Why is McDaniels here?

TomRicardo

rusty cohlebone
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Feb 6, 2006
19,657
Row 14
The offensive game plan was horrendous last night.  The fact he doesn't have a high power offense to mask his inability to adjust is really showing.
 
Is there any reason he is our OC?
 

jsinger121

@jsinger121
SoSH Member
TomRicardo said:
The offensive game plan was horrendous last night.  The fact he doesn't have a high power offense to mask his inability to adjust is really showing.
 
Is there any reason he is our OC?
 
Because he doesn't question Bill and is a yes man. Look at the entire staff. There are crappy coaches throughout that do not have experience or the balls to challenge Bill. That starts with the HC of the NEP.
 

Stitch01

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
18,155
Boston
I think he's had a top five DVOA offense literally every year he's been here as a coordinator, so its not a surprise they haven't canned him after four games.
 
The game plan was terrible last night though.
 

Smiling Joe Hesketh

All Hail King Boron
Dope
May 20, 2003
30,996
Deep inside Muppet Labs
jsinger121 said:
 
Because he doesn't question Bill and is a yes man. Look at the entire staff. There are crappy coaches throughout that do not have experience or the balls to challenge Bill. That starts with the HC of the NEP.
You have no real way of knowing this. At all. It could be true, but you don't know. None of us do.
 

Ralphwiggum

Well-Known Member
Gold Supporter
SoSH Member
Jun 27, 2012
5,906
Needham, MA
jsinger121 said:
 
Because he doesn't question Bill and is a yes man. Look at the entire staff. There are crappy coaches throughout that do not have experience or the balls to challenge Bill. That starts with the HC of the NEP.
 
Matt Patricia?  Jonathan Kraft?  You must be someone inside the organization to know this.  Please come forward and out yourself.
 
Unless you are the equipment manager who somehow managed to have the Pats slipping all over the place last night.  If this is you then go fuck yourself.
 

williams_482

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 1, 2011
391
I will accept the possibility that I am an idiot and don't understand any of the nuances of offensive playcalling, especially those nuances that should be obvious from my couch. Could someone explain what was so terrible about McDaniel's performance last night?
 

crystalline

Member
SoSH Member
Oct 12, 2009
5,713
JP
Totally agree. That's why Dante left, after all. He couldn't stand being the assistant head coach and didn't have enough years of experience to challenge Belichick.

Pepper Johnson, too. The guy had so little guts that he was afraid to leave when he didn't get the promotion he wanted. Not a risk taker. He's probably cleaning the cold tub right now.

And Belichick keeps hanging on to those quiet yes men coaches like Mangini. Can you believe that guy? If only he had the self confidence to go coach another team and talk back to Bill. Those attributes are key to success at the head coach level. If only Mangini had them he might be able to win as a head coach someday.

[Look man, you polluted the game thread with mindless drivel. Don't bring it here too.]
 

gryoung

Member
SoSH Member
jsinger121 said:
 
Because he doesn't question Bill and is a yes man. Look at the entire staff. There are crappy coaches throughout that do not have experience or the balls to challenge Bill. That starts with the HC of the NEP.
 
......and the chickens are running around the barnyard cackling ... "the sky is falling!  the sky is falling!"
 

AlNipper49

Huge Member
Dope
Apr 3, 2001
40,680
Mtigawi
crystalline said:
Totally agree. That's why Dante left, after all. He couldn't stand being the assistant head coach and didn't have enough years of experience to challenge Belichick.

Pepper Johnson, too. The guy had so little guts that he was afraid to leave when he didn't get the promotion he wanted. Not a risk taker. He's probably cleaning the cold tub right now.

And Belichick keeps hanging on to those quiet yes men coaches like Mangini. Can you believe that guy? If only he had the self confidence to go coach another team and talk back to Bill. Those attributes are key to success at the head coach level. If only Mangini had them he might be able to win as a head coach someday.

[Look man, you polluted the game thread with mindless drivel. Don't bring it here too.]
 
