Jump to content
  • Hey There!

    Please register to see fewer ads and a better viewing experience:100_Emoji_42x42:

tiger7_88

Panther's new DC makes scoring a priority

Recommended Posts

http://www.espn.com/blog/carolina-panthers/post/_/id/29697/panthers-new-defensive-coordinator-makes-scoring-a-priority

Quote

 

Eric Washington wasted little time on Monday, the first day of offseason workouts, letting players know his mission as the first-year defensive coordinator of the Carolina Panthers.

On the screen as he began his first official meeting with players was the word “SCORE’’ in big letters.

 

Hopefully Norv has convinced our head coach that that is a good thing to do on offense as well, as opposed to the past goals of the Rivera/Shula offensive regime.

  • Pie 7

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


2 minutes ago, tiger7_88 said:

http://www.espn.com/blog/carolina-panthers/post/_/id/29697/panthers-new-defensive-coordinator-makes-scoring-a-priority

Hopefully Norv has convinced our head coach that that is a good thing to do on offense as well, as opposed to the past goals of the Rivera/Shula offensive regime.

giphy.gif

  • Pie 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The runaway success of the Eagles last season should be making every conservative coach in the league go back to the drawing board.

I can't imagine the excuses that Ron would have had if he had lost his QB and LT...but they kept chugging right along.

Be aggressive, the numbers have been telling you to do it for a decade.  But here we sit.

 

  • Pie 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, thefuzz said:

The runaway success of the Eagles last season should be making every conservative coach in the league go back to the drawing board.

I can't imagine the excuses that Ron would have had if he had lost his QB and LT...but they kept chugging right along.

Be aggressive, the numbers have been telling you to do it for a decade.  But here we sit.

 

If you want to bring up the success of the Eagles then we should probably compare the value of their talent versus the value of their strength.

The Eagles had a top flight Safety that ran their D as opposed to us having a top flight MLB running their defense.

Eagles Defense:

  • Blitzed often with their MLB and SLB - Leaving Jenkins to play field commander 
  • eagles played man press defense - their corners were quick twitch corners tiny in size
  • The eagles were known for running stunts and crashes on the D line due to their athletes on the d line
  • In essence the Eagles had no choice but to play high risk high reward defense with the talent on the roster. 

That is example of good coaching paying off.

Now, the funny part is that Wilks tried to do the same thing with our defense, but learned that we did not have the correct players in place to run this type of defense, ultimately leading to our demise. Bad coaching? or bad players?

To your notion you are claiming being aggressive and we win..... well my friend we blitzed just as much as the Eagles last year.... and well we know how that turned out. 
 

Point being: Your play calling is only as good as the talent you have on the field to execute it. 

You can counter this by saying our offense was too conservative... and I will agree, but that was Shula and now we have Turner. However, if you want to proclaim our defense was conservative..... well that's going to be less than accurate. Playing aggressive only rewards those who do it correctly and at the right time. Wilks didn't recognize that. 

Wilks + Chud = Glamour coaches who wanted HC gigs and not what was best for the team.

 

Edited by TheCasillas
  • Pie 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is good to point out, especially since we have no safety. There's gonna be a lot of scoring.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, TheCasillas said:

You can counter this by saying our offense was too conservative

You read him totally wrong.  That's exactly what he was talking about in the first place.

You did see that he directly referenced losing a QB and a LT, right?  Not a LB and a DT?

  • Pie 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If by "Score" he is referring to the Panther defense, I am OK with it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That sounds nice and of course you want your defense to score but turnovers are hard to count on.  There is some luck involved.  Also what happens when you get to the playoffs and you play a top flite QB who doesn't even give you the chance for a turnover.

Look at the top teams in takeaways, most of the top 5 teams change every year.  If it was something you can control certain teams would always be on top.

What you can control is pressure, but pressure isn't just from your front 7.  With the evolution of some of the short passing attacks I think there is even more emphasis on good secondary play.  I'll take 4 seconds of coverage time and a good DE over 2 seconds of coverage time and a great DE. 

After QB, CB might be the most important position on the field.  I'm not convinced we have the personnel to be versatile on defense.  Also teams can scheme away from your top CB, or even your top 2.  That is why some people say its the one position you can't have too many of. 

If your 3rd WR is terrible you can just mostly throw to the best 2, that third receiver will still command coverage regardless.  If you 3rd CB is terrible, teams can exploit it and the only thing you can do it send help and that weakens you elsewhere.

  • Pie 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Rivera was one of the most aggressive DCs in the NFL. So aggressive, in fact, that some people were critical because his defenses often gave up big plays while going for a turnover or a strip.

