The LOB of coaching staffs?

[keasley45]

If the talent is anything like the lob the coaches will be gone with promotions by the time the roster is reshaped to fully capitalize on it.

In two years Canales went from our qb coach of geno's rise from the ashes, to OC for the bucs then HC of the Panthers despite never being a coordinator before.

Point being, if these guys are anything like the level of hype you're attributing, I'd prepare to have feelings hurt very quickly.

Macdonald is really the only one who matters, argument can be made for Grubb since he's likely very highly paid for a coordinator, but he might not be here long either.

You can't compare players to coaches, apples and oranges for contract stipulations.

LOB never happens if other teams could promote/pay guys on our defense more either.

I'm not hyping them. I likened their arrival here and the bond that can be created as similar to the birth of the LOB.

And, you are correct in that success breeds challenges. But that's been the case since day 1 of football. Coaches will move on. But what this FO seems primed to do now is hire for upside rather than just getting the guy doing 'the thing' right now. In other words, if you are looking for a qb coach that you are actually measuring not only based on his prowess as a teacher of the position , but also for his potential to replace the existing OC if / when he leaves, then that blow is lessened.
Our D will always have Mike running it, so the 'head' will never die. But on both sides of the ball, it seems this staff is hiring for growth.

In successful organizations, there's a mantra that's pretty common - always hire and then train your replacement. If you're doing that (and many organizations dont - look at the Patriots as a great example) then you stand to see fewer dips in performance as the staff turns over. That means hiring coaches who can teach players and their staff - essentially hiring teachers at every level.

Ironically, that notion is what made the last regime great, and then also was what did it in (in no longer hiring people who could teach the system, train the next generation, and uphold the standard).

John watched that failure happen in slow motion / real time. I'm sure if anyone is keyed in on establishing a method and a way of building a staff to not let that happen again, it's him. Look no further than Mike as evidence of that. He comes from Baltimore where the coach there has been in place for going on his 16th year. Where Pete was labeled as over tenured at 14 years, John has adapted, maintained the Ravens way and been successful longer than Pete was. And the coaches under him have come and gone, but by-and-large, the success has remained. Mike has seen it first hand. And his hires now look to be of the same mindset.
When you look at both Passing game coordinator and QB coach, both seem to have the leadership potential and talent to not only do their own jobs, but also step into Grubb's when he departs.
Jake Peetz has a ton of experience for being only 39 and was considered for coordinator positions this year.
Likewise, Charles London - he may be 'just' a qb coach for us right now, but when you listen to his experience in and out of coaching, his potential as a leader seems far greater than the job for which we hired him.

A piece on him:


So no, I'm not at all thinking these guys will necessarily come in and coach the team to a 17-0 record. But I do expect them to be better than last year. And in terms of the way in which this staff is being assembled and the metrics used in evaluating leadership, there's nothing about what they are doing that would lead one to believe they won't be successful... even sustainably so.

 

[xray]

I don't really know chit about the new coaching staff ; so I really can't compare them to chit either .

 

[HawaiiD]

I think even Pete himself thinks tiis new coaching is impressive

 

[chris98251]

Well Edelman would not need to fake a injury, he would have been body slammed and feeling real pain.

 

[olyfan63]

"If Hawks had kept Browner, SB49 would've likely been a W."

<snip>

That's quite the statement and of course there's no way for anyone to be sure of it.

It's actually not a stretch at all... it's more about what Browner added to the Patriots on "The Pick". Browner recognized the formation and the play that was coming, and got Malcolm Butler lined up properly, and because Browner new what was coming, he stuffed Jermaine Kearse's attempt to pick him off, Russell made a poor throw (too short to see Butler lurking, too eager to cement "his legacy", Butler made the pick, and SB 49 belonged to the Patriots.

Sure, everything else would have unfolded differently no doubt, time travel alternate timelines and all, but Browner made the difference for the Patriots in that situation and no other player in the NFL had the right combination of knowledge and athletic ability to thwart that play like Browner did. If only the Texans or Jaguars had signed Browner instead of the Pats...

 

[SeaWolv]

"If Hawks had kept Browner, SB49 would've likely been a W."

<snip>

It's actually not a stretch at all... it's more about what Browner added to the Patriots on "The Pick". Browner recognized the formation and the play that was coming, and got Malcolm Butler lined up properly, and because Browner new what was coming, he stuffed Jermaine Kearse's attempt to pick him off, Russell made a poor throw (too short to see Butler lurking, too eager to cement "his legacy", Butler made the pick, and SB 49 belonged to the Patriots.

Sure, everything else would have unfolded differently no doubt, time travel alternate timelines and all, but Browner made the difference for the Patriots in that situation and no other player in the NFL had the right combination of knowledge and athletic ability to thwart that play like Browner did. If only the Texans or Jaguars had signed Browner instead of the Pats...

The bottom line is PC should have had Beast run the damn ball! At the very least he should've recognized Browner's advantage and mitigated it or even better used it to the Seahawks advantage with some kind of misdirection. Browner should never have been able to influence the game in that way and the idea that he did is totally on PC. You can say all you want about Wilson's throw, Lockette's route or Kearse's blocking but ultimately PC cost Seattle that win.

