The Kingsbury Conundrum

Harry

ASFN Consultant and Senior Writer
Joined
Jan 7, 2003
Posts
10,864
Reaction score
23,290
Location
Orlando, FL
I saw Budda Baker characterized the season as a roller coaster. I see it more as a death spiral.

The recent Athletic article about Kingsbury was accurate as far as it went. I agreed with all the negatives and a few of the positives. I just reached a different conclusion about his tenure. Most of the negatives were ones I’d previously presented here but they missed numerous other valid criticisms, like receiver routes, excessive penalties, wasted timeouts and others so numerous it pointless to rehash.

The most valid endorsement is that the offensive personnel is weak. Better players would certainly have produced better outcomes. Are we sure better players will be something that gets fixed? I look at the major personnel issues Carroll has overcome in Seattle or the Rams overcame in their season ending regular season game. I understand the salary cap makes game planning around your weaknesses part of the job. Has Kingsbury shown the ability to do that? I already posted much of this falls on Keim.

Where our opinions diverge the most is in the belief that Kingsbury will change and improve. When Tech fired Kingsbury they noted, “It's not based on one game. This type of decision is not based on one season. This decision was made based on a three-year pattern, a three-year pattern of inconsistency," athletic director Kirby Hocutt said during a campus news conference. "We saw progress, but we also saw lapses of progress in key critical areas." I would say Kingsbury’s entire college tenure reflected this.

I don’t believe Kingsbury’s history indicates such improvement is likely. He wants to be head coach, offensive coordinator and quarterback coach. He basically sees the defense as somebody else’s problem. Sure he occasionally designs a good play but not a good game plan. Also that play is often not repeated. His play calling is atrocious for someone who’s been a head coach for so long. Why hasn’t he learned how to call a consistent game by now? Players don’t typically learn to shoot free throws after they reach the NBA. There are adjustments first time NFL coaches must make but there shouldn’t be this many adjustments needed. The author asks if the Cards let Kingsbury go can they find someone to develop Murray? I’d argue most of what Kingsbury does has not moved Murray forward. Murray’s running is instinctive. His passing mechanics are crude. His ability to read defenses seems severely limited. Murray rarely uses progressions. He is not being coached to be a leader of men. I’d like to know how much film he studies. Finally I think most good coaches could integrate Murray’s talent. Giving Murray a dedicated QB coach who would focus on traditional passing technique might fill a void of knowledge with which Murray struggles. I don’t think you can be a successful QB based on solely running. A winning QB must possess some pocket passing skills. I haven’t seen Murray improve these skills under Kingsbury’s tutelage.

My feeling is that next year the Cards will have a similar record. They will show some statistical improvement due to better personnel. However the excuse will be Kingsbury hasn’t had long enough to integrate the new players. The Kingsbury defenders will still be there, continuing to be thinking numbers not fundamentals.

What was totally ignored in the article was my belief the league has adapted to what few unique elements Kingsbury brought to the offense. I’ve been waiting for Kingsbury to adjust to the changed defenses. Simply put, he appears to be out of ideas. This lack of adjustment was just covered by ESPN, which reached the same conclusion that he’d failed to adjust.

So instead of continuing to beat this drum let’s assume the Kingsbury stays, which is the path of least resistance. That’s the Cards’ traditional route. There should be some conditions to his continuing in his role. First the hiring of a QB coach should be non-negotiable. Of course Kingsbury would be involved in the selection but could not be the only voice. My preference would be to hire an offensive coordinator as well. The obvious problem is Kingsbury is not really a head coach. As far as we can tell he has little or no involvement in the defense or special teams. So if he’s not wholly in charge of the offense what’s his role? So I guess an OC is out.

I would make it clear Kingsbury needs to be in the defensive scheming & the special teams’ decision if only as an empowered observer. These coaches report to him and they should feel like they’re being held accountable. In my mind the only other coach who should be in jeopardy is Joseph. Between Covid, excessive injuries, poor personnel and no head coach assistance Joseph has not been functioning in an ideal situation. Still I’ve seen too much inconsistency of game plans. Too many inexperienced QBs were too effective. Too many players seemed confused about their responsibility, especially in zone. Receivers were constantly left uncovered. On running plays to the edge were often left open. Their penalty counts reflected too little discipline. Joseph was part of the problem, not the solution. He must go.

