Jump to content

The Mike Vrabel thread (+ coaching staff)


Recommended Posts

13 minutes ago, quiller said:

Well..  Tanny is a good/better then average QB though I don't have him in the top 10.  Our OL is netter average but not elite  We just played a game with zero WR's that would be starting on the "top" teams in football.  Our secondary is slightly better then average. Our LB core is below average, though Landry is a top level player.  Our DL has two  good players so above average. Our place kicker is below average.   Our TE's are average. What does that leave, a elite punter who missed todays game and it showed, 12 yard punt from deep in our territory.  Two elite WR's who didn't play today.  

AND Finally the best player not a QB in FOOTBALL> 

SO you tell me the idea concept that we can win and dominate games when all we have going to separate us from other teams is KING Henry makes no sense to me.  

 

1. Tannehill is a top 10 QB. 

2. This was written 2 weeks ago.

Link to post
Share on other sites

We completely rebuilt the defense into the image Vrabel wanted. We let him hire his friends. And the problems persist. 

Team is unprepared. Mental lapses all over the defense. Stubborn offensive philosophy. Kern has been the only saving grace of the Special Teams his entire tenure.

He’s not good enough. And he’s almost certainly too stubborn to become good enough. Or maybe he will. It took Belichick two stops to figure it out, maybe that’ll be Vrabel’s path. But for now, he’s just defensive Mularkey. Blessed with a more talented roster and significantly better QB play than what Mularkey had here.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I just got home from a long @ss day

Met a lot of nice Titans fans today 

I’m mad at some of the coaches, I just don’t know who deserves how much blame 

I do want to say I feel terrible for Tannehill 

Hes a great QB, great leader and he’s absolutely getting the crap kicked out of him because this O-Line has been garbage and situations like today he just has no one that creates separation and he was forced to hold on to the ball longer 

RT has been an Achilles heel for JRob and Vrabel

 Titans were in need of WRs who could create separation today and yet we don’t bring up Kinsey or Fitzpatrick 

Titans had not 1 but 2 FBs active today

Wait till you guys see the snap count for McMath, he was on the field a lot today and he has yet to be targeted in any game

 What was worse was when he was on the field it was like we were playing with 10 guys because Tannehill never looked his way so there was never a threat of him doing anything 

Downing still stuck on run run pass

I still have no idea what Bowen does well

We didn’t blitz for most of the 4th quarter 

He has no exotic blitz packages, schemes, just nothing he literally brings nothing to the table 

Jackrabbit playing way off guys today

I don’t think we’ve blitzed a DB yet this year, probably could of dialed a few up today with Wilson just running around like a Madden game 

I get we have a ton of injuries

But this is why fans are upset with how we handle draft picks 

No one is going to replace what Julio and Brown can do but how can you tell us Fitzpatrick needs to keep working but I have to watch McMath just line up and run deep and not get targeted 

Our line looks like crap 

I can’t tell if Nate Davis is really having a bad year or is Quess so bad it’s making him bad

We take Radunz in the 2nd round and he’s not even active and the kicker is he would actually get into games with all the injuries on the line each week 

I’m forced to watch Borders and Jackrabbit get mossed by Davis and our 1st round pick is inactive 

Is Farley actually hurt? When Vrabel is asked he never really says he is or isn’t hurt 

I know he doesn’t talk about injuries but the few times I actually seen him answer Farley questions, he usually says “he just needs to keep working”

So is he just not ready or is he hurt?

Is it his back?

Did the Titans over look his medicals?

Theres just a lot of crap going with this team and I feel it’s been just a mismanagement of bad coaching hires and bad at developing draft picks at the moment 

Farley injured or not ready

Radunz not ready

Rice doesn’t play even though Jayon isn’t a 100%

Molden not playing as much

Fitzpatrick PS

Weaver broken leg  

McMath the only rookie who plays and doesn’t help on offense at all

Breeze IR 

Using injuries as an excuse is one thing but the roster development of these past 2 drafts has been awful outside of Fulton and Jackson 

Link to post
Share on other sites

The thing about the RT position... The first guy Robinson ever drafted is probably considered the best RT in the league right now on what is considered the best offensive line. This OL has been trash since Conklin left.

