Here's another consideration. Maybe we don't have to fire Sutton. What if we instead hired someone for a Childress role. Primary role is to work in innovation, but can help with game planning and most importantly making adjustments. Groom a young guy to do this and become our next DC. Would actually be a great fit for an Adam Zimmer but even better if we brought in an SEC guy who loves to blitz and can help coach on pattern matching concepts.
I could live with Sutton if we were introducing some innovation and we did a much better job at making adjustments. [Reply]
Originally Posted by chiefzilla1501:
Here's another consideration. Maybe we don't have to fire Sutton. What if we instead hired someone for a Childress role. Primary role is to work in innovation, but can help with game planning and most importantly making adjustments. Groom a young guy to do this and become our next DC. Would actually be a great fit for an Adam Zimmer but even better if we brought in an SEC guy who loves to blitz and can help coach on pattern matching concepts.
I could live with Sutton if we were introducing some innovation and we did a much better job at making adjustments.
I actually disagree. What this defense needs above all else is a change in attitude. The physicality and nastiness of this defense needs to be ramped up in addition to what you said. I just think this defense needs a new fresh and aggressive approach going forward. [Reply]
Originally Posted by kgrund:
I actually disagree. What this defense needs above all else is a change in attitude. The physicality and nastiness of this defense needs to be ramped up in addition to what you said. I just think this defense needs a new fresh and aggressive approach going forward.
I'm trying to look at the bright side since I don't think Sutton will be fired. I tend to agree. But I wonder how much of that is scheme. I never had an issue with the defenses attitude until this year. I think the players lack confidence in the scheme. There are only so many times you can get burned on 3rd down before it wears on you. Doesn't help the that zebras throw flags at us any time we're even remotely aggressive in coverage. [Reply]
Originally Posted by kgrund:
I actually disagree. What this defense needs above all else is a change in attitude. The physicality and nastiness of this defense needs to be ramped up in addition to what you said. I just think this defense needs a new fresh and aggressive approach going forward.
They're a bunch of soft bitches and a lot of that goes back to the coaches. [Reply]
Originally Posted by chiefzilla1501:
I'm trying to look at the bright side since I don't think Sutton will be fired. I tend to agree. But I wonder how much of that is scheme. I never had an issue with the defenses attitude until this year. I think the players lack confidence in the scheme. There are only so many times you can get burned on 3rd down before it wears on you. Doesn't help the that zebras throw flags at us any time we're even remotely aggressive in coverage.
I think you're right. How hard are they going to commit if they don't have confidence? Not very! [Reply]
Originally Posted by ThaVirus:
In Sutton's defense, the Jags D just gave up 42 points then followed that up by allowing 130 passing yards and 2 TDs in the 4th quarter alone.
The Vikings D got trampled by a Foles-led offense for 38.
That's why you make the decision on Sutton's body of work -- only playoff game that the D was not an embarrassment was against Houston. Indy, NE, Pitt, TN -- D couldn't force a punt to save its life. [Reply]
Originally Posted by FringeNC:
That's why you make the decision on Sutton's body of work -- only playoff game that the D was not an embarrassment was against Houston. Indy, NE, Pitt, TN -- D couldn't force a punt to save its life.
I think the D played fine against Pitt and new England. Especially when you consider how banged up we were. You're not going to stop Leveon bell with Terrance Smith and ramik Wilson as your lbs. You're not going to beat Brady without Justin Houston. [Reply]
Im thinking we should probably stop not scoring in the 2nd halves of playoff games.
That might be beneficial.
20, 16 and 22 points our last 3 playoff games. That wouldn't have been enough even if we had the AFC best Jags or NFL best Vikings D as evidenced by the Jags giving up 42 & 24 and the Vikings giving up 24 & 38 this postseason. [Reply]
Originally Posted by chiefzilla1501:
I think the D played fine against Pitt and new England. Especially when you consider how banged up we were. You're not going to stop Leveon bell with Terrance Smith and ramik Wilson as your lbs. You're not going to beat Brady without Justin Houston.
Last year, NE, hardly a good D, made Pittsburgh punt more in the first half of the first quarter than the Chiefs did the entire game. [Reply]