Colts Texans post game reaction

[jvan1973]

2 minutes ago, Moosejawcolt said:

Okay then answer this. Do you like Bradley as a coach? Do you like the scheme the Colts use? Do you think Ballard has hired the right coaches, and/or drafted well on the defensive side of the ball? Do you think the Colts could win the Superbowl if AR becomes elite and we still allow Bradley and Ballard to stay on and continue to build and/or run this defense? 

I guess we're about to find out.   I would love for the DBs to be more aggressive on the line.   Can you remember a time that they were?  How many head coaches and gms.  We play a similar defense.    Several different offensive strategies over the years. Basically one defensive strategy.    Who do you think is in control of that?

[Moosejawcolt]

1 minute ago, Superman said:

 

I don't think the argument is that the defense can be built cheaply. The argument is that you don't need to spend a lot of resources on the corner position. Which is why I never thought the Colts were going CB in the first round, and why I didn't think they'd trade for Sneed, and why I don't think they're freaking out about losing Brents right now. You still need good players at corner, but not the super expensive, freakishly quick man coverage guys. 

 

Instead, the philosophy is to prioritize DE, DT, Will, and Safety. Which is basically what the Colts did this offseason.

 

Regarding Gus, Ballard, and Steichen... once Steichen retained Gus after the 2023, his hands are just as dirty. Go listen to your boy Lombardi again. He makes it clear why Steichen is just as tied to Gus as anyone else -- the working relationship with Gus and Steichen actually pre-dates the working relationship between Gus and Ballard. Everyone likes to talk about Steichen as if he's going to right all of Ballard's wrongs. This is a great example of why I think that reasoning is faulty. 

Actually, I have always had this belief in this defense going back to the Dungy days and Lombardi is not my boy.

[jvan1973]

On 9/10/2024 at 2:11 PM, shasta519 said:

 

Tunsil seemed to handle Latu pretty well. But it was his first game against an AP LT though. 

 

 

Interesting they didn't bring up the tunsil false starts and the double teams.

[jvan1973]

1 minute ago, Moosejawcolt said:

Actually, I have always had this belief in this defense going back to the Dungy days and Lombardi is not my boy.

You are literally the only one that posts anything about Lombardi here

[Moosejawcolt]

1 minute ago, jvan1973 said:

I guess we're about to find out.   I would love for the DBs to be more aggressive on the line.   Can you remember a time that they were?  How many head coaches and gms.  We play a similar defense.    Several different offensive strategies over the years. Basically one defensive strategy.    Who do you think is in control of that?

It is on Steichen and Ballard. We all see it as fans that Gus will not change and it is proven by his history. That is on Ballard and Steichen as they are the head coach and GM and need to make a change if the coordinator wont and he is not successful. I bet most of this board wanted Gus back and I was on record saying dont expect anything different. 

[Superman]

Just now, Moosejawcolt said:

Actually, I have always had this belief in this defense going back to the Dungy days and Lombardi is not my boy.

 

We share the belief about the defense. Except for the part where you say it's meant to be cheap. Like I said, the corners are meant to be easier to find, the defense as a whole is not meant to be cheap. Even Dungy's defense had highly paid DEs and safeties, well paid LBs, and eventually spent some resources at DT. 

 

And yeah, the 'your boy Lombardi' comment was sharp, but it was tongue-in-cheek. Still, you do rep his viewpoint as if it's your own, quite a lot. That's fine, I think Lombardi is a good analyst, but I don't think he's any kind of special authority.

[jvan1973]

Just now, Moosejawcolt said:

It is on Steichen and Ballard. We all see it as fans that Gus will not change and it is proven by his history. That is on Ballard and Steichen as they are the head coach and GM and need to make a change if the coordinator wont and he is not successful. I bet most of this board wanted Gus back and I was on record saying dont expect anything different. 

Obviously Irsay wants this style of defense.   It hasn't changed no matter who the GM or head coach is. 

