The Coaching Staff

[MaineMan]

He needs a role while they wait out Josh. I think that BB asked Josh to forego a job last year because there was nobody ready to step in if he left. Daboll has been an OC in the league, is a very smart guy and in my mind was brought in as insurance should Josh get a job elsewhere next season.

BB's kid is already assisting McDaniel's with the QBs and Daboll probably didn't want the receivers again so the OL makes sense. He's going to learn a lot if he is in fact Dante's coaching assistant. he may be a roving assistant though, helping out all over the place as needed. It will be interesting to see what role he carries once training camp kicks off.

I'm hoping it isn't that he is taking over for Dante any time soon. I don;t want that guy going anywhere.

Daboll has coached QBs, RBs and WRs (presumably including receiving TEs), but I don't know that he's had direct, hands-on experience working with the OL except perhaps peripherally as an OC. So, working with Scar may represent the last stop on his "training tour" of all the offensive units.

 

[AllWorldTE]

Daboll has coached QBs, RBs and WRs (presumably including receiving TEs), but I don't know that he's had direct, hands-on experience working with the OL except perhaps peripherally as an OC. So, working with Scar may represent the last stop on his "training tour" of all the offensive units.

It's certainly not without precedent. Jeff Davidson is a former Scar protege under Belichick who went on to coordinate offenses in the NFL.

 

[jayShomp]

However, I think they did have a plan for replacing Welker, and it has been executed.

Except it was Plan B, Plan A was to keep him, if you believe what Kraft told the media.

 

[NFL-Know]

If the defense does not show anything this year, and with all of the players missing from the offense, it could show even more now, when do we question coaching.

Hopefully real soon because until the Pat get a "qualified D-secondary coach" who can teach the CBs, Ss, & LBs how to correctly play error/penalty free press coverage and not get torched so frequently, it will be the same as it has been for years now. It would also be really nice to see McDaniels put in some new and fresh O plays that enable more element of opponent D-surprise like last year's screen pass in the flats to Vereen that he went down the sidelines for a 70ish yard TD. Edelman played 4 years @ QB in college and why have we not seen one play yet using his skills there. :shrug_n: Oh well, there is always this coming year and next year and the year after.

 

[duckstruck]

Hopefully real soon because until the Pat get a "qualified D-secondary coach" who can teach the CBs, Ss, & LBs how to correctly play error/penalty free press coverage and not get torched so frequently, it will be the same as it has been for years now. It would also be really nice to see McDaniels put in some new and fresh O plays that enable more element of opponent D-surprise like last year's screen pass in the flats to Vereen that he went down the sidelines for a 70ish yard TD. Edelman played 4 years @ QB in college and why have we not seen one play yet using his skills there. :shrug_n: Oh well, there is always this coming year and next year and the year after.

I like your observations.

 

[Dwight Schrute]

I was speaking from a player acquisition standpoint and how it pertains to the head coach. If we want to say what coaches are not doing a smash up job, I would have to say I am not overly thrilled with Patricia. I would also not mind if they brought in fresh blood every once in awhile instead of the promotion within.

I don't know how an opinion on this guy can really be formulated given the info, or lack thereof, of what we get.

We don't get the Offensive package typically sometimes until after the play.

So we don't know if the correct Defensive substitution was made.

We don't necessarily know the Defense called.

We don't know the coverage call.

So it makes it pretty difficult to pinpoint who Fs up.

Sure, we can look at a play and say that sucked. But I can't sit back on a lot of blown assignments and say with 100% certainty that so and so really f'd that one up.

 

[Oswlek]

I don't know how an opinion on this guy can really be formulated given the info, or lack thereof, of what we get.

We don't get the Offensive package typically sometimes until after the play.

So we don't know if the correct Defensive substitution was made.

We don't necessarily know the Defense called.

We don't know the coverage call.

So it makes it pretty difficult to pinpoint who Fs up.

Sure, we can look at a play and say that sucked. But I can't sit back on a lot of blown assignments and say with 100% certainty that so and so really f'd that one up.

Yeah, just look at the past two years. NE's defensive roster in 2011 was poor and became a joke once players kept going down. I mean, at one point they had Edelman, Slater and Kouts on the field!

Yet, somehow, that team didn't allow a single playoff opponent to score more than 21 points, won the AFCCG almost single-handedly and made several key plays in the SB that should have been enough to seal the deal.

Then, in 2012, once the secondary finally clicked into place they because a top 10 unit in virtually every statistic, even most passing ones.

