PFT: Should Gruden be getting more heat?

[drfrey13]

2 hours ago, Darbsk said:

Well, Carr led us to be the only team thus far to beat the Chiefs and beat them in their own back yard very handily. We also should have beaten them at home so the evidence suggests that we can win the Superbowl with Carr if we build the right supporting cast - and by that I don't mean All Stars all round as sone would have us believe but a competent defence and some decent weapons and a good OL.

To me it is obvious what we need to do and that is easier than trying to draft a HoF QB who can drag this current underwhelming supporting team to greatness. 

We have over $45 million tied up in the Oline.  We have spent twice as much on offense than we have on defense.  Plus you have to give the defense some credit for that KC win.  The defense shut down KC in the second half.  The Chiefs did not score until we had the game locked up.  If we focus on improving the defense are we going to start saying Carr needs more weapons.  He has improved this year but I do not think he is ever going to be a top QB.  In his best year/s he is a tier 2/3 QB at best.  He is a more volatile Alex Smith.  Some weeks he is better and some weeks he is worse.

[Darbsk]

10 hours ago, drfrey13 said:

We have over $45 million tied up in the Oline.  We have spent twice as much on offense than we have on defense.  Plus you have to give the defense some credit for that KC win.  The defense shut down KC in the second half.  The Chiefs did not score until we had the game locked up.  If we focus on improving the defense are we going to start saying Carr needs more weapons.  He has improved this year but I do not think he is ever going to be a top QB.  In his best year/s he is a tier 2/3 QB at best.  He is a more volatile Alex Smith.  Some weeks he is better and some weeks he is worse.

Don't agree at all with the Alex Smith comparison, I think Carr is a superior QB, Smith played well with an elite supporting cast in KC whilst Carr has never had that. The couple years we've put good supporting cast around him he's played better than Smith ever has IMO but your reply does have some merit.

We have spent big on OL and IMO very worthwhile, but I think this FA the spending could potentially even out a little. It is likely that Williams and Witten will be off the books and possibly Incognito and Jackson (though I'd keep him if possible) and I dont see us spending that freed up cap on weapons, if anything I see us adding maybe a receiver and RB, possibly depth at OL in the draft in mid to late rounds. We desperately need a DT that can push the pocket, another DE and a FS that has range and ball skills. I hope that that money is reinvested in a high quality player at DT or FS plus we draft both aswell and a pass rusher.

With regard to the defence against KC I wouldn't say they were great, maybe slightly above average to good though they did get the Int and short field for the Jacobs TD near the end but basically the Offense hung 40 points on the reigning Superbowl champs and Carr was sublime so I think you're being a little disingenuous there. The offense clearly won the day for us IMO and would have in the return but for a couple very bad defensive mistakes, again the O put us in a position to win and the D couldn't seal the deal.

The team is Grudens vision so it's always going to have more emphasis on the offense but the defence should have more investment going forward. If we neglect that then we really are going down a wormhole. To win with offense only you need an all time offense and HoF QB likely. Even the great offence teams had at least good pass rushers like the Colts, Rams and Chiefs. Much, much easier to try and build a very good offense (which I believe we could have with a bit better play calling, some rookie development and tidying up execution) and a defence that can make plays when needed. We just don't pressure the QB enough, turn the ball over enough nor stop 3rd down conversions enough. We dont need an elite D in my view, just efficient in those 3 areas with the capability to not capitulate like against Miami and Los Angeles and we'd be a 10-6 or 11-5 team I reckon. We can reasonably achieve that moving forward I would hope 😀🍻

[drfrey13]

9 hours ago, Darbsk said:

Don't agree at all with the Alex Smith comparison, I think Carr is a superior QB, Smith played well with an elite supporting cast in KC whilst Carr has never had that. The couple years we've put good supporting cast around him he's played better than Smith ever has IMO but your reply does have some merit.

We have spent big on OL and IMO very worthwhile, but I think this FA the spending could potentially even out a little. It is likely that Williams and Witten will be off the books and possibly Incognito and Jackson (though I'd keep him if possible) and I dont see us spending that freed up cap on weapons, if anything I see us adding maybe a receiver and RB, possibly depth at OL in the draft in mid to late rounds. We desperately need a DT that can push the pocket, another DE and a FS that has range and ball skills. I hope that that money is reinvested in a high quality player at DT or FS plus we draft both aswell and a pass rusher.