Next time we’ll look in detail about the offensive personnel. I warn you ESPN just wrote, “This is a roster that can win big next year.” I disagree.
 

82CardsGrad

7 x 70
Joined
Dec 31, 2004
Posts
35,499
Reaction score
6,943
Location
Scottsdale
I saw Budda Baker characterized the season as a roller coaster. I see it more as a death spiral.

The recent Athletic article about Kingsbury was accurate as far as it went. I agreed with all the negatives and a few of the positives. I just reached a different conclusion about his tenure. Most of the negatives were ones I’d previously presented here but they missed numerous other valid criticisms, like receiver routes, excessive penalties, wasted timeouts and others so numerous it pointless to rehash.

The most valid endorsement is that the offensive personnel is weak. Better players would certainly have produced better outcomes. Are we sure better players will be something that gets fixed? I look at the major personnel issues Carroll has overcome in Seattle or the Rams overcame in their season ending regular season game. I understand the salary cap makes game planning around your weaknesses part of the job. Has Kingsbury shown the ability to do that? I already posted much of this falls on Keim.

Where our opinions diverge the most is in the belief that Kingsbury will change and improve. When Tech fired Kingsbury they noted, “It's not based on one game. This type of decision is not based on one season. This decision was made based on a three-year pattern, a three-year pattern of inconsistency," athletic director Kirby Hocutt said during a campus news conference. "We saw progress, but we also saw lapses of progress in key critical areas." I would say Kingsbury’s entire college tenure reflected this.

I don’t believe Kingsbury’s history indicates such improvement is likely. He wants to be head coach, offensive coordinator and quarterback coach. He basically sees the defense as somebody else’s problem. Sure he occasionally designs a good play but not a good game plan. Also that play is often not repeated. His play calling is atrocious for someone who’s been a head coach for so long. Why hasn’t he learned how to call a consistent game by now? Players don’t typically learn to shoot free throws after they reach the NBA. There are adjustments first time NFL coaches must make but there shouldn’t be this many adjustments needed. The author asks if the Cards let Kingsbury go can they find someone to develop Murray? I’d argue most of what Kingsbury does has not moved Murray forward. Murray’s running is instinctive. His passing mechanics are crude. His ability to read defenses seems severely limited. Murray rarely uses progressions. He is not being coached to be a leader of men. I’d like to know how much film he studies. Finally I think most good coaches could integrate Murray’s talent. Giving Murray a dedicated QB coach who would focus on traditional passing technique might fill a void of knowledge with which Murray struggles. I don’t think you can be a successful QB based on solely running. A winning QB must possess some pocket passing skills. I haven’t seen Murray improve these skills under Kingsbury’s tutelage.

My feeling is that next year the Cards will have a similar record. They will show some statistical improvement due to better personnel. However the excuse will be Kingsbury hasn’t had long enough to integrate the new players. The Kingsbury defenders will still be there, continuing to be thinking numbers not fundamentals.

What was totally ignored in the article was my belief the league has adapted to what few unique elements Kingsbury brought to the offense. I’ve been waiting for Kingsbury to adjust to the changed defenses. Simply put, he appears to be out of ideas. This lack of adjustment was just covered by ESPN, which reached the same conclusion that he’d failed to adjust.

So instead of continuing to beat this drum let’s assume the Kingsbury stays, which is the path of least resistance. That’s the Cards’ traditional route. There should be some conditions to his continuing in his role. First the hiring of a QB coach should be non-negotiable. Of course Kingsbury would be involved in the selection but could not be the only voice. My preference would be to hire an offensive coordinator as well. The obvious problem is Kingsbury is not really a head coach. As far as we can tell he has little or no involvement in the defense or special teams. So if he’s not wholly in charge of the offense what’s his role? So I guess an OC is out.

I would make it clear Kingsbury needs to be in the defensive scheming & the special teams’ decision if only as an empowered observer. These coaches report to him and they should feel like they’re being held accountable. In my mind the only other coach who should be in jeopardy is Joseph. Between Covid, excessive injuries, poor personnel and no head coach assistance Joseph has not been functioning in an ideal situation. Still I’ve seen too much inconsistency of game plans. Too many inexperienced QBs were too effective. Too many players seemed confused about their responsibility, especially in zone. Receivers were constantly left uncovered. On running plays to the edge were often left open. Their penalty counts reflected too little discipline. Joseph was part of the problem, not the solution. He must go.