 

[olyfan63]

The bottom line is PC should have had Beast run the damn ball! At the very least he should've recognized Browner's advantage and mitigated it or even better used it to the Seahawks advantage with some kind of misdirection. Browner should never have been able to influence the game in that way and the idea that he did is totally on PC. You can say all you want about Wilson's throw, Lockett's route or Kearse's blocking but ultimately PC cost Seattle that win.

I would adjust that to "Bevell" rather than PC. My understanding is Pete called whether "run" or "pass" to Bevell, and then Bevell chose the actual play. Pete took responsibility for the call, but then Bevell didn't extend the same courtesy to Ricardo Lockette and threw him under the bus after the game, with "could've been stronger to the ball".

Agreed, Bevell was brain dead for not understanding the bad matchups (e.g., play needed Kearse to manhandle Browner) and not playing to Wilson's strengths, e.g., some type of run/pass option, and also for having plays that could be so easily diagnosed. Also Bevell chose a play that is higher risk for a short QB, a pass over the middle in a confined space.

Pete took the arrows but IMO Bevell was the architect of the disaster. I think the analytics for the situation, including clock usage, did say pass on 2nd down and run on 3rd, and the 2nd down pass had to be either an incompletion or a TD.

As it relates to the "new" coaching staff, let's just hope that Grubbs has better, less predictable schemes and a better sense of matchups than Bevell did.

 

[SeaWolv]

I would adjust that to "Bevell" rather than PC. My understanding is Pete called whether "run" or "pass" to Bevell, and then Bevell chose the actual play. Pete took responsibility for the call, but then Bevell didn't extend the same courtesy to Ricardo Lockette and threw him under the bus after the game, with "could've been stronger to the ball".

Agreed, Bevell was brain dead for not understanding the bad matchups (e.g., play needed Kearse to manhandle Browner) and not playing to Wilson's strengths, e.g., some type of run/pass option, and also for having plays that could be so easily diagnosed. Also Bevell chose a play that is higher risk for a short QB, a pass over the middle in a confined space.

Pete took the arrows but IMO Bevell was the architect of the disaster. I think the analytics for the situation, including clock usage, did say pass on 2nd down and run on 3rd, and the 2nd down pass had to be either an incompletion or a TD.

As it relates to the "new" coaching staff, let's just hope that Grubbs has better, less predictable schemes and a better sense of matchups than Bevell did.

Bevell may have made the play call but PC put him in the position to do so. Pete is ultimately responsible for everything that happened on that sideline.

 

[Appyhawk]

I'm excited about our new HC and AHC, but from there on down I'm in wait and see mode. We let some good coaches go. For years we have been one of the top teams in the league on Special Team play. We let a good ST coach go and hired a guy who has never done it before. That could be costly. Same is true for the O and D coordinators. We could really suffer while all the new guys get up to speed.

 

[chris98251]

Bevell may have made the play call but PC put him in the position to do so. Pete is ultimately responsible for everything that happened on that sideline.

That was typical Pete end of game management, thinking one way no options for another, they should have never even called the time out, just changed the play at the line.

Pete panicked and didn't have a plan.

 

[Atradees]

The way Browner Maxwell and Kam played; I dont think they let players hit like that anymore. Sadness.

 

[bileever]

Too early to say how these coaches will pan out.

I like the hires, too, especially when compared to who else was available. But predicting the success of coaches is probably more difficult than grading draft picks. In 9 months from now, it's just as likely that someone will be calling for one or more of these coaches to be fired.

I like the way Schneider and Macdonald went about their process, and chose both coaches known to them as well as new blood. Also a mix of young and old. They were thorough, but decisive. I really like the hiring of Leslie Frazier as assistant HC.

But so many of the coaches are unproven. Grubb hasn't been an OC in the NFL and Durde hasn't been a DC in the NFL. I feel very positive about the coaches, but we'll have to wait for the test results.

In no other sport is the coaching staff so critical to the success of a team. Look at what DeMeco Ryans did in Houston last year. So, yeah, this part of the process is crucial. I'll keep my fingers crossed.

 

[ZagHawk]

I am looking forward to MM's defense and team that looks nothing like the LOB defense outside of being highly ranked, winning games and hopefully a SB. The game, rules, talent and competition were different in the LOB era than it is today. If I wanted an attempt back at re-creating the LOB in any shape or form I wouldn't have been asking to move on from Pete. I think comparing anything to the LOB is a disservice to the new team and the LOB. As a fan I think you're setting yourself up for failure with any hopes/expectations/comparisons to the past, take this team for what it is moving forward and welcome it as 100% new and the only thing staying the same is that team name.

 

[keasley45]

Too early to say how these coaches will pan out.

I like the hires, too, especially when compared to who else was available. But predicting the success of coaches is probably more difficult than grading draft picks. In 9 months from now, it's just as likely that someone will be calling for one or more of these coaches to be fired.

I like the way Schneider and Macdonald went about their process, and chose both coaches known to them as well as new blood. Also a mix of young and old. They were thorough, but decisive. I really like the hiring of Leslie Frazier as assistant HC.

