How good were the O-linemen Suggs faced?
- Thread starter Houdini
- Start date
JeffGollin
ASFN Icon
We have two classes of either morons or goobers or homers on this board and this thread right now.
Stout - Add to this a third class - those who name-call and launch personal attacks on people who don't agree with them.
Stout - Add to this a third class - those who name-call and launch personal attacks on people who don't agree with them.
SECTION 11
vibraslap
But will we be selecting at #6, and how many teams will need QB's next year?
I still think the timing is right. The planets are aligned. We've got #6, and one of the top two will be there (maybe).
kerouac9
Klowned by Keim
At least two less than this year (whomever takes Leftwich and Palmer, along with Grossman and Boller, and probably Simms)...
Stout
A handful of fairy tales from the story bag...
That debacle was a result of a lack of cajones on the part of our D-Coordinator and Head Coach than an indictment of our pass-rushing talents (though they weren't too good!).
SECTION 11
vibraslap
Interesting......
A bit late but thoought I would chime in!
Suggs did not have 1 good year. He had 1 GREAT YEAR and 2 good years. Unless Im mistaken he had 10.5 sacks both years as a Freshman and Sophmore!
Those are pretty good years especially for such a raw player who had played RB his whole FB career! 10.5 sacks is a good season especially in a season where you only play about 12 games heck 10.5 is considered decent in the NFL where you have 16 games!
Its not like hes a one year wonder either!
But couldn't it be suggested, as I have done, that a single pass rushing stud wasn't the mistake there but the fact our DC's didn't take risks seemingly at all last year...especially in a situation that called for all out blitzing.
My response isn't about Suggs per se since I am withdrawing from that but I suggest that a team can get a pass rush from multiple places...not just the draft or from one player.
SECTION 11
vibraslap
Me too.
- Joined
- May 13, 2002
- Posts
- 1,978
- Reaction score
- 4
Well, either Larry Marmie is going to have the biggest change of heart on the face of the earth or this simply doesn't apply to us.
Our defensive philosophy has been the same for 8 years, read & react, with the emphasis on pressure from the front 4. If we could just cobble together a pass rush from what we have, we could have just done so last year.
So there was no prayer of applying pressure if we blitzed more? Forget the coaches philosophies for a moment. If we had been more aggressive defensively and blitzed more, can we not agree we would have been able to apply pressure?
Onto the coaches. I think there are serious questions about them because they hold too tightly to their ideas of how to run the show. I mean, the read/react CLEARLY wasn't working. The smart coaches would try different things to adjust but I cannot recall much adjusting being done by the defensive coaches...unless of course we are talking about rushing 3 instead of 4.
- Joined
- May 13, 2002
- Posts
- 1,978
- Reaction score
- 4
We're agreeing here. You certainly could have applied a little more pressure by blitzing, but this staff simply does not think that way and I don't see a radical change of heart this offseason.
I seriously question the coaches too. I have never bought in to the whole McGinnis love-fest. He is a master motivator but his choice of assistants, and loyalty towards them after they fail, is scary. There's a very good reason he was called on the carpet and told to fire Greene, Marmie, and Olson...they're all pretty bad coaches. Granted, Marmie didn't have much to scheme with last year, but I just saw an utter lack of creativity on defense and have seen if for years.
Jamir Miller spends 4 years here dropping into zones and goes to Cleveland and gets 14 sacks. Hmm.
OP
OP
Houdini
Registered
- Joined
- Dec 27, 2002
- Posts
- 880
- Reaction score
- 0
Maybe I should go back and delete this thread. I didn't realize what a commotion it would cause 
SECTION 11
vibraslap
I think Mac is a decent HC because a head coach is alot about motivating and managing (although some of his game management decisions have been head scratchers). It is the, as you put it, "utter lack of creativity" that is disappointing since I always felt he was a better DE coach than he has shown. I mean if something isn't working, then you have to adapt and that is what boggles the mind. Or in a game, if a team is presented with a certain scenario and they don't take advantage of it, then again I cannot fathom that.
My point most of last season is this. It was plainly obvious in camp that the O was going to be the stronger unit and the D was weaker. That wasn't a surprise. The D was actually playing a bit worse than I thought during that hideous 1-9 run but I cannot say I was shocked. The thing that I was screaming for was to go down swinging and blitzing and risking and not go down like weak lambs...which is what they did. I know it goes against the coaches philosophies but at some point the light should have gone on and they should have said "Screw it. I am going to blitz like there is no tomorrow and if we lose, at least I can look myself in the mirror and know I lost while doing my damnest to win."
- Joined
- May 13, 2002
- Posts
- 1,978
- Reaction score
- 4
I couldn't agree more.
When it's obvious that you don't have the skill to cover the opposition in a zone and apply pressure with a 4 man rush, you are going to lose. So, you might as well lose playing like wild animals and bringing 7 guys on every other play than sitting back in a soft cushion and dying the death of 10000 papercuts (or, in this case, 6 yard passes) while Bell, Tanner, Wakefield, and KVB pitifully failed to apply pressure in a 4 man rush.
When it's obvious that you don't have the skill to cover the opposition in a zone and apply pressure with a 4 man rush, you are going to lose. So, you might as well lose playing like wild animals and bringing 7 guys on every other play than sitting back in a soft cushion and dying the death of 10000 papercuts (or, in this case, 6 yard passes) while Bell, Tanner, Wakefield, and KVB pitifully failed to apply pressure in a 4 man rush.
ChiCard
Registered
The sad thing is we've been saying that since Buddy Ryan left.
- Joined
- May 13, 2002
- Posts
- 1,978
- Reaction score
- 4
As much of a dipstick as Buddy Ryan was, he is the only coach in this team's 15 years in the Valley that ever went after the opposition on defense. I mean, the guy was the worst hire the team ever made in retrospect but he had some balls on defense, that's for sure.
I think if we look at the top defenses, they are great because they do take chances and cause chaos and they don't wait for the play to come to them. They make things happen and they don't hope everything goes well. Read and react only wirks with strong discipline and great tackling and the Cards didn't exhibit either of those things.
Buddy Ryan, if he wasn't such a dunce, would have built a real legacy as a coach but his boneheaded management ways doomed him
SECTION 11
vibraslap
I'll go on record right now and say that I think Larry Marmie is horrible and should not have survived the offseason cleaning.
I 100% rock-solid guarantee that Jim Johnson would turn this defense around in a heartbeat.
http://140.99.36.102/vb/showthread.php?s=&threadid=8380
I 100% rock-solid guarantee that Jim Johnson would turn this defense around in a heartbeat.
http://140.99.36.102/vb/showthread.php?s=&threadid=8380
- Joined
- May 13, 2002
- Posts
- 1,978
- Reaction score
- 4
I can't agree more. Whoever forced McG to fire Olson should also have forced him to fire Marmie. The guy is terrible. It took him 16 games to figure out that the standard 4-man front with a zone wasn't getting it done......and it took the fans about 3.
