Houston...err...Tennessee, we've got a problem!

Discussion in 'Tennessee Titans and NFL Talk' started by Gut, Aug 21, 2006.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. dg1979us

    dg1979us Starter

    Joined:
    Nov 11, 2003
    Messages:
    2,955
    I dont really buy that. THese guys are paid millions of dollars to play a game. If they need anybody to provide them motivation, or attitude and fire, then they probably need to be in another profession where they can make $8 an hour. But, if your going to go that route, then the buck doesnt stop at Schwartz, it stops at Fisher. I dont think Schartz is as good as a Greg Williams, but I also dont think we have seem him with the same type of talent WIlliams had. Two season ago the whole d was injured, and there wasnt a coach in the league that could have made that D good. Last year we had 2 starting rookie CBs, one of whom didnt even go to training camp. This past weekend, our top DT didnt play, Laboy didnt play, and Odom got hurt, plus it was a preseason game, above all else.

    When Schwartz did have talent, we completely shutdown a 2000 yard back in the playoffs, and then the next week held an offense ran by perhaps the great postseason QB ever, to 3 points after the first quarter. It is obvious that when given the talent he can put a quality D out on the field week end and week out.
    #51
  2. Gut

    Gut Starter

    Joined:
    Jan 7, 2003
    Messages:
    3,993
    dg,

    Re-read what Jwill and I have been saying. Talent is NOT what we are talking about. Case in point...if our WHOLE D was injured and we played our 2nd team D vs their #1 offense, I'd expect players to play with proper technique, take proper pursuit angles and tackle to the best of their ability while probably getting beat.

    That is NOT what is happening. We're not getting beat because we have no talent, but our talent is not playing up to it's potential! That is a HUGE difference!!!

    Since I live in NY, I'll use a NY analogy for your comment...these guys get paid millions of dollars and shouldn't need motivation, ect. If you remember a coach named Bruce Coslet? He came and coached the Jets and made a similar comment...these guys are Professionals and are paid millions of dollars...I don't need to motivate them. Not surprisingly, the Jets stunk under him and said bye bye to Coslet. While in a perfect world they wouldn't need motivation, the reality is that they DO!

    Most - if not all - the great coaches are great motivators. Unmotivated players don't get you a top 10 defense...pure and simple. But a better motivated team can beat a more talented one!

    As for your Schwartz comment, here's the avg points per game our D has surrendered (scoring defense) under his tenure...

    '01 24.2 (25th)
    '02 20.2 (11th)
    '03 20.2 (13th)
    '04 27.4 (30th)
    '05 26.3 (29th)

    I don't know about you, but it doesn't seem like even with great talent and no injuries he can get a D to avg less than 20 points a game...and that is with IDEAL circumstances!

    And don't give me we shut down someone AFTER the first quarter...next I'll hear that Schwartz can get the D to stuff the run when it's below 30 degrees, the opposing team is starting their 3rd stringer, they have no OL, and the other team is winning 24-10. So what?

    Show me that less than 10% of starting RB's get 100+ yards off us...or that we allow no rushing TD's, or that we lead the league in takeaways, or that we have the lowest 3rd down success rate given up...SOMETHING to justify this soft D other than we can tackle Marvin Harrison SOMETIMES after he catches the ball for a 40 yard gain! Or if the stats aren't there...show me that no team likes playing the Titans because we hit harder than everyone else and you might beat us on the scoreboard, but we're gonna strap it on and beat you up!

    Find me ONE serious redeeming value for Schwartz....ONE!!!

    Talking about Schwartz and Williams in the same sentence should only be for showing that they are on opposing ends of the spectrum. Williams D was MUCH better than Schwartz and he's even been better after he left us. He took a Skins D that perennially STUNK and turned them into a good unit...even with a bunch of nobodies making up HALF the unit. Or how is it that Belicheck can WIN a Super Bowl starting an undrafted free agent CB and playing a WR as the nickel?

    Schwartz CHOSE to start 2 rookies at CB because he thought they were better than the more experienced CB's we had...so he doesn't get a pass for starting rookies.

    And quite frankly, I think there are a few posters who - given the talent - could put a quality D on the field!

    Gut
    #52
  3. TitanJeff

    TitanJeff Kahuna Grande Staff

    Joined:
    May 24, 2002
    Messages:
    23,321
    I'll buy that. So are you saying Bulluck no longer practices the same technique he once did because of Schwartz?

    My opinion is that if Bulluck (or anyone else) is successful using solid technique then abandons them (even for a few plays), it is their own fault. The player KNOWS what he should be doing. He's done it before. It is exposed on film. It's not rocket science.

    Why should a coach continue to teach technique a player already knows? How can anyone ever learn more if they have to be taught the same thing over and over.

    At some point, the burden of playing the game properly is on the players.

    Isn't the preseason one big rehearsal? I suspect they'll get it fixed or heads will roll.

    In Bulluck's case, he may never have practiced great technique but it was never exposed because of the talent around him and his superior athleticism. Even now, it's rare he's not around the ball.

    But in the case of most of the other players on the team, they don't have the skills Bulluck has. They've either not been in the league long enough to fully develop or they don't have the athletic ability to begin with.

