Official Search for a New Defensive Coordinator Thread - Bush Hired! - Page 4

barrett · #61 01-09-2009, 11:41 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by papabear

Based on my understanding of the Tampa 2 system, which is probably wrong, our front seven would fit. It emphasizes speed over size, and needs penetrating interior lineman. I think our CB's are better suited to man coverage. Reeves was better here, relatively speaking, than in Dallas where he was asked to play more zone. Robinson is on record saying that he prefers man. I think our corners would be OK in this system, but the safeties is what worry me. I'm also not sure if the Tampa 2 would be the best system for Demeco....everybody has a little different flavor of the scheme, like the "west coast offense", so it's really hard to say. I know Urlacher is often asked to take a deep drop to the middle of the field in the bears scheme. I would like Demeco to have a little freedom though.

For Tampa 2 personell...

The only thing we lack in the front 7 is a speed rushing DE who I hope we aquire regardless of what defense we run next year.

As for the secondary, our CBs fit ok. Dunta is WAY better in zone regardless of what he might have said. Any time he plays man and has to turn and run with a WR he goes from a defensive leader to a liability. He is far better in zone with eyes on the QB. Plus, one of the keys for a cover 2 CB is the ability to close and tackle, and Dunta is as good as any CB in the NFL at that.

The biggest hole in any effort to run a cover 2 system is our safeties. Is anyone comfortable with 2 of our safeties each plyaing half the field and ending up in 1 on 1 battles when a WR goes deep down the sideline? We would need to scrap the hybrid SSs we use for guys with cover skills who play with eyes on the QB. eugene Wilson would not be bad, but starting harrison/brown/earl/etc.. in a cover 2 would be brutal.

nero THE zero · #62 01-09-2009, 02:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cland

Aww man, after writing the above post I happened across a post by AJ: http://www.examiner.com/x-778-Housto...coach-position

Turns out he has a similar take...and he posted it earlier...which makes me appear to be a take-stealer....*poubt*

That's definitely a possibility. I guess I just don't understand the whole "DC search" charade if they have already settled on Bush as the DC.

papabear · #63 01-09-2009, 03:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cland

Aww man, after writing the above post I happened across a post by AJ: http://www.examiner.com/x-778-Housto...coach-position

Turns out he has a similar take...and he posted it earlier...which makes me appear to be a take-stealer....*poubt*

That's OK. That about somes up my "take" as well....even though I hate that term because Jim Rome is a D-bag.

Roy P · #64 01-09-2009, 03:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by nunusguy

I dunno, what are the implications personnel wise in a conversion to Tampa-2/Cover-2 ? One thing I'm aware of is a team does not require as much man coverage by its corners, so the search for premiere cover CBs is no longer required since they routinely get help from a safety. Of course this may just shift the needs of the Def-Backfield to acquiring more versitale, competant safeties ?
What about the personnel requirements for the front 7 in the Cover-2 , or is that independant of the DB schemes ?

Well, I will submit that when Sapp was doing his thing, he had the benefit of Booger McFarland. When Tommie Harris was healthy and playing like a Pro-Bowler, he had Tank Johnson beside him. I don't consider Travis Johnson to be either to allow Okoye to become "Baby Sapp" by any stretch of the imagination.

As for our CBs, Fred Bennett and Molden would be ideal in terms of size. However, I'm not convinced that playing zone with them is their strong suit. Generally, Cover-2 CBs are big, slow, and excel in Zone coverage. This year's draft has an ideal candidate in Victor Harris from Va Tech.Bennett, Molden, Robinson, and Reeves were not brought here for that. Could they do it? Possibly, but I'm not thinking that is using your players' strengths.

The FS position is generally a large college CB who is converted to play S. Dunta Robinson might be moved to that position, but he does lack the typical size.

DeMeco running down the middle of the field with Dallas Clark worries me considerably.

Other than that, we'd fit like a hand in a glove running the Tampa-2.

papabear · #65 01-09-2009, 04:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by barrett

For Tampa 2 personell...

The only thing we lack in the front 7 is a speed rushing DE who I hope we aquire regardless of what defense we run next year.

Agreed. Although, if we turn our DT's loose to penetrate upfield Okoye and Johnson's effectiveness should go up, slightly lessening the need for a speed rusher. Still a need though.