Next time we’ll look in detail about the offensive personnel. I warn you ESPN just wrote, “This is a roster that can win big next year.” I disagree.


Kingsbury was overmatched in virtually every game this season (not to mention last year...). As you pointed out Harry, there is nothing in his coaching past to suggest better days lie ahead for this team. I don't understand the thinking that seems to exist with MB and SK, as well as others who support Kliff, that he will suddenly "figure it out" while coaching in the most competitive league on the planet. Huh?
Kliff doesn't strike me as a leader. And as far as I'm concerned, being someone who inspires others and whom can ignite others to rally to a cause is job #1 as a head coach! Kliffy seems to want to portray his uber-cool, Lululemon persona as he attempts to be more of "one of the guys," than an authoritative and inspirational leader. Hence, we see a team this year, as was the case last season, that is stunningly undisciplined and embarrassingly inconsistent.

In short, MB and SK f'd up here, period. I don't care one iota what Kyler Murray thinks about Kliff. IMHO, Murray doesn't have the first clue what it takes to be a legit NFL head coach and he doesn't even realize what type of a coach is best for him and his career...
Kliff needs to go, plain & simple.

And as for the joker at ESPN who believes this roster can "win big next season..." I can only conclude that the writer was enjoying his consumption - legally now of course - of weed when he wrote such a piece!
 

cardpa

Have a Nice Day!
Joined
Mar 14, 2003
Posts
7,335
Reaction score
4,011
Location
Monroe NC
I don’t believe Kingsbury’s history indicates such improvement is likely. He wants to be head coach, offensive coordinator and quarterback coach. He basically sees the defense as somebody else’s problem.

So instead of continuing to beat this drum let’s assume the Kingsbury stays, which is the path of least resistance. That’s the Cards’ traditional route. There should be some conditions to his continuing in his role. First the hiring of a QB coach should be non-negotiable. Of course Kingsbury would be involved in the selection but could not be the only voice. My preference would be to hire an offensive coordinator as well. The obvious problem is Kingsbury is not really a head coach. As far as we can tell he has little or no involvement in the defense or special teams. So if he’s not wholly in charge of the offense what’s his role? So I guess an OC is out.

I would make it clear Kingsbury needs to be in the defensive scheming & the special teams’ decision if only as an empowered observer. These coaches report to him and they should feel like they’re being held accountable.

Interesting in that I just pretty much said this in another post.
 

Finito

ASFN Icon
Joined
Oct 23, 2005
Posts
21,023
Reaction score
13,765
I saw Budda Baker characterized the season as a roller coaster. I see it more as a death spiral.

The recent Athletic article about Kingsbury was accurate as far as it went. I agreed with all the negatives and a few of the positives. I just reached a different conclusion about his tenure. Most of the negatives were ones I’d previously presented here but they missed numerous other valid criticisms, like receiver routes, excessive penalties, wasted timeouts and others so numerous it pointless to rehash.

The most valid endorsement is that the offensive personnel is weak. Better players would certainly have produced better outcomes. Are we sure better players will be something that gets fixed? I look at the major personnel issues Carroll has overcome in Seattle or the Rams overcame in their season ending regular season game. I understand the salary cap makes game planning around your weaknesses part of the job. Has Kingsbury shown the ability to do that? I already posted much of this falls on Keim.

Where our opinions diverge the most is in the belief that Kingsbury will change and improve. When Tech fired Kingsbury they noted, “It's not based on one game. This type of decision is not based on one season. This decision was made based on a three-year pattern, a three-year pattern of inconsistency," athletic director Kirby Hocutt said during a campus news conference. "We saw progress, but we also saw lapses of progress in key critical areas." I would say Kingsbury’s entire college tenure reflected this.

