An old bird told me

[LeMoyneCuse]

I didn't say they were the same. I said they were both bad football coaches. One was a lot worse than the other, but that doesn't change they were both shitty coaches.

Reminds me of this:

 

[Toga]

Shocking, another positive thread spirals into something completely different. How long are you guys going to continue to whine about the previous staff?

We get a nugget that JF, DS & ED are killing it. Followed by verification and additional information from a player's parent. Ok, let's take this opportunity to talk about the ineptitude of the previous staff. Start a thread if you want to continue comparing staffs and their shortcomings.

Holy crap, I'm glad some of you aren't any of my ex's, just let it goooooooo.

View attachment 57734

View attachment 57735

I see you are very multiple.

 

[Finwad32]

I see you are very multiple.

Lol, not in a long time, poor choice for a plural.

 

[OttoinGrotto]

That's Clock Management 101. A class Shafer apparently took at UNC.

Damn, that's a ruthless joke. Phenomenal joke though.

 

[Chip]

I'm used to waiting. I'm a Buffalo Bills fan - losing and waiting to get good is all I know.

Besides, Babers is the type of coach where you can enjoy watching the progress no matter how long it may take.

I think your 2nd line is the key.

This isn't all going to click from day 1, will definitely take time. But it's going to be fun watching it evolve. For once, we know where the offense is headed. We won't be switching OCs and O systems 1-2 years into the new coach. Which is what happened with the previous 3.

 

[Pearl309]

I see you are very multiple.

Has Dino dropped a "multiple" on us yet?

 

[billsin01]

Well there is that, I think the Tampa 2 is a safer approach for a team that wants to run 100 offensive plays, to me it seems easier to have a middle of the road defense this way as well, Top 10 offense, middle of the road defense should get us back to winning quite a few games. Those holding out hope to be great on both sides of the ball, I just don't see it anytime soon. Lots of 45-42 games in our future, which is fine. Tougher to beat better teams with no offense as well

I wouldn't say that I actually disagree with any of this, to be honest, but I also don't know that the rationale for selecting a defense is ever to be mediocre. I mean, I would assume the idea is to get as many athletes as possible on both sides of the ball (I know you realize this as well) and be as dynamic defensively as possible as well. It may take us longer to get there defensively, but I would still assume that is where we are trying to go.

Now if there is a philosophical debate about the importance of making teams earn yards vs. allowing teams to potentially hit big plays by forcing the issue defensively, I guess I can buy that. But I would say ultimately that the goal, at the very least, is not to have to win a lot of games 45-42 but rather 45-28. So the other team scores points and the defense may not be flawless, but we're still getting a bunch of stops and forcing some turnovers and some of those points are more a matter of teams scrambling from behind and playing a lot of desperation football to try and get back in the game.

 

[billsin01]

Has Dino dropped a "multiple" on us yet?

God I hope not. That phrase drives me insane more than most for some reason. It's one of those football phrases that fans seem to eat up despite the fact that it means nothing. I mean any offense ever invented is multiple in some way. The freaking wishbone uses a lot of misdirection and each play has several variations. Meanwhile, any offense that tries to do everything under the sun -- wildcat, wishbone, shotgun ... -- is bound to get bogged down in a 5,000 page playbook.

Anyway, drives me insane.

 

[clayman32]

In an article a week or two ago, Dino said he became enamored with the way North Dakota St ran the Tampa 2 while he was at Eastern Illinois

I found this article but forgot to post it. Not sure if anyone else posted it. It's how they defended the team coached by Milly's man crush
http://www.footballstudyhall.com/20...-bison-stopped-the-bob-stitt-offense-Air-raid

Interesting read. Although I had flashbacks when I came upon the word "spinner"

Looks like DC Entz for NDSU was at Western Illinois for one year. Co-Defensive Coordinator with Brian Ward

 

[IthacaBarrel]

I wouldn't say that I actually disagree with any of this, to be honest, but I also don't know that the rationale for selecting a defense is ever to be mediocre. I mean, I would assume the idea is to get as many athletes as possible on both sides of the ball (I know you realize this as well) and be as dynamic defensively as possible as well. It may take us longer to get there defensively, but I would still assume that is where we are trying to go.

Now if there is a philosophical debate about the importance of making teams earn yards vs. allowing teams to potentially hit big plays by forcing the issue defensively, I guess I can buy that. But I would say ultimately that the goal, at the very least, is not to have to win a lot of games 45-42 but rather 45-28. So the other team scores points and the defense may not be flawless, but we're still getting a bunch of stops and forcing some turnovers and some of those points are more a matter of teams scrambling from behind and playing a lot of desperation football to try and get back in the game.

Well said, agree 100% but you see my point. I think the goal would be get the offense up to speed first where we can compete and then figure out a way to get a few more stops and like you said win more games 45-42 as opposed to 45-42. Year 2 I would hope we are at stage 1 which would be 45-42

 

[IthacaBarrel]

I wouldn't say that I actually disagree with any of this, to be honest, but I also don't know that the rationale for selecting a defense is ever to be mediocre. I mean, I would assume the idea is to get as many athletes as possible on both sides of the ball (I know you realize this as well) and be as dynamic defensively as possible as well. It may take us longer to get there defensively, but I would still assume that is where we are trying to go.

Now if there is a philosophical debate about the importance of making teams earn yards vs. allowing teams to potentially hit big plays by forcing the issue defensively, I guess I can buy that. But I would say ultimately that the goal, at the very least, is not to have to win a lot of games 45-42 but rather 45-28. So the other team scores points and the defense may not be flawless, but we're still getting a bunch of stops and forcing some turnovers and some of those points are more a matter of teams scrambling from behind and playing a lot of desperation football to try and get back in the game.