Quote:

As for the secondary, our CBs fit ok. Dunta is WAY better in zone regardless of what he might have said. Any time he plays man and has to turn and run with a WR he goes from a defensive leader to a liability. He is far better in zone with eyes on the QB. Plus, one of the keys for a cover 2 CB is the ability to close and tackle, and Dunta is as good as any CB in the NFL at that.

I agree with this on Dunta too. The Tampa 2 would let him get on the line and jam the WR. I think he would be more effective than he realizes. He can struggle when he's left alone. Even before the injury, but with the rules these days that's all corners. The key is he actually has to trust the safeties behind him. .

Quote:

The biggest hole in any effort to run a cover 2 system is our safeties. Is anyone comfortable with 2 of our safeties each plyaing half the field and ending up in 1 on 1 battles when a WR goes deep down the sideline? We would need to scrap the hybrid SSs we use for guys with cover skills who play with eyes on the QB. eugene Wilson would not be bad, but starting harrison/brown/earl/etc.. in a cover 2 would be brutal

My fear as well.

My hope is that we end up wth a defense that's comfortable in a lot of different schemes. We have a young defense (team actually) but hopefully our next D-Coordinator+more experience for the players will mean that we can mix things up and be effective doing a lot of different things in the years to come. I think that was Smith's biggest fault. He tried to do a lot of differnt things without getting his guys very good at any of them.

teufelhunden · #66 01-09-2009, 07:20 PM

Hello all I am new to the board and I have been reading this thread in hopes of getting everyones opinion. I am left with a few questions.

How do the candidates that have been mentioned fit with the coaches that we have? What are we going to do with Rhodes, Bush, et.al when we hire these guys?

What hand did the coaches that remain on our staff have in the abysmal defensive performance that we witnessed this year? I know that Bush was the first choice when we hired Smith, What has changed?

I would appreciate anyones insight or opinion.

Roy P · #67 01-09-2009, 07:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by teufelhunden

Hello all I am new to the board and I have been reading this thread in hopes of getting everyones opinion. I am left with a few questions.

How do the candidates that have been mentioned fit with the coaches that we have? What are we going to do with Rhodes, Bush, et.al when we hire these guys?

What hand did the coaches that remain on our staff have in the abysmal defensive performance that we witnessed this year? I know that Bush was the first choice when we hired Smith, What has changed?

I would appreciate anyones insight or opinion.

Welcome, Devildog.

My personal opinion is that Rhodes and Bush were simply implementing Smith's game plan. They probably broke down film, looked at tendencies, and coached the players just like most assistants do in the league.

I'm not really sure how much of a hand they had in the "identity" of this defense. Were they making defensive calls? I doubt it.

Now, both coaches are esteemed by Kubiak so they will definitely get the benefit of the doubt. Should they be held accountable? I would have to say yes. Just as should most of the players on the defense.

We don't really need to blow up the entire defense and staff. There are some things we do well. We just need the right leadership to reinforce success and play to our strengths.

kravix · #68 01-09-2009, 10:27 PM

OOHRAH!! And god bless our fellow Marines!

Personaly, I think that the job is Bush's. Rhodes was the DC in Denver when Bush was the LB coach there. I think that Bush getting the DC job here, like Kubiak wanted origonaly, makes sense. Especially when you look moves like bringing in Gibbs to help Shanny. It makes sense to bring in Rhodes to help Bush.

If Kubiak doesnt hire Bush as the DC and picks someone completly outside of his circle, then it is possible that Bush and Rhodes are gone. However, if Kubiak trends like he usually does and hires people he knows from the Broncos organization they both have a shot at sticking.

As for arguments about giving Bush authority of Smtih later in the season if he was truely the next candidate, it doesnt make sense. Why keep a DC all season that has basically been fired? Bush may have had input later in the season, but to ponder why he wasnt given full reign over Smith and the Def is crazy. No organization works that way, it breeds discontent among the staff and players.

I see alot of people wishing for a speedy edge rusher, and I disagree. I would prefer not to turn into the Colts. A perverbial playoff team that cannot advance becasue their run def is a joke. I want a team that can stop the run and be creative enough to rush the passer with 4 or 4+1. An edge rusher would be nice in nickle, but the premium some are putting on that role is way to high.

