Brian Schottenheimer Is Not the Problem

[Faceplant]

Culter's not leaving Chicago.Look how bad Clausen was today.Not to mention Shannahan will be coaching there and he drafted Cutler so I wouldn't bet on him leaving.

Clausen played fine today. Jeffires and his other WRs dropped passes on him all day. Did you watch the game? I would take Clausen over Hill without question at this point for arm strength alone.

 

[Faceplant]

Only if he's coaching Hill to hold the ball too long and letting his receivers outrun his arm.

See, I notice that too. Britt and Tavon seems to be able to beat press coverage everytime I see them run a 9 route against it. Hill just doesn't let it go early enough and they are constantly coming back for the ball, if it is even catch able. I would like to see these guys get the ball in stride for a change. Even on his bomb to Britt against the Broncos, it was too close for comfort. Britt made a good play to shield the DB with his body.

 

[Alan]

jrry32 picking what's important to him:
No, I'm picking the stat that matters.

What would I call a D that lets the other team march down the field but not score TDs? A winning defense.

There isn't a person in this world that would care if their defense gave up 400 yards per game if they only gave up 15 points per game. Yards don't win games. Points win games.

So let me ask you a question, Alan...which defense would you rather have...
Denver - 309.4 yards per game allowed, 21.6 points per game allowed
Arizona - 366.4 yards per game allowed, 18.6 points per game allowed
(I'm using points per game allowed because I haven't updated my DPPG allowed numbers yet)

Ignore the personnel...speaking purely statistically, which defense would you rather have?

Me? It's an easy answer. As I said before, the game is won and lost by points.

I thought we had already established the fact that YOU think it's the most important stat and I don't. No matter how many times you say it, it won't make it true or make me agree with your contention.

Didn't we just lose a game to the Cards where in we didn't allow a TD? That right there invalidates your premise (A winning defense.) doesn't it? Are you talking to me or a wider audience? Because if you're talking to me using prejudicial wording like "There isn't a person in the world" is not only laughably incorrect, it's ineffective as an argument with me. In addition jrry, let's try and stay on the same page here OK? When did we start talking about what it takes to win games rather than what demonstrates/indicates a top ten D? We can have that discussion during the off season when we have nothing else to talk about. In the meantime, let's stick with stats that indicate you have a top 10 D or not OK?

This question, "So let me ask you a question, Alan...which defense would you rather have..." is off subject, prejudicial, allows for for only one correct answer and has nothing to do with whether or not you're a top 10 D. I'll be happy to answer it by rephrasing your question so as to eliminate the cherry picked stats that only allow for one reasonable answer.

I'd rather have a defense that allows 150 total yards and gives up only 7 points versus a defense that allows 397 yards and gives up only 7 points. Keeping the Broncos to only 7 points while giving up that many yards may win you an occasional game but in the long run it's a losing D. Giving up only 150 yards would indicate that for that game at least, your D was dominating, made very few mistakes and undoubtedly a top 5 D that week. Giving up 397 yards and only 7 points says nothing to me about the quality of your D except that you were very lucky to have given up only 7 points. Speaking "purely statistically" I'd rather have the 150 yard D for sure. So would you. In your scenario there is only one answer due to your wording but when you say "purely statistically" you need to identify which stat you prefer and I prefer total yards and not total points given up. That's if I'm trying for a top 10 D and not worrying about wins and losses of course because I'm sticking to our original disagreement.

Here's what I think the difference is in how we view what a top D is. For me, to allow an opposing O to march down the field and get into scoring position requires many failures to stop their offense from doing what they want to do on each of those 11 plays that lead them to your red zone . Great Ds don't make that many mistakes. If the other team coughs up a fumble or fails to score, due to some good plays by your D (finally) when they get into the red zone I don't consider that to be an indication of a top 10 D. You do. If you're lucky enough to stop them regularly then you'll win a lot of games but we aren't talking about winning or losing we're talking about have a top 10 D and no matter how many times you try to ignore what the rest of the world uses as the measuring stick for that, it's not going to go away just because you disagree with it. Doesn't make you wrong but allowing you to pick your own stat as a measuring stick doesn't make you right either.

So to bring this back to the original subject which is whether we have a top 10 D now and will have a top 5 next year, we don't have a top ten D now IMO and we'll not have a top 5 D next year unless we fix some of the problems I mentioned.

 

[dieterbrock]

Shottenheimer is average. Has been for years.
I don't think he should be fired for poor performance I just truly believe the position could be upgraded.

 

[Corbin]

Just like in the '99 season we got a new offensive coordinator in Mike Martz. We need to find someone else who can run this offense better even with healthy pieces. With that being said some of our OL and QB is horrible. We need to address those issues first and foremost.

 

[Merlin]

Could not disagree more. We are crossing the streams here on the different issues that are wrong with this team.

QB does suck. Hill is demonstrating why he's a backup and some fans are just realizing that.

OL does suck. And they need to address it.

But the OC sucks too. And here's a prediction that I hope is wrong: after Fish brings Schotty back we'll see the same, plodding, sorry, predictable "3 'n Out" offense that gets dictated to by 80% of the defenses in this league. And fans will, as we do, look for reasons to explain why the offense sucks yet again; it will be "well Sam got hurt again" or "the offensive line is young now and giving up some pressure" or any other of a tired list of excuses. But it won't matter, because Fish will probably be fired, as he should be, for bringing that clown back.

If Schotty returns this regime is done. I hope Fish makes that connection once he has time to sit back and ruminate on another sorry season.

 

[RhodyRams]

Jeff Fisher has been fielding average teams his whole career also,even back in Tenn. But that doesn't excuse him from putting a poorly coached, poorly disciplined on the field. Both Fisher and BS were hired to produce a winning football team,and neither has accomplished that yet.