That Dante, it only took him 13 years to get up the mettle to quit because of mean old Belichick
 
 

( . ) ( . ) and (_!_)

T&A
SoSH Member
Feb 9, 2010
5,293
Providence, RI
I get the concept and the advantage of being a game plan offense and trying each week to attack whatever weakness you can find on the other team.  Makes sense to me.
 
I don't get being a complete chameleon offense and making wholesale changes to the approach week-to-week.  Contrast the approach against MN (6 lineman, establish some run game, play action) vs. last night (dress 3 WRs, slater doesn't count, go from the shotgun, run Vereen between the tackles). 
 
For a team struggling to find any rythem or consistency on offense these wildly drastic weekly approaches to the offense can't be helping.  There is a way to mix it up week to week and attack teams different that still lets you continue to also do what you do well and not change the whole thing up weekly.  It's a fair criticsm that they don't actually do anything well right now, but cramming in wildly different game plans week-to-week can't be helping,
 

IdiotKicker

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 21, 2005
5,349
Somerville, MA
I think that with the struggles of the O-line, it's very difficult to say where the problems with the gameplan begin and where the problems with personnel end.  McDaniels came back to the team as OC in 2012, and in 2012 and 2013, the team averaged 4.2 and 4.4 YPC.  This year it is 3.7.  Is that because Josh suddenly became unable to call run plays at the right time in the game.  Or is the 15% decrease in YPC due to the fact that our O-line has shown a complete inability to open holes or move the LoS?
 
There are obviously issues with the playcalling.  And on one level, the job of a coach is to put his players in a position where their strengths are maximized and weaknesses masked as much as possible.  But the big question is whether or not the weakness of the O-line allows for McDaniels to do the types of things that allow for that to happen.  Because right now, the biggest weakness is the fact that the O-line has no consistency from play to play, and the only way to get around that is running either quick pass plays, or gimmick run plays.  Shit, we saw two shovel passes yesterday.  That's not because it's McDaniels first choice.  I think we may have seen one of those in the last two years in total.  It's because he is forced to work from a limited playbook due to the flaws of this team right now.
 
So where do you go with things?  I think getting quality O-line help at this point in the season is going to be difficult.  In-season trades are rare to begin with, and I don't remember the last time you saw any type of substantial one for an offensive lineman.  So I think that the offense is going to continue to be an issue for at least the next 3-4 weeks, and potentially the entire season.
 

Harry Hooper

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jan 4, 2002
26,969
Dressing 3 real WRs would suggest a game plan going in that would feature a lot of running plays. That didn't happen, and MCD would likely cite the scoreboard as his explanation. There is a sense watching over time, though, that he is rather quick to abandon the run whenever the opponent gets a double-digit lead. Might not be true, but it feels that way.
 

Ralphwiggum

Well-Known Member
Gold Supporter
SoSH Member
Jun 27, 2012
5,906
Needham, MA
Harry Hooper said:
Dressing 3 real WRs would suggest a game plan going in that would feature a lot of running plays. That didn't happen, and MCD would likely cite the scoreboard as his explanation. There is a sense watching over time, though, that he is rather quick to abandon the run whenever the opponent gets a double-digit lead. Might not be true, but it feels that way.
 
But they also came out and threw the ball three straight times from the shotgun formation on their first drive.  So it wasn't just based on falling behind.
 

Stitch01

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
18,155
Boston
As I said in one of the other threads, what frustrated me was that Denver ran well against KC's light fronts. The guys breaking down film for footballcentral figured out you could run inside on KC vs. their light fronts.  Jon Gruden on the telecast said "Gee KC only has six in the box, have to run here".  For some reason, the Pats didnt really want to run against the light fronts and, the one time they did, ran a long developing play around the end.
 

Harry Hooper

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jan 4, 2002
26,969
Ralphwiggum said:
 
But they also came out and threw the ball three straight times from the shotgun formation on their first drive.  So it wasn't just based on falling behind.
 
Right, so did the Chiefs have 9 in the box to start? Did McD and Brady agree on using just the 3 most "trustworthy" WRs for the game? It's a murky mess.
 

