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!

     

Ron Rivera doesn't take dictation


Mr. Scot

Recommended Posts

Great post Mr. Scot, glad to hear we have a coach who feels the best philosophy is the one that produces a win.

In general, I think coaches fail when they get too married to any one philosophy, the NFL has evolved so as a coach you have to evolve with it or you become obsolete. We have another example of this in town, Larry Brown was trying to make his players match his philosophy instead of looking at the players he had and adapting his philosophy to get the most out of them. Silas rolled into town and decided to adapt a philosophy that best suits the talent he has and they have won 4 out of the last 6 games after getting blown out by double-digits in several games leading up to Brown's dismissal.

Rivera has already demonstrated his willingness to evolve by taking a job as the defensive coordinator of a 3-4 defense in San Diego after being a student of the 4-3 defense in every other stop he made up to that point. When he got the DC job in San Diego, he didn't try to adapt the team to his philosophy... he adapted his philosophy to the team so he could make the most out of the talent he had.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I haven't been this excited about an offseason well....I've never been excited about an offseason.

Hopefully the CBA get's done so we can put some focus on signing some guys..

To add to that..I'm already dying for the preseason to be here...

WHOWOOWHDHOWOZHOHFHFCVNF!!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Halftime adjustments???

Even better. Preemptive adjustments.

The guys that win chess tournaments are the ones that think several moves ahead, ie "When I move here, in response he will move here; and then I will move here, which will cause him to..." and so on, and so on.

Fox rarely adjusted anything when the team was winning. Unfortunately, that approach fails to account for the fact that your opponent might make a change that nullifies what you were doing that was working.

If you think ahead, you can prepare for that sort of thing. Sadly, Fox never did.

(remember all those times we were winning after the first half then inexplicably fell behind in the third quarter and had to come back?)

Sounds like Rivera will play it more like a chess match. I guess we'll see in about seven or eight months (hopefully) :(

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I also think the days of the tampa-2 are coming to an end, there are so many rules now that favor the passing game that you can't expect to be able just to hang back and wait for the offense to make a mistake. Offenses are designed to beat the tampa-2/cover-2 at this point, the only way to counter all the rules that favor the passing game is to get as much pressure on the QB as possible.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I loved the part where he emphasized "tackling" and "wrapping up" on D. You see it 10 times a game, DB's coming in and just hitting a guy - said reciever then bounces off and runs 10 more yards - tackle and hold the gain to a minimum. I'm looking forward to a D that isn't sitting back on their heels - take it to them!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Even good offensive teams need to adopt this philosophy...look at the colts for example. Sometimes manning gets caught up in the moment and they actually pass a little too much. And when they have to run they aren't very effective...like on the goaline. The only thing that helps the colts is that manning and the wide receivers are ultra talented...but their offense would be more effective if they had some balance.

Like Mr Scott indicated, the pats employ the same concepts...it's no wonder that they became a much better team when they started running the ball more behind green-Ellis.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Good analysis Mr. Scot... When he said "choose to." I interpreted it as meaning we'll be proactive rather than reactive as we were with Fox, but being that he was talking about possible assistants, I was kind of lost... Plus, my kids were running around yelling and playing, lol.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I loved the part where he emphasized "tackling" and "wrapping up" on D. You see it 10 times a game, DB's coming in and just hitting a guy - said reciever then bounces off and runs 10 more yards - tackle and hold the gain to a minimum. I'm looking forward to a D that isn't sitting back on their heels - take it to them!

Not only is this already a fundamental necessity in the NFL, it's tied to the new expectations of defensive tackling. Fines are being handed out and the coaches have to guide the players away from the plays that are getting the fines. Fundamental techniques will reduce the penalties/fines.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • In my opinion Fitterer was probably right about not paying McCaffrey. Now not wanting to "pay RBs" in my opinion isn't something you want to set in stone, to me it all comes down to the individual.
    • Maybe I'm just not understanding, but everywhere that I have read says that signing bonuses go against the cap prorated by as much as five years. The following example uses Andrew Luck's rookie contract as an example. "Take Andrew Luck, the first overall pick in the 2012 NFL draft. Luck signed a four-year contract with the Colts worth $22.1 million and included a $14.5 million signing bonus. Rather than a $14.5 million cap hit in 2012, the Colts spread out his signing bonus over the life of his contract. The hit against the cap would be $3.625 million per year over four years instead of a direct cap hit of $14.5 million directly in 2012. This gave the Colts more leverage and cap flexibility in signing other players." https://www.the33rdteam.com/nfl-signing-bonuses-explained/ I don't know why some of you think that signing bonuses aren't counted against the cap over the length of the contract, but whatever.   "The bonus with a signing is usually the most garish aspect of a rookie contract. Bonus is the immediate cash players receive when they ink a deal. It factors into the cap, but only for the whole contract duration, in terms of salary cap calculations. In the case of Bryce Young’s $24.6 million signing bonus, that’s prorated to approximately $6.15 million per season over a four-year deal. This format allows teams to handle the cap and provides rookies with some short-term fiscal stability, which is important given the high injury risk in this league." https://collegefootballnetwork.com/how-rookie-contracts-work-in-the-nfl/ I understand how signing bonuses can be a useful tool in order to manage the cap, and as one of the article suggests, signing bonuses may become important if you have a tight cap, but the bill is always going to come due. I'm not necessarily referring to you Tuka, but it seems to me that others simply don't want to understand that fact which is why they're reacting to what I'm saying negatively. How odd. In any event, I have a better general understanding of why signing bonuses are used now, and it's generally to fit salaries under the cap. Surely players, whether they be rookies or not, love a signing bonus because they get a good portion of their money up front. This in turn gives them more security and probably amounts to tax benefits as well. I also understand why teams would not want to use signing bonuses, particularly for players or draftees who have a higher probability of being gone before a contract even ends.
    • Get any shot you can at humane society, so much cheaper
×
×
  • Create New...