Jim Schwart'z future

A little summary on this thread

some people like head cheese. While I would not take head cheese home from the grocery store if they were giving it away. Now if I had some excellent sharp cheddar and the sharp cheddar quit to become the HC of the Bills. Then somebody forces head cheese on me while telling me it is mild cheddar. When I get home 3 or so years later and discover what was supposed to be mild cheddar is really head cheese I would throw the head cheese away.

Now if you let mild cheddar age a while - hey I'm no cheese expert here so any cheesy mistakes are just that - you might end up with sharp cheddar, but if you let head cheese age you wind up giving up 25+ points per game in consecutive seasons.

Does that make the people who like head cheese wrong, yea in my book they are.

 

Coaches are only so good as their most recent results. It's amazing how a coach can go from great to terrible and back to great in just a few years based merely on his winning percentages.

I seem to recall all the criticism of Lowry on special teams in recent years. I guess he's a great coach all of a sudden?

Coaches can't succeed without good players. Vince Lombardi couldn't have made the playoffs with the Titans in 2004 or 2005. To blame Schwartz is stupid. Also, to blame his style of play is also useless. The 46 is dead and teams can win with the zone.

We don't need a new DC. We need personnel upgrades on D.

 

Last year. Of course, it's the same DC/head coach who gave up three touchdowns in the fourth quarter to the Carolina Panthers in a Super Bowl, in a year when the Panthers were not tearing up the league as a high-scoring team. The same DC/head coach who came off their very first Super Bowl season and missed the playoffs the next year, losing a total of 7 games and giving up 24+ points in 6 of those losses (I know at least one of those games featured the opposing team scoring a defensive touchdown to factor into that...but then I doubt anyone really takes that into account when talking about the points the Titans give up, either).

Which players do people think Schwartz has not gotten the most out of, who have gone on to play for other DCs and done so much better that it proved that they were misused or underachieving while they were Titans?

I absolutely think Crennel (or Belichick) is a better DC, and they definitely got the most out of some solid veteran talent (especially McGinest, Seymour, Bruschi, Harrison, Vrabel). I think Williams is a better DC. I'd rank Kiffin and Jim Johnson higher. Maybe a couple of others.

I just don't think Schwartz is at the back of the pack.

 

The preceding comments just prove my point. The people that think that our defense is good will quote stats on how they are ranked and how many points they allow in 3.87 minutes with integrals and using an abacus. Outside of the most recent offseason, the Titans have drafted heavy on the defensive side. McNair, to my knowledge hasn't had a #WR and if he has (?Dyson) it has been quite some time.

Maybe the reason why we had better talent pre-Schwartz was because the DC made the better and played to their strengths. What else does he need to prove himself? Injuries are a part of football everybody deals with them.

 

The last time we've drafted a WR in the first round was Kevin Dyson in 98'... the last time we've drafted a O-Line in the first round was Hopkins in 93'. Neither Reese or Fisher have ever drafted a O-lineman in the first round in their era and Dyson was taken over Moss, which was Fishers call ( Didn't turn out that well ). Reese's theory is you draft WR/OL in the mid-to-late rounds and let your position coach develope them into solid starters, creating value ( I totally agree with the exception of LT ). With our offensive style, and McNair as the starting QB... you wont see a " Blow'em out ", " down field " passing attack, regardless who is receiving. Run, Run, pass to the flat or slot, Run and every once in a while a long post route... ect with McNair under throwing, over throwing or misreading the defense.

 

This also kind of makes me scratch my head. As if the Titans somehow shortchanged the investment on offense.

They DID invest. They just invested in a lot more VETERANS than they did rookie draft picks.

From '95 to '02/'03, they spent a ton of money on offense.

They drafted McNair and (third round) Chris Sanders in the same year -- and even gave Sanders a second veteran contract pretty quickly when he flashed some production early on, and honored almost until the end -- then added a franchise RB (got a huge second contract), second round WR pick (Kent, who busted), a fourth rounder at WR (Mason, who ended up getting a pretty significant second contract), gave a HUGE free agent contract (at the time) for WR Yancey Thigpen, and used a first round pick on WR Kevin Dyson. They even tried to supplement with Carl Pickens when Thigpen started looking like he couldn't go a full season anymore.

They re-upped Matthews (for as long as he wanted to play), Wycheck (ditto), Hopkins, Piller, Olson, with new contracts, too. When Wycheck left, they paid Kinney. They even paid veteran dollars to guys like NOD and Jason Mathews for as long as they could as depth.

