On coaching QB's.... When Lovie was first hired to coach LB's for the Bucs it was because of his skills at teaching, communicating with players, ie coaching. The Tedford hire seems to me to be the culmination of thinking and watching football during Lovie's year off. It's a bit out of the box on one hand but a good fit on the other. Like Lovie, Tedford can teach and communicate. It's not same old same old. To those who point out that some of Tedford's successes in college did not turn out so good in the NFL? Well, Tedford wasn't coaching them in the NFL, was he? It will be interesting and I'm optimistic to find out how things work out with Glennon and another young QB if the Bucs draft one.
On coaching QB's.... When Lovie was first hired to coach LB's for the Bucs it was because of his skills at teaching, communicating with players, ie coaching. The Tedford hire seems to me to be the culmination of thinking and watching football during Lovie's year off. It's a bit out of the box on one hand but a good fit on the other. Like Lovie, Tedford can teach and communicate. It's not same old same old. To those who point out that some of Tedford's successes in college did not turn out so good in the NFL? Well, Tedford wasn't coaching them in the NFL, was he? It will be interesting and I'm optimistic to find out how things work out with Glennon and another young QB if the Bucs draft one.
Garv,You can see some of the same principles that Coach Dungy used to build his staff when he came to the Bucs. Mixing in college coaches that were good teachers with some experienced NFL coaches. We can only hope that it works out as well. So far I like what I've seen/heard about the coaches that Coach Smith is bringing in. From the limited exposure I've had to Coach Tedford's offense, it appears to be a good fit for Glennon. To me Glennon was at his best with the quick slants/intermediate routes.
I think the Niners, Seahawks and to a lesser extent the Panthers are what Lovie wants to bring to Tampa. Obviously all three have quarterbacks who can make plays but they also possess top notch rushing attacks and dominant defenses.I thought the Niners/Panthers game was old school defense at it's best. It was an old fashioned slobberknocker and in the end, only 30 points were scored between the two teams.
I think the Niners, Seahawks and to a lesser extent the Panthers are what Lovie wants to bring to Tampa. Obviously all three have quarterbacks who can make plays but they also possess top notch rushing attacks and dominant defenses.I thought the Niners/Panthers game was old school defense at it's best. It was an old fashioned slobberknocker and in the end, only 30 points were scored between the two teams.
The big thing with all 3 of those team is that they aren't trying to hide their passing attacks nor do they view the passing game as a last resort. None of those teams want to "keep it close and win in the 4th quarter". They can because of their defense but all of them try and get ahead, hold you down with the defense and run out the clock.
Brady didn't throw one TD pass in the win over the Colts, I would say the Seahawks won with a good defense and running game, x's and o's don't change guys good defense and running game STILL wins championships!!
So far what I have seen in the playoff's to get to the superbowl is the following: pass rush, running game, QB. Manning and Brady are no longer great QB's because age has caught up with them. All four QB's in the playoffs have good pass rush, running game, and QB. For us to get there I believe we need one more DL and we will have a good pass rush, we will have a good running game if we get at least one or two new OL from somewhere, and the QB is decent; I have no idea if he will be good because it's too early. I am not sure about the benefit of bringing in an older experience QB that is now also just decent. I think we need to draft a DL, OL, QB with our early round picks. That's just my opinion.
There is no silver bullet absent, perhaps, a once in a generation QB. You have to have a good offense and a good defense to win a division, Once you get in the playoff, usually defense and running games play an even bigger part.
There is no silver bullet absent, perhaps, a once in a generation QB. You have to have a good offense and a good defense to win a division, Once you get in the playoff, usually defense and running games play an even bigger part.
Wrong on run game. Never matters - I know this just kills people that it is such a crutch of logic. None of these running teams are really running well. They are running a lot based on a lead. Game situations determine running game. Defense does matter more because once you get to the playoffs everyone has good QBs so they aren't the only filter anymore.
Unless you win the lottery and either draft Peyton or your "pistol" QB never gets injured, the best way to consistently win is with what Coach Schiano calls "complimentary" football...run the ball, take some shots, great defense, and great special teams. The "game manager" QB works best in this instance.The ONLY two negatives I've ever seen to "complimentary" football is 1) a great deal of today's fans and media think it doesn't work, is too conservative, and is unexciting. 2) owners agree with the aforementioned group and thus make the rule changes and hire coaches that will bring about the higher scoring games. The NFL has for a long time tried to bring in more women,young people, and fringe fans who don't appreciate a 13-7 defensive battle. They've thumbed their noses at fans like myself who yearn for the game the way it was supposed to be played. It's turned out well for the NFL SO FAR. I have my doubts it will be doing this well twenty years from now, though.
