Week 3 GDT: Raiders vs. Steelers - Waitin' all day for a Sunday Night

[ronjon1990]

41 minutes ago, big_palooka said:

I had hopes for McDaniels. There was a reason he's been on a short list of candidates for years. But he's proving a letdown. 

If there is a year to hire and let that guy pick his QB, this is it. Let a coach and rookie QB grow together. And I then throw the highest contract at a vet DC you can. They need something proven to help draft and develop on defense. 

There was indeed a reason he was on the short list for years and only 2 highly dysfunctional franchises bothered even trying. Spot on there, because people saw through the coattail-riding shine. 

Moving on.

I would actually try going in the opposite direction with a subsequent hire. 

The one thing we were under JDR and Bissacia was not embarrassing. 

Gruden, Callahan, Turner, Shell, Kiffin, Cable, Jackson, Sparano, McDaniels. We've done the offensive minded HC thing to death and have failed repeatedly since the turn of the millennium. 

Dennis Allen was bad, yes, but JDR and Rich- who's background was ST's, but was defense oriented with much of it, at least kept us from being outright embarrassed most of the time. 

Give me a defensive minded HC and tell him "We're going to give you a stupid amount of money for an OC and offensive staff because we're taking our franchise QB in the draft. Your job is to run the team and make us relevant. That starts on your side of the ball. Find your OC, get your QB, and let your OC, QB coach, pass game coordinator, and whoever else comes on board worry about that side of the ball.". 

If the OC is initially a dud, hire a new OC. If it works well, hopefully your money invested on lower staff pays off and when the OC is poached, onto the next guy. But if the HC hire is a good one, he doesn't need to be solely focused on the QBOTF. We aren't built for that approach to succeed, it would just shell-shock a young QB into probable bust status. We need a HC worried about running the team as a whole, not micromanaging one side of the ball, and we need a designated assistant whose job it is to bring the QBOTF along without meddling from above. 

[big_palooka]

1 hour ago, justwinbaby81 said:

Tough loss, long season though. Got to beat the chargers to get the season on track or it's a lost cause. Really just sucks that it is must-win is already here in week 4. 

 

Pretty stunning that an offensive-minded head coach won't go for it in Goal to go needing only 4 with an all-time WR dominating the game. Situation to tie the game when just got eight points. The upside is so much higher to go for it then to put it in this defenses hands. 

The only encouraging thing is that both sides of the ball did not give up when this game could have been a blowout. But coaching made the difference. And Marcus Peters dropping an easy pick Six absolutely transformed the game. Good teams can overcome that, we cannot afford to lose a free six when we have so many one possession losses constantly

Hard to see them coming out and playing a complete game to beat the Chargers after last night. But doing that, getting to .500 would be a step in the right direction. But watching Herbert this weekend, he's dialed in right now, could be a long long day. 

 

[big_palooka]

1 hour ago, Rolni said:

So true!

Get a new GM and a new creative offensive HC in the house, bring a good DC on board and then draft the QBotF finally and build up this team after this ****show of 20+years...

That's why I'm disappointed in this regime. 

McDaniels had the look of a good QB guy after his work with Mac Jones. Long history with a winning organization. More of known commodity than plucking a random coach off a hot staff. Hired Graham who most were excited about. His defenses were ranked 9th and 16th in NY and he was considered an up and coming coaching talent. 

Talent is a problem, but both coaches really look lost for answers in scheme, execution and counter. Just looks bad all the way around right now. 

[big_palooka]

1 hour ago, Humble_Beast said:

We spend all the money on offense. McDaniels suppose to be an offensive mastermind and he’s scared to go for it on 4th down. He didn’t want to get heat if he failed…. Smh 

Rarely agree with you, but do here.  You trade for Adams. Extend Renfrow. Sign Meyers. Retrofit your QB in the offense for at a premium. You have Jacobs and you don't have 2 play calls up your sleeve to tie the game? And you don't even take the shot?

Worse, you kicked 48 yard FG and made it. Why accept the penalty if you're not going to go for the tie? You just burned 1 min+ game time to get the same outcome! What was the point. 

That was honestly one of the most boneheaded sequences I've seen in years. The kind of decision where your players no doubt have to question you. I can't imagine being Devante Adams and thinking you're not even going to call my name here? He lives for that stuff. 

[Rolni]

10 minutes ago, big_palooka said:

That's why I'm disappointed in this regime. 

McDaniels had the look of a good QB guy after his work with Mac Jones. Long history with a winning organization. More of known commodity than plucking a random coach off a hot staff. Hired Graham who most were excited about. His defenses were ranked 9th and 16th in NY and he was considered an up and coming coaching talent. 

Talent is a problem, but both coaches really look lost for answers in scheme, execution and counter. Just looks bad all the way around right now. 

Same here.