EL Jeffe

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 30, 2006
819
I suppose it's fair to call out McDaniels (to a degree), but let's face it, the Patriots have been running pretty much the same plays/offensive concepts for the last few years. Some tweaks here and there, but at some point the league was going to catch up and that appears to have happened. One of the most interesting things watching the game last night was Gruden's commentary regarding the Chiefs. A few times he mentioned how Andy Reid was running plays/concepts that Gruden had never seen from Reid. He also mentioned how they brought in Brad Childress as their spread offense special assistant. It's time Belichick takes a fresh look at the schemes on both sides of the ball and starts to adjust. 4.55 40 WRs and 270lbs LBs aren't the future of the NFL. Dobson is the only receiver on the roster who can take the proverbial top off the defense - where the hell is he? Watching Hightower (and previously Spikes) try to cover/tackle in the open field has been dreadful. I'm not going to sit here and say the NFL has passed Bill Belichick by. I mean FFS, they were in the AFCC last season. BUT...it feels like it's time to adjust the schemes and roster building/drafting philosophies. I'm fine with McDaniels and Patricia being let go this offseason and fresh blood being brought in. They're not scapegoats and they're running the system that Belichick wants, but I think he needs to bring in people from outside his coaching tree system who do things differently.
 

Kenny F'ing Powers

posts 18% useful shit
SoSH Member
Nov 17, 2010
11,026
Kenny F'ing Powers said:
 
This team has proven over the last handful of years - both pre-game planning as well as coming out at halftime - to have some very questionable play calling. I don't think there's any harm in asking, "why not adjust during the game?"
 
Ridley had runs of 6, 2, 7, 5, and 8 yards. The first 4 of those carries came with enough time for the game to be in reach. He may not rip off big 20 yard gains, but nobody is going to with this line.
 
If we're going to give Brady slack ("he's done it before, he can right the ship!") why aren't we willing to do the same with a 1200+ yard rusher? He hasn't fumbled the football this year which, by the way people were talking, I was expecting him to have at least 13 fumbles so far. He was averaging 5+ yards a pop. Why weren't we using him?
 
I heard a clip on the radio yesterday from the Pats/Raiders pre-game where McDaniels asked Belichick, "you want to run or pass this game?" To which Belichick responded, "Run." We saw them run the ball 32 times. I thought this was bizarre because, as the game dragged on, it became obvious that the Raiders were keying on the run and the Patriots needed to focus on the passing game. It is fair to assume that conversation happened again this week, and the answer was "pass", which is why they threw the ball on all 3 plays to start their first drive and only had Vereen/Ridley run the ball 13 times before the game got out of hand. If this team is so inflexible that they are going to stay true to their game plan without making any adjustments to what the defense gives them, then that is a serious problem and needs to be changed. Like, right now.
 
Cross posting from another thread.
 

ifmanis5

Member
SoSH Member
Sep 29, 2007
40,710
Rotten Apple
Harry Hooper said:
Dressing 3 real WRs would suggest a game plan going in that would feature a lot of running plays. That didn't happen, and MCD would likely cite the scoreboard as his explanation. There is a sense watching over time, though, that he is rather quick to abandon the run whenever the opponent gets a double-digit lead. Might not be true, but it feels that way.
Not only that but the RBs had to stay back and block. Not chipping and releasing, full on blocking, so they only had 2 guys out in pattern for a lot of the plays. It's no wonder no one was open on passes. Yet they didn't run very often even though when they did run it worked pretty well. It made no sense.
 
Dec 10, 2012
6,943
After the draft, I thought they would have 7 WR's capable of catching the ball. Now that we seemingly have 3, it's off-putting. Even if McDaniels was fine last night (I am not sure either way), it appears as a left hand/right hand problem. 3WR's and abandoning the run only down 2 scores is problematic.
 
Honestly they should just move Vereen to WR (as he has the 2nd best pair of hands on the team after Jules) and go with Ridley and Bolden (uggh) at RB. 
 

Stitch01

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
18,155
Boston
Vereen would be a terrible WR.
 
Watching Hightower (and previously Spikes) try to cover/tackle in the open field has been dreadful.
 
