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!

     

From Snow to Wilks


Mr. Scot
 Share

Recommended Posts

4 minutes ago, Catsfan69 said:

I just think it's intellectually dishonest for people to critique Wilks in this area.

How many defensive staff members did he lose?

Did he lose two corners and have to sign a batista?

He was given a schit sandwich and told to make it delicious. 

I mean, even aside from this year as interim HC, he was never even that good of a defensive coordinator. His 2017 season left a ton to be desired considering the amount of talent we had on D, and he clearly was nowhere near as good as McD was in his years here under Ron. Then he was pretty bad coordinating the D in Cleveland after AZ fired him. 

 

I think Wilks is an incredible leader of men, has generally solid football sense despite being very conservative in his coaching and is a great secondary coach. But he's not some defensive Xs and Os guru. Rivera honestly was, the game is passing him by a bit at this point (and Wilks too as he's from the same mold) but he got some incredible seasons from his defenses, getting more out of the talent than most other coaches would by coaching to their strengths and putting guys in a position to succeed within his scheme. 2013 is a great example. Yes we had prime Luke and TD and Hardy was dominating, but the secondary talent level was an absolute joke and our entire interior DL was rookies who still needed developing. 

 

Wilks will lead the guys as well as anyone but I don't consider him a great coach for running a great D whether as HC or DC. I really think the best spot for him on a contending team would be what he was initially brought in to be here : assistant HC and secondary coach. If he gets the 49ers DC job I'll be happy for him and that'll be a good spot considering the talent level but it'll be a considerable downgrade from Ryans for them.

  • Pie 5
  • Beer 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree and disagree. As people have said highs were high but lows were really, really low. 
Never liked his defensive scheme and he was fired not only from Arizona, whose defense was horrible under him and Holcomb, who he wanted as his DC here. But from the University of Missouri and Browns. Both as DC. 
I think I read somewhere that Missouri’s defense actually got better when Steve left. 
 

  • Pie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, t96 said:

I mean, even aside from this year as interim HC, he was never even that good of a defensive coordinator. His 2017 season left a ton to be desired considering the amount of talent we had on D, and he clearly was nowhere near as good as McD was in his years here under Ron. Then he was pretty bad coordinating the D in Cleveland after AZ fired him. 

I think Wilks is an incredible leader of men, has generally solid football sense despite being very conservative in his coaching and is a great secondary coach. But he's not some defensive Xs and Os guru. Rivera honestly was, the game is passing him by a bit at this point (and Wilks too as he's from the same mold) but he got some incredible seasons from his defenses, getting more out of the talent than most other coaches would by coaching to their strengths and putting guys in a position to succeed within his scheme. 2013 is a great example. Yes we had prime Luke and TD and Hardy was dominating, but the secondary talent level was an absolute joke and our entire interior DL was rookies who still needed developing. 

Wilks will lead the guys as well as anyone but I don't consider him a great coach for running a great D whether as HC or DC. I really think the best spot for him on a contending team would be what he was initially brought in to be here : assistant HC and secondary coach. If he gets the 49ers DC job I'll be happy for him and that'll be a good spot considering the talent level but it'll be a considerable downgrade from Ryans for them.

Truth be told, I think Wilks gameday skill set is actually better suited for a head coaching position than a defensive coordinator.

Unfortunately, one of the things that makes or breaks a head coach is smart staffing.

I don't think he's got it in that area.

  • Pie 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Kaye is also basing his comments on some ridiculous stat as well.  "Middle of the field passes"?  Really?  When has that EVER been a stat anyone cared about?

When talking about defense, there is only one stat we should care about:  Points.  If a team drives 99 yards on my defense and comes away with zero points, I'm ok with that.  Frankly, that's probably a big win for the defense.  If an offense completes 100% of their passes against my defense, but only scores 6 points, who am I to care?

It's all about points.  You can use the other stats to help discover why you may be giving up points, but points are the stat that matters.