It's easy to assume that he'd be equally aggressive on offense, but it's also true that a lot of the most attack oriented defensive coaches are absolute cowards when it comes to offense. And yeah, I think that's Rivera.

Initially, with Chud calling the plays, we didn't exactly look to be going conservative. But I do sometimes wonder if Chudzinski scared Rivera into going back to his true nature with Shula.

To his credit, I think now Ron may have finally realized he doesn't know jack s--t about offense and needs to put that side of the ball in the hands of someone who does.

Edited by Mr. Scot
  • Pie 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, TheCasillas said:

If you want to bring up the success of the Eagles then we should probably compare the value of their talent versus the value of their strength.

The Eagles had a top flight Safety that ran their D as opposed to us having a top flight MLB running their defense.

Eagles Defense:

  • Blitzed often with their MLB and SLB - Leaving Jenkins to play field commander 
  • eagles played man press defense - their corners were quick twitch corners tiny in size
  • The eagles were known for running stunts and crashes on the D line due to their athletes on the d line
  • In essence the Eagles had no choice but to play high risk high reward defense with the talent on the roster. 

That is example of good coaching paying off.

Now, the funny part is that Wilks tried to do the same thing with our defense, but learned that we did not have the correct players in place to run this type of defense, ultimately leading to our demise. Bad coaching? or bad players?

To your notion you are claiming being aggressive and we win..... well my friend we blitzed just as much as the Eagles last year.... and well we know how that turned out. 
 

Point being: Your play calling is only as good as the talent you have on the field to execute it. 

You can counter this by saying our offense was too conservative... and I will agree, but that was Shula and now we have Turner. However, if you want to proclaim our defense was conservative..... well that's going to be less than accurate. Playing aggressive only rewards those who do it correctly and at the right time. Wilks didn't recognize that. 

Wilks + Chud = Glamour coaches who wanted HC gigs and not what was best for the team.

 

I'm talking about team wide, and wasn't really directly discussing the defense.  I'm not a huge fan of us blitzing as much as we did last year.

Overall Ron is a very conservative coach, he does let his hair down a bit on the defensive side, but certainly not on the offensive side of the ball.  He is coaching like it's 1990, and although Turner is (we hope) more aggressive than Shula, he too is a product of the 80's and 90's....whereas the best playcallers in the NFL right now are in their 30's.

  • Pie 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, tiger7_88 said:

You read him totally wrong.  That's exactly what he was talking about in the first place.

You did see that he directly referenced losing a QB and a LT, right?  Not a LB and a DT?

The thread is about D coordinator 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, thefuzz said:

I'm talking about team wide, and wasn't really directly discussing the defense.  I'm not a huge fan of us blitzing as much as we did last year.

Overall Ron is a very conservative coach, he does let his hair down a bit on the defensive side, but certainly not on the offensive side of the ball.  He is coaching like it's 1990, and although Turner is (we hope) more aggressive than Shula, he too is a product of the 80's and 90's....whereas the best playcallers in the NFL right now are in their 30's.

I was staying OP topic of the defense. We are in agreement here, just pointing why the Eagles had the success they did.

Their scheme was more the success and not the play calling.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, TheCasillas said:

The thread is about D coordinator 

Which doesn't change that his comments were about the offense.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, thefuzz said:

The runaway success of the Eagles last season should be making every conservative coach in the league go back to the drawing board.

I can't imagine the excuses that Ron would have had if he had lost his QB and LT...but they kept chugging right along.

Be aggressive, the numbers have been telling you to do it for a decade.  But here we sit.

 

Every year is different irt the SB winner

2013 lots of scoring

2014 winner was due to a dominant defense.  

2015 winner came down to a coach that should have been conservative and run the ball, but passed instead. And it got picked off.

2016 saw a SB winner with a qb that couldn't throw the ball more than 10 yards.  

2017 saw a coaching move that was to aggressive (throwing instead of running) and cost a team a sb that they could  have locked up with a fg by a very accurate kicker. 

2018 saw a scoring explosion.

 

The great thing about the NFL is that no one really knows what will happen this.  So while I generally agree that coaches shouldn't be to conservative,  the most important thing is knowing when to be conservative, and when to "go for the throat" so to speak.  It's also the most difficult aspect of coaching imo.  

  • Pie 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



  • Member Statistics

    • Total Members
      19,291
    • Most Online
      2,867

    Newest Member
    biggie01
    Joined
  • Topics

  • Forum Statistics

    • Total Topics
      140,398
    • Total Posts
      4,468,088
×