[Superman]

4 minutes ago, jvan1973 said:

I guess we're about to find out.   I would love for the DBs to be more aggressive on the line.   Can you remember a time that they were?  How many head coaches and gms.  We play a similar defense.    Several different offensive strategies over the years. Basically one defensive strategy.    Who do you think is in control of that?

 

We did have Pagano for six years... still didn't have a good defense, though.

[Superman]

2 minutes ago, Moosejawcolt said:

I bet most of this board wanted Gus back and I was on record saying dont expect anything different.

 

Nah, I don't think that's accurate. I don't think there's ever been a lot of Gus support on this board, not even when he was hired. Not everyone is grabbing pitchforks and trying to run him out of town, but I don't think anyone would have objected to him being fired, either in 2023 or this year. 

[jvan1973]

Just now, Superman said:

 

We did have Pagano for six years... still didn't have a good defense, though.

The corners still played passive, bend don't break.   They blitzed more with pagano

[Solid84]

I forget, is this the last season in Bradley's contract or did we extend him?

[jvan1973]

4 minutes ago, Moosejawcolt said:

It is on Steichen and Ballard. We all see it as fans that Gus will not change and it is proven by his history. That is on Ballard and Steichen as they are the head coach and GM and need to make a change if the coordinator wont and he is not successful. I bet most of this board wanted Gus back and I was on record saying dont expect anything different. 

Oh...  wait..  you were on record?    Man,  I had no idea it was on record.   I'll mark that down.   "It was on record".   Who gives a damn

[Superman]

1 minute ago, jvan1973 said:

The corners still played passive, bend don't break.   They blitzed more with pagano

 

Pagano's coverage principles were much more aggressive. First, they played a ton of man (outside of Vontae, almost no one did a good job of it). 

 

Second, they were more willing to engage at the LOS. This is something that was exploited by teams like the Patriots (no depth to the second level of the defense is why they were able to break those long runs against us), and the Steelers (bunch formations to beat press). 

 

I think the Pagano era was a significant departure from what the Colts have done on defense since Dungy was hired. It also proves that just changing the scheme is not the answer. We need good personnel, and good coaching, especially in today's NFL with so many good QBs and WRs. Right now, we probably don't have either.

[Superman]

3 minutes ago, Solid84 said:

I forget, is this the last season in Bradley's contract or did we extend him?

 

I didn't hear anything about an extension for him, and I don't know the specifics of his contract. Typical assistant coach contracts are 2-3 years, so I'm thinking it's probably his final year, but that's just a guess. 

[Moosejawcolt]

13 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

Nah, I don't think that's accurate. I don't think there's ever been a lot of Gus support on this board, not even when he was hired. Not everyone is grabbing pitchforks and trying to run him out of town, but I don't think anyone would have objected to him being fired, either in 2023 or this year. 

Sorry,  i meant to say that the majority of this board did not want Gus back. My error

12 minutes ago, jvan1973 said:

Oh...  wait..  you were on record?    Man,  I had no idea it was on record.   I'll mark that down.   "It was on record".   Who gives a damn

Lol

[Two_pound]

The announcers alluded to the fact of all the soft coverage on Diggs second touchdown when Cross was 4 yards deep in the end zone. That play reminded me of one from years ago when we were playing the Bengals and Marlon Jackson was a corner, the Bengals had the ball on the 2 yard line and Jackson was FIVE yards deep in the end zone. It was the easiest quick slant pitch and catch touchdown I've ever seen. You have to at least challenge the opponents sometimes.

[Goatface Killah]

1 hour ago, Moosejawcolt said:

Lombardi has been around the league and I love it how everyone throws that out. Lombardi is never shy about the mistakes he has made and what he would do differently. He went to some pretty dysfunctional teams and some great teams as well. People always throw out the line "well what has Lombardi done"? rather than actually agreeing or disagreeing with his comments!

I love how people value someone who never had any success just because they feel the same way they do.

 

You know who else runs a very similar defense? San Fransisco. They seem to be doing ok. 

[shasta519]

18 hours ago, krunk said:

You watch AR and you see that thing that Irsay didn't see in Wentz. AR has that dawg, that ability to just put the thing on his shoulders and get his team mates to respond. They all believe in him. You didn't see that much with Wentz. When we got down to crunch time and we had to get in the playoffs the team wilted and so did the QB. He couldn't shoulder the load. 

