Discussion in 'Fan Zone' started by xwalker, Jul 11, 2014.
I just read Garrett is coaching the defense more than Marinelli this year - what is your reaction?
Throwing some of us a bone, huh. Works for me. The defense esp with a few more critical injuries could sunk or with a bit of health could be a surprise. Color me optimistic about Wilcox, Crawford, Bass, and a little with the McClain's and more with Melton.
Won't say we'll win but if decently healthy we will be in ball games more often than not.
As my wife would say in at times broken English.....don't believe you!; always with a smile, too.
On Jason Garrett taking a more active role with the defense
Barry Church: This offseason, I feel like he's been over there - shoot, more than the defensive coaches. Going through our coverages and going through our defense to get a better understanding of it. He's becoming more of a defensive coach. That's a hard thing to say because he's a quarterback.
This could implode the board in the event the defense is good. Marinelli/Garrett will become the Finkel/Einhorn debate of 2014
ON the other hand, my vote is "Marinelli" gets synonymous with 0-16 if its a bad year
I'm hopeful for Wilcox, Crawford, Lawrence, Bishop, maybe Gardner. I think Melton needs a year to get back to what he was.
I'm also hopeful that Bruce Carter can show that 2013 was an aberration and that Kyle Wilber can be a decent starter.
Other than that, I got nothing.
A head coach becoming familiar with his still new defense isn't the same thing as coaching it more than the coordinator. I don't buy that. This is Rod's ~heads bowed......moment of silence~.....defense.
That's fair - but apparently they have a new scheme to better use the CBs to their strengths
I eagerly anticipate this CB led defense.
He didn't say individual players wouldn't be decent. He said the defense won't be good.
I agree. IF, everything falls in to plan, we might be able to get a middle of the pack defense. What does that say about what happens if everything doesn't go 100% as planned? We could see a Wade Phillips like collapse.
Sounds like that Bruce Rodgers guy gets it.
I mean, I hope Church wasn't speaking literally and Garrett already understood his defense's coverages. How could he not?
I think there is too much concern about Melton but all could be right. Not sure about Lawrence whom I think will surprise with some sacks and pressure but will play inconsistently; which is normal for a rookie. I'm fine with Crawford and Bass although I seem to be the only one on the Bass bandwagon. Wilcox a big maybe. I don't know Bishop or Gardner although many seem high on both particularly Bishop. I also don't have a good feel for Carter although I suspect he will play well but that's may just be gas I'm feeling.
Garrett is going to know most defenses in the league since he goes against them. But he's not going to know all the ins and outs. I applaud his willingness to get the whole enchilada.
I hope the latter isn't going to happen. I've seen a coach or two go 0 for and turn out okay.
Why not? He should.
You have? To my knowledge Rod ~head bowed/moment of silence~ is the only one to accomplish that feat.
I think the way the media presents that when they mention it is unfair. They had killer nicknames that year.
Landry yr1 I assume is the reference
Because he isn't going to know as much as the defensive coaches particularly Kiffin, Marinelli, or the DB coaches. I sure as hell hope they know more about the D than the HC or OC.
Tom Landry didn't win his first year. That's off the top of my head.
Yes. Rod is the only one to go 0-16.
Tell me, if Rod was coaching the Redskins defense would you be taking about how you saw some relic coach go 0-fer and turn out okay or would you simply be laughing that the 0-16 Detroit loser is in D.C.?