Never should have let him out of the building. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, TitanSS said:

The thing about the RT position... The first guy Robinson ever drafted is probably considered the best RT in the league right now on what is considered the best offensive line. This OL has been trash since Conklin left.

Never should have let him out of the building. 

I still push back about this.  
Henry and Tanny were needing to be signed too. Probably could have worked the cap to make it work, but gotta keep that in mind when talking about bringing him back. He ended up making almost LT money. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, KingTitan said:

I still push back about this.  
Henry and Tanny were needing to be signed too. Probably could have worked the cap to make it work, but gotta keep that in mind when talking about bringing him back. He ended up making almost LT money. 

I said it then and I still would sign him over the RB as RT is that much more valuable and harder to find. OL success harder to reproduce. I know we have an elite RB, but an All-Pro RT is more valuable.

I know it's unpopular. I know literally everyone disagrees with me, so I don't wanna go down that road and start that whole deal again.

Not trying to take anything away from Henry. One of my favorite players and I named my dog "Henry" after him. That's just my opinion on team building.

The rumor is we did offer Conklin a deal as good or better than Cleveland's. Apparently, he didn't want to resign with us because he was pissed how the front office handled his 5th year option. He doesn't seem like the kind of guy to be a diva, so we needed to handle that differently. That's on the front office for burning that relationship.

 

Edited by TitanSS
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, TitanSS said:

I said it then and I still would sign him over the RB as RT is that much more valuable and harder to find. OL success harder to reproduce. I know we have an elite RB, but an All-Pro RT is more valuable.

I know it's unpopular. I know literally everyone disagrees with me, so I don't wanna go down that road and start that whole deal again.

Not trying to take anything away from Henry. One of my favorite players and I named my dog "Henry" after him. That's just my opinion on team building.

The rumor is we did offer Conklin a deal as good or better than Cleveland's. Apparently, he didn't want to resign with us because he was pissed how the front office handled his 5th year option. He doesn't seem like the kind of guy to be a diva, so we needed to handle that differently. That's on the front office for burning that relationship.

 

Yeah. I'd still think we made the right call if it was an either or. 
Henry is literally the only thing we can truly depend on. He is the only player that will play up to superstar status 90% of the time. I do recall hearing we wanted Conklin but he didn't like not given the 5th year option. 

But also, I'd say we did well without him. Kelly is the one that we should have kept. Kelly filled in very respectably. Quez was too for 3 weeks. lol
But as important as a RT might be, I think this team and offense has managed to do well on the cheaper without it.

I don't think we'd have an QB option without Tanny. Maybe drafted one?  We wouldn't have got Brady.  Winston? lol
I did like Jalen Hurts tho. 

But anyway...lol

Link to post
Share on other sites

For all that's fair about things to criticize regarding Vrabel, I think one thing this fanbase would do well to get over is this idea that struggling against or losing to bad teams is some unheard of or uncommon aspect among winning teams. Can look at pretty much every successful franchise throughout the league's history and see this.

I read a post, forget from who, during the GDT of someone even saying "we never beat worse teams convincingly", as if the Detroit, 2nd Jacksonville and Chicago(game ended with a 7 point differential, but only due to Chicago scoring in garbage time) games didn't happen last year, or the Browns, Falcons, 2nd Jacksonville and Raiders game didn't happen the year before that, so on and so forth.

I think people fail to understand how relatively uncommon blow outs in the NFL are.

Criticizing things that led to us struggling or losing to a lesser team is understandable, asking questions like "what are we(or at the end of a season, what did we) going to change to fix the problem", evaluating if it was just a piss poor game and move on, etc, those type of things.

But I feel people who have this idea in their heads that we should just be blowing out every single lesser team we play as the expectation either don't understand how the NFL works, or maybe are just letting their disappointment and frustration over the loss cloud their heads and hide what a reasonable expectation is in the league.

Breaking down and criticizing game planning/play calling, roster decisions, etc I'm all for, just not sure I'll ever understand the mentality listed above.