Which leads me to the Tampa 2 style def. I am not a big fan. Although up front our players seem to fit that mold I would prefer something with bit of meat on the back end.

Bigtinylittle · #69 01-09-2009, 11:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by teufelhunden

Hello all I am new to the board and I have been reading this thread in hopes of getting everyones opinion. I am left with a few questions.

How do the candidates that have been mentioned fit with the coaches that we have? What are we going to do with Rhodes, Bush, et.al when we hire these guys?

What hand did the coaches that remain on our staff have in the abysmal defensive performance that we witnessed this year? I know that Bush was the first choice when we hired Smith, What has changed?

I would appreciate anyones insight or opinion.

Welcome to the board. There aren't many posters here, but the quality is very high. Not a lot of mindless ranters here. Hope you like it.

I personally suspect Bush is going to be the man, and if he isn't he will still stick around because Kubiak wants him here. If the new guy wants a job he will have to be OK with that.

As far as who to blame for the failure, to me one of the hardest things in football is figuring out who to blame when things don't work out. I think a lot of times head coaches and owners go more by gut feeling than anything else.

I'm glad to see Smith gone, though. Not because I know he wasn't qualified, but more because I think it makes it more likely that we will have a more risk-taking, agressive style next year.

mussop · #70 01-10-2009, 03:18 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mike

As long as the Iggles are still playing, then they cannot contact him. Once they are done, then they can request permission to interview him.

Hopefully he is the main target and that is why talk has been scarce. We are just waiting for him to get eliminated. Cmon Giants kick some ass this week.

teufelhunden · #71 01-10-2009, 04:16 AM

Thanks for the insight gentlemen. I like Bush but was on the fence about his DC ascension. I do not know his chemistry in the locker room and I wonder if by hiring him we are sending the right signals to our D. We need drastic improvement from that side of the ball. I dont know if that change can come from someone associated with the old D. While the choice of Bush is wrought with danger, wholesale changes to the staff is also risky.

I had a Sgt. Major who always said " If you are going to be a bear, Be a grizzly bear." So my choice would be someone outside the circle. Obviously someone who employs a defense that can utilize the players we have. As we have seen, They can be effective when the are aggressive.

Whomever is selected had better be aggressive, starting in the draft. A rock in the middle of our D-line would do wonders for the rest of it. As would a Taylor Mays type Safety. IMHO.

Thanks again.

nunusguy · #72 01-10-2009, 06:50 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by teufelhunden

I had a Sgt. Major who always said " If you are going to be a bear, Be a grizzly bear." So my choice would be someone outside the circle. Obviously someone who employs a defense that can utilize the players we have.

I dunno, but it also seems like perverse logic to me to modify the composition of the defensive personnel to conform to the philosophy of assistant coachs instead of vice versa and supplimenting what we've got thru the Draft.
BTW I like the jarhead expression about the bear, but why can't we find a grizz within the circle ?

teufelhunden · #73 01-10-2009, 08:11 AM

Quote:

"BTW I like the jarhead expression about the bear, but why can't we find a grizz within the circle ?"

I feel if we would have had a real grizz on that staff he would have bitten someone. At least he would have raised more sand than anyone did.

Roy P · #74 01-10-2009, 10:11 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mussop

Cmon Giants kick some ass this week.

The other side of the coin is perhaps we go after one of the Giants assistants. Perhaps someone has had Spags rub off on them.

Andre Curtis - Def QC (Young guy)
http://www.giants.com/team/coach.asp?coach_id=21

Peter Giunta - Secondary/Cornerbacks (Previous DC of Rams SuperBowl team)
http://www.giants.com/team/coach.asp?coach_id=20

David Merritt - Secondary/Safeties (Young guy)
http://www.giants.com/team/coach.asp?coach_id=12

Bill Sheridan - Linebackers (Lots of college experience)
http://www.giants.com/team/coach.asp?coach_id=11

Mike Waufle - DLine (Tuck, Osi, Kiwi, Strahan, Cofield productive under him)
http://www.giants.com/team/coach.asp?coach_id=14

I'd consider any of these guys as legitimate candidates.

Joshua · #75 01-10-2009, 10:34 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Roy P

The other side of the coin is perhaps we go after one of the Giants assistants. Perhaps someone has had Spags rub off on them.

