mav1234

Alright Darnold, the defense got you the ball back, time to make this a one score game

What was that idiot 3rd down play

Ridiculous

yeah definitely, the fact it is this close with how bad it has felt we've played is a testament to the fact a good coach could turn this around imo

so are some of the fans in this thread, heh.

If Wilks is the man for the job, this is exactly the kind of game to show it. What had been working isn't, time to adjust.

I don't understand that playcall on 3rd down Edit: may be Darnold not throwing it fast enough actually - at first looked like slow developing routes but I think that may not be the case

He struggles to read the field imo.

he can only do so much. tho I was expecting Darnold to be our let down here...

agree for sure - but let's also let this game finish - isn't looking good, but plenty of game time left.

Wilks won't be fired but the outcome of this and every game from here on out has a strong influence on his getting the interim tag removed.

Haha Wilks only knows DBs okay... Whatever man. I don't think Wilks is some savant but lol. It's crazy how angry this is making you. I've never said McAdoo knows less than Wilks about the offensive. The opposite, lol, just read my fuging post in response to yours a page ago where I said that hahaha. The reason I'm responding is you keep acting like a bigger and bigger ass with more insults. Interesting that when pointed out with your own initial mistakes you say you "explained" aka corrected aka you made a mistake in your intial post. All good bud, glad we're on the same page and Wilks knows something about the offensive side of the ball The best part of this is we probably agree pretty closely on how much Wilks has to do with the offense lol

He hasnt played 17 this season yet.

Depends if you start in CJs first season where he wasn't good enough to see the field yet (unlike Burns), where yes Burns has more. Starting in the second tho, no, but Burns earned his starting job earlier... Because he was better. As to stopping the run, CJ definitely was good there... By his mid career. Let's see what Burns becomes.

Other stats of CJ vs Burns - and this is NOT to knock Charles Johnson, who was great for us... Charles Johnson by the end of his 4th year: 89 solo tackles, 23 TFLs, 36 QB hits, 21.5 (I miscounted and can't edit anymore) sacks. Brian Burns, still in his 4th year: 113 solo tackles, 39 TFL, 73 QB hits, 36 sacks Like ok, Burns' potential trade aside, hard to argue that kind of production and esp. clear growth isn't worth his draft position.

ok fair I shouldn't bother but...

uh what? Johnson after 4 seasons in the league: 20.5 sacks Burns after 4 seasons in the league (with 4 games still to go): 36 Even if you talk about only counting years once they both started playing every game (since CJ barely played his rookie year), Burns is still up (36 vs 30.5)... But keep in mind this itself is an indication of productvity and development... CJ at 24 was 15.5 sacks behind Burns at 24.

Your first post said "[Wilks] has zero knowledge of offensive football." Then it was "Ok, he knows a little, but McAdoo knows more." Then it was, "The reason Wilks has had any success is because of McAdoo and Holcomb. [Wilks isn't some] ultra multitasking HC." I never said he was ... multitasking as an OC, or knew more than the OC, or whatever. My point in every post has been this: Wilks knows more than "zero" about an NFL offense. As is the cast for most HCs, he likely has a vision that he works with his coordinators to implement. You're the one that called me an idiot and whatever else just for replying to you. I clearly struck a nerve, which is pretty funny, given I've never had a problem admitting when I was wrong here before. I wouldn't now. I agree - and always have - that Wilks is going to need a good OC to have any sustained success. Doesn't mean I agree he "has zero knowledge of offensive football."

Burns... Hasn't been a resounding success? What? I understand thinking we shoulda traded him but how you can call him unsuccessful here as a draft pick is beyond me .

Not to mention in the NFL going on a 6 game winning streak is hard no matter the opponents...

It's very possible we don't draft a QB, but if we do not, we are probably going to bring in a veteran bridge QB (honestly likely regardless). Trading up doesn't really factor in as much as lack of productivity in the previous preseason and his injury IMO in terms of factors contributing to how the team views him next year. He will be here, but it won't change any moves they make at QB either way.

Snake arguing with himself, in three posts: "[Wilks] has zero knowledge of offensive football." "He may have some understanding of offenses" "You idiot don't you read posts he's not some mastermind!" What's so funny about this is if your stance is, "he knows about NFL offenses but not enough to run an offense and needs an OC to do that," we agree! I just disagreed with your initial *unqualified* statement that he has zero knowledge of offensive football. But I like I struck a nerve and now I understand the bag wearing a bit better. Edit: and having a coordinator doesn't mean "zero knowledge" either.

Nobody said backup was his ceiling. We said backup is a success for a 3rd round QB. Ceiling for any rookie is usually very high. But the floor is very low. He wasn't groomed as a starter last year and he won't be next year. He'll get a shot in camp, but hell, teams use back to back first rounders on QBs in rare circumstances, they won't blink at using another draft pick after a 3rd rounder. Not to say we didn't believe he had (has) potential - but this is gonna be a new regime or a coach that can't go into the season with this QB room...

You legit said "Wilks doesn't know anything about NFL offenses," then admitted right after he did have an understanding of them when it was pointed out how dumb that is. Of course he's letting his coordinators coordinate. Are you saying he doesn't know anything about NFL defenses, either? . Saying HCs need good coordinators is not the same as saying an HC needs a coordinator because they "know nothing about" the offensive/defensive side of the ball. See, the Huddle is a place you can't just interpret everything ridiculous as hyperbole. You can admit you were exaggerating for effect, it's ok.

I have no doubt McAdoo has more fine scale knowledge of an NFL offense than Wilks, but that isn't what you said. Regarding comparisons with Rhule, I don't think it's fair to put Rhule and Wilks in the same category of knowledge on the offense... If nothing else than having been around the NFL for longer I suspect Wilks picked up more... But I also think good defense coaches do need to know the offense well... They have to scheme against them after all. It doesn't mean he can come up with great new schemes on his own, or has the same knowledge as an OC that's been in the league since probably before half our posters were born etc but this is again not what you said...