Hightower had a down game last night, but he was awesome the first three games and is a much better player than Spikes (who they are missing more than I thought they would given the pair of Jones, Collins, and Ninkovich are all not great against the run so far)
 

dynomite

Member
SoSH Member
I find it interesting how quickly both we as Patriots fans and the entire league have jumped on the Patriots. They are less than a year removed from an AFC Championship game, and here are their ranks in points scored under McDaniels since he returned:
2013: 3rd (444 points)
2012: 1st (557 points)

Going back further, they haven't ranked lower than 3rd in points scored since '09.

1) It's hard to judge an OC after a game in which literally everyone on the offense played so poorly -- they couldn't coach, block, throw, run, or catch. Or hell even tackle (after INTs).

2) As others have said, the Patriots have had something like the best offense in football for years, and without being part of the team it's hard to know who to credit for that success and blame for last night's disaster.

Overall I can't really express much of an opinion until I get a chance to see the All-22. That said:

- I credit McDaniels for going back to the shotgun formation on something like 17 of their first 20 snaps to try buy Brady some time, but I have to question his decision to only activate 3 WR to accompany it.
- Watching in real-time it looked like Stork played the C position about as poorly as anyone I've ever seen in an NFL game. On multiple plays he seemed to be unsure of his assignment or misread the defense, turning to block a gap no one was rushing from and generally using poor technique. He seemed overwhelmed both physically and schematically. To be fair, he's a rookie on the road against the loudest crowd in the league on MNF -- the fact that he started in the first place is another questionable move by the coaching staff.
 

TomRicardo

rusty cohlebone
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Feb 6, 2006
19,657
Row 14
It was obvious very quickly the shotgun was not going to work.  The stadium was too loud.
 
I am not sure why Amendola is even on the field at this point.  I would just go with Dobson, LaFell, Edelman.  
 
They need to start shorten the game.  They were most effective last night with Vereen on short screens.  Gronkowski was open all night 3-5 five yeards out.  Yet we watched Brady consistently trying to go to Edelman 10-20 years out and get beat.  In order for Edelman to be successful he cannot be double and triple teamed.  
 

TomRicardo

rusty cohlebone
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Feb 6, 2006
19,657
Row 14
dynomite said:
I find it interesting how quickly both we as Patriots fans and the entire league have jumped on the Patriots. They are less than a year removed from an AFC Championship game, and here are their ranks in points scored under McDaniels since he returned:
2013: 3rd (444 points)
2012: 1st (557 points)

Going back further, they haven't ranked lower than 3rd in points scored since '09.

1) It's hard to judge an OC after a game in which literally everyone on the offense played so poorly -- they couldn't coach, block, throw, run, or catch. Or hell even tackle (after INTs).

2) As others have said, the Patriots have had something like the best offense in football for years, and without being part of the team it's hard to know who to credit for that success and blame for last night's disaster.

Overall I can't really express much of an opinion until I get a chance to see the All-22. That said:

- I credit McDaniels for going back to the shotgun formation on something like 17 of their first 20 snaps to try buy Brady some time, but I have to question his decision to only activate 3 WR to accompany it.
- Watching in real-time it looked like Stork played the C position about as poorly as anyone I've ever seen in an NFL game. On multiple plays he seemed to be unsure of his assignment or misread the defense, turning to block a gap no one was rushing from and generally using poor technique. He seemed overwhelmed both physically and schematically. To be fair, he's a rookie on the road against the loudest crowd in the league on MNF -- the fact that he started in the first place is another questionable move by the coaching staff.
 
The Line's biggest two problems was making adjustment on the lines and the long snap count.  Each time the Pats went right to the line and snapped the ball the line bullied KC.  The second last drive there was a draw play where the entire line moved KC DL about three yards.
 
The Shotgun did not buy Brady any extra time.
 

twothousandone

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jan 18, 2001
3,976
Ralphwiggum said:
 
But they also came out and threw the ball three straight times from the shotgun formation on their first drive.  So it wasn't just based on falling behind.
I listened on radio and on the first possession, they said the balls weren't well-thrown. Basically, they laid the blame on the first 3 and out on Brady. Anyone think differently?
 
EDIT: Of course the first to Vereen wasn't the problem.
 

