Jump to content
  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

The Shula promotion in 2013


Jmac

Recommended Posts

Was he actually promoted over many other more qualified coordinators because R.R feared for his job? The specuLation was mentioned right after the promotion and still is a valid question. Using the excuse that Cam needed Shula and the continuity as reasoning. Rivera was a razors edge from getting canned before the 2013 season. He knew that Shula couldn't step in as HC if the season started going south, making it harder to replace him mid season. I know he is loyal to his staff and that was part of it, but was that all of it? After the mirage of the 2013 season is fading, that decision is now weighing heavy on this offense.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This was discussed over and over again.

 

 

The truth is he was promoted not because he was more talented, but because they did not want to make Cam learn an entirel new offensive system. It was a continuity hire, not a capability hire.

This and no one more qualified wanted the a job when the head coach was most likely going to be fired at the end of the year. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We forget that last year this team starting scoring around 25 points a game after our first two losses and had some spectacular late drives last year. 5 games of 30+ although against week teams.

 

I'm no Shula supporter but it's not like we don't have the capability to succeed on offense. We may look different come the soft part of the schedule.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We forget that last year this team starting scoring around 25 points a game after our first two losses and had some spectacular late drives last year. 5 games of 30+ although against week teams.

I'm no Shula supporter but it's not like we don't have the capability to succeed on offense. We may look different come the soft part of the schedule.

It would seem like that's the case, but honestly the offense is not far off from what it was in 2013. We're ranked in the mid 20s in total yards just like last year, our efficiency has gone down only a few spots on football outsiders, the team is still winning the TOP. So it's not like it's not doing the same things it did last year.

The difference is, it doesn't have a great defense to back it up. So in order to win with this slow, uninspiring, uncreative offensive system, we basically require a defense that doesn't give up a first half touchdown in any game and is pretty much the 85 Bears reincarnate.

Now tell me what other team punishes itself with the Sisyphean undertaking of trying to win with a self-limiting formula?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Sure it does, maybe not every position and not every draft.  You have to admit the hit rate goes down the further in the draft you get.  Would you more readily find a generational talent at the #2 pick or #19 pick?  High picks are considered "busts" if they doesn't pan out, whereas guys drafted later don't have that level of scrutiny upon them.  Different expectation levels.  If Styles does indeed go #2, I already listed the rarefied air that he would be in.  Maybe he doesn't set the League on fire, but my gut feeling is he does.  Again, you don't take an off-ball LB #2 if he is just a 'really good' player.
    • To illustrate my point, I watched (and commented on the Huddle) that Rozeboom would often wait a full second (or close to it) before taking his first step.  I assume that he probably had issues with false steps, a faulty practice that can take an ILB out of the gap completely.  Watch Luke and you see a step with the snap, and rarely was it a false step.  Rozeboom may have had 100 tackles (speculating) but initial contact was 2-3 yards on the defensive side of the ball.  Luke's 100 tackles were made 1-2 yards from the LOS.  Over the course of a year, Luke was much more productive (more fumbles, fewer long gainers, more OL penalties, fewer first downs, etc) that Rozeboom, but on the stat sheet, they both had 100 tackles.  In fact, Rozeboom's inefficiency kept him on the field more (more first downs, fewer OL penalties, turnovers, and punts) so he should have MORE tackles.   I would like to see stats that break down those things.   For example again, Josh Norman was slow--4.68 or so at CB.  However, his anticipation speed was incredible.  He made as many plays as a 4.4 CB.  I had one coach (college--later became the head coach at WCU) tell me that slower players have to use their brains more to still be around.  Elite athletes can just get by on their physical superiority.  He added, "Rarely does a football player run full speed.  Most of the time, they are not, so the 40 time is misleading stat.  Smart players overcome shortcomings--when the elite athlete becomes average (slows with age, advances in level of competition) they struggle against smarter (football IQ) competition.  
    • Obviously tongue in cheek hyperbole. But we do not need a first round RB to compete for a championship. We need intelligent roster building. That to me is the complete opposite of intelligent roster building because it is a prime resource at a devalued plug and play position when we have needs across the defense.
×
×
  • Create New...