Link to post
Share on other sites
50 minutes ago, KingTitan said:

Yeah. I'd still think we made the right call if it was an either or. 
Henry is literally the only thing we can truly depend on. He is the only player that will play up to superstar status 90% of the time. I do recall hearing we wanted Conklin but he didn't like not given the 5th year option. 

But also, I'd say we did well without him. Kelly is the one that we should have kept. Kelly filled in very respectably. Quez was too for 3 weeks. lol
But as important as a RT might be, I think this team and offense has managed to do well on the cheaper without it.

I don't think we'd have an QB option without Tanny. Maybe drafted one?  We wouldn't have got Brady.  Winston? lol
I did like Jalen Hurts tho. 

But anyway...lol

I just fundamentally disagree with building a team around running the football and prioritizing your investments in pursuit of that.

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, TitanLegend said:

For all that's fair about things to criticize regarding Vrabel, I think one thing this fanbase would do well to get over is this idea that struggling against or losing to bad teams is some unheard of or uncommon aspect among winning teams. Can look at pretty much every successful franchise throughout the league's history and see this.

I read a post, forget from who, during the GDT of someone even saying "we never beat worse teams convincingly", as if the Detroit, 2nd Jacksonville and Chicago(game ended with a 7 point differential, but only due to Chicago scoring in garbage time) games didn't happen last year, or the Browns, Falcons, 2nd Jacksonville and Raiders game didn't happen the year before that, so on and so forth.

I think people fail to understand how relatively uncommon blow outs in the NFL are.

Criticizing things that led to us struggling or losing to a lesser team is understandable, asking questions like "what are we(or at the end of a season, what did we) going to change to fix the problem", evaluating if it was just a piss poor game and move on, etc, those type of things.

But I feel people who have this idea in their heads that we should just be blowing out every single lesser team we play as the expectation either don't understand how the NFL works, or maybe are just letting their disappointment and frustration over the loss cloud their heads and hide what a reasonable expectation is in the league.

Breaking down and criticizing game planning/play calling, roster decisions, etc I'm all for, just not sure I'll ever understand the mentality listed above.

I think the fans remember Vrabel being on the Pats when they would just run over bad competition routinely and hoped Vrabel would bring that to Tennessee 

The problem with hoping for that is Tannehill isn’t Brady and what they did will probably never be done again 

It’s just unrealistic to expect blow outs

I said that all week, it would be ideal to get up 3 4 scores but it’s the NFL it just doesn’t happen often and especially with this team 

I agree with you though, criticize all that other stuff, not the margin of victory 

I just want to look good for a whole game which he have yet to see so far through the first quarter of the season 

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Titans fan 617 said:

I think the fans remember Vrabel being on the Pats when they would just run over bad competition routinely and hoped Vrabel would bring that to Tennessee 

The problem with hoping for that is Tannehill isn’t Brady and what they did will probably never be done again 

It’s just unrealistic to expect blow outs

I said that all week, it would be ideal to get up 3 4 scores but it’s the NFL it just doesn’t happen often and especially with this team 

I agree with you though, criticize all that other stuff, not the margin of victory 

I just want to look good for a whole game which he have yet to see so far through the first quarter of the season 

Even looking at the Pats with Brady/Belichick, they're no where near being above struggling or even losing to bad teams. Even if you look at their undefeated 2007 regular season arguably the greatest regular season team in NFL history, they struggled with the 4-12 Jets, 8-8 Eagles and 5-11 Ravens.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think anyone is focusing on the actual margin of victory, or lack thereof, but the competition we faced and how we actually looked like the inferior team in the second half after not capitalizing on anything in the first half.

We played like dog****. We've played like dog**** for 14 out of a possible 16 quarters this season. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, TitanSS said:

I don't think anyone is focusing on the actual margin of victory, or lack thereof, but the competition we faced and how we actually looked like the inferior team in the second half after not capitalizing on anything in the first half.

We played like dog****. We've played like dog**** for 14 out of a possible 16 quarters this season. 

