under Coyer. I believe we will see a marked improvement just going from a passive to an aggressive, physical style of defense with much improved tackling.

I have different hopes: I want us to tackle well and be adaptable to situations. I don't care whether it's a 3-4 or a 4-3 or a 5-2 or a freakin 0-7, as long as we make adjustments based on game situations and tackle well. I think people fall in love with aggressive playcalling and automatically equate it with good defense, but there are plenty of good defenses that are not categorically aggressive, and there are aggressive defenses that aren't very effective. I don't care if the defense is aggressive and all that, so long as it's effective.

I also think Coffee made a good point: When Coyer took over, we all said "anything is better than Meeks." Not that I was ever pining for Meeks, and honestly I think Coyer's hands were tied and he wanted to do things that his superiors wouldn't allow him to do, but the Coyer Experience wasn't a positive one. So the "anything is better than what we used to have" angle isn't all that reassuring.

I'm not concerned like others are, and this pairing might be the best thing since peanut butter and jelly (speaking of which, would you believe my daughter doesn't like a good ol' PB&J sandwich???) I like that Manusky at least has experience as a coordinator, unlike Keith Butler. I'm getting more excited as this thread gets longer, as a matter of fact.

[BOTT]

2009 was good but what happened last year? I work with a Steelers fan and he's ecstatic that Arians is gone and made a point to voice his concern about our new OC.

not sure, but the offensive line has been a mess for a couple years

[MAC]

+1

Use the "Like" button.

[BOTT]

That's fine that you feel that way and you and several people on here are making me feel better about Arians than my initial reaction. But the part about Tom Moore is not true. He turned Scott Mitchell into a 4000 yard QB, made Herman Moore a household name at WR. And he did the same thing with Mitchell that he did with Manning, he gave him three plays and let him pick the best play after seeing the D.

yes, i'm well aware of his time in detroit. but given his age and his entire resume it's not really that impressive....before peyton. heck, if i'm correct, moore was in such high demand when the colts hired him he was coaching rb's in new orleans.

[MAC]

meh, i'm not too worried about arians. i mean tom moore's resume was pretty mediocre before he met up with peyton manning. in 2009 the steelers had 4000yrd passer , two 1000 yard receivers, and a 1000 yard rusher.

Actually Tom Moore made Scott Mitchell and a couple of WRs I don't remember look like one of the most explosive offenses in the league. Having Barry Sanders didn't hurt, but "Scott Mitchell"?

[BOTT]

Actually Tom Moore made Scott Mitchell and a couple of WRs I don't remember look like one of the most explosive offenses in the league. Having Barry Sanders didn't hurt, but "Scott Mitchell"?

like i stated above, i am well aware of this, but that was the highlight of his resume before teaming with peyton. not like he was don coryell. plus, i think the colts offensive was kinda overrated until manning got more control over it following the debacle the was the playoff loss too the jets several years ago.

[vacolt16]

Regarding Manusky, everyone knows he wasn't Pagano's first choice but I've got to believe that Chuck talked to his brother John, who coached with Manusky for a couple of years, and that John gave him an honest assessment of Manusky's coaching abilities, and that based on that assessment, along with input from other coaches or players who know Manusky, Chuck decided that Manusky would be a good choice for the DC position.

[Fatboyslim11]

I have different hopes: I want us to tackle well and be adaptable to situations. I don't care whether it's a 3-4 or a 4-3 or a 5-2 or a freakin 0-7, as long as we make adjustments based on game situations and tackle well. I think people fall in love with aggressive playcalling and automatically equate it with good defense, but there are plenty of good defenses that are not categorically aggressive, and there are aggressive defenses that aren't very effective. I don't care if the defense is aggressive and all that, so long as it's effective.

I also think Coffee made a good point: When Coyer took over, we all said "anything is better than Meeks." Not that I was ever pining for Meeks, and honestly I think Coyer's hands were tied and he wanted to do things that his superiors wouldn't allow him to do, but the Coyer Experience wasn't a positive one. So the "anything is better than what we used to have" angle isn't all that reassuring.