 

In fairness to Wentz, he certainly had games where he was willing the team to a win and they responded. That MNF BAL game comes to mind. Similarly in that SF game. He also led the game-winning drive against AR too when no team could get anything going.

 

The collapse of the 2021 season continued throughout the entire 2022 season. Ryan supposedly was bringing in the leadership to fix that, but even he (a well-respected vet who had led a team to a SB appearance) couldn't will that team to respond or do much. Same with Foles later in the season. So I don't think we can put that on Wentz for not being able to shoulder the load. That was a team collapse.

 

But I have no doubts his team believes in AR or that Irsay sees something special...we just haven't seen this team in real crunch time yet either. 

[shasta519]

16 hours ago, Two_pound said:

The announcers alluded to the fact of all the soft coverage on Diggs second touchdown when Cross was 4 yards deep in the end zone. That play reminded me of one from years ago when we were playing the Bengals and Marlon Jackson was a corner, the Bengals had the ball on the 2 yard line and Jackson was FIVE yards deep in the end zone. It was the easiest quick slant pitch and catch touchdown I've ever seen. You have to at least challenge the opponents sometimes.

 

The first Diggs TD looked to be on Kenny more than anyone. Looks like he was late to cover that slant. 

[richard pallo]

16 minutes ago, shasta519 said:

 

The first Diggs TD looked to be on Kenny more than anyone. Looks like he was late to cover that slant. 

His PFF score was very low this game.  That didn't help.

[smittywerb]

16 hours ago, Goatface Killah said:

I love how people value someone who never had any success just because they feel the same way they do.

 

You know who else runs a very similar defense? San Fransisco. They seem to be doing ok. 

This.  Doesn’t matter what we do if we don’t have the personnel.  As others have mentioned, we can bring in a DC who is the most aggressive blitz happy one out there and still have a bad defense because we don’t have the players.

 

See, offense is a little different.  You still need the talent but QBs are the biggest force multipliers in the game.  Having a good qb can cover a lot of things up on offense.  On defense, you really don’t have that.  Not saying there aren’t force multipliers on defense but it takes more of a collection of talented players to have a good defense.  

 

 

[shasta519]

17 hours ago, Superman said:

 

We did have Pagano for six years... still didn't have a good defense, though.

 

I wasn't a huge fan of the Pagano defense. Seemed to be prone to blowout losses and getting gashed by certain teams. But it was pretty solid in 2013 and 2014 when they had the pieces to make it work. The 2014 defense held CIN and DEN to 20 total pts in two games to get to the AFCCG.

 

Grigson failed to sustain it long-term via the draft and players aged out quickly. But Pagano does share some of the responsibility for this. His fingerprints and scheme are all over many defensive draft picks, including Ballard's first draft.

 

I think Irsay desired a more balanced team (like NE). It wasn't long after hiring Pagano (maybe 2013), that Irsay publicly lamented about only winning one SB with Peyton and their "Star Wars numbers." This felt like a shot at the offense, but also the defensive scheme as well. And I think it gave us a glimpse into his mindset at the time. Post Peyton, he felt like a change was needed so they didn't "waste" Luck's greatness. And Pagano fit the mold as the former DC of another good, balanced team in BAL, who could build a great defense while Luck would lead the offense.

 

Sort of worked I guess, at least for a little while. But by 2016-17, that defense had regressed into a bottom 5 unit. Switching to a new scheme was probably necessary by default.

[shasta519]

6 minutes ago, richard pallo said:

His PFF score was very low this game.  That didn't help.

 

I saw those coverage grades, but they must have changed them because PFF now has Moore at an 80 grade for the game.

 

But Pro-Football Reference charted 3/3 for 30 yards and a TD (147 passer rating against), with 5 combined tkls and a missed tkl. 

 

Maybe because he was only targeted a few times that's a positive, but an 80 implies he was great.