With regard to the defence against KC I wouldn't say they were great, maybe slightly above average to good though they did get the Int and short field for the Jacobs TD near the end but basically the Offense hung 40 points on the reigning Superbowl champs and Carr was sublime so I think you're being a little disingenuous there. The offense clearly won the day for us IMO and would have in the return but for a couple very bad defensive mistakes, again the O put us in a position to win and the D couldn't seal the deal.

The team is Grudens vision so it's always going to have more emphasis on the offense but the defence should have more investment going forward. If we neglect that then we really are going down a wormhole. To win with offense only you need an all time offense and HoF QB likely. Even the great offence teams had at least good pass rushers like the Colts, Rams and Chiefs. Much, much easier to try and build a very good offense (which I believe we could have with a bit better play calling, some rookie development and tidying up execution) and a defence that can make plays when needed. We just don't pressure the QB enough, turn the ball over enough nor stop 3rd down conversions enough. We dont need an elite D in my view, just efficient in those 3 areas with the capability to not capitulate like against Miami and Los Angeles and we'd be a 10-6 or 11-5 team I reckon. We can reasonably achieve that moving forward I would hope 😀🍻

Nice post.  I never said the offense deserves no credit or that the defense deserves more credit than the offense.  Just stating that we need to give the defense some credit.  My problem with Carr is when the defense plays good/average the offense has to play well or the defense eventually falls apart.  If you use the NE and KC games you see 2 very different outcomes.  When the both sides of the ball are clicking the team looks great.  We could still improve on defense but right now the D has to sustain itself on heart and not talent.  The offense kept the defense fighting in KC and we held them to 25 points when it mattered.  NE on the other hand the defense came out motivated and was doing really well.  The offense collapsed and kept putting them in a bad spot.  The defense kept us in the game but the offense came out in the 2nd half with a chance to tie it up and missed a FG.  The defense quit because the offense put up 13 points when it mattered.  Now the offense collapse was not 100% on Carr but he did not have a good game.  Carr is definitely capable of being better than Smith but he is also capable of being much worse then him.  When you average out his play that is the range he falls into and maybe a little better.  Smith's best year is almost the same as Carr's best year with similar weapons, similar defenses, and similar TO ratio.  The difference is Carr got hurt at the end of the year so we do not know how far he would have taken us.  Biggest difference is coaching though.  I definitely give the advantage to Carr and I believe he can be better but how much is $22 million question.  I am fine going with Carr again next year but we need to make changes that make sense.  He needs a #1 WR and we need to improve the defense.  If not we need to shot for the stars with a high potential QB in the draft.

[dante9876]

1 hour ago, drfrey13 said:

Nice post.  I never said the offense deserves no credit or that the defense deserves more credit than the offense.  Just stating that we need to give the defense some credit.  My problem with Carr is when the defense plays good/average the offense has to play well or the defense eventually falls apart.  If you use the NE and KC games you see 2 very different outcomes.  When the both sides of the ball are clicking the team looks great.  We could still improve on defense but right now the D has to sustain itself on heart and not talent.  The offense kept the defense fighting in KC and we held them to 25 points when it mattered.  NE on the other hand the defense came out motivated and was doing really well.  The offense collapsed and kept putting them in a bad spot.  The defense kept us in the game but the offense came out in the 2nd half with a chance to tie it up and missed a FG.  The defense quit because the offense put up 13 points when it mattered.  Now the offense collapse was not 100% on Carr but he did not have a good game.  Carr is definitely capable of being better than Smith but he is also capable of being much worse then him.  When you average out his play that is the range he falls into and maybe a little better.  Smith's best year is almost the same as Carr's best year with similar weapons, similar defenses, and similar TO ratio.  The difference is Carr got hurt at the end of the year so we do not know how far he would have taken us.  Biggest difference is coaching though.  I definitely give the advantage to Carr and I believe he can be better but how much is $22 million question.  I am fine going with Carr again next year but we need to make changes that make sense.  He needs a #1 WR and we need to improve the defense.  If not we need to shot for the stars with a high potential QB in the draft.

The falcons game also played out like this. 

[drfrey13]

2 hours ago, dante9876 said:

The falcons game also played out like this. 

I missed that game and when I went back to watch it I did not pay attention because I knew we got destroyed.  Looking at that box score I might have to go back and pay attention.  How does the defense give up 304 yards and 3 TDs and the other team beats you 43 to 6.