    The learning curve is greater for these guys. Their weaknesses are exposed easier.
    #53
  4. Riverman

    Riverman That may be....

    Joined:
    May 2, 2005
    Messages:
    8,658
    At the NFL level, the coach isn't necessarily "teaching" the fundamentals or specific techniques, but rather, monitoring the players to make sure that they have not abandoned them in an effort to make plays. For example, not squaring hips in early coverage because he "anticipates" the route- and then gets burned when the receiver cuts the other way. Or takes a bad angle on a tackle because he wants to get him in the backfield and then gets juked on a cut. aka "overpursuit".

    The players are only human- they want to make plays. The coach is responsible (IMO) to make sure that the player doesn't shortcut the fundamentals. The coach is the objective reviewer, the quality control guy, in this role. The coach is also responsible for making sure someone is on the field who "gets it". If he can't get a guy to employ fundamentals, he is responbible to put the guy on the bench.

    IMO, the 2 year history of poor defensive play has been largely affected by the coaches neglect to insure that sound fundamentals are being executed. The schemes also haven't been effective. IMO, I think Schwartz is so interested in being the "design scheme wiz" that he doesn't recognize the problem. The effectiveness of the defense is primarily his responsibility- so he is going to have to take the heat. If he gets it fixed, I'll give him the credit. It appears he just hasn't done anything to get it right the past 2 years.
    #54
  5. TitanJeff

    TitanJeff Kahuna Grande Staff

    Joined:
    May 24, 2002
    Messages:
    23,321
    I completely agree with this. But you don't think someone with the experience of a Keith Bulluck sees this for himself in film review? Does he need McGinnis to say "now Keith, you were not moving your feet well here. You need to remember to move your feet, Keith."

    I only agree to a certain point because, if this was the case, you'd never be able to go beyond a certain point in learning. How do you gameplan when you have to go over the same fundamentals? OTAs and training camp is for this kind of thing. There isn't time to teach techique during the regular season.

    Fisher has had some tackling techinque "reminders" in the past but he shouldn't have to make it a habit.

    Then what happened in '03 when the Titans defense was among the best in the league? Did they stop teaching after '03 or what? It's a legit question, IMO.

    That's another issue. Scheme is on the coaches and they must adjust if the players are unable to handle it. From what I understand, Schwartz simplied the defense significantly last year due to the youth on the team. He couldn't do many of the things he did in '03 when the team had more vets and was a top 10 defense.

    I'm not the biggest fan of Schwartz but I also know he isn't working with the talent and experience many teams in the league have. It dropped off significantly in '04 and '05 and just now appears to be on the rebound from a talent standpoint. If the problems persist in the regular season with this new talent/experience, then I start looking at him as the problem. Until then, I see it as much, if not more, a player issue than anything else.
    #55
  6. Riverman

    Riverman That may be....

    Joined:
    May 2, 2005
    Messages:
    8,658
    This is an excellent question that I think Schwartz should be addressing the with team and media. Honestly, many of the same players look worse now technique-wise the since '03. He "dummy-down" scheme didn't work. His cover 2 scheme didn't work. His weak blitz packages haven't worked.

    I realize you and I differ on where to pin the responsibility. IMO, Schwartz is in-escapably responsible for the poor play AND the apparent lack of improvement thus far this season. I'll be the first to congratulate him, if this defense quits missing tackles, taking bad angles, getting burned deep on coverage schemes and can keep an offense (other than the Colts) to less than 24 points.

    My main issue is that the defense is looking worse, not better, and players are getting frustrated. 2 years is long enough to have "turned it around". I'd settle for middle of road defense as long as we're on the up-swing. I don't think Schwartz has the capacity to coordinate that effort. I'm afraid his players agree.
    #56
  7. dg1979us

    dg1979us Starter

    Joined:
    Nov 11, 2003
    Messages:
    2,955
    I agree with you that this defense, and team in general needs to start showing a lot of improvement this year. But, if they dont improve, it is Reese and Fisher who have to be held responsible, because this is the team they have put together.

    But again, it has been 2 preseason games, let give them a chance to see if they have improved before we start throwing everybody under the bus.
    #57
  8. Gunny

    Gunny Lord and Master Tip Jar Donor

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2002
    Messages:
    46,841
    so should our S and C coach. The injuries we have is ridiculous.
    #58
  9. Riverman

    Riverman That may be....

    Joined:
    May 2, 2005
    Messages:
    8,658
    I agree. I'm hopeful we do. And ultimately, Fisher and Reese should and will answer also if we don't.
    #59
  10. TitanJeff

    TitanJeff Kahuna Grande Staff

    Joined:
    May 24, 2002
    Messages:
    23,321
    Which begs the question, "is it the scheme or the execution"? If Schwartz's watered down scheme is a problem (as we saw Saturday), then it is his responsibility to find something better. But we have examples of where it was very successful in certain matchups like the Ravens game. Generally, I think it comes down to the inexperience/talent issue more than the scheme.

    This season has only been a couple of preseason games. IMO, you can't gauge improvement until the regular season when you have your starters on the field more than a half.

    Yet he proved in '03 he could. Maybe the talent on that team was so good, even Schwartz couldn't screw it up. I somehow doubt that though. I think it's unrealistic to judge this season's defense based on two meaningless games.
    #60
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.