I don’t believe Kingsbury’s history indicates such improvement is likely. He wants to be head coach, offensive coordinator and quarterback coach. He basically sees the defense as somebody else’s problem. Sure he occasionally designs a good play but not a good game plan. Also that play is often not repeated. His play calling is atrocious for someone who’s been a head coach for so long. Why hasn’t he learned how to call a consistent game by now? Players don’t typically learn to shoot free throws after they reach the NBA. There are adjustments first time NFL coaches must make but there shouldn’t be this many adjustments needed. The author asks if the Cards let Kingsbury go can they find someone to develop Murray? I’d argue most of what Kingsbury does has not moved Murray forward. Murray’s running is instinctive. His passing mechanics are crude. His ability to read defenses seems severely limited. Murray rarely uses progressions. He is not being coached to be a leader of men. I’d like to know how much film he studies. Finally I think most good coaches could integrate Murray’s talent. Giving Murray a dedicated QB coach who would focus on traditional passing technique might fill a void of knowledge with which Murray struggles. I don’t think you can be a successful QB based on solely running. A winning QB must possess some pocket passing skills. I haven’t seen Murray improve these skills under Kingsbury’s tutelage.

My feeling is that next year the Cards will have a similar record. They will show some statistical improvement due to better personnel. However the excuse will be Kingsbury hasn’t had long enough to integrate the new players. The Kingsbury defenders will still be there, continuing to be thinking numbers not fundamentals.

What was totally ignored in the article was my belief the league has adapted to what few unique elements Kingsbury brought to the offense. I’ve been waiting for Kingsbury to adjust to the changed defenses. Simply put, he appears to be out of ideas. This lack of adjustment was just covered by ESPN, which reached the same conclusion that he’d failed to adjust.

So instead of continuing to beat this drum let’s assume the Kingsbury stays, which is the path of least resistance. That’s the Cards’ traditional route. There should be some conditions to his continuing in his role. First the hiring of a QB coach should be non-negotiable. Of course Kingsbury would be involved in the selection but could not be the only voice. My preference would be to hire an offensive coordinator as well. The obvious problem is Kingsbury is not really a head coach. As far as we can tell he has little or no involvement in the defense or special teams. So if he’s not wholly in charge of the offense what’s his role? So I guess an OC is out.

I would make it clear Kingsbury needs to be in the defensive scheming & the special teams’ decision if only as an empowered observer. These coaches report to him and they should feel like they’re being held accountable. In my mind the only other coach who should be in jeopardy is Joseph. Between Covid, excessive injuries, poor personnel and no head coach assistance Joseph has not been functioning in an ideal situation. Still I’ve seen too much inconsistency of game plans. Too many inexperienced QBs were too effective. Too many players seemed confused about their responsibility, especially in zone. Receivers were constantly left uncovered. On running plays to the edge were often left open. Their penalty counts reflected too little discipline. Joseph was part of the problem, not the solution. He must go.

Next time we’ll look in detail about the offensive personnel. I warn you ESPN just wrote, “This is a roster that can win big next year.” I disagree.

You yourself in this post say you don’t see a roster that can win big and I agree neither do.

is KK perfect no not all but is he the worst coach in the league no not at all.

at the end of the day this was a legit top ten offense with a horrible WR core outside of Hopkins and an average running game.

we were 8-8 with 5 losses coming by 1 score including 3 by a field goal.

I can legitimately look at Kirk and Zane and say you cost us 3 games.

Kirk took a huge step back, dropped 2 touchdowns in two separate one score games and that’s horrible but someone brought up the fact Kirk didn’t have one broken tackle all year. that’s super alarming. He feels contact and he just goes down that’s what that tells me. Anyone remember that sweep on the goal line and he pulled up at the 1? Then the whole party bus thing. Nobody disappointed me more than him. If....IF he’s on this team next year he should be a 3 at best.

How many times could we not punch it in from the 1? Our interior needs to be reworked and we need a different back. Drake is NFL average and I think he’s a quality back up but what he is not is a starter. We need a big physical bruising back or a explosive one who can break it open.

everybody loved to bring up the Patriots for the last 15 years. The Patriots do it like this we should do it like them. Well the Patriots have had a saying that whole time and it “Do your job” is KK perfect? Nope but he ain’t the one missing field goals and dropping catches in the end zone gotta do your job.

I want the best offensive weapon in this draft in rounds 1 and 2. Round 1 Pitts/Waddle/Smith and round 2 I’m taking the best RB on the board.