[oakdb36]

11 hours ago, drfrey13 said:

I missed that game and when I went back to watch it I did not pay attention because I knew we got destroyed.  Looking at that box score I might have to go back and pay attention.  How does the defense give up 304 yards and 3 TDs and the other team beats you 43 to 6.

5 turnovers. 11 penalties for 141 yards.

[Darbsk]

23 hours ago, drfrey13 said:

Nice post.  I never said the offense deserves no credit or that the defense deserves more credit than the offense.  Just stating that we need to give the defense some credit.  My problem with Carr is when the defense plays good/average the offense has to play well or the defense eventually falls apart.  If you use the NE and KC games you see 2 very different outcomes.  When the both sides of the ball are clicking the team looks great.  We could still improve on defense but right now the D has to sustain itself on heart and not talent.  The offense kept the defense fighting in KC and we held them to 25 points when it mattered.  NE on the other hand the defense came out motivated and was doing really well.  The offense collapsed and kept putting them in a bad spot.  The defense kept us in the game but the offense came out in the 2nd half with a chance to tie it up and missed a FG.  The defense quit because the offense put up 13 points when it mattered.  Now the offense collapse was not 100% on Carr but he did not have a good game.  Carr is definitely capable of being better than Smith but he is also capable of being much worse then him.  When you average out his play that is the range he falls into and maybe a little better.  Smith's best year is almost the same as Carr's best year with similar weapons, similar defenses, and similar TO ratio.  The difference is Carr got hurt at the end of the year so we do not know how far he would have taken us.  Biggest difference is coaching though.  I definitely give the advantage to Carr and I believe he can be better but how much is $22 million question.  I am fine going with Carr again next year but we need to make changes that make sense.  He needs a #1 WR and we need to improve the defense.  If not we need to shot for the stars with a high potential QB in the draft.

I can see where you are coming from and do agree in part, however, there are 16 games in a regular season and every team will faulter or have a blip and its just not reasonable to expect the offense to every game 'protect' the defence.

We should, most games be led by the offense I agree but there also has to be a point where we say 'heck the D will just have to step up this game' because the O is not performing. We simply never, ever have that. The D has (under Gruden 2) never bailed the O out, never won us a game and never taken over a game. If the aim of the organisation is to compete and actually win a Division, Conference or even Superbowl title then the D has to play at least a small part. 

Also, I still think Carr/Smith is a poor comparison. Carr has done more with much less, Smiths best year was nowhere near Carr's unless you just go by numbers. I think you're underselling Carr, he's the main reason we win pretty much any game, though I will give you Cleveland where the whole team stepped up, what a rarity 😀

I dont think we're too far apart, I think even an average D that can pull out the odd win would have us as a perennial double digit win team.

[drfrey13]

20 minutes ago, Darbsk said:

I can see where you are coming from and do agree in part, however, there are 16 games in a regular season and every team will faulter or have a blip and its just not reasonable to expect the offense to every game 'protect' the defence.

We should, most games be led by the offense I agree but there also has to be a point where we say 'heck the D will just have to step up this game' because the O is not performing. We simply never, ever have that. The D has (under Gruden 2) never bailed the O out, never won us a game and never taken over a game. If the aim of the organisation is to compete and actually win a Division, Conference or even Superbowl title then the D has to play at least a small part. 

Also, I still think Carr/Smith is a poor comparison. Carr has done more with much less, Smiths best year was nowhere near Carr's unless you just go by numbers. I think you're underselling Carr, he's the main reason we win pretty much any game, though I will give you Cleveland where the whole team stepped up, what a rarity 😀

I dont think we're too far apart, I think even an average D that can pull out the odd win would have us as a perennial double digit win team.

I agree about improving the defense.  My issue there is Gruden.  I have been saying it since we to Pagano to kick rocks that Gruden does not want a good defense.  He wants at most an average defense so he can be the star.  I think Carr is the 1a reason why we win games and a good run game is 1b.  Carr struggles when the run game is not there and the run game suffers when Carr can not distract the defense.  We are 6-3 when rushing for 100+ yards and two of those game, SD and Miami, we should have won.  We are 1-5 when we do not.  I think that might be why Gruden wants Carr to run more.