My issue from now on is that I can't really believe neither JMD and his scheme on the O side and neither PG and his scheme on D. I mean if they were quality coaches the team should look better year 2, but right now they seem to be overwhelmed and outcoached. The handling of the QB situation in general, the Waller or the Renfrow situations adn to some degree the Chandler Jones stuff shows that the FO work is also failing...then we can jump into the draft classes...neither looks to good right now.

I don't trust the FO to select the right QB, to build up the team the right way and I don't trust the coaching staff to develope that QB and scheme the team to succeed week in and week out...

 

I want stability like most fans, but we need stability with success! If we pick high enough to get a promising QB, I want a new FO, new coaching staff in place. Give them 3-4 years to build the kid, build the roster and win.

[big_palooka]

58 minutes ago, ronjon1990 said:

There was indeed a reason he was on the short list for years and only 2 highly dysfunctional franchises bothered even trying. Spot on there, because people saw through the coattail-riding shine. 

Moving on.

I would actually try going in the opposite direction with a subsequent hire. 

The one thing we were under JDR and Bissacia was not embarrassing. 

Gruden, Callahan, Turner, Shell, Kiffin, Cable, Jackson, Sparano, McDaniels. We've done the offensive minded HC thing to death and have failed repeatedly since the turn of the millennium. 

Dennis Allen was bad, yes, but JDR and Rich- who's background was ST's, but was defense oriented with much of it, at least kept us from being outright embarrassed most of the time. 

Give me a defensive minded HC and tell him "We're going to give you a stupid amount of money for an OC and offensive staff because we're taking our franchise QB in the draft. Your job is to run the team and make us relevant. That starts on your side of the ball. Find your OC, get your QB, and let your OC, QB coach, pass game coordinator, and whoever else comes on board worry about that side of the ball.". 

If the OC is initially a dud, hire a new OC. If it works well, hopefully your money invested on lower staff pays off and when the OC is poached, onto the next guy. But if the HC hire is a good one, he doesn't need to be solely focused on the QBOTF. We aren't built for that approach to succeed, it would just shell-shock a young QB into probable bust status. We need a HC worried about running the team as a whole, not micromanaging one side of the ball, and we need a designated assistant whose job it is to bring the QBOTF along without meddling from above. 

I don't disagree with this. You want to fix a defense, hire a defensive minded HC. The "try to win a shootout against KC" mindset isn't working. And this ball control, keep it close and hope for the best approach feels outdated AF this morning. 

The hard part in the league right now, if you want a play caller you have to make them the HC. 

I could be wrong, but seems easier to get the play caller, then hire the vet defensive guy than the other way around. Not as many veteran OCs who are studs compared to DCs as guys are not getting as many jobs. 

[NickButera]

5 minutes ago, big_palooka said:

 

Talent is a problem, but both coaches really look lost for answers in scheme, execution and counter. Just looks bad all the way around right now. 

I agree talent is a problem. But all good coaching staff's can usually show glimmers of hope in certain areas, at certain times, so that when talent begins trickling in everything begins piecing together into a great team. I agree they should be showing some answers in scheme and player development. But I see nothing to hope for. I haven't since he got here. There's no upsides or positives, said it all offseason. 

[bucksavage1]

The choice to kick the 3 was the most chicken Sh%% call by a coach I’ve seen in a long time. I’ve seen conservative college coaches punt but that was bad

 

JMD could have lost the locker room there

[BackinBlack]

1 hour ago, ronjon1990 said:

There was indeed a reason he was on the short list for years and only 2 highly dysfunctional franchises bothered even trying. Spot on there, because people saw through the coattail-riding shine. 

Moving on.

I would actually try going in the opposite direction with a subsequent hire. 

The one thing we were under JDR and Bissacia was not embarrassing. 

Gruden, Callahan, Turner, Shell, Kiffin, Cable, Jackson, Sparano, McDaniels. We've done the offensive minded HC thing to death and have failed repeatedly since the turn of the millennium. 

Dennis Allen was bad, yes, but JDR and Rich- who's background was ST's, but was defense oriented with much of it, at least kept us from being outright embarrassed most of the time. 

Give me a defensive minded HC and tell him "We're going to give you a stupid amount of money for an OC and offensive staff because we're taking our franchise QB in the draft. Your job is to run the team and make us relevant. That starts on your side of the ball. Find your OC, get your QB, and let your OC, QB coach, pass game coordinator, and whoever else comes on board worry about that side of the ball.". 

If the OC is initially a dud, hire a new OC. If it works well, hopefully your money invested on lower staff pays off and when the OC is poached, onto the next guy. But if the HC hire is a good one, he doesn't need to be solely focused on the QBOTF. We aren't built for that approach to succeed, it would just shell-shock a young QB into probable bust status. We need a HC worried about running the team as a whole, not micromanaging one side of the ball, and we need a designated assistant whose job it is to bring the QBOTF along without meddling from above. 

