Ricky Spanish

That's how I look at it too. The coaches make those changes, but they aren't drawing up plays on the fly. They're the ones making the adjustments behind the scenes if you will, and then the players get told to execute the plays relayed to them, which would be different choices from the already established pool of 60 or so plays that week. So if say, your backup CBs were getting beat over the top by mike evans with no safety help, a good coach might look at that and say "Hmm, might want to keep a safety over on Evans' side of the field in case they go deep to him again." Just as a totally random example.

Not really Moore's fault though, no? They're best RB went down so they had to lean on their franchise QB earning 40 Mil per year to get the job done. And he threw 2 egregious picks with 2 or 3 others that should also have been picked. Dak was making all the wrong reads last night.

Welp, let's also be real here, He's Payton friggin Manning. There's no OC in the world that was going to tell him what "adjustments" needed to be made because he already knew it. I honestly can't believe that there aren't coaches out there who look at the data of what is and isn't working so far, and start calling more plays that attack the middle of the field/get the ball out quicker due to an injury on the line/running the ball more, whatever it may be based on the current situation of the game. You may have 60 plays available for the game, but if all the outside run plays aren't working, you should have the wherewithal to not continuously spam those outside runs the rest of the game and "adjust" what you may call in similar situations in the second half. I'm not talking complete gameplan changes on the fly, I'm talking identifying what is and isn't working for the week's gameplan, and ignoring the plays that aren't working the rest of the game.

That last play was cheeks, but Moore did not call a bad game at all. Dak played TERRIBLY.

Pulling for San Fran next week so we can finally interview Steichen in person.

I think on the player's side, there's no adjustments, but on the coaching side, they all get together, regroup, talk about what's working and what isn't, and then make adjustments with playcalling for the next half. Then it's up to the players to execute those plays.

That was last year. They hired him in the offseason and did a complete 180.

You could also make the argument that some of the best offensive minds in football recognized something special in him.

That's him playing better than he ever has before, but it's not balling out. That roster was EXTREMELY limited in terms of personnel and they managed to make the post season.

For real. @rippadonn, name one receiver on that roster not named Kenny Golladay (who only had like 6 catches all year and was their highest paid player).

https://theathletic.com/4104453/2023/01/19/giants-mike-kafka-nfl-head-coach-candidate/ Good read if you have a subscription. Steichen was my original pick as HC before the offseason kicked off, but now he's giving me Norv Turner vibes. Nothing wrong with that, but seems he'd make a better OC than HC. Then Ben Johnson showed up and I fell in love with his scheme and how he was able to get the best out of his players. But he pulled out so that dream died. Enter Kafka. Almost seems like he's being mentioned as a throwaway, but his resume and what people say about him has me intrigued. Dude is apparently a born coach and beloved everywhere he goes. Super smart guy. Helped develop Mahomes in KC Realized he had a cap in terms of potential with KC so struck out on his own to use what he learned to further his career not under Reid's shadow. Lead the NYG to a top 10 offense in his first year as OC using scrap parts of their roster. Creative playcaller/designer that puts his players in positions to succeed, doesn't force them to execute a plan that highlights their own weaknesses. I hope he interviews well. He's making his way up to the top of my list.

I dunno man. Honestly I don't. HC is such a crapshoot to begin with, but I'd rather swing for the fences than settle for what is familiar.

I disagree. We have one year of 8/9 wins, then we make the playoffs in year two, then we tank in year three, then we're back to 8/9 wins in year four maybe squeaking into the playoffs with a late season run that saves his job, and then we tank year 5 and we are right back where we started. It's Ron Rivera all over again. Wilks is capable of doing what Rivera did, I don't doubt that. I just want more consistency (GOOD consistency, not Rhule incompetent consistency)

I gave him credit where it was due. He identified that's all we were good for because he's competent. He is Rivera. I want more than competent with my HC though. I want better than Rivera.

We were a one trick pony though, that's my argument. Literally everyone knew we were going to run the ball. We beat teams who were bad against the run. Seattle and Detroit were #3 and #4 worst in the league against the run. Cincy and Baltimore, both top 5. Pitt, top 10. TB, mediocre at run defense so we split. NO, bottom 10 run defense, we swept them. There was no exceptional game plan after he took over, it was just pound that rock. We should have won the games we won because we were built to win against those teams. Any team that was remotely good against the run and we had no counterpunch. Granted, he still identified that was what our identity should be based on our personnel, something Rhule was oblivious to, but that comes back to Wilks actually being competent.

Let's ignore that stint at Cleveland as DC for Wilks though... for narrative's sake. One good year and one bad year averages out to average, to me personally. McDermott coached 4 top 10 defenses in his 6 years as DC here. 2016 was the year we went mad dumb with no corners to start the year after cutting Norman with no replacement plan, and also the year Kuechly went down with the bad concussion. By that time he had already proven his abilities as a DC.

I'm still not following how this proves wilks should be the HC though? We had over 10 minutes more TOP due to the fact we were running at will, and they still managed to score above the league average of points after they completely abandoned the run. We didn't handle it so much as we beat the breaks off their defense by breaking a franchise record in rushing.

Because McDermott was actually a good D-coordinator. Wilks was average at best. There was a massive step down in defensive quality after McDermott left.

Flores isn't getting HC opportunities this go round because apparently he's a dick. He straight tried to sabotage Tua, and once they paired him with a coach who gave a crap about him then he flourished until his brain kept getting scrambled. Many players have come out not liking Flores from his time in MIA. He's still getting DC interviews. And looking at one game to crap on Johnson where their DEFENSE gave up 320+ Rushing yards and 37 points is kind of dumb, especially considering their QB threw for 355 and 3 TDs. So the run game wasn't working, something the offense leaned on heavily throughout the season and jamaal williams lead the league in TDs. OK, let's spin the rock then. He couldn't help that their defense couldn't stop us. Let's contrast that with what happened with us against Cincy, Pitt, and TB. Any game we couldn't run, we were SOL. They're stopping the run today, time to pack it in boys, no chance at winning. Can't adjust this scheme to generate some points, nope. and that was with Darnold actually playing well. I say this without having Johnson at the top of my list of candidates. Wilks is the same ol' same ol' we had with Rivera. I'm ready for something new.

Flores has actually gotten interviews this coaching cycle though. Look, I love what Wilks did by coming in and stabilizing the ship. He did an admirable job with what he was handed. The team we assembled this past offseason was good enough to make the playoffs. The coaching staff we had at the beginning of the year was not. Matt Rhule sucked as a coach so our team sucked. All we needed was someone competent to lead the team, and lo and behold, we are contending for a playoff spot once Wilks took over. Having said that, he's just that - Competent. I don't think can out plan/out maneuver his opponents. You will know what you are up against week in and week out with him at the helm. He's Rivera 2.0 in that regard: Great guy. Leader of men. Stagnant and old-school. Inconsistent due to inflexibility. Our team was so bad the past few years under Rhule, that reverting back to the old Rivera Ways seems like a huge upgrade, and it unfortunately is, but we've seen that song and dance before and we know how it ends. There's a reason we moved on from Rivera in the first place. Just because we didn't get his replacement right doesn't mean we need to revert right back to the status quo. We should aim higher.

Because we'd have to give up assets to a division rival in order for him to coach our team.

Had we traded for Watson, I was gone.