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!

     

What might a Steve Wilks staff look like?


Mr. Scot
 Share

Recommended Posts

31 minutes ago, Shocker said:

LOL…Mr Scott…great post but this constant plugging of Rob Chudzinski makes me question your thought process.  

It’s no plug. I’m not a Chudzinski fan. I’m strictly looking at people that have a previous connection to Wilks and are potentially available.

That said, I’d likely take Chudzinski over McAdoo.

  • Pie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Mr. Scot said:

It’s no plug. I’m not a Chudzinski fan. I’m strictly looking at people that have a previous connection to Wilks and are potentially available.

That said, I’d likely take Chudzinski over McAdoo.

McAdoo finishes the season IMO.  I look forward to seeing him without Rhules bullshet personally 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Shocker said:

McAdoo finishes the season IMO.  I look forward to seeing him without Rhules bullshet personally 

This thread was about next year, specifically who Wilks might hire if he could choose his own staff.

Barring some major turnaround, I seriously doubt McAdoo would be retained in that scenario.

Edited by Mr. Scot
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Mr. Scot said:

This thread was about next year, specifically who Wilks might hire if he could choose his own staff.

Barring some major turnaround, I seriously doubt McAdoo would be retained in that scenario.

Next year Sean Payton is going to be the coach…time to start thinking about that angle

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Shocker said:

LOL…Mr Scott…great post but this constant plugging of Rob Chudzinski makes me question your thought process.  

Why is that such a bad idea?  I don't know if you remember our offense with Chudz.  Had we had a defense those teams would have been playoff teams. 

Cam's first two games were over 400 yds passing and Cam was dynamic back then.  Shula was supposed to take that offense and simplify it and it was a disaster.   Chudz wasn't much of a head coach in Cleveland but I'd take his offense in a heartbeat over McAdoo.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, DaveThePanther2008 said:

Why is that such a bad idea?  I don't know if you remember our offense with Chudz.  Had we had a defense those teams would have been playoff teams. 

Cam's first two games were over 400 yds passing and Cam was dynamic back then.  Shula was supposed to take that offense and simplify it and it was a disaster.   Chudz wasn't much of a head coach in Cleveland but I'd take his offense in a heartbeat over McAdoo.

This guy is an assistant coach for Boston College.  Look up their record.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • LOL... Yet again proving you can't look below anything than what you see on the surface Mock drafts ARE NOT draft grades They are what people think will happen.  They are mocking teams taking QB's in the top 5 of the draft because that's just historically how drafts go regardless of the grades on the QBs.  Almost every draft expert, even those mocking QB's going high, have said time and time again that none of these QB's actually grade out as those type of picks. This is again, where I say you don't like to actually read what I have to say, because I already explained it. 2022 the exact same thing happened, mock drafts had guys like Pickett and Willis going in the Top 5 because that's just what teams usually do, but GM's listened to their prospect grades and knew they weren't worth taking that high, so they didn't. It's not to say QB's won't go that high this year, but it's to say that they aren't graded out as elite QB prospects.  Mock drafts 
    • Have you seen the mock drafts lately?   Most of them have us taking a QB. Just because you aren't high on these QBs doesn't mean the Panthers or other teams aren't.   If you want me to be real I just think you a Tmac homer and all you care about is us drafting him. It's why you get so defensive when people mention other prospects.   Be open to other people's ideas. Nobody in this thread is saying anything bad about your boy Tmac. 
    • Oh good lord Interest doesn't mean interest in making a bad trade to take the player, that's why I had such a long post, to accurately describe why those are two different things, but you don't like to listen to that stuff.  Being interested in a player doesn't live in a vacuum. It's very simple... there isn't a #1 draft pick type of grade on any of these QB's, if there was, we'd just take them.  You can't bluff a pick everyone knows you won't make, and trying to trade the pick is the CLEAR signal that you're not taking the QB. Just because the Raiders would have interest, doesn't mean they're going to bail us out of a situation we don't want to be in, they'd be smart about it and just sit put, let us take a non QB as we'd be telling the world we're not taking one just by trying to trade the pick, and then they'd take him at #2 (either with their own pick or by trading less to get that one). Oh, and your point of "if nobody is willing to make the trade, you obviously just take the best QB" is quite literally the dumbest thing I've ever read on here. If nobody is willing to trade up to take the QB, then it's OBVIOUS that the QB isn't worth taking with that pick, so OBVIOUSLY taking the best QB there is just OBVIOUSLY stupid and a bad pick. The moral of it is if there is a QB worth taking, we're taking them and not making the trade.  If there isn't a QB worth taking there, nobody is trading up to #1 to take one, we just showed the NFL how bad of an idea that is 2 years ago, it's really not hard to see. You keep making up this mythical situation where there is a QB who has shown to be worth trading up to #1 for and we'll be able to leverage that into a trade.  But we're the most QB needy team in the league, if we end up with the #1 pick, either we are taking a QB #1 or no QB is going #1 unless we get VERY lucky and two teams in the Top 5 fall in love with one prospect and we can play them off each other and fleece one of them. But again, I can't see that happening, as if there was a QB worthy of that, we're just taking him ourselves.
×
×
  • Create New...