Yup, as BP said, we keep trying to go the win shoot out routes, but we are doing this without the top 5 QB. AKA the most important thing to consistently win shoot outs. 
Who are some young and upcoming DCs who should be given a HC chance?

Dare I say, we do the opposite of what we’ve done the last 20 years. Start by getting some DTs and LBs. 
Get some nasty players on the D who are going to physically beat you up for 60 minutes. 
Make opposing Os hate having to play us. 

Nothing Dirty, just physical players, who love contact. 

[NickButera]

4 minutes ago, BackinBlack said:

Yup, as BP said, we keep trying to go the win shoot out routes, but we are doing this without the top 5 QB. AKA the most important thing to consistently win shoot outs. 
Who are some young and upcoming DCs who should be given a HC chance?

Dare I say, we do the opposite of what we’ve done the last 20 years. Start by getting some DTs and LBs. 
Get some nasty players on the D who are going to physically beat you up for 60 minutes. 
Make opposing Os hate having to play us. 

Nothing Dirty, just physical players, who love contact. 

It's almost like there's a template for that in SF. 

[big_palooka]

9 minutes ago, NickButera said:

I agree talent is a problem. But all good coaching staff's can usually show glimmers of hope in certain areas, at certain times, so that when talent begins trickling in everything begins piecing together into a great team. I agree they should be showing some answers in scheme and player development. But I see nothing to hope for. I haven't since he got here. There's no upsides or positives, said it all offseason. 

I agree. The game I point to is KC on the road last year. That game felt like a precursor to me. They played their best game and for me it was like..... okay, I see what you're trying to build. I see how you want to play and when you play your game, what we can expect. Even in a loss, they looked capable of competing against anyone.  

They just flat never built on that. And my optimism (granted, I was not a fan of Jimmy G) was like anyone else. That with a QB who's the extension of the HC, they'd round more into that vision. It's been anything but that to this point. And arguably much worse. 

[ronjon1990]

33 minutes ago, BackinBlack said:

 Who are some young and upcoming DCs who should be given a HC chance?

Dare I say, we do the opposite of what we’ve done the last 20 years. Start by getting some DTs and LBs. 
Get some nasty players on the D who are going to physically beat you up for 60 minutes. 
Make opposing Os hate having to play us. 

100% if I'm picking the route, it's just that- a nasty D. You still need a playmaker or 2 on O, but look around the league- Philadelphia, Buffalo, Baltimore, LA Rams, 49ers....first thing that comes to mind is the defense, accompanied by a talented offense to varying degrees in their own right (and, yes, in some cases an offense that's arguably actually the better unit once the pieces are in place). 

Jeff Ulbrich, Jets DC. Former player, was a standout recruiter in the college ranks, guys live him, Saleh respects him enough to bring him on board, git shafted in Atlanta by a bad HC and management. 

Al Harris, Cowboys DB coach. Former player, the Cowboys DBs usually overachieve a bit. Not a super sexy pick, but he's connected to McCarthy (as a player and coach) so it's a new tree we've seen work (Holmgren, Reid, McCarthy, etc). 

Aaron Glenn, Lions DC. Former player. I can't say enough good things about the job Campbell's staff has done in short order in Detroit. 

Dre Bly, Lions DB coach. Former player. I'd explore it if Glenn is off the table. Would prefer Glenn as HC and bring Bly along as DC. 

Those would be my top 4 targets if the search began right now. 

There's a few retreads I wouldn't be 100% opposed to, provided they were given clear instruction that they're here to manage primarily, not coordinate.  

Jim Schwartz would be a pretty safe pick, IMO. Detroit fell apart, but they had potential. He flopped as HC the first time, but he wasn't terrible. Detroit has seen worse, and he's been successful elsewhere. I would trust him with the right coordinators. 

Vic Fangio or Jim Tomsula, I'd trust either under the same circumstances- be the manager, not a coordinator. Both got handed losing situations as HCs, and both deserve a real shot. Harbaugh ties, and that carries some weight for me,, as long as they delegate duties properly. 

Rich Bissacia. Tried and true, should've gotten the job to start with, resume be damned. 

 

[justwinbaby81]

The top teams in the league...nearly all have offensive coaches at the HC spot. I don't think we go defensive head coach when we eventually move on from McD, but wouldn't be the worst to zig when the rest zag, specifically in our division. 

[MrOaktown_56]

We should get an offensive head coach who taylors the offense to the players strengths. 

[justwinbaby81]

43 minutes ago, MrOaktown_56 said:

We should get an offensive head coach who taylors the offense to the players strengths. 

That'd be a novel idea wouldn't it? Something this regime flat out does not do, regardless of how you feel about McD.