We are not far off but I do not know if we will ever be a Super Bowl champion with Carr.  Not saying he is not capable but the chances are slim because he is the type of QB that needs so many things to go right to have that happen.  I still believe the #1 reason why the Raiders had so much success in 2016 was TO differential.  I said it that off-season that we would not repeat if we did not create the same luck in 2017.  Now that puts pressure on the defense because we were 2nd in the league in takeaway but that also falls on the offense.  We were 4th in the league in giveaways in 2016 with 14.  We were at 0 or +1 when we controlled our own destiny for the playoffs.  We have been -9 in the last 5 games.  Only game we were positive was Jets which we won.  If we were even we would have lost or gone to OT.  If we are even against the Dolphins and Chargers we probably win both games.   Then we have a shot at the playoffs this week.  For whatever reason this team almost always comes down to the TO battle.  Maybe it is how Gruden coaches.

[Humble_Beast]

I honestly feel like MM should get more heat. We had the assets to build a contender if we nailed our last two drafts. It’s been so so, an average team. I understand the players are young, but we see other rookies and 2nd year players we passed having a bigger impact. Gruden offense is usually good every Sunday, even with a young roster and the OLine has been hit hard with injuries. Gruden mistake was not getting a real DEfensive coordinator. 

[dante9876]

47 minutes ago, Humble_Beast said:

I honestly feel like MM should get more heat. We had the assets to build a contender if we nailed our last two drafts. It’s been so so, an average team. I understand the players are young, but we see other rookies and 2nd year players we passed having a bigger impact. Gruden offense is usually good every Sunday, even with a young roster and the OLine has been hit hard with injuries. Gruden mistake was not getting a real DEfensive coordinator. 

How about hiring a first time gm that hasn't been In a front office before and tasking him with a full rebuild of a franchise. That wasn't a gruden mistake? 

Edited January 2, 2021 by dante9876

[Humble_Beast]

17 minutes ago, dante9876 said:

How about hiring a first time gm that hasn't been In a front office before and tasking him with a full rebuild of a franchise. That wasn't a gruden mistake? 

😬

[drfrey13]

2 hours ago, dante9876 said:

How about hiring a first time gm that hasn't been In a front office before and tasking him with a full rebuild of a franchise. That wasn't a gruden mistake? 

I also think Gruden has a lot more input into who we are drafting.  He does not like developing young guys.  He also prefers the perceived safe pick over potential.  Ruggs is probably the riskiest high pick.  I really do not like how this team has drafted the past couple decades.  Does not matter if we are drafting #1 or #32.  To add that Al did not have the infrastructure to develop players and Gruden does not like doing it is even more frustrating.

[jimkelly02]

3 hours ago, Humble_Beast said:

I honestly feel like MM should get more heat. We had the assets to build a contender if we nailed our last two drafts. It’s been so so, an average team. I understand the players are young, but we see other rookies and 2nd year players we passed having a bigger impact. Gruden offense is usually good every Sunday, even with a young roster and the OLine has been hit hard with injuries. Gruden mistake was not getting a real DEfensive coordinator. 

I like a Mayock but your spot on.  Mayock had made some poor decisions and wasted cap space and not optimized the draft capital we had.  I’m not calling to fire him but he really needs to have a very big offseason, otherwise he’ll Be on the hot seat.

[big_palooka]

Blaming Mayock for anything is hilarious. He's Gruden's glorified scout. He's not making any final roster decisions. Gruden has the keys to this franchise, is making the final decisions. How is that even debatable at this point? 

[G]

I'm a big fan of Carr the whole time and I don't think he needs more weapons. If Nelson isn't resigned then another vet presence should be added. Also need a bigger RB especially with Jacob's DUI. I think he's a good kid and won't make that mistake moving forward but a little competition and a different 'type' would help in the red zone IMO. 

We NEED a pass rush. Spend on a vet and maybe two. Draft capital should be used for depth and trading down to add to that capital. UNLESS a STUD fell, then pull the trigger. Doesn't matter what position or side of the ball.(ST not OK) We could use a difference maker. Would rather not use a pick til 38-40 (DB prefer S) and get lots of picks below 80. I really want Hudson's back up and eventual replacement found and them versatile enough to challenge at Guard. Late 2nd early 3rd and a RT early 3rd. All other picks at any position on the Defense. I'd also add another WR if an injured one fell. Carr doesn't need a #1 and spreads the ball well enough to beat the other team with numbers and 'who to focus on changing each week if Gruden game plans as such.