Andre Curtis - Def QC (Young guy)
http://www.giants.com/team/coach.asp?coach_id=21

Peter Giunta - Secondary/Cornerbacks (Previous DC of Rams SuperBowl team)
http://www.giants.com/team/coach.asp?coach_id=20

David Merritt - Secondary/Safeties (Young guy)
http://www.giants.com/team/coach.asp?coach_id=12

Bill Sheridan - Linebackers (Lots of college experience)
http://www.giants.com/team/coach.asp?coach_id=11

Mike Waufle - DLine (Tuck, Osi, Kiwi, Strahan, Cofield productive under him)
http://www.giants.com/team/coach.asp?coach_id=14

I'd consider any of these guys as legitimate candidates.

Just to brush up on league rules, could we have asked for permission to speak with any of these guys during the bye week? I thought I saw where a couple teams asked for permission to speak with Spags during the bye week and my recollection is that you can do this if it would be a promotion. I also seem to remember that it had to be one of the teams with a bye (thus, we couldn't ask to speak with McDermott). Anybody know the rules on this?

bckey · #76 01-10-2009, 02:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Roy P

The other side of the coin is perhaps we go after one of the Giants assistants. Perhaps someone has had Spags rub off on them.

Andre Curtis - Def QC (Young guy)
http://www.giants.com/team/coach.asp?coach_id=21

Peter Giunta - Secondary/Cornerbacks (Previous DC of Rams SuperBowl team)
http://www.giants.com/team/coach.asp?coach_id=20

David Merritt - Secondary/Safeties (Young guy)
http://www.giants.com/team/coach.asp?coach_id=12

Bill Sheridan - Linebackers (Lots of college experience)
http://www.giants.com/team/coach.asp?coach_id=11

Mike Waufle - DLine (Tuck, Osi, Kiwi, Strahan, Cofield productive under him)
http://www.giants.com/team/coach.asp?coach_id=14

I'd consider any of these guys as legitimate candidates.

I really don't like any of those guys for dc except for maybe Merritt. Sean McDermott is really about the only position coach I could see coming in as dc at this time besides our own Bush who I really don't want either. Other than that I think they will go with a proven dc.

Curtis is way too inexperienced for the jump to dc.

Giunta is probably the most qualified of the bunch but do the Rams really conjur up memories of an aggressive and good defense

Merritt is interesting but I would still take McDermott over him just because of his long tenure under Jim Johnson.

Sheridan needs a little more NFL experience before making the jump to dc imo.

Waufle looks like from his resume he is a dl coach for life. We don't want another Marinelli.

Joshua · #77 01-10-2009, 03:31 PM

It's being reported that Marinelli decided to join the Bears. Not a big surprise, but the Texans can scratch him off.

bckey · #78 01-10-2009, 08:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Joshua

It's being reported that Marinelli decided to join the Bears. Not a big surprise, but the Texans can scratch him off.

No surprise due to his ties with Lovie.

nero THE zero · #79 01-11-2009, 07:02 AM

Here's LZ's take on the personnel for a Tampa-2

Quote:

Bulman isn't quick enough to be a 1-gap DT. He's a try-hard DE which is fine, but not a starter. Deljuan is okay and if Okoye can play, he'll be okay too. Cochran is also depth, but like Bulman, I just don't see him a starter on a defensive line that needs to get up the field. Look at the Bears, Colts and Bucs teams of the late 90's up to about 2004. Those teams have faster DEs and 3-techniques that are very disruptive (not so much with the Colts as with the other two teams). Those teams are the model.

I think DeMeco could pull off being an MLB as well, but an upgrade over Diles and potentially Adibi would be nice. Speed isn't the only thing, but you would at least like for your LBs to have very good quickness and to be able to diagnose exceptionally quickly.

The front 7 means everything to a cover 2. The CBs don't have to have great speed, but they need to have instincts and be able to tackle while the safeties need to have the same traits. Everything happens with the front 7 and it is imperative that your front 4 can get pressure on the QB without having to blitz. I don't see that being the case with the bunch they have right now.

Warren · #80 01-11-2009, 09:25 PM

For those eyeing McDermott, ProFootballTalk.com is reporting that he's being mentioned for the Broncos DC opening. They also point out that since he's under contract through the '09 season the Eagles can deny any team permission to talk to him unless they"re looking at him as a head coach.