MyDaughterLovesTomGordon

Member
SoSH Member
Jun 26, 2006
8,704
What I really don't get is the complete and total abandonment of the hurry-up. At one point, they were just destroying teams by running more plays than anyone else and forcing them to keep packages on the field that were advantageous to the Pats. Now, it's like every play is a 15-second huddle. 
 
There's no urgency, never a sense that the other team is scrambling to keep up. On almost every play, it seems like the margin for error is zero and if Brady can't thread the needle, or the running back doesn't get perfect blocking, the play has no chance. 
 
Yet opposing offenses are consistently hitting wide-open guys and gashing us for 10 yards at time on the ground (this is an exaggeration, but there have been many long runs). 
 
What could possibly have gone so wrong so fast? The one thing this team could do last year was score. It's not all Brady and it's not all the offensive line. It's like the plays just don't have a prayer from the start. 
 

mt8thsw9th

anti-SoSHal
SoSH Member
Jul 17, 2005
17,120
Brooklyn
Man, Kraft has to be looking at the reigning NFL champion Seahawks and be kicking himself for letting Pete Carroll go. Dark days, these are.
 

( . ) ( . ) and (_!_)

T&A
SoSH Member
Feb 9, 2010
5,293
Providence, RI
twothousandone said:
I listened on radio and on the first possession, they said the balls weren't well-thrown. Basically, they laid the blame on the first 3 and out on Brady. Anyone think differently?
 
EDIT: Of course the first to Vereen wasn't the problem.
 
He absolutely rushed both throws.  Had time to set his feet and stepped into them but rushed them.  I don't really blame him after the first couple of games he had no reason to expect there to magically be more time to throw, but it was there.
 
That second down play pissed me off so much.  I know you have to take your shots, but that play displayed what to me is a total lack of game awareness.
 
You have crappy field position, your offense is struggling to find any consistency all season and you suck at throwing the deep ball.  Not the right time to try that.
 

soxfan121

JAG
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 22, 2002
23,043
mt8thsw9th said:
Man, Kraft has to be looking at the reigning NFL champion Seahawks and be kicking himself for letting Pete Carroll go. Dark days, these are.
 
Yup. This starts right at the top. Bob Kraft's continued enablement of Bill Belichick is the problem. If only we had an owner like Jerry Jones. Not just a terrific stadium architect, Jones is also a noted football genius. He doesn't tolerate a coach who screws up the grocery shopping. 
 
I don't think this team is ever going to win again. 
 

Kenny F'ing Powers

posts 18% useful shit
SoSH Member
Nov 17, 2010
11,026
soxfan121 said:
 
Yup. This starts right at the top. Bob Kraft's continued enablement of Bill Belichick is the problem. If only we had an owner like Jerry Jones. Not just a terrific stadium architect, Jones is also a noted football genius. He doesn't tolerate a coach who screws up the grocery shopping. 
 
I don't think this team is ever going to win again. 
 
Sarcasm meter...broken?
 

E5 Yaz

Transcends message boarding
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Apr 25, 2002
64,345
Oregon
TomRicardo said:
It was obvious very quickly the shotgun was not going to work.  The stadium was too loud.
 
More than anything else early on, this is what puzzled me the most. Sure, give it a set of downs if you want; but when it was obvious what was happening in that stadium, go to Plan B. It seemed as though they didn't even have a Plan B. That they were just going with what they had decided on and that was that.
 
With younger and/or unproven players on the line and in the receiving corps, there's far less margin of error. That almost demands simplifying the game plan to build consistency and confidence. It's one thing to go by the "Next Man Up" philosophy when the next man has a solid foundation, or a working relationship with the quarterback. But given the personnel the Pats have, that's not the case -- and McDaniels should have seen it before this point. 
 
Steve Young might have been over the top in his Brady defense last night, but the point he made that was most relevant was that none of the receivers were finding ways to get open. When you're running long-developing plays, and the receivers can't get open, even the best O-line isn't going to keep the quarterback safe. The Chiefs linebackers knew early on last night they didn't have to respect the run.
 