I'm not concerned like others are, and this pairing might be the best thing since peanut butter and jelly (speaking of which, would you believe my daughter doesn't like a good ol' PB&J sandwich???) I like that Manusky at least has experience as a coordinator, unlike Keith Butler. I'm getting more excited as this thread gets longer, as a matter of fact.

Good. Sounds like you are thinking like most of us. The objective is to have a better defense - the old "there is more than one way to skin a cat" approach. Too bad your kid doesn't like PB&J, my kids personally kept Peter Pan in business for a number of years.

[JoKeR]

Phil Wilson just tweeted:

"#Colts GM Ryan Grigson talking now in media room. Says team is settling on flexible defensive scheme, sometimes 4-3, sometimes 3-4."

Sweet

[JoKeR]

That, I DON'T like. I don't like the idea of the head coach calling the plays. It works sometimes, but it bombs other times. I like having my head coach running the team, with the coordinators calling the plays. JMO

Why not? Shows that our top guy is a chess player and not just a game manager like Caldwell. It shows he thinks on his feet instead of relying on gameplans 100%.

[Coffeedrinker]

like i stated above, i am well aware of this, but that was the highlight of his resume before teaming with peyton. not like he was don coryell. plus, i think the colts offensive was kinda overrated until manning got more control over it following the debacle the was the playoff loss too the jets several years ago.

Yeah, he didn't have much of a resume before that. Just being a WR coach for Swann and Stallworth as they won 2 SBers and then being the offensive coordinator for the Steelers from 83 to 89 where they did not have a Top 10 O twice and the Asst HC with the Vikings where their offense was ranked 9, 13th and 4th from 1990 to 93 and then to Detroit where he took the offensive from 16th to 6th to 2nd.

But yeah, he didn't do much. :rolleyes:

[MAC]

like i stated above, i am well aware of this, but that was the highlight of his resume before teaming with peyton. not like he was don coryell. plus, i think the colts offensive was kinda overrated until manning got more control over it following the debacle the was the playoff loss too the jets several years ago.

Didn't read that far, sorry.

Interesting take on the Colts offense. All about Manning "taking control" huh, as if everyone else was holding him back. Gee, perhaps it was his developing relationship with Jim Caldwell who only became his QB coach, the season of the Jets loss. Or maybe it was Edge's injury forcing all of them to shift the focus of the attack. People can put whatever slant on his development that they want. Personally I think that they must have changed gatorade flavors right before his first MVP season, but that's just me.

None of that changes the fact that the Lions offense back then put up spectacular numbers with mostly marginal players. Considering the inovative and successful offense he then brought to the Colts, I'd say that he deserves a substantial amount of the credit.

[BOTT]

Yeah, he didn't have much of a resume before that. Just being a WR coach for Swann and Stallworth as they won 2 SBers and then being the offensive coordinator for the Steelers from 83 to 89 where they did not have a Top 10 O twice and the Asst HC with the Vikings where their offense was ranked 9, 13th and 4th from 1990 to 93 and then to Detroit where he took the offensive from 16th to 6th to 2nd.

But yeah, he didn't do much. :rolleyes:

yes, becuase i stated "he didn't do much". that is completely different from saying his resume wasn't that impressive....and i stand by that. it wasn't horrible by any means, but nothing really pops out to me anyway. and the fact that you're trying to give him credit for swann and stallworth is funny. they had established themselves before moore even arrived...heck, swann had already won the sb mvp. i'm sure you could pull out a buch of scenarios for arians like you did with moore and it would make him look great too.

[BOTT]

Didn't read that far, sorry.

Interesting take on the Colts offense. All about Manning "taking control" huh, as if everyone else was holding him back. Gee, perhaps it was his developing relationship with Jim Caldwell who only became his QB coach, the season of the Jets loss. Or maybe it was Edge's injury forcing all of them to shift the focus of the attack. People can put whatever slant on his development that they want. Personally I think that they must have changed gatorade flavors right before his first MVP season, but that's just me.

