StLunatic88 Posted February 2 Share Posted February 2 Pretty interesting that with 8 Head Coach openings this cycle, 5 were filled with Defensive guys and 3 with Offensive guys Granted, the Ben Johnson situation changed it a little bit, but that would have only made it 4 and 4. (althought the big names who didnt get jobs were all Defensive guys as well) The "need" for an Offensive Head Coach is completely over blown 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dll2000 Posted February 2 Share Posted February 2 1 hour ago, StLunatic88 said: Pretty interesting that with 8 Head Coach openings this cycle, 5 were filled with Defensive guys and 3 with Offensive guys Granted, the Ben Johnson situation changed it a little bit, but that would have only made it 4 and 4. (althought the big names who didnt get jobs were all Defensive guys as well) The "need" for an Offensive Head Coach is completely over blown That is true. It doesn't change the trend and fact that OCs are very short lived in their positions across board. I think virtually none or none have had same job with same team for more than a few years. With an offensive coach that doesn't matter. With a defensive coach - you are potentially changing terminology and scheme with each OC change. Offense is harder to learn than defense. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StLunatic88 Posted February 2 Share Posted February 2 1 hour ago, dll2000 said: Offense is harder to learn than defense. Its not harder, it may take longer depending on the OC but most of these systems are running the same concepts It has been said by multiple QBs, Chase Daniel being the most recent I saw talking about how that its just not true that its hard to change OCs/Systems because nearly all the stuff being run in the NFL today is variations of just a few systems. Its why QBs and WRs who have never played together can have conversations about calls, because they are all so similar Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dll2000 Posted February 3 Share Posted February 3 5 hours ago, StLunatic88 said: Its not harder, it may take longer depending on the OC but most of these systems are running the same concepts It has been said by multiple QBs, Chase Daniel being the most recent I saw talking about how that its just not true that its hard to change OCs/Systems because nearly all the stuff being run in the NFL today is variations of just a few systems. Its why QBs and WRs who have never played together can have conversations about calls, because they are all so similar Even with that it is still harder than defense. But yes it is much easier if it same terminology, scheme and concepts of course. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AZBearsFan Posted February 3 Share Posted February 3 7 hours ago, dll2000 said: That is true. It doesn't change the trend and fact that OCs are very short lived in their positions across board. I think virtually none or none have had same job with same team for more than a few years. With an offensive coach that doesn't matter. With a defensive coach - you are potentially changing terminology and scheme with each OC change. Offense is harder to learn than defense. I think that’s the idea with bringing Thomas Brown in. If next year is great for us on offense and we lose Waldron to a HC gig elsewhere we’ve already got someone in house with play calling experience to step in who can run largely the same stuff. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chisoxguy7 Posted February 3 Share Posted February 3 Did anyone know Dan Quinn got the HC job in Washington? Can't believe I'm just seeing this today! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CBears019 Posted February 3 Share Posted February 3 3 minutes ago, chisoxguy7 said: Did anyone know Dan Quinn got the HC job in Washington? Can't believe I'm just seeing this today! Yeah most of us aren’t still using AOL dial up internet. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StLunatic88 Posted February 4 Share Posted February 4 15 hours ago, chisoxguy7 said: Did anyone know Dan Quinn got the HC job in Washington? Can't believe I'm just seeing this today! If you think that’s wild, wait till you hear what the Raiders did for their OC. Ill let you read it in in the Times, wouldn’t want to ruin the surprise 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BEAR FACE DOWN ARROW Posted February 4 Share Posted February 4 3 hours ago, StLunatic88 said: If you think that’s wild, wait till you hear what the Raiders did for their OC. Ill let you read it in in the Times, wouldn’t want to ruin the surprise What's the thinking there? Have to be after the run game success but jeez, better have a QB that can unlock that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AZBearsFan Posted February 4 Share Posted February 4 3 minutes ago, BEAR FACE DOWN ARROW said: What's the thinking there? Have to be after the run game success but jeez, better have a QB that can unlock that. Right? All the posts praising the move talk about how effective our run game was last year, but ignore that we ran for about 90 ypg last year if you take out the Fields rushing, most of which was not on designed runs (meaning Getsy had nothing to do with it). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HuskieBear Posted February 4 Author Share Posted February 4 2 hours ago, AZBearsFan said: Right? All the posts praising the move talk about how effective our run game was last year, but ignore that we ran for about 90 ypg last year if you take out the Fields rushing, most of which was not on designed runs (meaning Getsy had nothing to do with it). but the raiders think our issues were not with getsy! (take a JF trade spot off the board) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TankWilliams Posted February 4 Share Posted February 4 7 hours ago, StLunatic88 said: If you think that’s wild, wait till you hear what the Raiders did for their OC. Ill let you read it in in the Times, wouldn’t want to ruin the surprise Yeah, if the Bears trade out of #1 again, smart move would be to send it to Vegas for 3 firsts. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StLunatic88 Posted February 5 Share Posted February 5 (edited) 👀 Edited February 6 by StLunatic88 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AZBearsFan Posted February 5 Share Posted February 5 46 minutes ago, StLunatic88 said: https://twitter.com/adamschefter/status/1754315349062037795?s=46&t=yycVVhpwVpOXJIuSJJzGaQ 👀 So much more manufactured content coming because of this. It’s not complicated - if CW is Poles’ guy he’s taking him outside of some ungodly massive offer. If he’s not then we trade the pick, with a move to WSH at 2 giving us both the option to take Maye/Daniels/MHJ (if we stick with Fields) or to trade down again for a second haul. I love the draft cycle - it’s one of my favorite parts of the NFL - but I can’t wait until we get to the part of the draft cycle where we can just talk about the draft. If the plan is trading Fields I hope that happens sooner than later. At least then it can be prospect debating rather than the sniping and condescending Fields vs. the world **** we see every single day. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AZBearsFan Posted February 5 Share Posted February 5 1 hour ago, AZBearsFan said: So much more manufactured content coming because of this. It’s not complicated - if CW is Poles’ guy he’s taking him outside of some ungodly massive offer. If he’s not then we trade the pick, with a move to WSH at 2 giving us both the option to take Maye/Daniels/MHJ (if we stick with Fields) or to trade down again for a second haul. I love the draft cycle - it’s one of my favorite parts of the NFL - but I can’t wait until we get to the part of the draft cycle where we can just talk about the draft. If the plan is trading Fields I hope that happens sooner than later. At least then it can be prospect debating rather than the sniping and condescending Fields vs. the world **** we see every single day. I mean the Bears literally interviewed Kingsbury and decided they didn’t want him. If we’re going to be drawing conclusions from everything don’t you take from that that either KK doesn’t really matter in the equation or that, if he does, that CW isn’t our guy? When did sports journalism become ******* TMZ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.