OilCanShotTupac

Sunny von Bulow
SoSH Member
Jan 10, 2004
18,733
The 718
soxfan121 said:
 
Yup. This starts right at the top. Bob Kraft's continued enablement of Bill Belichick is the problem. If only we had an owner like Jerry Jones. Not just a terrific stadium architect, Jones is also a noted football genius. He doesn't tolerate a coach who screws up the grocery shopping. 
 
I don't think this team is ever going to win again. 
This is obvious sarcasm, but Jerrah isn't looking half bad lately, with that good OL opening holes for Murray...
 

SeoulSoxFan

I Want to Hit the World with Rocket Punch
Dope
Jun 27, 2006
20,119
South Korea
I blame the invention of the ball. No ball, no football, no Kraft, no BB, no devastating week 4 loss. No SoSH too, so why I am typing?
 

soxfan121

JAG
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 22, 2002
23,043
SeoulSoxFan said:
I blame the invention of the ball. No ball, no football, no Kraft, no BB, no devastating week 4 loss. No SoSH too, so why I am typing?
 
OOOooooooh, that's a good one. 
 

Reverend

for king and country
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jan 20, 2007
45,086
Stitch01 said:
As I said in one of the other threads, what frustrated me was that Denver ran well against KC's light fronts. The guys breaking down film for footballcentral figured out you could run inside on KC vs. their light fronts.  Jon Gruden on the telecast said "Gee KC only has six in the box, have to run here".  For some reason, the Pats didnt really want to run against the light fronts and, the one time they did, ran a long developing play around the end.
Yep.



I don't even have an inkling as to an explanation of why we didn't see more of that attempted.
 

j44thor

Well-Known Member
Silver Supporter
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
9,464
Smiling Joe Hesketh said:
Because McDaniels is operating under the illusion that he's got 2007-era Brady under center.
And Randy Moss outside, hell 2007 Donte Stallworth would be the second best wr on this team.
 

Stitch01

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
18,155
Boston
Boy its going to be an interesting day around here when BB retires and McDaniels gets handed the keys
 

Tony C

Dope
Dope
Apr 13, 2000
12,185
Blaming the OC for playcalling is the the unanimous occupation of every NFL team's fans. Either every single OC in the league is an utter f-ing idiot, or the OC is just a convenient scapegoat because "If they'd just run whatever the opposite is of what they ran it would have worked" is utter BS. I too think they should have run Ridley more, but Monday night was an utter and complete fail and pretending a few different playcalls would have changed anything is silly.
 

j44thor

Well-Known Member
Silver Supporter
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
9,464
Tony C said:
Blaming the OC for playcalling is the the unanimous occupation of every NFL team's fans. Either every single OC in the league is an utter f-ing idiot, or the OC is just a convenient scapegoat because "If they'd just run whatever the opposite is of what they ran it would have worked" is utter BS. I too think they should have run Ridley more, but Monday night was an utter and complete fail and pretending a few different playcalls would have changed anything is silly.
 
They only dressed 3 WR, only one of which is capable of playing outside (though even he spent more time in the slot last season) and they come out throwing.
You don't think that is questionable play calling?
 

Devizier

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 3, 2000
12,190
Somewhere
soxfan121 said:
 
Yup. This starts right at the top. Bob Kraft's continued enablement of Bill Belichick is the problem. If only we had an owner like Jerry Jones. Not just a terrific stadium architect, Jones is also a noted football genius. He doesn't tolerate a coach who screws up the grocery shopping. 
 
I don't think this team is ever going to win again. 
 
I laffed.
 

Smiling Joe Hesketh

All Hail King Boron
Dope
May 20, 2003
30,996
Deep inside Muppet Labs
Tony C said:
Blaming the OC for playcalling is the the unanimous occupation of every NFL team's fans. Either every single OC in the league is an utter f-ing idiot, or the OC is just a convenient scapegoat because "If they'd just run whatever the opposite is of what they ran it would have worked" is utter BS. I too think they should have run Ridley more, but Monday night was an utter and complete fail and pretending a few different playcalls would have changed anything is silly.
 