Fitz gone, Peterson gone if he doesn’t want to take a pay cut. That’s 25 million wrapped up in those two. My target in FA is Scherff or Thuney
 

Ouchie-Z-Clown

I'm better than Mulli!
Joined
Sep 16, 2002
Posts
61,167
Reaction score
53,542
Location
SoCal
Agree with you 100% Harry. We can go through all the details but ultimately after he figured out that he can’t go solely full spread all the time I haven’t seen a propensity to learn, grow or adapt and that’s the biggest nail in a coach’s coffin imo.
 

RugbyMuffin

ASFN IDOL
Joined
Apr 30, 2003
Posts
30,485
Reaction score
4,877
Agree with you 100% Harry. We can go through all the details but ultimately after he figured out that he can’t go solely full spread all the time I haven’t seen a propensity to learn, grow or adapt and that’s the biggest nail in a coach’s coffin imo.

This whole situation is quite anxiety inducing.

If Kliff is not an NFL coach, that is bad.

The scary part is that I was not wrong two years ago, and trust me, I WANT TO BE WRONG RIGHT NOW.

But, if Kyler Murray is perfect for Kingsbury's system, but Kingsbury system does not work in the NFL, then where does that leave us with Murray? Murray is RIDICULOUSLY physically talented, but can he read defenses, go through progressions, stand in the pocket, throw down field? He certainly will not stay in the pocket and take a hit, because he cannot since he will get injured, or at least it feels like that happens a lot.

If Kliff is not the guy, and Murray cannot learn other systems, that is a nightmare scenario. Not to mention we still have Steve Keim at the helm and while he can make a good trade, his free agent signings are 50/50, and his drafting is ACTROCIOUS. Looks like that 2019 draft was a bad as it looked at the time as well.

https://247sports.com/nfl/arizona-cardinals/Team/Arizona-Cardinals-682/DraftPicks/?year=alltime

Ugh.......just ugh.

If there is something to say positive about the situation? At least the games where the team is competitive are entertaining as all heck. This year there were some GREAT games to watch, which is hard to remember since the last two games were HORRIBLY BORING and disappointing.

And to re-start this whole thing we need for Kliff to be fired, Murray to fail, and Keim to be FINALLY fired. That is a long, long timeline, at least 3 to years.
 

SoonerLou

ASFN Addict
Joined
Sep 15, 2019
Posts
7,806
Reaction score
11,411
Location
St Louis, MO
I’m sure you could find most of these points posted by multiple people.
Isnt it possible we fix the issues by simply taking more of the load off of Kliff.

1. Force Kliff to bring in a QB coach.
2. Force another coach to join the team either as a senior offensive assistant or bring in another coach to be assistant Head Coach. That either helps bring in someone else to call plays or take some of the game management duties off of him.

Now this could potentially make Kliff look like a lame duck coach, but imo its needed. There's too much on him. I dont know what Keim was thinking in terms of having a non NFL guy with no track history of winning doing so many roles.

The Paytons, McVay's, Shanahan's cut their teeth in the NFL for years. Even bright minds like Andy Reid have a stable of coaches to handle other issues for him.

Its too much on Kliff and sometimes it looks like he zones out or looks exhausted.
 

TaylorSwift

Hall of Famer
Joined
Sep 20, 2019
Posts
1,406
Reaction score
1,240
Location
Phoenix
This whole situation is quite anxiety inducing.

If Kliff is not an NFL coach, that is bad.

The scary part is that I was not wrong two years ago, and trust me, I WANT TO BE WRONG RIGHT NOW.

But, if Kyler Murray is perfect for Kingsbury's system, but Kingsbury system does not work in the NFL, then where does that leave us with Murray? Murray is RIDICULOUSLY physically talented, but can he read defenses, go through progressions, stand in the pocket, throw down field? He certainly will not stay in the pocket and take a hit, because he cannot since he will get injured, or at least it feels like that happens a lot.

If Kliff is not the guy, and Murray cannot learn other systems, that is a nightmare scenario. Not to mention we still have Steve Keim at the helm and while he can make a good trade, his free agent signings are 50/50, and his drafting is ACTROCIOUS. Looks like that 2019 draft was a bad as it looked at the time as well.

https://247sports.com/nfl/arizona-cardinals/Team/Arizona-Cardinals-682/DraftPicks/?year=alltime

Ugh.......just ugh.

If there is something to say positive about the situation? At least the games where the team is competitive are entertaining as all heck. This year there were some GREAT games to watch, which is hard to remember since the last two games were HORRIBLY BORING and disappointing.