 

It sometimes seems like individual players are arbitrarily graded high or low. The Colts defense was #29 in EPA/play and gave up 29 pts. Yet the way PFF tells it, the only poor grades on the defense were Jaylon Jones, Tyquan Lewis, Dayo and Taven Bryan. Maybe Bryan ,but I don't know how you can say the rest were appreciably worse than their counterparts on defense.

[Superman]

59 minutes ago, shasta519 said:

 

I wasn't a huge fan of the Pagano defense. Seemed to be prone to blowout losses and getting gashed by certain teams. But it was pretty solid in 2013 and 2014 when they had the pieces to make it work. The 2014 defense held CIN and DEN to 20 total pts in two games to get to the AFCCG.

 

Grigson failed to sustain it long-term via the draft and players aged out quickly. But Pagano does share some of the responsibility for this. His fingerprints and scheme are all over many defensive draft picks, including Ballard's first draft.

 

I think Irsay desired a more balanced team (like NE). It wasn't long after hiring Pagano (maybe 2013), that Irsay publicly lamented about only winning one SB with Peyton and their "Star Wars numbers." This felt like a shot at the offense, but also the defensive scheme as well. And I think it gave us a glimpse into his mindset at the time. Post Peyton, he felt like a change was needed so they didn't "waste" Luck's greatness. And Pagano fit the mold as the former DC of another good, balanced team in BAL, who could build a great defense while Luck would lead the offense.

 

Sort of worked I guess, at least for a little while. But by 2016-17, that defense had regressed into a bottom 5 unit. Switching to a new scheme was probably necessary by default.

 

I don't disagree. I'm not saying the Pagano defenses were absolute trash and never had good games, but in general, the defense wasn't a strength. There were some highlights, mostly because of Vontae Davis locking down a receiver, or Robert Mathis wrecking a game.

 

My point was just that switching defensive schemes doesn't solve the problem. The scheme we run isn't my favorite, but I think it can be better with modest adjustments, regardless of personnel. 

 

Side point: Irsay's comments about Star Wars numbers got a lot of press. Maybe he was playing mind games with Peyton before his return game to Indy... But I always thought that, behind all the overreactions, his point was missed. To me, he was saying we needed to be more complementary, because just having a great offense isn't good enough. I never took it as a shot towards Peyton, or anyone else. And I think he's made similar comments since then, and both Grigson and Ballard have had a mandate from Irsay to build a complementary football team, not a team that relies so heavily on any one unit as the Manning era Colts did. 

 

I think Ballard brought his own philosophy on team building and defensive scheme, and once they moved on from Pagano he made sure to implement it. I don't have a problem with the philosophy or even the scheme, it's been the execution of both that are the problem. And I think that was true of the Grigson/Pagano defense as well. 

[Moosejawcolt]

18 hours ago, Goatface Killah said:

I love how people value someone who never had any success just because they feel the same way they do.

 

You know who else runs a very similar defense? San Fransisco. They seem to be doing ok. 

They have the key players to run that defense. Elite rush end, loaded along the D line. Best coverage linebacker in the league and great safety play. They got rid of Buckner because they knew they would be paying a lot to keep that Dline together for the coming years. What do we have? Elite DT.

 

[Moosejawcolt]

19 hours ago, jvan1973 said:

I guess we're about to find out.   I would love for the DBs to be more aggressive on the line.   Can you remember a time that they were?  How many head coaches and gms.  We play a similar defense.    Several different offensive strategies over the years. Basically one defensive strategy.    Who do you think is in control of that?

