titans0021 Posted December 3, 2017 Share Posted December 3, 2017 2 hours ago, ragevsuall17 said: So we agree that changes are needed... We just disagree that those trips stats are/are not the proverbial needle that broke the camel's back? No, the trip stats certainly aren't the breaking point by any means. Pairing them with the 12 personnel stat is what bothered me. The combination of leading the league in something we're terrible at while sitting in the bottom five in something we're actually good at was tough to read. I honestly don't think we're that far apart here. Just found the 1-2 punch of the 12 personnel and trips numbers to be a decent statistical indicator that backs up my primary complaint with what we've opted to do offensively this year. I'm just hoping for a change this offseason. I'm fine with Mularkey, the team likes him and he's done well to turn this team around in a season and a half. But I'm not sure I love the long-term direction of the offense. Right now we have a top five pick at receiver, a very good #2 receiver, two athletic tight ends, a potentially speedy and dynamic slot guy and a pair of bookend tackles combined with a mobile quarterback. Nothing about the current build of the team screams power-run to me other than running back. The coaching staff continuing to try to force a square peg into a round hole just wears me down a little. No matter how happy we are with the record, and yeah, I'm not upset about 7-4, I think we can all agree that we've spent far too many assets on the offensive side of the ball to be sitting in the bottom half of the league in yards and points almost 3/4 of the way through the season. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TitanSS Posted December 18, 2017 Share Posted December 18, 2017 So reading previous comments it looks like people were saying to be happy we were 7-4 despite the fact that we had played like ****. Recent trends would suggest that we can forget that ideology now. So who do we want as our next head coach? Let's all riot and see if we can't expedite the firing of Malarkey to the Monday following the end of our 8-8 2017 season. Outside of McDaniels, I'm not even sure who the top candidates are. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
615finest Posted December 18, 2017 Share Posted December 18, 2017 I think David Shaw would make an interesting candidate but I’m sure it would take a lot to get him away from Stanford. I say we bring Gruden out of retirement, he loves Mariota lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KingTitan Posted December 18, 2017 Share Posted December 18, 2017 14 minutes ago, 615finest said: I think David Shaw would make an interesting candidate but I’m sure it would take a lot to get him away from Stanford. I say we bring Gruden out of retirement, he loves Mariota lol If y'all hate Murlarkey you going to hate Shaw. Lol. Have y'all seen his offense? It's 99% TEs and extra lineman. I can't recall a wr ever doing anything of note in his offense. And Gruden would force his Spider Y banana offense on us. His ego wouldn't allow Mariota to be comfortable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
615finest Posted December 18, 2017 Share Posted December 18, 2017 1 minute ago, KingTitan said: If y'all hate Murlarkey you going to hate Shaw. Lol. Have y'all seen his offense? It's 99% TEs and extra lineman. I can't recall a wr ever doing anything of note in his offense. And Gruden would force his Spider Y banana offense on us. His ego wouldn't allow Mariota to be comfortable. I’ve seen his offense a few times. It doesn’t seem as condensed as ours tho, he seems to spread it out a little more and it still would fit the runnin styles of Murray and Henry. Spider 2Y Banana would have won us that game yesterday! Lmao Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KingTitan Posted December 18, 2017 Share Posted December 18, 2017 10 minutes ago, 615finest said: I’ve seen his offense a few times. It doesn’t seem as condensed as ours tho, he seems to spread it out a little more and it still would fit the runnin styles of Murray and Henry. Spider 2Y Banana would have won us that game yesterday! Lmao Lol ok. Well all I really see from him is condensed formations with heavy personnel. That's why we see those RBS break out so many long runs. Once they get past level one it's daylight. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KingTitan Posted December 18, 2017 Share Posted December 18, 2017 Saints offense this year is ideal to me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
615finest Posted December 18, 2017 Share Posted December 18, 2017 3 minutes ago, KingTitan said: Lol ok. Well all I really see from him is condensed formations with heavy personnel. That's why we see those RBS break out so many long runs. Once they get past level one it's daylight. Makes sense. I’m not too familiar with the head coaching candidates this year. McDaniels is the only name I constantly hear about. I honestly think Mularkey will be the coach next year as much as I hate to say it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SerenityNow Posted December 18, 2017 Share Posted December 18, 2017 13 minutes ago, KingTitan said: If y'all hate Murlarkey you going to hate Shaw. Lol. Have y'all seen his offense? It's 99% TEs and extra lineman. I can't recall a wr ever doing anything of note in his offense. And Gruden would force his Spider Y banana offense on us. His ego wouldn't allow Mariota to be comfortable. As a Stanford fan, I think the key thing you're missing with Shaw compared to Mularkey is that he knows how to adjust to attack based on the team that he's going against. His philosophy is similar to Mularkey's and there are similar offensive concepts, but when the run isn't working he's shown an ability to spread it out with the pass. It's not the type of offense where if the run fails (which has been rare in Stanford's offense under Shaw) that we can't move the ball. I personally think Shaw's offense could really thrive with Marcus running it, but the longer the season has gone on the more I want to get away from anything that even remotely resembles the offense that we have now, so I could definitely understand the hesitation with Shaw even though I don't think Mularkey is anywhere close to Shaw's level as a head coach from an X's and O's perspective. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KingTitan Posted December 18, 2017 Share Posted December 18, 2017 11 minutes ago, SerenityNow said: As a Stanford fan, I think the key thing you're missing with Shaw compared to Mularkey is that he knows how to adjust to attack based on the team that he's going against. His philosophy is similar to Mularkey's and there are similar offensive concepts, but when the run isn't working he's shown an ability to spread it out with the pass. It's not the type of offense where if the run fails (which has been rare in Stanford's offense under Shaw) that we can't move the ball. I personally think Shaw's offense could really thrive with Marcus running it, but the longer the season has gone on the more I want to get away from anything that even remotely resembles the offense that we have now, so I could definitely understand the hesitation with Shaw even though I don't think Mularkey is anywhere close to Shaw's level as a head coach from an X's and O's perspective. Fair enough. I think people here are wanting something more proven, than assumptions on what might work. I'd be ok with Shaw. I also have no problem with Murlarkey overall. There is no perfect coach to me. It's all about what you willing to overlook and what are you willing to accept. With changes I will be ok with Murlarkey. That is my threshold. For others their threshold with Murlarkey is at about one play call. Lol I love the approach of Shaw and Murlarkey. I'm not going to assume Shaw would come and coach circles around anyone. Murlarkey has been a good OC, so I know he knows his stuff. Can he apply it all the time???? I think Murlarkey won't work in the end because he has too much public opinion against him. Deservedly so some and unfairly some too. Edit: I said I couldn't think of a wr from Stanford. Doug Baldwin. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TitanSS Posted December 18, 2017 Share Posted December 18, 2017 11 minutes ago, KingTitan said: Saints offense this year is ideal to me. This is 100% my thoughts as well. Henry is our Ingram. We need to dump Murray for a Kamara style RB. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TitanSS Posted December 18, 2017 Share Posted December 18, 2017 Not a fan of Shaw. Def don't want Malarkey retained as OC lol. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SerenityNow Posted December 18, 2017 Share Posted December 18, 2017 3 minutes ago, KingTitan said: Fair enough. I think people here are wanting something more proven, than assumptions on what might work. I'd be ok with Shaw. I also have no problem with Murlarkey overall. There is no perfect coach to me. It's all about what you willing to overlook and what are you willing to accept. With changes I will be ok with Murlarkey. That is my threshold. For others their threshold with Murlarkey is at about one play call. Lol I love the approach of Shaw and Murlarkey. I'm not going to assume Shaw would come and coach circles around anyone. Murlarkey has been a good OC, so I know he knows his stuff. Can he apply it all the time???? I think Murlarkey won't work in the end because he has too much public opinion against him. Deservedly so some and unfairly some too. Yeah I love Shaw and his approach, and I'd be fine having him here, but I'm starting to get away from it to an extent because I am tired of us using so many heavy formations. Though a lot of that with Shaw especially this past year was based on the fact that our QB early in the year Keller Chryst was really struggling, so all we really had was the Bryce Love show. Once we got KJ Costello in there at QB the offense started really taking off, and we had a great balance. I don't want to derail the whole thread into a Stanford discussion though, because I could go on and on about them lol. I'd be perfectly fine with a Saints esque approach as well or a Chiefs approach under Matt Nagy the past few weeks as I mentioned in the Around the League thread this weekend. I definitely don't mind being a "run first" team I just want some balance and versatility there. Some versatility in the formations can go a long way where you can get in your power run sets but also move into more spread concepts depending on how the defense is attacking you. Speaking of the Saints... Pete Carmicheal Jr. has been Sean Payton's right hand man for years and still hasn't gotten a head coaching gig. I wonder what the deal is there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ttitansfan4life Posted December 18, 2017 Share Posted December 18, 2017 28 minutes ago, TitanSS said: This is 100% my thoughts as well. Henry is our Ingram. We need to dump Murray for a Kamara style RB. TRADE FOR DUKE!!! Pete Carmichael an option? Don’t think he calls plays but he’s from that tree and has hands in the offense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Titans fan 617 Posted December 18, 2017 Share Posted December 18, 2017 25 minutes ago, ttitansfan4life said: TRADE FOR DUKE!!! Pete Carmichael an option? Don’t think he calls plays but he’s from that tree and has hands in the offense. We definitely need a speedy back who can make plays in the receiving game for sure. Fluellen is useless all he does is play Special Teams. We have a speedy back on the team who we wasted a pick on since they never gave him carries in the preseason and clearly isn’t getting it since he’s not even talked about in Khalfani Muhammad. I’m not saying the Titans need to draft a back but I totally wouldn’t hate it but the Titans will have to start taking dynamic defensive players early in the draft at some point but we definitely need help Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.