But so many of the coaches are unproven. Grubb hasn't been an OC in the NFL and Durde hasn't been a DC in the NFL. I feel very positive about the coaches, but we'll have to wait for the test results.

In no other sport is the coaching staff so critical to the success of a team. Look at what DeMeco Ryans did in Houston last year. So, yeah, this part of the process is crucial. I'll keep my fingers crossed.

Agree 100%. And Grubb... i swing back and forth between concern and excitement. The thung that does give me some comfort with him though is the hire of Peetz as passing gane coordinator. I have to believe that he will be instrumental in translating Grubbs concepts to the NFL and blending them with some of what Peetz will bring over from LA. Grubb still has to prove his chops in terms of in game adjustment and gameplanning, but the i do feel better that the O won't be some failed port of a 'high powered' college scheme.

 

[keasley45]

I am looking forward to MM's defense and team that looks nothing like the LOB defense outside of being highly ranked, winning games and hopefully a SB. The game, rules, talent and competition were different in the LOB era than it is today. If I wanted an attempt back at re-creating the LOB in any shape or form I wouldn't have been asking to move on from Pete. I think comparing anything to the LOB is a disservice to the new team and the LOB. As a fan I think you're setting yourself up for failure with any hopes/expectations/comparisons to the past, take this team for what it is moving forward and welcome it as 100% new and the only thing staying the same is that team name.

Sorry if the original post was confusing, but this thread actually isn't at all about the LOB defense or how MMs defense might compare. It's about the common threads in which the men that made the LOB came together and the way in which this coaching staff is being assembled.

But I will say that when I watch the Ravens play D, the first thing I think is LOB. And ive watched probably 3/4s of their games over the last 3 years. Not in terms of schematics, but the ferocity with which they play, their speed, and how you'd swear at times that they were playing with an extra man on the field for how they always seemed to be around the ball.

 

[Hawknight]

Agree 100%. And Grubb... i swing back and forth between concern and excitement. The thung that does give me some comfort with him though is the hire of Peetz as passing gane coordinator. I have to believe that he will be instrumental in translating Grubbs concepts to the NFL and blending them with some of what Peetz will bring over from LA. Grubb still has to prove his chops in terms of in game adjustment and gameplanning, but the i do feel better that the O won't be some failed port of a 'high powered' college scheme.

In the least, I'm more about the excitement regarding the change. The last few years or more, it was pretty consistent and fairly stale on the plays that the Seahawks were producing each game. It was almost as if you as a fan could actually know what the Seahawks were going to do each down and many times to much frustration. Now we have coaches who will perhaps mix it up, give us something we haven't seen. The anticipation of what might be is more exciting that it has been in a long time, even since when we started to see what Wilson was capable of being and the LOB rising to greatness. Just the changes taking place currently will offset a boring offseason no doubt. Bring on the draft! IF it all turns out to be a bust, at least we made the effort to take a chance, something we clearly needed but nothing is guaranteed in life.

 

[Jerhawk]

As mentioned above, I'm excited for the change, but personally I'm super nervous about the inexperience across the board with the lead coaches.

I'm all for the youth movement, and I'm anticipating the first couple seasons to be rough under Macdonald, but I was hoping for some seasoned coaches to really get these young guys, our future core, prepared and ready to go.

Not saying they won't, I'm just apprehensive about it.

 

[rigelian]

Agreed, Bevell was brain dead for not understanding the bad matchups (e.g., play needed Kearse to manhandle Browner) and not playing to Wilson's strengths, e.g., some type of run/pass option, and also for having plays that could be so easily diagnosed. Also Bevell chose a play that is higher risk for a short QB, a pass over the middle in a confined space.

This. My problem was not with pass on that down, my problem was with that particular pass. ML is a beast, always has been, but on short yardage goal line plays he often got stopped. Rollout, play action, rollout...but a quick pass over the middle was brain dead.

 

[olyfan63]

Sorry if the original post was confusing, but this thread actually isn't at all about the LOB defense or how MMs defense might compare. It's about the common threads in which the men that made the LOB came together and the way in which this coaching staff is being assembled.

But I will say that when I watch the Ravens play D, the first thing I think is LOB. And ive watched probably 3/4s of their games over the last 3 years. Not in terms of schematics, but the ferocity with which they play, their speed, and how you'd swear at times that they were playing with an extra man on the field for how they always seemed to be around the ball.

I went back and watched a few games from the peak LOB era, 2013-14, and that was my take-away too, the speed and togetherness (and ferocity) with which they played jumped off the screen compared to recent years Seattle defenses.

 

[olyfan63]

Bevell may have made the play call but PC put him in the position to do so. Pete is ultimately responsible for everything that happened on that sideline.

Pete stepped forward and took responsibility for it. Chicken-schitt Bevell threw Ricardo Lockette under the bus and never took any responsibility for the shiite call, that I ever saw. IMO Pete needed to either force Bevell to issue a public apology or summarily fire him. Bevell violated the "Protect the Team" prime directive and Pete did nothing.