I think they play off becasuse Bradley is conservative and fears they will get burned. I know people on this board pound the table for more blitzing. I would argue that when Bradley has blitzed, it has not ended well. Honestly,  this defense is just lacking talent to really be a good defense no matter what scheme they decide to run. Sure, you could fire Bradley and may get a bump in play. However, I just think this defense lacks the talent. Gus is archaic and conservative but I put it more on Ballard as I don't think he has drafted well on defense at all. He has been pretty good on the offensive side but I would give him a big fail on the defensive side

[Superman]

1 minute ago, Moosejawcolt said:

I think they play off becasuse Bradley is conservative and fears they will get burned. I know people on this board pound the table for more blitzing. I would argue that when Bradley has blitzed, it has not ended well. Honestly,  this defense is just lacking talent to really be a good defense no matter what scheme they decide to run. Sure, you could fire Bradley and may get a bump in play. However, I just think this defense lacks the talent. Gus is archaic and conservative but I put it more on Ballard as I don't think he has drafted well on defense at all. He has been pretty good on the offensive side but I would give him a big fail on the defensive side

 

What would happen if they disguise Cover 4 and Cover 2, and allow the outside corners to engage at the line of scrimmage? 

 

Take the big play to Collins. What if Brents can put his hands on Collins, rather than letting him work up to top speed, uninterrupted, for 30 yards? 

 

Blitzing is just one element of it. There are other adjustments that can be made that don't have anything to do with blitzing.

[Moosejawcolt]

Just now, Superman said:

 

What would happen if they disguise Cover 4 and Cover 2, and allow the outside corners to engage at the line of scrimmage? 

 

Take the big play to Collins. What if Brents can put his hands on Collins, rather than letting him work up to top speed, uninterrupted, for 30 yards? 

 

Blitzing is just one element of it. There are other adjustments that can be made that don't have anything to do with blitzing.

Agreed, but do you really think there is a lot of talent on this defense? Just asking. This team is still needing an above average Dline to make it work and I just dont see it. We have Buckner and hopefully Latu can be that rush end. Until someone is able to compliment Buckner and put pressure coming around the edge.  I dont see this D working no matter what they do differently

[Goatface Killah]

19 minutes ago, Moosejawcolt said:

They have the key players to run that defense. Elite rush end, loaded along the D line. Best coverage linebacker in the league and great safety play. They got rid of Buckner because they knew they would be paying a lot to keep that Dline together for the coming years. What do we have? Elite DT.

 

Yeah Moose, thats the idea. You have to have the key players to run your scheme, whatever scheme that is.

 

You were trashing the system itself, Im only pointing out that the scheme can obviously work.

[KB]

1 minute ago, Superman said:

 

What would happen if they disguise Cover 4 and Cover 2, and allow the outside corners to engage at the line of scrimmage? 

 

Take the big play to Collins. What if Brents can put his hands on Collins, rather than letting him work up to top speed, uninterrupted, for 30 yards? 

 

Blitzing is just one element of it. There are other adjustments that can be made that don't have anything to do with blitzing.

Isn't pressing at the line supposed to be a main part of the defense? It was in Seattle if I remember right. I believe it was to have the corners press at the line and guide them to the outer part of the field so the corner could always be between the qb and WR. I believe this is the correct article I got it from last year.

 

https://www.si.com/nfl/colts/news/juju-brents-darius-rush-colts-mold-cornerback

 

If it is then why do we not in your opinion?

 

[Superman]

12 minutes ago, Moosejawcolt said:

Agreed, but do you really think there is a lot of talent on this defense? Just asking. This team is still needing an above average Dline to make it work and I just dont see it. We have Buckner and hopefully Latu can be that rush end. Until someone is able to compliment Buckner and put pressure coming around the edge.  I dont see this D working no matter what they do differently

 

I think the talent needs to be better. And I don't think it matters much as long as Bradley refuses to be more aggressive. I disagree with your last line. Just a couple modest adjustments would yield positive results, IMO, but Bradley is conservative to a fault.

[Superman]

3 minutes ago, KB said:

Isn't pressing at the line supposed to be a main part of the defense? It was in Seattle if I remember right. I believe it was to have the corners press at the line and guide them to the outer part of the field so the corner could always be between the qb and WR. I believe this is the correct article I got it from last year.

 

https://www.si.com/nfl/colts/news/juju-brents-darius-rush-colts-mold-cornerback

 

If it is then why do we not in your opinion?

 

 

That's my understanding. As for why we don't, I don't have a good answer to that. My belief is that Bradley is uber conservative, and that's why we play with cushions, whether it's good or not. It would be nice if someone would ask him some of these questions, but our pressers are pretty weak, IMO. 

