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!

     

In other former coach news, Steve Wilks...


Mr. Scot
 Share

Recommended Posts

14 hours ago, pantherclaw said:

Yet their in the superbowl. A goal all teams have, yet only 2 make it to.  

Defensive and offensive ratings are great. Fantastic.  

The only stats that truly matter, is the wins and losses column.  

So, seems like you're just looking for something negative to say about him and the work that he does. 

 

Good job. 

I like Steve, he seems like a great man without doubt. And I’m very happy for him. I was just anticipating the hype squad saying him being in the superbowl somehow makes him a great coach. The last couple of games have been really rough in the 49ers defense, despite being stacked with talent.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, Martin said:

I like Steve, he seems like a great man without doubt. And I’m very happy for him. I was just anticipating the hype squad saying him being in the superbowl somehow makes him a great coach. The last couple of games have been really rough in the 49ers defense, despite being stacked with talent.

Great teams don't fail to score. Ya don't get to the Superbowl by having an offense that fails to produce against good defenses. Just like ya don't get there without good defenses. 

Nobody is worshipping the man. So you can go play in traffic until ya find someone that is doing so. 

 

  • Poo 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, pantherclaw said:

Great teams don't fail to score. Ya don't get to the Superbowl by having an offense that fails to produce against good defenses. Just like ya don't get there without good defenses. 

Nobody is worshipping the man. So you can go play in traffic until ya find someone that is doing so. 

 

Wow, a lot of anger there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

SF is allowing 1 more pt per game and 5 more yards per game than last year.

2.6 sacks per game vs 2 5 last year

1.6 takeaways vs 1.7 last year

That difference is insignificant. Why is Wilks considered a letdown when Ryans got a HC gig from it?.

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

If those stats are right that is illuminating. I can only guess that it just looks lesser. Whether that is love for Ryans clouding the picture or what, unsure. I haven’t watched but a couple of SF games this year to know. 

Edited by strato
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, strato said:

If those stats are right that is illuminating. I can only guess that it just looks lesser. Whether that is love for Ryans clouding the picture or what, unsure. I haven’t watched but a couple of SF games this year to know. 

https://www.teamrankings.com/nfl/stat/opponent-points-per-game

 

Can easily compare per game stats between years and it seems to take in to account any playoff games as well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, CamWhoaaCam said:

The goal is to win a SB why does the score matter?

 

He's the last DC left standing. Give the man his credit regardless if the Chiefs score a lot of points. You're basically proving my point as to why people will have excuses win or lose.

 

Well if KC scores 40 points, his defense isn't beating them. It's like saying if SF wins, Sam Darnold is a Super Bowl winning QB. While technically true, it doesn't mean he was directly responsible for winning the game. Denver beat Carolina in SB50 is spite of Manning, not because of him. You judge the performance, not just the outcome. 

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

    • The era that you played in, and, more importantly, who you played with actually matters. Honestly, that's why these issues will be debated forever, as it's just difficult to say that this person or that person is better when you're discussing the passage of time. As for me, after Rice, Moss and maybe Megatron and T.O., there's probably a dozen or so guys that can be argued about to the cows come home. Personally, I'm not putting Fitz, Harrison, Johnson, Evans, or especially D-Hop, Jefferson, Chase or Hill definitely in front of Smitty (and Colston ain't even in the discussion). Context and all that stuff actually matters. Things like the triple crown matter. 
    • Some of those guys? Yeah honestly you can.  I would 100% take Steve Smith over Larry Fitzgerald, Harrison, even Mike Evans. He is 100% a better player than those guys in his prime. If you look at the numbers Smith is historically under targeted in comparison to his contemporaries. He was only targeted 150 times or more only once in his career. Fitzgerald for example was targeted well above that 9 different seasons. Had Smith played with Peyton, Brady, Greatest Show on Turf, or even with Warner in Arizona he would broken records. His 2008 season was ridiculous accumulating 1400 yards in 13 games on less than 80 receptions. All time he also lost a season due to injury in 04, barely played WR as a rookie. Got robbed of 1k season with Clausen. Thats easily another 1800yds minimum that should have been tacked on to his #s. The only guys I’d say for certain are better than Smith are Rice, Moss, TO, Megatron, Julio Jones, Antonio Brown.
    • I parked in this lot a few times. It would take over and hour to get out of that lot after games. Never again
×
×
  • Create New...