 

[LesBaker]

I don't care if they trust their OL. That's not stopping them from hitting the WR with a pass. Hill and Davis just don't get it done. We need a guy that's at least an average starting QB. Hill or Davis are fine if they were starting 1 or 2 games...but over 16 games, they're going to hold this team back. We need Bradford. Hell, I'd settle for Cutler, Stafford, or Palmer.

I'd flip that around to "we need Cutler, Stafford or Palmer. Hell I'd settle for Bradford."

 

[cgsuddeath]

Clausen played fine today. Jeffires and his other WRs dropped passes on him all day. Did you watch the game? I would take Clausen over Hill without question at this point for arm strength alone.

Clausen played fine today. Jeffires and his other WRs dropped passes on him all day. Did you watch the game? I would take Clausen over Hill without question at this point for arm strength alone.

Yes but they put up only 14 points against a so so pass defense.No saying Clausen is terrible but Cutler is better and if the coaching change occurs it will more than likely be Shanahan who drafted him.

 

[LesBaker]

Hill versus a pass rush that has been on fire was 24/32 for 290 yards, 9.1 YPA, 2 TD's, 1 INT .

Blaming the QB, or complaining about him after a loss like this, when the O puts up 27 points is kinda odd.

When you put up 27 you should win.......... a lot.

 

[dieterbrock]

Food for thought...
I believe in the wisdom of the league beyond what is written or produced in the media.
Point being, there have been OC who got HC gigs while managing mediocre offense. At what point is an OC failing by not getting in the mix for a HC job? I mean if Shott was truly "held back" all these years by poor line play, poor QB play and poor O-lines, wouldnt the brain trust(s) see through all that?
Seems to me that if he is getting further away from the goal of being a HC, at that is indicative of how well he is doing

 

[cgsuddeath]

Hill versus a pass rush that has been on fire was 24/32 for 290 yards, 9.1 YPA, 2 TD's, 1 INT .

Blaming the QB, or complaining about him after a loss like this, when the O puts up 27 points is kinda odd.

When you put up 27 you should win.......... a lot.

My point exactly.

 

[dieterbrock]

Yes but they put up only 14 points against a so so pass defense.No saying Clausen is terrible but Cutler is better and if the coaching change occurs it will more than likely be Shanahan who drafted him.

Detroit is one of the top defense in the league and had Alshon not dropped all those passes, they would have scored a boat load. I watched the game, and by dropped passes we're not talking about "got a hand on it" kind of drops, we're talking about Jared Cook "right in the mitts" kinda drops
Clausen was great, if anything though it proved that it might not be Cutler's fault there.
Lord knows Brandon Marshall drops his share too

 

[cgsuddeath]

Detroit is one of the top defense in the league and had Alshon not dropped all those passes, they would have scored a boat load. I watched the game, and by dropped passes we're not talking about "got a hand on it" kind of drops, we're talking about Jared Cook "right in the mitts" kinda drops
Clausen was great, if anything though it proved that it might not be Cutler's fault there.
Lord knows Brandon Marshall drops his share too

Yes but that sorry Patriots team passed on them

 

[dieterbrock]

Yes but that sorry Patriots team passed on them

I think you forgot to change that font color to blue

 

[LACHAMP46]

Nope, Schotty is NOT the problem....Not sure we have the guns to win a shootout...Don't know why either...But with the QB's he's dealt with in his 5 years of coaching as an OC, he has done OK....

 

[cgsuddeath]

Hill versus a pass rush that has been on fire was 24/32 for 290 yards, 9.1 YPA, 2 TD's, 1 INT .

Blaming the QB, or complaining about him after a loss like this, when the O puts up 27 points is kinda odd.

When you put up 27 you should win.......... a lot.

We have a lot of sorry fans who only see the quarterback not much else.

 

[-X-]

Nope, Schotty is NOT the problem....Not sure we have the guns to win a shootout...Don't know why either...But with the QB's he's dealt with in his 5 years of coaching as an OC, he has done OK....

But, "NY JETS." You know, the team where Sanchez is a good QB and Schotty is a bad OC? The same Sanchez who's 3-4 in Philly while Foles was 6-2? While the Jets have been 17-30 without Schotty and 51-45 with? Here's Schotty's legacy so far. His QBs have been:

1 year of Bradford
1 year of Favre
2 years of Pennington
3 years of Sanchez
2 years with assorted QBs in St Louis (Hill, Clemens, and Davis)

I can't imagine why he can't draw up innovative and uber-effective game plans on a consistent basis with that superior crop of QBs.

 

[-X-]

Hill versus a pass rush that has been on fire was 24/32 for 290 yards, 9.1 YPA, 2 TD's, 1 INT .

Blaming the QB, or complaining about him after a loss like this, when the O puts up 27 points is kinda odd.

When you put up 27 you should win.......... a lot.

And when you're top 5 in offensive points allowed, you should win a lot too.

 

[iced]

But, "NY JETS." You know, the team where Sanchez is a good QB and Schotty is a bad OC? The same Sanchez who's 3-4 in Philly while Foles was 6-2? While the Jets have been 17-30 without Schotty and 51-45 without? Here's Schotty's legacy so far. His QBs have been:

Yet the Houston Texans have been rotating QB's throughout the season and have more PPG than us, despite also being first year in a new system and on their 4th QB (one that we brought in briefly this season at that).

And then there's the Browns offense with norv turner..with 3 different qb's and new system, didn't matter for josh gordon - still had ridiculous numbers..again, is that qb or oc?

just some food for thought