Panther's new DC makes scoring a priority

[Davidson Deac II]

2 hours ago, thefuzz said:

The runaway success of the Eagles last season should be making every conservative coach in the league go back to the drawing board.

I can't imagine the excuses that Ron would have had if he had lost his QB and LT...but they kept chugging right along.

Be aggressive, the numbers have been telling you to do it for a decade.  But here we sit.

 

Every year is different irt the SB winner

2013 lots of scoring

2014 winner was due to a dominant defense.  

2015 winner came down to a coach that should have been conservative and run the ball, but passed instead. And it got picked off.

2016 saw a SB winner with a qb that couldn't throw the ball more than 10 yards.  

2017 saw a coaching move that was to aggressive (throwing instead of running) and cost a team a sb that they could  have locked up with a fg by a very accurate kicker. 

2018 saw a scoring explosion.

 

The great thing about the NFL is that no one really knows what will happen this.  So while I generally agree that coaches shouldn't be to conservative,  the most important thing is knowing when to be conservative, and when to "go for the throat" so to speak.  It's also the most difficult aspect of coaching imo.  

[Smithers]

2 hours ago, RumHam said:

This is good to point out, especially since we have no safety. There's gonna be a lot of scoring.

Both Adams and Searcy graded out as average last year.  We could do a lot worse than that.  We could do better as well...but Searcy should be a big upgrade over Coleman.

[thefuzz]

17 minutes ago, Davidson Deac II said:

Every year is different irt the SB winner

2013 lots of scoring

2014 winner was due to a dominant defense.  

2015 winner came down to a coach that should have been conservative and run the ball, but passed instead. And it got picked off.

2016 saw a SB winner with a qb that couldn't throw the ball more than 10 yards.  

2017 saw a coaching move that was to aggressive (throwing instead of running) and cost a team a sb that they could  have locked up with a fg by a very accurate kicker. 

2018 saw a scoring explosion.

 

The great thing about the NFL is that no one really knows what will happen this.  So while I generally agree that coaches shouldn't be to conservative,  the most important thing is knowing when to be conservative, and when to "go for the throat" so to speak.  It's also the most difficult aspect of coaching imo.  

I'm not speaking only in the Super Bowl, nor individual games, but the overall scheme, thought process, in game strategy, etc...Individual games are just far too up and down.

 

What I'm really getting down to here is the almost always running on 1st down.  Favoring vets over younger players.  Leaving timeouts and potentially points on the board when getting the ball back toward the end of a half...etc.

 

[RumHam]

56 minutes ago, Davidson Deac II said:

Every year is different irt the SB winner

2013 lots of scoring

2014 winner was due to a dominant defense.  

2015 winner came down to a coach that should have been conservative and run the ball, but passed instead. And it got picked off.

2016 saw a SB winner with a qb that couldn't throw the ball more than 10 yards.  

2017 saw a coaching move that was to aggressive (throwing instead of running) and cost a team a sb that they could  have locked up with a fg by a very accurate kicker. 

2018 saw a scoring explosion.

 

The great thing about the NFL is that no one really knows what will happen this.  So while I generally agree that coaches shouldn't be to conservative,  the most important thing is knowing when to be conservative, and when to "go for the throat" so to speak.  It's also the most difficult aspect of coaching imo.  

These are the individual games, not what got them to that point.

[BigSyke]

Yeah, Panthers defense lacked the turnovers and scoring on defense that 2015 had.

 

The top scoring defense and top pressure defenses  are usually a good indication of who the best defense really is unlike other stats like yards allowed and etc.

[XOBlackxJokerOX]

Last season, no matter the combination, we couldn't get consistent pressure with the front four. Philly could and by all means did. If we can get back to being able to pressure the QB with just the front four, we could go back to the defensive success of 2015. More pressure = less accurate or rushed throws. DE is still an iffy position right now as we do not know how well Daeshon Hall has improved, whether Bryan Cox Jr. has improved or stayed at the same level either, if Wes Horton is going to be with us because he's gotten cut and brought back the last three year (if I recall correctly; the guy is a good run stopper), and who is going to spell Julius Peppers. I'm not worried about Mario Addison.

[Davidson Deac II]

46 minutes ago, RumHam said:

These are the individual games, not what got them to that point.

If you are talking about conservative vs aggressive philosophy, Seattle and Denver both got to that point by being conservative.  In fact, Denver had to adjust and be more conservative as their season went along.  Strong defense and a powerful run game can still win SB's just as easily as throwing the ball all over the place.  And I don't think a coach should ever adjust his philosophy simply or only because of one teams success in a given year.  It's great to say hey, lets be like philly.  Much harder to put in practice though.  

 

Btw, if you are talking about the philosophy that got them there, the Eagles were top 5 in the league in running the ball.  And their run offense was overall very good. Their passing offense for most of the year was rather pedestrian, 13th in attempts and 23rd in completion percentage.  Middle of the pack on yards per catch as well.  

 

[tiger7_88]

2 hours ago, TheCasillas said:

The thread is about D coordinator 

I guess you didn't read my OP too carefully then.

The linked ARTICLE is about the DC.  My *point* (and the point of the thread) was about the OC. 

You did notice I was referring to Norv and Shula in the OP, right?  Reading comprehension much?

[tiger7_88]

1 hour ago, Mr. Scot said:

Which doesn't change that his comments were about the offense.

Except that my OP, though linking an article about the DC and scoring, wasn't about the defense at all.

[Mr. Scot]

14 minutes ago, tiger7_88 said:

Except that my OP, though linking an article about the DC and scoring, wasn't about the defense at all.

Valid point.

[Snake]

4 hours ago, TheCasillas said:

If you want to bring up the success of the Eagles then we should probably compare the value of their talent versus the value of their strength.

The Eagles had a top flight Safety that ran their D as opposed to us having a top flight MLB running their defense.

Eagles Defense:

• Blitzed often with their MLB and SLB - Leaving Jenkins to play field commander 
• eagles played man press defense - their corners were quick twitch corners tiny in size
• The eagles were known for running stunts and crashes on the D line due to their athletes on the d line
• In essence the Eagles had no choice but to play high risk high reward defense with the talent on the roster. 

That is example of good coaching paying off.

Now, the funny part is that Wilks tried to do the same thing with our defense, but learned that we did not have the correct players in place to run this type of defense, ultimately leading to our demise. Bad coaching? or bad players?

To your notion you are claiming being aggressive and we win..... well my friend we blitzed just as much as the Eagles last year.... and well we know how that turned out. 
 

Point being: Your play calling is only as good as the talent you have on the field to execute it. 

You can counter this by saying our offense was too conservative... and I will agree, but that was Shula and now we have Turner. However, if you want to proclaim our defense was conservative..... well that's going to be less than accurate. Playing aggressive only rewards those who do it correctly and at the right time. Wilks didn't recognize that. 

Wilks + Chud = Glamour coaches who wanted HC gigs and not what was best for the team.

 

Never thought I would say this but we blitzed too much last year. Yes we got to the QB but we also had a record low turnovers. Scheme over team is why Philly won. They had excellent coaching and overcame their problems. I honestly think Washington will be a better DC because he's not looking to skip town for a HC spot next year. Wilks will flame out in AZ simply because he has poor schemes. 

[TheCasillas]

3 hours ago, tiger7_88 said:

I guess you didn't read my OP too carefully then.

The linked ARTICLE is about the DC.  My *point* (and the point of the thread) was about the OC. 

You did notice I was referring to Norv and Shula in the OP, right?  Reading comprehension much?

My apologies i totally misread.