All evidence points to things being personnel issues, not coaching.

 

[midgar8784]

Yeah, just look at the past two years. NE's defensive roster in 2011 was poor and became a joke once players kept going down. I mean, at one point they had Edelman, Slater and Kouts on the field!

Yet, somehow, that team didn't allow a single playoff opponent to score more than 21 points, won the AFCCG almost single-handedly and made several key plays in the SB that should have been enough to seal the deal.

Then, in 2012, once the secondary finally clicked into place they because a top 10 unit in virtually every statistic, even most passing ones.

All evidence points to things being personnel issues, not coaching.

Good teams gameplan against the pats was to keep the offense off the field, they did this with a slowed down ball control offense, this keeps the score down and also keeps you in the game, so while only giving up 21 is good, when they control the ball for 40 minutes and score 21, you very well could win. Thats what they did in the superbowl....they could not get the Giants off the field. That has been the issue for awhile. When a team controls 40 minutes of the clock, it requires you to score on almost every drive, no room for a 3 and out or a none scoring drive...

 

[Oswlek]

Good teams gameplan against the pats was to keep the offense off the field, they did this with a slowed down ball control offense, this keeps the score down and also keeps you in the game, so while only giving up 21 is good, when they control the ball for 40 minutes and score 21, you very well could win. Thats what they did in the superbowl....they could not get the Giants off the field. That has been the issue for awhile. When a team controls 40 minutes of the clock, it requires you to score on almost every drive, no room for a 3 and out or a none scoring drive...

The Giants controlled the clock almost solely because NE's offense gave the ball back to NY after a single play on their opening drive. Had they simply gotten two first downs, TOP would have been about even.

You keep saying variations of this:

it requires you to score on almost every drive, no room for a 3 and out or a none scoring drive

But it isn't true at all. By the time Wes dropped the pass, NE had had 4 non-scoring drives, 3 of which were three plays or less and the other amassing a total of 5 plays. They had also given the ball away twice. And they still had the lead and were a catch away from putting the game away.

NE's offense was primarily responsible for losing that game, and bears at least as much culpability for the TOP slant. Stop making it seem like a cross the offense had to bear, and start laying blame where it belongs.

 

[midgar8784]

The Giants controlled the clock almost solely because NE's offense gave the ball back to NY after a single play on their opening drive. Had they simply gotten two first downs, TOP would have been about even.

You keep saying variations of this:



But it isn't true at all. By the time Wes dropped the pass, NE had had 4 non-scoring drives, 3 of which were three plays or less and the other amassing a total of 5 plays. They had also given the ball away twice. And they still had the lead and were a catch away from putting the game away.

NE's offense was primarily responsible for losing that game, and bears at least as much culpability for the TOP slant. Stop making it seem like a cross the offense had to bear, and start laying blame where it belongs.

In the first quarter the Giants had 1 drive that was 10 plays that took 6 minutes, there other drive was 9 plays that took 5.5 minutes, 11.5 minutes on two drives. 2nd quarter 8 plays that took 4 minutes, next drive 7 playos that took 5 minutes. Both ended in punts, but did the job, it took 11 minutes off in the first quarter and 9 minutes off in the second quarter. 20.5 minutes off the clock in the first half....giants had the ball, Even though they had the ball most of the half, NE had more points...So the giants had 20.5 minutes to get 7 points, the pats only had 9.5 minutes to get 10 points. Thats what I am saying about not getting the giants off the field and the pats offense back on. So pats on the last drive of the half went on a 96 yard drive 14 play drive, but they only had 4 minutes left to do it....second half, the pats get the ball go on a 8 play 79 yard drive, back to back td drives...then the giants get the ball....a quick 3 and out here and we get the ball right back....no, giants go on a 10 play 45 yard drive that takes another 5 minutes. Next drive 9 play 33 yard drive, then a 10 play 49 yard drive, all 3 of these drives take 5 minutes a piece. Then toward the end after the welker drop the giants go on a 9 play 88 yard drive that takes 2:50 off the clock with 3:46 left, which leaves the pats with 57 seconds...So even on drives the giants did not score they kept the pats off the field for long periods of time. So while you can make a point for some drives the pats stalled on, is that the giants defense coming up big to get them off the field, and is it the pats defense letting the giants have huge time consuming drives to keep the pats offense off the field. The pats took a lead into half time and scored on a long drive to start the half, they were in control, but long time consuming drives took by the giants took a lot of time away from them, and even when the giants didnt score, they kept the pats offense off the field. So while its true, the pats offense did not score as much as needed, they had way less time to do it than the giants did. The game plan by the giants worked.