And to re-start this whole thing we need for Kliff to be fired, Murray to fail, and Keim to be FINALLY fired. That is a long, long timeline, at least 3 to years.

Did you watch any of the games this year?

Murray has shown all those things. You aren't putting up positive numbers in the NFL and reducing negative plays in your 2nd year without being able to read defenses and go through progressions.
 

NWMike

Rookie
Joined
Dec 15, 2008
Posts
97
Reaction score
247
Location
Seattle, WA
I agree with all these points as well and have come to the sad conclusion that the Kingsbury experiment is a failure. I give credit to Keim for trying to go big though. He probably bought himself a couple of more years in the process. The problem I see for next year is two fold. Even if this team gets statistically better there is a really good chance it won't be reflected where it matter in the W-L column. I know every year is a new year yada yada but the schedule next year is exponentially more daunting than what we played this year and I could easily see us losing 10 plus games. Second, the one area that could be looked at right now is the defense by bringing in a new coordinator. I think Vance needs to go but if we buy into the notion that Keim/Kliff are going into a make or break year the only reason a great D-coordinator would want to come here is if they think they would be in position to ascend to the top spot. It makes more it more difficult to attract good candidates for that role so you may have to live with Vance as well next year as a package deal. The whole thing doesn't give me a lot of hope for any enjoyment next season.
 

GuernseyCard

ASFN Icon
Joined
Dec 29, 2012
Posts
10,123
Reaction score
5,681
Location
London UK
2020 vs 2019

2020: Pts for: 410 (13) – yards: 6153 (6)

2019: Pts for: 361 (16) – yards: 5467 (21)

2020: Pts against: 367 (12) – yards: 5631 (13)

2019: Pts against: 442 (28) – yards: 6432 (32)

2020: +43
2019: -81

WHY this coaching staff gets another year!
 
Last edited:

HGC

All Star
Joined
Mar 21, 2017
Posts
953
Reaction score
1,046
Location
Chandler
Lots of issues with Kliff. My biggest and the most concerning to me is I don’t believe he’s a strong developer of talent. Murray played well but a majority of the improvements were made with his legs. He’s shown some improvement but he still looks like the same quarterback he was his rookie year. Kirk, hasn’t improved. Isabella and Johnson are no better than street free agents at best. Players seem get better immediately after leaving Kingsbury. Obviously they all went to better situations but Kliff doesn’t seem like the kind of guy who gets the most out of his players.
 

Krangodnzr

Captain of Team Murray
Joined
Jul 21, 2002
Posts
35,658
Reaction score
32,629
Location
Orange County, CA
Nice post....but one that is slightly divorced from reality.

The Cardinals offense finished 6th in total yards. 7th in rushing yards. 13th in points per game. 17th in passing yards, but the difference in 9th and 17th is only 12 yards per game.

You admit that the Cardinals have a talent deficit. You admit that. So how does this team rank in the top ten in MANY offensive categories, and yet there is a dire prediction that Kingsbury has been "figured" out. The only conundrum I see is that your basic premise falls apart when you admit the Cardinals have a talent deficit.

The offense only had ONE reliable receiver. A RB that at best, is really a good platoon back. One real good offensive lineman, and the rest are replacement level or below. The reality is that there was no real strength for the offense to hang their hat on.

How is the Kingsbury experiment such an abject failure when he has been pretty successful DESPITE having sub par personnel? That premise doesn't even remotely pass a basic logic test.

So....you admit that there is a personnel deficit and objectively, the Cardinals ranked in the top half of almost ALL NFL offensive statistics...what is the problem? Maybe the personnel deficit is still too great to do any better than mediocre (8-8)?
 

Krangodnzr

Captain of Team Murray
Joined
Jul 21, 2002
Posts
35,658
Reaction score
32,629
Location
Orange County, CA
2020 vs 2019

2020: Pts for: 410 (13) – yards: 6153 (6)

2019: Pts for: 361 (16) – yards: 5467 (21)

2020: Pts against: 367 (12) – yards: 5631 (13)

2019: Pts against: 442 (28) – yards: 6432 (32)

2020: +43
2019: -81

WHY this coaching staff gets another year!

Don't bring facts into an emotional, non-fact based argument.
 

