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!

     

Coach Wilks


Jai.
 Share

Recommended Posts

5 minutes ago, onmyown said:

I don’t take alt trolls seriously but here is the point -

the best man for the job/new regimen doesn’t so happen to ‘coincidentally’ be Wilks. 

Or Fit.

Or PJ.

That makes no sense but this board acts like this is the future. It’s psychotic. 

Who is to say that the next HC is going to change things?  You're making a huge assumption that our next head coach, whoever you think, is going to automatically be the answer. 

Nailing a head coach like Billicheat, McDermott, Reid or Tomlin is a greater risk than nailing the top QB in a draft.

You act as if changing from Wilks to someone else is a guarantee for success. 

There's an old say "Be careful of what you ask for"

I like Wilks, I like the way he motivates and keeps our players in the game.  Is he the answer, I don't know but, Hiring a new HC doesn't always mean it's the best move. 

For instance, I would have rather kept Rivera, with Fitterer as his GM, than Fhule. Rivera was hamstrung by Marty " I don't know how to draft after the 1st round" Hurney. 

  • Pie 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, DaveThePanther2008 said:

Who is to say that the next HC is going to change things?  You're making a huge assumption that our next head coach, whoever you think, is going to automatically be the answer. 

Nailing a head coach like Billicheat, McDermott, Reid or Tomlin is a greater risk than nailing the top QB in a draft.

You act as if changing from Wilks to someone else is a guarantee for success. 

There's an old say "Be careful of what you ask for"

I like Wilks, I like the way he motivates and keeps our players in the game.  Is he the answer, I don't know but, Hiring a new HC doesn't always mean it's the best move. 

For instance, I would have rather kept Rivera, with Fitterer as his GM, than Fhule. Rivera was hamstrung by Marty " I don't know how to draft after the 1st round" Hurney. 

I wonder if the Raiders wish they kept Rich Bisaccia

  • Pie 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Zappy said:

He better be our coach next year .. fug a 'young offensive mind' .. that's the direction the entire league is basically going but look at Pete Carroll's D up in SEA

I don't understand. If the league is transitioning to young, offensive-minded coaches, then shouldn't we do the same? The time of having an old guy coaching has expired. It's adapt or die. Wilks has done well, I'll admit, but he had his chance as a HC, and he failed. But keep him as the DC.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Jon Snow said:

He's certainly accomplished more with much less than an coach I coach that I can remember.  I would love nothing more than to see him succeed here.

It would only be fair to allow him be given a chance to pick his coordinators and QB at least to get a shot here. 

To me there's just something unfair about the opportunity he's been given to prove himself here. 

As long as he drafts a QB….IDC. But the reality is that the rookie QBs have done better with offensive minded HCs. Not defensive coaches. 
 

Pickett - Struggling with defensive minded Tomlin

Willis - Not playing/not impressive defensive minded Vrabel. 

Hurts - Playing really well with O minded Siriani 

Mac Jones - Belichick (defense) - Not great

TUA - Went from D minded Flores to O minded McDaniel…stud now. 

Mahomes - Andy Reid

Herbert - Brandon Staley - Stud

Lawrence - Playing much better under Pederson 

Fields - Still struggling under Eberflus who is a former DC. 

Burrow - Zac Taylor - O minded 

Josh Allen - unicorn but is thriving under McDermott who is D minded 

So of the best young QBs recently..Mahomes, Herbert, Tua, Hurts, Burrow are far and away the best young QBs. They’re all coached by offensive minded HCs. Josh Allen is a Unicorn. Lamar is playing great hut has ups and downs and Harbaugh is neither O nor D. 

  • Pie 1
  • Poo 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm with the young, offensive-minded HC approach. Always have been. The reason is they tend to be more aggressive and innovative. I will say that Wilks has been much better than previous regimes with getting the best guys on the field. No politics or undeserved loyalty. Just best man up. Learns from past weeks' mistakes and adjusts at halftime. And holds guys accountable. Got an attitude problem - gone. Not performing up to NFL standards - reduced playing time until you're ready. Is he the long term answer? Can't know after 2 weeks, but he's damn sure going in the right direction. 

  • Beer 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Xtreme said:

I don't understand. If the league is transitioning to young, offensive-minded coaches, then shouldn't we do the same? The time of having an old guy coaching has expired. It's adapt or die. Wilks has done well, I'll admit, but he had his chance as a HC, and he failed. But keep him as the DC.

McDermott and Salah are defensive minded coaches.  Who's to say you can have a young offensive minded coordinator?  If he gets hired away, you bring up one of his assistances and go from there. 

The head coach is over both offense and defense.  On game day he is overseeing the entire game.  The offensive coordinator is calling the plays.    

IMO as long as you have a good OC you are ok.  Buffalo is a prime example.   McDermott is defensive yet has probably the most potent offenses in the NFL. 

  • Pie 2
  • Beer 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Jon Snow said:

He's certainly accomplished more with much less than an coach I coach that I can remember.  I would love nothing more than to see him succeed here.

It would only be fair to allow him be given a chance to pick his coordinators and QB at least to get a shot here. 

To me there's just something unfair about the opportunity he's been given to prove himself here. 

And yet, there he is out there just killing it. Give that man a contract!

Honestly, it's too early to say that but he is, without a doubt, showing that he's a much better coach than Rhule. He's more competitive with fewer stars on the field. Those men will go to war for Steve Wilks.

 

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

    • 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...