  • Pie 6
  • Beer 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I mean… his lows were super low. That Bengals game was uglier than anything I can remember here in a long time. We also just didn’t want to cover Tampas best WR with a second guy for some inexplicable reason. 
 

I think it evened out to a wash basically. The good stuff was good but there were some god awful head scratchers after Snow left as well. 
 

It damn sure wasn’t great. 
 

We let Joe Mixon look like the best back in the league. Then we made a down year Mike Evans look like he was better than Justin Jefferson. I haven’t seen this kind of stubbornness since Rivera was here. 

Edited by Varking
  • Pie 6
  • Beer 1
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

    • Here is how Morgan is strategic-He re-signs Scott because he was not going S in round 1--he had the chance, and he did not.  He saw the top of the draft at T and knew none of them would be ready to start day 1, so he signs a veteran to a one-year deal, giving his tackle selection a chance to learn and prepare for what might be LT or RT.  Those two moves suggested, perhaps ironically because they contradict each other, what he was going to do, based on the talent pool.  He never brought in a Robinson replacement at DE/NT, and then moves up to draft one.   I almost wonder if the intent was to draft DT/DE all along at some point, maybe with a trade back, but then Freeling dropped to them.   Of course, we felt that they were looking WR, and wonder if the plan was to draft a WR in round 2 if you traded back in round 1.  However, when Freeling was there, the trade back fell apart.  Then we traded up for Hunter.  We could stick with XL and hope Metchie steps up, so we sat still in round three and took Brazell II, a 1000 yard speedster and perfect Z WR.  What a break. At that time, CB and Center were our biggest needs, and with several possible centers on the board and a good fit for our defense at CB, we grabbed Will Lee III.  Lee and Thornton have people in front of them, but I think Morgan knew we needed a guy who can play the outside and press--and probably step in as Jackson's replacement in 2027.    After making trades to get back into the fifth round, where we grabbed one of the best centers in the draft.  This is significant because we signed Fortner to a one-year deal; maybe Morgan saw what some of us saw--the center position is strong in this draft--on day 3, and day 3 players need a year, in most cases.  Moments later, a safety they had been talking to whose skill set matched what we are looking for in a FS.  As stated, Scott was signed,  but the fact that the Panthers were talking to Wheatley and not Theiemann means that they might have known they were not going FS early, but would need a developmental FS later--which explains why we signed Scott.  So if you pay attention to the one-year, vet deals, you can tell where we planned to sign later-round, developmental players.  What positions did we draft early that did not have 1-year veterans signed in front of them:  DL (Hunter) and WR (I don't count Metchie because I count starting-level players). I would not be surprised to learn later that the plan was DT and WR in rounds 1 and 2--then Freeling fell.  Notice that Freeling--from Mt Pleasant SC, did not come in for a visit.  Most of the other OT candidates had short arms or were certain to be gone. I don't think Freeling was in their plans.  I think a trade back and Hunter and maybe Boston was the vision.  I am guessing that CB was also high on their list.   So in this draft, we got 
    • This is one area I think that is not getting enough exposure in the midst of all the optimism. I like Chuba a great deal from a personal standpoint but he has largely proven nothing on a consistent basis yet. He's had the one season of production but before that most people pegged us as moving on. And last year injuries or not he just did not have that juice. The rest of the guys are completely unproven. I don't see anyone among the group having a game or a handful of games worth of high level production the way Rico Dowdle did last year. And yeah he dropped off and yeah he got an attitude about our incompetent handling of the touches which was honestly justified on his part and he moved on but he did legitimately save our season. That's what it is going to take to seize control of the NFC South. We all know that we will not be passing all over defenses. It is what it is. So who amongst this RB group is capable of doing that? And if we are struggling to run the ball AND pass are we going to revert to making excuses for our coach and QB again? That is definitely getting old.
×
×
  • Create New...