Well said, agree 100% but you see my point. I think the goal would be get the offense up to speed first where we can compete and then figure out a way to get a few more stops and like you said win more games 45-42 as opposed to 45-42. Year 2 I would hope we are at stage 1 which would be 45-42

 

[upperdeck]

so does the tampa 2 stop our new offense

 

[orangepassion]

We've averaged 5.5 wins a season over the past 7 years.

4.6 wins a season over the 14 years.

Dino can run whatever defense he wants. The hand wringing is silly.

Glad he has your permission. Of course, he can run what he wants, but this is a message board, so I don't think it's unreasonable for fans to discuss what they think about defensive strategy

 

[CuseOnly]

I didn't say they were the same. I said they were both bad football coaches. One was a lot worse than the other, but that doesn't change they were both shitty coaches.

You said they both were shitty, that puts them at the same level. They simply aren't and I wouldn't characterize Shafer as a shitty "coach" at all, if you want to say he wasn't a good HEAD coach fine. He is a great DC and has proved it here, Stanford and other places, that makes him a very good "coach".

 

[OrangeAl]

You can be a genius in the booth but choke when you're wearing the headset on the sideline. FHCSS seems like a good football coach, but not cut out for game management.

 

[leftytg]

You said they both were shitty, that puts them at the same level. They simply aren't and I wouldn't characterize Shafer as a shitty "coach" at all, if you want to say he wasn't a good HEAD coach fine. He is a great DC and has proved it here, Stanford and other places, that makes him a very good "coach".

and Greg Robinson won two Super Bowls as defensive coordinator. Apparently, using your methodology, that makes him a very good coach (and a better one that Shafer).

You're trying to be hyper literal where bnoro wasn't trying to write in a hyper literal sense. Both Robinson and Shafer had success up the coaching ladder and both were over their heads and utter failures as head coach. To everyone but the Robinson and Shafer families and a handful of fans with blinders on, this is not a controversial statement.

 

[bnoro]

You said they both were shitty, that puts them at the same level. They simply aren't and I wouldn't characterize Shafer as a shitty "coach" at all, if you want to say he wasn't a good HEAD coach fine. He is a great DC and has proved it here, Stanford and other places, that makes him a very good "coach".

Read my first post where I specified Head Coach. I thought he was a great defensive coordinator. Greg Robinson was also a great defensive coordinator.

Charlie Weis was a great OC. Will Muschamp was a great DC. On and on and on.

They're all horrible head coaches.

 

[alphaorange]

Does ANY of this coaching stuff really belong in a thread about what players have looked great in practice? I guess this thread is officially hijacked. Pretty inconsiderate.

 

[bcubs9497]

Does ANY of this coaching stuff really belong in a thread about what players have looked great in practice? I guess this thread is officially hijacked. Pretty inconsiderate.

Nope.

 

[SUFaninNJ]

Totally get ya. Cubs fan since '75.

Not to jinx things, but I feel really good about this year! #GoCubsGo

 

[chakka3421]

Does ANY of this coaching stuff really belong in a thread about what players have looked great in practice? I guess this thread is officially hijacked. Pretty inconsiderate.

I think it was my fault so its on me! My context was that I was glad to hear players excelling in the new offense whereas we really have had no sustainable offensive identity for a long time especially the last few years. That was my intention but the "path to he!!" is always paved with good intentions!

I think that whenever a past coach is mentioned, any thread will go viral. My bad - nuff said!

 

[CuseOnly]

and Greg Robinson won two Super Bowls as defensive coordinator. Apparently, using your methodology, that makes him a very good coach (and a better one that Shafer).

You're trying to be hyper literal where bnoro wasn't trying to write in a hyper literal sense. Both Robinson and Shafer had success up the coaching ladder and both were over their heads and utter failures as head coach. To everyone but the Robinson and Shafer families and a handful of fans with blinders on, this is not a controversial statement.

What success did Gerg have at the college level?

He won in the pros not in college and quite frankly that doesn't always translate either way. Does that mean that Saban is a "shitty coach" because he doesn't have the super bowl rings that Gerg does?

What bnoro said was that they are both "shitty coaches" which is a pretty broad statement an frankly not true.

 

[CuseOnly]

Sorry but I didn't hijack the thread.

No more responses, back to your usual programming.

 

[bnoro]

What success did Gerg have at the college level?

He won in the pros not in college and quite frankly that doesn't always translate either way. Does that mean that Saban is a "shitty coach" because he doesn't have the super bowl rings that Gerg does?

What bnoro said was that they are both "shitty coaches" which is a pretty broad statement an frankly not true.

14-23 is a shitty record for a head coach.

10-38 is a shittier record for a head coach.

Both are shitty head coaches, which is a true statement. I was a fan of Shafer the person, and wasn't even on the Fire Shafer train until his asinine comments after getting Dungey another concussion.

 

[CuseOnly]

14-23 is a shitty record for a head coach.

10-38 is a shittier record for a head coach.

Both are shitty head coaches, which is a true statement. I was a fan of Shafer the person, and wasn't even on the Fire Shafer train until his asinine comments after getting Dungey another concussion.

Whatever, you said shitty coach, not shitty head coach. Two entirely different statements and meanings.

Calling a guy a shitty coacha after a 20+ years of coaching based on 3 as a first time head coach is plainly wrong.

I would be willing to bet that you wouldn't want your entire career at whatever you do defined by your worst 3 years. Especially when those 3 years are at a particular position you have never held before. You shouldn't do the same to others.