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!

     

Were you satisfied with Wilks' performance this year?


MVPccaffrey

Were you satisfied with Steve Wilks' performance this year?  

41 members have voted

  1. 1. Were you satisfied with Steve Wilks' performance this year?

    • Very much so
      2
    • He was still better than McDermott
      2
    • He wasn't any worse or better than McDermott
      14
    • He was worse than McDermott
      19
    • Not satisfied
      3


Recommended Posts

I'm not calling for him to be fired, but I don't get the hype. Last 7 weeks of the season his defense was ranked 32nd in the league. If I were a Giant or Cardinals fan right now I'd be screaming that he's a front runner for the head coaching job. Not saying he can't improve, but I'm stunned by the hype.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Turnover and takeaways were down which was disappointing with all the pressure he brought. I think the pressure and scenarios in which he blitzed became a bit predictable and as a result he hung our weak secondary out to dry more often than he should have. I preferred McDermott but it’s tough to say after just a year under Wilks. I also think if Wilks had stayed coaching the DBs we probably would have seen continued improvement from Bradberry and Worley as opposed to them taking a step back; which it feels like for me at the moment. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Left a lot to be desired. I wouldn't say I want him replaced but if he doesn't get a head coaching job this year and doesn't improve next year I'd want him gone. I think the defense under performed in the second half of the year and playoffs considering the talent levels all around on defense. Bradberry regressed this year when he should've taken a step forward. Worley didn't regress but he didn't take that step forward either. And it seemed Wilks had no clue how to properly use Captain and Shaq. I don't think it'll be a big loss if he gets hired away from us here, but I wouldn't say that I want him gone this year either. He deserves more than one year to show that he could improve. It was his first year as coordinator.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, NJPanthers12 said:

I'm not calling for him to be fired, but I don't get the hype. Last 7 weeks of the season his defense was ranked 32nd in the league. If I were a Giant or Cardinals fan right now I'd be screaming that he's a front runner for the head coaching job. Not saying he can't improve, but I'm stunned by the hype.

Damn, our defense was really that bad for that long of a stretch? I know for sure we gave up far too many big plays but the players on the field should share blame for that. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, NJPanthers12 said:

I'm not calling for him to be fired, but I don't get the hype. Last 7 weeks of the season his defense was ranked 32nd in the league. If I were a Giant or Cardinals fan right now I'd be screaming that he's a front runner for the head coaching job. Not saying he can't improve, but I'm stunned by the hype.

wow, that's nuts. 

do you have a source? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As far as comparing him to McD goes, I'd say Wilks' first year here was better than or close to McD's first year here. But compared to McD the past few years? Not as good. And regardless, this is Rivera's D. It'll always be solid or even amazing as long as Rivera is here. The coordinator matters but not nearly as much as OC matter with Rivera as HC. I think we'll turn this D around next year and have it back where it belongs in the top 5-10, whether Wilks stays or goes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Pressure, yes. Everything else, no. Luke was screaming all year long and didn’t look comfortable or satisfied. Nor did he look like the surest tackler in the league. Our cbs played with zero confidence and always seemed to be playing catch-up . Not super impressed with the product on the field.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It felt like the defense as a whole regressed throughout the year. My biggest problem is that blitzes backfired against QB's too often and we allowed too many big plays in situations where it should've been stopped far earlier. I do like the aggression but we didn't back off when opponents used that tendency against us.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • This is gonna be longest six weeks ever 
    • This 1000%.  Hey who wants to sign with the guy that couldn't even get his client the guaranteed contract of a 3rd round pick?  Lmao
    • I don't think it's any weird or unique clause, it's the offset language, same thing so many contract disputes are over. It just means that including it, if a player is cut and then signed by another team, the original team would be able to subtract how much they're getting paid by the new team from what they still owe him on their guaranteed money. For example, it's why Russell Wilson signed for the minimum last year with the Steelers as that was included in his Denver contract.  So if he signed with the Steelers for $1 million, he'd get $1 million less from the Broncos, if it was $2 million, he'd get $2 million less, basically he couldn't make any more money than he was already going to make, so you sign for the minimum to not take unnecessary cap room from your new team while giving extra cap room to your old one. The problem with trying to include it in rookie deals is that a team trying to include it, it says they think they don't really believe the player will make it 4 years with the team before they cut them.  And this usually comes up with one or two rookies in most seasons, the difference is it's usually handled much more quietly and not as public and ugly as this one. The other difference is that it's happening with the Bengals, which I believe I saw are one of the few (or only?) team that doesn't have protections for rookies in rookie and mini camps to be able to participate even if they haven't signed their contract yet.  The other teams have injury protections that allow them to still play, but the Bengals do not, which is also why this one is so public and ugly, as most the time this happens, the rookie is still participating in the rookie and subsequent mini camps, giving them more time to get the contract done before training camp when they'd then hold out.
×
×
  • Create New...