GuernseyCard

ASFN Icon
Joined
Dec 29, 2012
Posts
10,123
Reaction score
5,681
Location
London UK
Lots of issues with Kliff. My biggest and the most concerning to me is I don’t believe he’s a strong developer of talent. Murray played well but a majority of the improvements were made with his legs. He’s shown some improvement but he still looks like the same quarterback he was his rookie year. Kirk, hasn’t improved. Isabella and Johnson are no better than street free agents at best. Players seem get better immediately after leaving Kingsbury. Obviously they all went to better situations but Kliff doesn’t seem like the kind of guy who gets the most out of his players.

So in addition to HC, QB coach, play-caller, you'd like him to coach wideouts?

KM completion % went from 64.4 to 67.2. Only 3 QB's hit 70.0.
 

football karma

Happy in the pretense of knowledge
Joined
Jul 22, 2002
Posts
14,956
Reaction score
13,389
progress is undeniable

some of it clearly was schedule related. Some of it was talent related -- D Hop for one. Some of it was K Murray getting better.

Cards wont play the NFC East again next year, but they are in a position cap, free agent and draft wise to improve talent (especially relative to the division) and i think Murray can get even better.

my biggest concern: the jump from 5 to 8 wins is easier than the jump from 8 to 10 or more wins.

I am assuming the Kliff and Vance stay.

Keim made a development hire in KK two years ago. Part of development is frank feedback and expectations on improvement -- as well as putting necessary support around him. Thats on Keim and MB to do this offseason.
 

Krangodnzr

Captain of Team Murray
Joined
Jul 21, 2002
Posts
35,658
Reaction score
32,629
Location
Orange County, CA
progress is undeniable

some of it clearly was schedule related. Some of it was talent related -- D Hop for one. Some of it was K Murray getting better.

Cards wont play the NFC East again next year, but they are in a position cap, free agent and draft wise to improve talent (especially relative to the division) and i think Murray can get even better.

my biggest concern: the jump from 5 to 8 wins is easier than the jump from 8 to 10 or more wins.

I am assuming the Kliff and Vance stay.

Keim made a development hire in KK two years ago. Part of development is frank feedback and expectations on improvement -- as well as putting necessary support around him. Thats on Keim and MB to do this offseason.

The jump to 10 wins was hitting 2-3 more FGs and Kirk not dropping 2-3 TDs.
 

Chopper0080

2021 - Prove It
Joined
May 15, 2002
Posts
26,964
Reaction score
35,841
Location
Colorado
Some of this is on the roster construction as much as it is on talent.

How many slow slot WRs are we going to carry that can't break tackles?

How do we only have two viable NFL RBs on our roster?

Campbell, Hicks and Vallejo...all slow at ILB. The only outlier was Simmons and we didn't play him.

Kennard, Gardeck and Reddick all undersized at OLB. The only guys on the roster over 260 were Jones and Fitts and then we added Golden. This wouldn't be a huge issue expect that we play in one of the most physical divisions in football.

Same with our interior OL. Pugh, Cole, Sweezy and Murray are all finesse players at this point. How are we supposed to handle the monster DL of Seattle, SF and LA?
 

iLLmatiC

Drive-by Poster
Joined
Jul 4, 2004
Posts
7,483
Reaction score
5,012
Location
Gilbert, AZ
Sure, but who the hell carried Zane Gonzales for so long? Who continued to Activate Streveler over Hundley? He made too many mistakes that cost us important games this year that we should've won.
 

dreamcastrocks

Chopped Liver Moderator
Super Moderator
Moderator
Supporting Member
Joined
Aug 19, 2005
Posts
46,061
Reaction score
11,596
Sure, but who the hell carried Zane Gonzales for so long? Who continued to Activate Streveler over Hundley? He made too many mistakes that cost us important games this year that we should've won.

So do young players.

Hopefully year 3 is when everything clicks. We all know KK isn't getting fired.
 

dreamcastrocks

Chopped Liver Moderator
Super Moderator
Moderator
Supporting Member
Joined
Aug 19, 2005
Posts
46,061
Reaction score
11,596
Meh... in the words of Bill Parcells, "You are what your record says you are!"

Then the sky isn't falling like most of the board says it is. 8-8 is not bad, especially considering our putrid history.
 
Top