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!

     

So, The Issue With Steve Wilks And The Defense


Saca312

Recommended Posts

This isn't really a breakdown or really anything long. It's just collecting a few thoughts I have about our poor production lately from our defense.

First things first, our secondary isn't good. It just isn't. Their biggest thing is making so many stupid errors and bad judgement calls on a multitude of plays, leading the opposing offense to big gains. To add on, it seems this whole defense is incapable of defending Seams and misdirection from WRs each game despite the same tactics being used constantly. 

One thing that's certain is that Mike Adams has been our best man in the secondary. He's having a really good year in terms of pass coverage and being an all around starting caliber SS. He was a great pickup, but clearly not ideal considering his age. He's not the fastest nor most agile, so of course he'll get beat a few times in that regard. But nevertheless, compared to everyone else, he's been the best.

Next up is Daryl Worley, who thus far has played like our best corner. I love James Bradberry, but it saddens me to say he's been underperforming this year. Part of that is this coaching staff's thinking towards the idea that James Bradberry is already a number 1 corner, and it's clear he's still got a ways to go and learn. He's struggling in a few facets of his game it likely will take an off-season to correct. 

On the other hand, Daryl Worley has been okay. Despite a few times where indeed he's been beat mainly due to issues with hips, as of late he's been pretty solid when given the opportunity. In fact, he's in the top 6 when it comes to yards per target. However, it's clear he still has deficiencies in certain instances and of course stopping some of his dumb penalties.

Kurt Coleman has also been a disappointment. He keeps getting played by QBs with their eyes and Coleman falling for it. Gets out of position too easily allowing the big play to go through. Needs to be far more disciplined and understanding in his approach, as he's shown he's capable of being a solid safety when need be.

To add on, our pass rush is old. Hate to admit it, but our pass rush started diminishing most likely due to the age of our DEs. Marty Hurney IR'ing promising rookie Daeshon Hall obviously doesn't help, but still will need a fresher rotation in the future to keep us good. That's a big reason why our pass rush isn't hitting home as of late, just because our old guys are gassed.

Steve Wilks is also an interesting character in his aggressive approach. The issue is, he just doesn't know his personnel well. He keeps sending blitz after blitz without realizing our secondary isn't as good as he thinks. He also has this weird obsession with remaining in base defense with Shaq covering shifty WRs, something a LBer shouldn't do tbh. If we had the right personnel, he'd be a top 3 DC because of how aggressive he is. However, his lack of awareness on our personnel, talent level, and situation need to be improved on, which is likely going to be the case if he remains with us for another year.

Either way, it's clear we need to inject youth and talent on this defense if we want to reach the elite category in the future. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

TL;DR

-Secondary Bad

-Pass Rush Old

-Wilks scheme good, just doesn’t have personnel to run it @ full potential. Needs better secondary & more consistent pass rush & easily top 3 DC. 

-Wilks needs better situational playcalling & understanding of personnel moving forward.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That being said, if we remain intelligent with our blitzing and ensure we have the Vikings deadly weapons covered up, we should have no problem defending against Case Keenum. In a QB friendly environment masking his deficiencies that are certainly exploitable.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You're right that the secondary as a whole hasn't been good and that Bradberry hasn't played as well as last year. But, Bradberry has still been better than Worley. There's a reason why Worley and Seymour have been splitting time. Worley is just awful in coverage but he's also our best CB in run support. Wilks is blitzing so much precisely because our secondary is weak. If you can't cover, you better get after the QB. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When you realize the Saints game planned to attack Badberry with the run, you will understand the problem. They were quick releasing OLs to the second level to get Kuechly tied up and ran extra traffic in to Kuechly while allowing the cut back to Badberry.

The Saints were fine with leaving Badberry unblocked on their run side. They gave Badberry releases to the runner all day long and challenged him to identify the play and attack the hole. He failed most of the time to even alter the play.

When the opposing offense is running blockers around a defender to overload the LBs with blockers, that defender must make the play or he is a liability to the defense. Badberry is afraid to stick his nose in on the play and give up his body. Not to mention he is an awful tackler.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

HOLY poo.

Bradberry and Coleman can be criticized now??? WHERE AM I??

I need guidance. Who should I be biased for? I thought I was supposed to just stay quiet about Coleman and Bradberry getting beaten over the top for late TDs and lucks out when the WR drops the ball but then freak out when Worley gives up an 8 yard pass. 

You know what's really sad? The best I've ever seen a Rivera secondary play was the end of 2014 when they allowed 13 points on the road vs New Orleans and Atlanta combined. The secondary was Norman, rookie Boston, Bene, Melvin White and Harper. They didn't even have a great pass rush. 

So basically Rivera's scheme doesn't work unless he has shutdown corner and/or ball hawks. Look at his defenses in SD and Chicago. Same thing. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • I realize it about the expectations, but on paper, we drafted players who would have a chance to compete at positions where any could realistically step in and take the job---Freeling?  Yup.  Hunter?  Yup.  Brazzell?  Yup.  It is likely that all three see the field early and often.  Day 3:  Lee?  I see him as the #3 CB and the job is his when they are ready for him--and it is his to lose.  Hecht?  I loved him in mock research and called him the best C in the draft.  He might play a year behind Fortson or he could take the job--regardless, he is the obvious front runner for the 2027 season.  Wheatley?  I see Ransom and Moehrig as basically the same "in the box" type S.  If Wheatley can learn for a season behind Scott, he has the tools to be a serviceable FS, something this team needs.  Finally, Kuwatch seemed to be a PS pick, and he could be--but to win the 4th ILB job, he needs to beat out Bam Morris-Scott and with a 46.5 vertical (I can't do that on the triple jump) and a superior RAS rating, he looks like a special teamer and depth piece.....I forgot about Morgan's comment about giving up the 5th--probably to get ahead of Detroit.  Freeling has the athleticism and the tools to be the best OT in this draft.  The others lacked arm length or something like that--Freeling simply lacks a ton of experience. 
    • excellent points and insights.  I agree on Tepper.  I guess I worry that his questions and comments might influence the thinking of his employees, that his presence in the room might add pressure to an already stressful situation, but after watching it again, it does not appear to be like that.  Morgan was in charge.  Canales mentioned needing a center, but beyond that, he was there to serve as a consultant, more or less, if asked.  I suppose my point was this--everyone knew their roles, I did not see egos--I saw empowerment.  As for Morgan--I saw a leader that listened to others, made wise decisions, and never lost control.  I was VERY IMPRESSED with Dan Morgan. 
    • Pretty good summation, although I would caution just a bit that there might be a little of over-enhanced expectations. I do agree with the assessment on BPA. It was exceedingly clear they had a specific shopping list. Early on when there was some discussion about the tackles available, Morgan was asked if he was willing to give up a 5th to get Freeling, if it came to that. I think the only way it wasn't a left tackle with that 1st pick is if none that were valued as a 1st were still available.
×
×
  • Create New...