 

Oh I said it today to anyone that would listen. We can't seem to blow anyone out, because of our run approach. Margin of victory will always be about 10 points at the best most time. 
For that reason, you will never know what you will get from t his team. We might win against an undefeated team or we'll lose to the Jets. 
Our playing style lends itself to any NFL team that is hype enough. 
Playing the run is a matter of want to and desire. Especially at this level when everyone has some level of talent. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, TitanLegend said:

For all that's fair about things to criticize regarding Vrabel, I think one thing this fanbase would do well to get over is this idea that struggling against or losing to bad teams is some unheard of or uncommon aspect among winning teams. Can look at pretty much every successful franchise throughout the league's history and see this.

I read a post, forget from who, during the GDT of someone even saying "we never beat worse teams convincingly", as if the Detroit, 2nd Jacksonville and Chicago(game ended with a 7 point differential, but only due to Chicago scoring in garbage time) games didn't happen last year, or the Browns, Falcons, 2nd Jacksonville and Raiders game didn't happen the year before that, so on and so forth.

I think people fail to understand how relatively uncommon blow outs in the NFL are.

Criticizing things that led to us struggling or losing to a lesser team is understandable, asking questions like "what are we(or at the end of a season, what did we) going to change to fix the problem", evaluating if it was just a piss poor game and move on, etc, those type of things.

But I feel people who have this idea in their heads that we should just be blowing out every single lesser team we play as the expectation either don't understand how the NFL works, or maybe are just letting their disappointment and frustration over the loss cloud their heads and hide what a reasonable expectation is in the league.

Breaking down and criticizing game planning/play calling, roster decisions, etc I'm all for, just not sure I'll ever understand the mentality listed above.

I said all that. And what I said was that we are culturally incapable of convincingly beating bad teams.

and I stand by it. We just got beat, outplayed and out coached by the Jets. A team that has been absolutely getting their teeth kicked in with a rookie QB. Same thing happened last year against Cincy. We literally almost lost 2x to Houston last year and almost lost to Jax in our first meeting.

beating middle of the pack teams (at the time) in chicago and Oakland and actually thoroughly beating a bad team in Detroit doesn’t change the fact that we typically play up to and down to the level of our opponent. Consistently. And have throughout Vrabel’s tenure. Detroit reads more like an outlier in the bigger picture.

I’m well aware of how the NFL works. Well aware of how slim the margin of error is and the difference between a great team like KC and a bad team like Houston isn’t all that much. 
 

but can you seriously say that teams like KC, GB, and Baltimore don’t go into NY on Sunday and almost certainly come out with a win? And we can’t use the “they have franchise QBs” as an excuse here, because the consensus here (and I agree) is that Tanny is a top ten QB.

9/10 times, those teams take care of business. We make it hard on ourselves and have every single season. We either limp into the playoffs like last year or need to make a late push for the WC. It’s ridiculous.

 

the single objective in this league is to win a super bowl. Literally nothing else matters. Losses like Sundays show how far we are from winning one when you look at the big picture. 
 

we can’t beat the Jets but we are supposed to beat Balt/Buffalo/KC in consecutive weeks? 
 

and miss me with any “overreaction / the sky isn’t falling” bs. Because it’s not an overreaction. This team is repeatedly showing that, the way it is in its current state (injuries or not), it is not on the right path toward winning a super bowl. Whether it’s getting our butts totally whooped by the Browns or Packers last year or by Cincy and the Jets…this is a football team that simply fails to show up mentally and strategically every single Sunday. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, KingTitan said:

 

Oh I said it today to anyone that would listen. We can't seem to blow anyone out, because of our run approach. Margin of victory will always be about 10 points at the best most time. 
For that reason, you will never know what you will get from t his team. We might win against an undefeated team or we'll lose to the Jets. 
Our playing style lends itself to any NFL team that is hype enough. 
Playing the run is a matter of want to and desire. Especially at this level when everyone has some level of talent. 

YUP. The easiest thing to improve upon defensively is intensity. Can make all the difference

Link to post
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.

×
×
  • Create New...