So far what I have seen in the playoff's to get to the superbowl is the following: pass rush, running game, QB. Manning and Brady are no longer great QB's because age has caught up with them. All four QB's in the playoffs have good pass rush, running game, and QB. For us to get there I believe we need one more DL and we will have a good pass rush, we will have a good running game if we get at least one or two new OL from somewhere, and the QB is decent; I have no idea if he will be good because it's too early. I am not sure about the benefit of bringing in an older experience QB that is now also just decent. I think we need to draft a DL, OL, QB with our early round picks. That's just my opinion.
Really? Are they not both playing in the NFC Championship Game next Sunday? Did they not both get there despite almost overwhelming injuries to their teams? Didn't Brady do it despite losing almost every receiver he had last year including both TE and Wes Welker? Didn't Peyton Manning just finish a season where he threw for almost 5500 YARDS and 55 (FIFTY FIVE) TD's?Just because it is your "opinion" you cannot expect to have the obvious thrown back in your face. Or are you TRYING to be controversial? If so, it comes across as something far less flattering.........in my opinion.BTW? Drafting a defensive line, and offensive line and a QB with two picks in the first three rounds would be a nest trick indeed.
Unless you win the lottery and either draft Peyton or your "pistol" QB never gets injured, the best way to consistently win is with what Coach Schiano calls "complimentary" football...run the ball, take some shots, great defense, and great special teams. The "game manager" QB works best in this instance.The ONLY two negatives I've ever seen to "complimentary" football is 1) a great deal of today's fans and media think it doesn't work, is too conservative, and is unexciting. 2) owners agree with the aforementioned group and thus make the rule changes and hire coaches that will bring about the higher scoring games. The NFL has for a long time tried to bring in more women,young people, and fringe fans who don't appreciate a 13-7 defensive battle. They've thumbed their noses at fans like myself who yearn for the game the way it was supposed to be played. It's turned out well for the NFL SO FAR. I have my doubts it will be doing this well twenty years from now, though.
What a GREAT POST! Seriously, you nailed it Sweep. Things have changed, haven't they? Can you imagine Vince Lombardi or George Halas "listening to the fans" and making coaching decisions or draft choices accordingly?It's all about instant gratification now, no doubt. Having typed that, I've pretty much had to let it go. BOTH Dungy and Gruden were fired by sports radio jockeys and message board posters more than they were by football people. Hopefully the Buccaneers got it right with Lovie. I think they did myself. And as for getting an "exciting" QB? As long as he plays better than the guy we have, I'm in. Let Lovie, the new GM (whoever THAT is) and Tedford decide and not Cissy from Clearwater or Garv from Sarasota for that matter.
Garv; I believe that every team has to overcome their injuries with depth. I believe that is normal. I don't see the point you are making. I don't see great QB's playing in the NFC Championship game; just good ones. I am confused about your points? Brady was successful because the Patriots had a solid running game and a good defense despite having WR/TE problems for a few games. Doesn't mojo also count? Didn't the Ravens start peaking during the playoffs and I believe that the Patriots are doing the same. We're just having a discussion and I don't see where I am being controversial.
I don't know how you are saying that Manning isn't a great QB right now. Is his arm the same? No. But he's a master at manipulation, and most of the run success seems to me a function of Manning's ability to consistently get good looks. The guy is an absolute master.
Brady was successful because the Patriots had a solid running game and a good defense despite having WR/TE problems for a few games.
You should post that comment on the Red Board just so we can enjoy the fireworks. ;)On the Red Board it seems like most conversations start and END with "you have to have an elite QB.," even while watching playoff games won with a lot of defense and running. I think the opposite of the Red Board slogan is true (i.e., you cant go far with an incompetent QB) but because "elite QBs" don't grown on trees and there are 53 players on a roster and a lot of teams, it still take defense and running. The rules may have a greater impact down the road, but maybe the answer to my own question is that the emphasis on the QB might be overblown, at least for now.
I don't know how you are saying that Manning isn't a great QB right now. Is his arm the same? No. But he's a master at manipulation, and most of the run success seems to me a function of Manning's ability to consistently get good looks. The guy is an absolute master.
Not to mention he drew the defense offside with hard counts 2 times, IIRC