And, of course, they re-upped McNair.

When they lost Jon Runyan involuntarily over money, they went right out and spent millions on Fred Miller to take his place. Center was the ONLY position on the offensive line where they scrimped.

If they didn't get enough production out of those offensive investments, it's not for lack of spending the cap room. But if you are going to spend all that money on veteran starters, it's kind of hard to justify a lot of first round picks on offense, too.

Justin McCareins was the first deserving young player in a LONG time on the offensive side of the ball -- besides Runyan, and Lorenzo Neal, who was more of a security blanket for George than for McNair (so George lobbied for Greg Comella) -- where they had to let him go purely for cap reasons.

There is no comparison in the amount of involuntary roster turnover on offense vs. defense from '99 to '03. They maintained much more continuity on offense. It's only the last couple of years that they've had to really force changes in the starting lineup on offense strictly because of cap reasons.

Williams avoided most of the turnover on defense since it really started after the '00 season. Except for making over the LB corps coming off the '99 season...but he got to do that with a prized free agent LB in Godfrey as the key piece.

There has been and will be a growing investment on offense from the draft or possibly free agency now (e.g., Travis Henry, which cost them draft value and veteran dollars) -- because all those guys they kept paying on offense these last 5-10 years have to eventually turn their spots over. Including two of the most expensive positions on any team, QB and LT.

They drafted on defense because that's not where they spent a ton of money to keep their veterans together from '99 to '04.

 

so, if I understand this correctly Nendzone, your saying the reason we've gone D heavy in the recent drafts is because we spent alot of money on vets on the O side of the ball, but now that certain positions, like QB and LT, are aging - we're going to do the same thing, except draft heavy O and pay big to vets on the D side of the ball? Sounds like a good plan, but didn't we just find out the hard way what happens when we tie alot of wealth into vets this past off-season or did that come from poor managing?

Also, if we followed that above mentioed method, we'd technically draft our new QB this year, possibly a #1 WR next year and then a franchise RB (that's if something happens to CB)?

 

I'm saying, the only guys on this roster who will be 30 or older next year are all on offense (plus Hentrich). Including McNair, Hopkins, Olson, and Piller. Volek is the other. Not coincidentally, they represent some of the highest cap numbers on the team next year.

In fact, all five of those guys are in the top 10 projected cap numbers for 2006. (And the Titans have paid every one of those guys on offense every nickel they've made as NFL players, from the time they were rookies until now, when they are the oldest guys on the team.)

Those spots are probably going to get rolled over sooner than the younger players/starters on the roster. That's just common sense.

The Titans have already made significant investments in quantity of draft picks on OL the last two years, and they think they have some future starters in that group. They are likely to spend some money to retain Bell and maybe Amano for the longer haul, but that would likely come at the expense of (say) Olson and Hartwig. And maybe Hopkins, if they believe Roos is ready and Bell is a capable RT prospect. If they flip three spots on the OL, they may still draft more or look for backup help in free agency.

We all know McNair's days are numbered, even if he's back next year, which means they are likely in the market for a young QB to groom, if one they like falls to a spot they like in the draft.

They made a big investment in youth (and IMO, promising talent) at WR this past year, but because Calico hasn't developed like they'd hoped, it won't surprise me to see them invest another fairly significant pick at WR (doesn't seem to be a lot of talent at the top, though, so I'm guessing it won't be in the first round).

They've done a good job at restocking the depth chart at TE behind Kinney, for now.

They invested in RB depth with Henry, but if they have to burn that pick because they can't come to terms on reduced dollars with him and he's gone after this season, then we'll probably see them look for RB help, too. Not sure if that would be via the draft or free agency.

But I also think they need to be proactive about getting better talent at LB and S (especially if they let Tank Williams walk in free agency). This is a good draft for LBs. If they can find a good value there, I'm all for them investing in it, including in the first or second round. And especially since they are likely to lose one or more of Sirmon, Kassell, and Boiman, while Bulluck isn't getting any younger himself.

 

You are truly clueless. You have no idea how to assess talent. If teams could win with young inexperienced players than they all would. They don't. You need to take off the blinders and realize the caliber of players we have, furthermore, Jeff Fisher is responsible for the D not Schwartz. If it's so obvious that Schwartz sucks so bad don't you think Fish would do something about it? Do you think he's stupid? Your frustration needs to be aimed at the head coach who just so happens to be a defensive minded coach that possibly knows as much as you. Though, I doubt he's knows nearly as much as you about NFL Defense.

 

no, remember eddie george?

no, just loyal.