[Moosejawcolt]

14 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

I think the talent needs to be better. And I don't think it matters much as long as Bradley refuses to be more aggressive. I disagree with your last line. Just a couple modest adjustments would yield positive results, IMO, but Bradley is conservative to a fault.

So let's say u r right. A few changes may have positive results. Who does that fall on? Ballard and Steichen know football and they must know this as well. Three years in and the same old. Therefore, in the end it does fall on Steichen and and Ballard. If he refuses to change and the results are not acceptable. Then either of those 2 need to fire him. I was totally shocked they brought back Gus for  another year. Love Steichen, but I did not agree at all and puzzled by his decision.

[Moosejawcolt]

22 minutes ago, Goatface Killah said:

Yeah Moose, thats the idea. You have to have the key players to run your scheme, whatever scheme that is.

 

You were trashing the system itself, Im only pointing out that the scheme can obviously work.

In my defense, I don't belive in the system. However,  did also say that in order for it to work effectively. U need to be loaded with talent on the Dline and safety positions.

[Superman]

9 minutes ago, Moosejawcolt said:

So let's say u r right. A few changes may have positive results. Who does that fall on? Ballard and Steichen know football and they must know this as well. Three years in and the same old. Therefore, in the end it does fall on Steichen and and Ballard. If he refuses to change and the results are not acceptable. Then either of those 2 need to fire him. I was totally shocked they brought back Gus for  another year. Love Steichen, but I did not agree at all and puzzled by his decision.

 

I think this is laughable. Bottom line, you refuse to allow Bradley to bear responsibility for the way he calls the defense. 

 

Agreed with the bolded, but any number of defensive coaches would use modest adjustments when their defense is struggling to get results. Bradley mostly does not, and when he does, it's to be even more conservative. And that's on him. 

[Moosejawcolt]

9 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

I think this is laughable. Bottom line, you refuse to allow Bradley to bear responsibility for the way he calls the defense. 

 

Agreed with the bolded, but any number of defensive coaches would use modest adjustments when their defense is struggling to get results. Bradley mostly does not, and when he does, it's to be even more conservative. And that's on him. 

Not at all. All i am saying is this. Let us just say that there is more talent than we think and we can become say a top 15 defense with a couple of tweaks here and there.  The coach and the GM decided to run it back for year 3 with him. Do you not think Steichen and Ballard have sat down and reviewed the tape and know we have to be more aggressive and/or disguise coverages more? Are they not conveying this to Gus? If they are telling Gus he has to be less conservative and he refuses. Than yes that falls on Steichen and/or Ballard as they need to make a move. We all know this is Gus and this is who he is. He is not going to change and that appears to be obvious. I dont understand for the life of me why the front office doesn't appear to see it. Lafleur had to fire his D coach last year. Apparently he was a good friend but he did it because he had to do it and I believe it was reported that he got pressure to make the change from the front office.

[Superman]

16 minutes ago, Moosejawcolt said:

Not at all. All i am saying is this. Let us just say that there is more talent than we think and we can become say a top 15 defense with a couple of tweaks here and there.  The coach and the GM decided to run it back for year 3 with him. Do you not think Steichen and Ballard have sat down and reviewed the tape and know we have to be more aggressive and/or disguise coverages more? Are they not conveying this to Gus? If they are telling Gus he has to be less conservative and he refuses. Than yes that falls on Steichen and/or Ballard as they need to make a move. We all know this is Gus and this is who he is. He is not going to change and that appears to be obvious. I dont understand for the life of me why the front office doesn't appear to see it. Lafleur had to fire his D coach last year. Apparently he was a good friend but he did it because he had to do it and I believe it was reported that he got pressure to make the change from the front office.

 

To the bolded, I sure hope so. Both Steichen and Ballard made comments early in the offseason suggesting that some adjustments would be necessary to the defense, even with Bradley staying. 

 

But if they are conveying that to Bradley, and he still can't push the right buttons, that's on Bradley for not being good enough. And that's a separate conversation from whether they should have kept him, or whether the personnel needs to be better. 