 

[Oswlek]

Middy, I'll say this again: Had Brady not taken the unnecessary safety and instead just got two first downs and a punt, the TOP would have been about even, despite NY's game plan. Not only did that strip NE of valuable time, but it handed the ball back to NY is terrific field position against a defense that needed a little rest.

The funny thing is, that wasn't even really NY's game plan, it was NE's defensive game plan, which they made clear as day by starting Tracy White at ILB. And you know what? It worked. They held NY to 15 offensive points, and were driving to put a stake in them despite two offensive turnovers and NY luckily stumbling on both loose balls.

NE's offense was at least as responsible for the TOP as their defense.

 

[midgar8784]

Middy, I'll say this again: Had Brady not taken the unnecessary safety and instead just got two first downs and a punt, the TOP would have been about even, despite NY's game plan. Not only did that strip NE of valuable time, but it handed the ball back to NY is terrific field position against a defense that needed a little rest.

The funny thing is, that wasn't even really NY's game plan, it was NE's defensive game plan, which they made clear as day by starting Tracy White at ILB. And you know what? It worked. They held NY to 15 offensive points, and were driving to put a stake in them despite two offensive turnovers and NY luckily stumbling on both loose balls.

NE's offense was at least as responsible for the TOP as their defense.

I can what if quite a bit of things, but on the safety, he was about to get sacked, so his choice was to take it and get a safety or throw it deep where nobody could get it and that is never called a safety since he was still in the pocket...and I believe the giants gameplan was to keep the pats offense off the field, not sure how you could think it wasn't, everytime they play the pats, thats what they do....they avoid the shoot out by ball controlling it up and down the field. Well had NE got one of those turnovers that would have maybe stopped one of those long drives, or when they did get the turnover, they had the right amount of guys on the field....I guess what I am saying is....both sides had their moments of fault and you can what if both of them.

 

[Oswlek]

I can what if quite a bit of things, but on the safety, he was about to get sacked, so his choice was to take it and get a safety or throw it deep where nobody could get it and that is never called a safety since he was still in the pocket...and I believe the giants gameplan was to keep the pats offense off the field, not sure how you could think it wasn't, everytime they play the pats, thats what they do....they avoid the shoot out by ball controlling it up and down the field. Well had NE got one of those turnovers that would have maybe stopped one of those long drives, or when they did get the turnover, they had the right amount of guys on the field....I guess what I am saying is....both sides had their moments of fault and you can what if both of them.

Of course both screwed up, but before you indicated the TOP was an albatross that Brady had to carry around, valiantly conquering that and the opposing defense. It is that characterization that I strongly disagree with; the offense was at least as culpable for the TOP issue as the defense was.

Yes, the Giants have played it close to the vest in prior matches, but NE wanted them to run. Look at who they put on the field. Any play that didn't involve a forward pass was seen as a victory. The DL didn't quite hold up their end of the bargain, but overall the D did enough to win the game.

 

[midgar8784]

Of course both screwed up, but before you indicated the TOP was an albatross that Brady had to carry around, valiantly conquering that and the opposing defense. It is that characterization that I strongly disagree with; the offense was at least as culpable for the TOP issue as the defense was.

Yes, the Giants have played it close to the vest in prior matches, but NE wanted them to run. Look at who they put on the field. Any play that didn't involve a forward pass was seen as a victory. The DL didn't quite hold up their end of the bargain, but overall the D did enough to win the game.

All year the offense had to carry more burden than the defense. The pats offense lead the league in first downs and also length of drive, they were 28th in yards given up per drive on defense, which means lots of time taken away from the offense through out the year. I guess that mean an offense has to set a record in first downs to keep up. I mean every once in awhile, how about holding a team to a 3 and out? When the Giants faced the niners that year in the title game, the niners held the giants to 5 straight 3 and outs at the end of the game, but their offense did not score on any of them....in that instance, yeah I say the offense let the niners down....if the pats offense was given 5 straight times back on the field after the D held the other team to 5 3 and outs, I imagine they score on one of them.

 

[Oswlek]

All year the offense had to carry more burden than the defense. The pats offense lead the league in first downs and also length of drive, they were 28th in yards given up per drive on defense, which means lots of time taken away from the offense through out the year. I guess that mean an offense has to set a record in first downs to keep up. I mean every once in awhile, how about holding a team to a 3 and out? When the Giants faced the niners that year in the title game, the niners held the giants to 5 straight 3 and outs at the end of the game, but their offense did not score on any of them....in that instance, yeah I say the offense let the niners down....if the pats offense was given 5 straight times back on the field after the D held the other team to 5 3 and outs, I imagine they score on one of them.