None of that changes the fact that the Lions offense back then put up spectacular numbers with mostly marginal players. Considering the inovative and successful offense he then brought to the Colts, I'd say that he deserves a substantial amount of the credit.

man! you are witty. i'm sure your kids love it.

wow, you read too much into that. i was referring to manning going to dungy after getting blown out by the jets and telling him they needed to change the offense. i guess it's just coincidence that the offense blosomed after that. and then you listen to guys like dan fouts and troy aikman talk about how they have never seen a qb run practice like manning, etc...i guess you believe it was just coincidence that the coincidence that the colts when 2-14 this year...even with peyton's might "mentor" jim caldwell as head coach.

and great, tom moore had a few very good years as an oc with detroit. that's his highlight after that many years in the league? nice, but lets not exxagerate it.

[Superman]

Why not? Shows that our top guy is a chess player and not just a game manager like Caldwell. It shows he thinks on his feet instead of relying on gameplans 100%.

I know he can call a defense, because he did a fantastic job of doing that in Baltimore this year. But the head coach has a lot of responsibilities, and needs to be aware of all game situations. Being a defensive playcaller is taxing enough, but having to manage the rest of the game on top of that is sometimes problematic. Not that it can't be done, but it's so much better, in my opinion, when the coordinators call the players and the coach manages the game.

He and Manusky can collaborate at key times, and he can recommend specific plays that get called at certain times. But ideally, to me, the coordinators call the plays.

[GrizzColt]

Ever notice how nobody ever criticizes the Pats DC and secondary coaches for being last in the league? The perception is that BB has most of the control of his defense...and offense for that matter. If a HC wants to have that kind of control, apparently he can. We had/have a QB who is like that. If Pagano so chooses, he could assert his defense on Manusky.

[Superman]

Ever notice how nobody ever criticizes the Pats DC and secondary coaches for being last in the league? The perception is that BB has most of the control of his defense...and offense for that matter. If a HC wants to have that kind of control, apparently he can. We had/have a QB who is like that. If Pagano so chooses, he could assert his defense on Manusky.

He doesn't call the plays, as far as I understand.

He has control of the defense, and he's very involved in what they do. But he exerts that control without calling the plays.

He does a lot of other stuff that most coaches don't do. You'll see him grab a clipboard and go over assignments with the offensive line. You'll see him talk to the receivers, or the linebackers, or the defensive line. You'll see him and Brady huddle regarding certain situations. Belichick is a different kind of cat, unlike most anyone else in football. And even sometimes he seems spread too thin. Matter of fact, you could argue that poor game management cost him a challenge in the 2009 "4th and 2" game, and maybe even the game. The Pats uncharacteristically used a timeout at the start of that drive because the right personnel wasn't on the field, then used another before the 4th down play. No timeouts left, and couldn't challenge the spot of the ball, which you better believe he would have had he been left with a timeout.

Andy Reid is a head coach that's constantly criticized for his questionable game management (timeouts, challenges, situational playcalling, punting when he should go for it, going for it when he should punt, etc.) He also calls the offensive plays. That doesn't prove that it can't be done. I'm just saying I would prefer my head coach be in tune with the flow of the entire game, be aware of what his team is doing, and what the situations are, and that's enough hard to do with everything going on on the sideline. It's even harder when he's calling the plays.

[HGRekks]

Ever notice how nobody ever criticizes the Pats DC and secondary coaches for being last in the league? The perception is that BB has most of the control of his defense...and offense for that matter. If a HC wants to have that kind of control, apparently he can. We had/have a QB who is like that. If Pagano so chooses, he could assert his defense on Manusky.

The Patriots don't have a defensive coordinator.

Though I'm not sure if that's an argument for coaches being able to have more control or an argument against.

Well, I think it's a non-point. Belichick is not Pagano. Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't. Depends on the person.

[jbaron04]

We must allowed 72% then because our Defense stayed on the field the whole year.

teams werent even getting too 3rd down converted alot on second downon us