 

On 4th down on the 2 yard line, we didn't need to blitz, and we didn't need Darrelle Revis or Ed Reed in the defensive backfield. We just needed the defensive play caller to give our guys a chance to make a play. And on Sundays, stuff like that is squarely on Bradley's shoulders.

 

I fully agree with Lombardi on this one. Steichen has to be the head coach -- not just the head coach of the offense, but the head coach of the entire football team -- and get Bradley to do better. And if he can't do better, then Bradley needs to go. I'm not ever the 'fire this guy!' poster, but if the defense isn't significantly better this season, and Bradley isn't replaced before 2025, I'll have a lot to say about this entire operation, including Ballard and Steichen.

[Moosejawcolt]

6 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

To the bolded, I sure hope so. Both Steichen and Ballard made comments early in the offseason suggesting that some adjustments would be necessary to the defense, even with Bradley staying. 

 

But if they are conveying that to Bradley, and he still can't push the right buttons, that's on Bradley for not being good enough. And that's a separate conversation from whether they should have kept him, or whether the personnel needs to be better. 

 

On 4th down on the 2 yard line, we didn't need to blitz, and we didn't need Darrelle Revis or Ed Reed in the defensive backfield. We just needed the defensive play caller to give our guys a chance to make a play. And on Sundays, stuff like that is squarely on Bradley's shoulders.

 

I fully agree with Lombardi on this one. Steichen has to be the head coach -- not just the head coach of the offense, but the head coach of the entire football team -- and get Bradley to do better. And if he can't do better, then Bradley needs to go. I'm not ever the 'fire this guy!' poster, but if the defense isn't significantly better this season, and Bradley isn't replaced before 2025, I'll have a lot to say about this entire operation, including Ballard and Steichen.

Totally agree.

[Zoltan]

1 hour ago, Moosejawcolt said:

Not at all. All i am saying is this. Let us just say that there is more talent than we think and we can become say a top 15 defense with a couple of tweaks here and there. 

 

The coach and the GM decided to run it back for year 3 with him. Do you not think Steichen and Ballard have sat down and reviewed the tape and know we have to be more aggressive and/or disguise coverages more? Are they not conveying this to Gus? If they are telling Gus he has to be less conservative and he refuses. Than yes that falls on Steichen and/or Ballard as they need to make a move. We all know this is Gus and this is who he is. He is not going to change and that appears to be obvious. I dont understand for the life of me why the front office doesn't appear to see it. Lafleur had to fire his D coach last year. Apparently he was a good friend but he did it because he had to do it and I believe it was reported that he got pressure to make the change from the front office.

 

To the 1st part, I do believe there is more talent on this defense than most think, and there is good evidence that by just changing Defensive coordinators you can take a bottom of the league defense and get them into the teens. Thats why when you are 25+ in defensive ranking, I believe it is more of a coach problem than a player problem and us being 28th in points allowed two years in a row indicates its a coach problem. 

Examples (these are just the ones I know):

Vikings in 2022 28th in Points allowed, hired Brian Flores 2023 ranked 14th. 

Eagles in 2015 28th in Points allowed, hire Jim Schwartz 2016 Ranked 12th. 

 

 

[Moosejawcolt]

Just now, Zoltan said:

 

To the 1st part, I do believe there is more talent on this defense than most think, and there is good evidence that by just changing Defensive coordinators you can take a bottom of the league defense and get them into the teens. Thats why when you are 25+ in defensive ranking, I believe it is more of a coach problem than a player problem and us being 28th in points allowed two years in a row indicates its a coach problem. 

Examples (these are just the ones I know):

Vikings in 2022 28th in Points allowed, hired Brian Flores 2023 ranked 14th. 

Eagles in 2015 28th in Points allowed, hire Jim Schwartz 2016 Ranked 12th. 

 

 

Agree somewhat. However, I feel both the Eagles and Vikings were stronger up front, but i get your point. I do think a change definitely is not going to make them take a step back. Any change will have a positive effect, but how much, I dont know.