I couldn't give two shits about what happened all year, I'm only talking about one game.

I also couldn't give two shits about what happened the week before.

The simple fact is this: NE had a 17-9 lead only 3 minutes into the second half. All they needed to do was score one more time and they would likely win, even if it was just a FG. A TD and their odds of victory would be in the 90s.

Instead their next two drives amassed a total of 5 plays and 1:49 (TOP anyone?) including a turnover. Despite this - and the fact that NY had three possessions in the interim - they still maintained a 2 point lead. And the offense responded with a resounding thud even though NY apparently decided to stop covering receivers.

You don't need to hold the other team to 5 straight three and outs to do your job as a defense. If you remain unconvinced, then we probably aren't going to come together on this one.

 

[midgar8784]

I couldn't give two shits about what happened all year, I'm only talking about one game.

I also couldn't give two shits about what happened the week before.

The simple fact is this: NE had a 17-9 lead only 3 minutes into the second half. All they needed to do was score one more time and they would likely win, even if it was just a FG. A TD and their odds of victory would be in the 90s.

Instead their next two drives amassed a total of 5 plays and 1:49 (TOP anyone?) including a turnover. Despite this - and the fact that NY had three possessions in the interim - they still maintained a 2 point lead. And the offense responded with a resounding thud even though NY apparently decided to stop covering receivers.

You don't need to hold the other team to 5 straight three and outs to do your job as a defense. If you remain unconvinced, then we probably aren't going to come together on this one.

No you dont need to hold the other team to 3 and outs....but if you do, then I do not really blame the defense on those losses. We did not hold the giants to any 3 and outs, nor got a turnover. This is old news though, I hope the defense improved because at this moment, I am not sure the offense can do what it did last year.

 

[MaineMan]

I couldn't give two shits about what happened all year, I'm only talking about one game.

I also couldn't give two shits about what happened the week before.

The simple fact is this: NE had a 17-9 lead only 3 minutes into the second half. All they needed to do was score one more time and they would likely win, even if it was just a FG. A TD and their odds of victory would be in the 90s.

Instead their next two drives amassed a total of 5 plays and 1:49 (TOP anyone?) including a turnover. Despite this - and the fact that NY had three possessions in the interim - they still maintained a 2 point lead. And the offense responded with a resounding thud even though NY apparently decided to stop covering receivers.

You don't need to hold the other team to 5 straight three and outs to do your job as a defense. If you remain unconvinced, then we probably aren't going to come together on this one.

Middy keeps beating that drum about the Pats offense leading the league in "length of drive". They did - in yards. But not in minutes per drive where they were faster than the league average on scoring drives (around 12th, IIRC).

Of course, then he concludes that the yards per drive yielded by the Pats defense indicates that those drives were necessarily time-consuming and, thus, keeping the Pats offense off the field.

Having it both ways - again.

 

[midgar8784]

Middy keeps beating that drum about the Pats offense leading the league in "length of drive". They did - in yards. But not in minutes per drive where they were faster than the league average on scoring drives (around 12th, IIRC).

Of course, then he concludes that the yards per drive yielded by the Pats defense indicates that those drives were necessarily time-consuming and, thus, keeping the Pats offense off the field.

Having it both ways - again.

Not having it both ways, fact is, the pats lead the league in first downs, they lead the league in length of drives, they lead the league in points, they lead the league in yards, they lead the league in 3rd down conversion, they lead the league in the fewest 3 and outs....Its hard to lead the league in TOP when your defense cannot get the other team off the field...how about we actually take a look at what the actually problems were, not try and invent them. belichick has not been bringing in a ton of defensive players every year because the defense was so great and was dragged down by the offense. The only thing that made this defense even look half way good, was what the offense was doing, if we had even an average offense, the defense would be in trouble. Can you imagine, turnovers? 3 and outs? failure to move the ball? Handing it back to the defense over and over again? Some of you do the expectation game....oh well I do not expect the defense to be good so they get a pass, I expect perfection from the offense, so a couple 3 nad outs or *gasp* a turnover and I point the finger....well sorry, but I hold both to the same fire, and the defense is not holding up its end....and with all the losses the offense just suffered this year, that needs to change, or you will really see what a bad team looks like again.