McDaniels has a very long history of questionable and baffling play calling decisions. j44 points it out above: KC can't stop the run and the Pats set their personnel up to set up the run, and yet they called only 7 runs in the first half and came out throwing the ball all over the place despite a makeshift, shitty OL and a difficult KC pass rush. In what way does that plan make the slightest amount of sense?
 
McDaniels is a bad OC. He's been a bad OC for a very long time, and it's killing the team. He pretends that Tom Brady can solve all his problems, and doesn't realize that 2007 is gone. And I shudder to think what's going to happen to this organization once Belichick retires and he's named head coach.
 

Tony C

Dope
Dope
Apr 13, 2000
12,185
Smiling Joe Hesketh said:
 
McDaniels has a very long history of questionable and baffling play calling decisions. j44 points it out above: KC can't stop the run and the Pats set their personnel up to set up the run, and yet they called only 7 runs in the first half and came out throwing the ball all over the place despite a makeshift, shitty OL and a difficult KC pass rush. In what way does that plan make the slightest amount of sense?
 
McDaniels is a bad OC. He's been a bad OC for a very long time, and it's killing the team. He pretends that Tom Brady can solve all his problems, and doesn't realize that 2007 is gone. And I shudder to think what's going to happen to this organization once Belichick retires and he's named head coach.
 
I don't know, we also have threads here about a lack of talent on both lines, the QB in decline, a failure to develop WRs, Hernandez gone and Gronk a shadow of his former self, etc etc. All these things can't be true -- if McD has so little talent, he's actually a miracle worker at this point.
 
Just a few things:
 
1: BB is McD's boss  and he oversees all prep. So if there's blame, it goes to him. It's not like McD shows up Sunday morning/Monday afternoon and hands BB the gameplan with a bow on it.
2: With relatively similar personnel and the same OC,the team was at the top of the heap last year offensively. Occam's Razor would say the reason for this year's decline is not having the exact same OC but rather having "relatively" similar players. Solder seems to be in decline, Mankins is gone, Brady is declining, and the WRs haven't developed (though they can't be worse than last year).
3: I agree on the basic point that they underuse Ridley, I'm just noting that the bottom line is they got their butts whipped on the lines and Brady looked like he was 47 not 37. That ridiculous run by Vereen was a bad call, but when virtually everything they ran didn't work, I think the issue is elsewhere.
4: And maybe McD is a bad OC, but the offense has performed. Maybe BOB was, too, because that's what a lot of people said here. And maybe Weiss was, too, because a lot of people thought that, too. Everytime I visit another team's board they're screaming about the OC, too. If poor Mark Sanchez just wasn't saddled with Schotty, all would be good in Jets land, just like Marty M is the problem now for some rather than a talentless QB. I'll just Occam Razor it again: all OCs can't suck. All fans can't know better than OCs what to call. There's no evidence that McD/BB are historically bad.
 

dcmissle

Deflatigator
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Aug 4, 2005
28,269
Stitch01 said:
Boy its going to be an interesting day around here when BB retires and McDaniels gets handed the keys
Yes, primarily because his resume as a HC is atrocious and a good number of people cannot rise above the assistant level. And there is nothing wrong with that.
 

soxfan121

JAG
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 22, 2002
23,043
dcmissle said:
Yes, primarily because his resume as a HC is atrocious and a good number of people cannot rise above the assistant level. And there is nothing wrong with that.
 
I heard someone on radio make this point today, followed with "and he drafted Tebow in the first round!"
 
Yep. He did. After taking Demaryius Thomas with the first of his two first-round picks in that 2010 draft. And after taking Knowshon Moreno - who's turned into a pretty good player when he's healthy - and Robert Ayers - who has not - in the 2009 first-round. 50% is 50%. One superstar, one very solid starter, two busts. Not awful, not good enough.
 
He went 8-8 his first year (same record as Shanahan the previous season) and then was fired after going 3-9 in 2010. That's poor. Not atrocious. 
 
I think McDaniels made many mistakes in his first go-round as a head coach and if he were to approach his next job having learned nothing since, he'd be a bad hire. However, I think it is implausible that he didn't learn from the experience and likely he will do better in his second chance. Worked for his mentor.