Should Gregg Williams return as defensive coordinator in '08?

[Slingin Sammy 33]

Originally Posted by firstdown

We would also be 9 and 5 if the O could have scored 20 points in 9 games. So it goes both ways. The O has only scored 30 or more points one time.

The offense has been consistent outside of the Eagles & Packers game. Consistently not very good, but still consistent. I guess to me the main thing that points to a big coaching problem is the defense isn't consistent and breaks down after halftime.

[firstdown]

Originally Posted by Slingin Sammy 33

The offense has been consistent outside of the Eagles & Packers game. Consistently not very good, but still consistent. I guess to me the main thing that points to a big coaching problem is the defense isn't consistent and breaks down after halftime.

Maybe because they spend the whole first half picking up the slack for the O and by the 2nd half are tired of running on and off the field.

[#56fanatic]

I absolutely want him back next year. I also want him to remain here as the head coach when Joe steps down. I think Greg learned a lot of lessons from Buffalo, and a TON of lessons from Joe while being here. I think he will be a great coach for us. He is very motivational, and I believe he has learned that being a coach is, as he said " people business" He didn't do that in buffalo, and has changed while being here. Look at what he has done with the limited resources due to injuries. He gets guys to play hard, and never quit, which comes directly from Joe. If Greg became coach, I hope he retains Al (if Al wants to stay) to run the offense. Continuity is huge in this league and I think we have that right now even though we have struggled at times this year. I am not one that always wants coaching staff to be overhauled if we dont win. I have, and still, believe Joe should retire, but I think we have the staff in place under Joe to keep things moving in the right direction.

[BringBackJoeT]

I want him back. What happened this year says a lot about him. He was under the microscope after last year, and he was tagged as being too stubborn. Well, he sucked it up, showed some humility, and has put together schemes all year that maximize the talent he has on the field, as opposed to the schemes he'd prefer to implement. He'd love to blitz more than he does, but that just wasn't working last year, and to the surprise of a lot of people, he's drawn back on the blitz, even though, on the whole, his front four can't put a lot of pressure on the QBs (Andre being the major exception, of course). As someone has said, the defense is the major reason why we're still in the playoff hunt going into week 15, and it's been his coordination of it that is the reason why we're playing so well. So, we need to keep him. Let him continue to establish an identity for this team's defense.

[Paintrain]

While I've stated my opinion of being off of the Grilliams bandwagon, I still would like for him to return rather than start all over with another D-coordinator, especially when you're looking at starting next season with at least 3 new starters (Rogers & McIntosh still rehabbing, Springs either gone or moved to FS to replace Taylor, Griffin and Washington have huge cap numbers coming up) it's going to be paramount to maintain continuity on both sides of the ball.

While some say the defense is the reason we're still in the playoff hunt, I'd also say the defense is the reason we're not already locked into a playoff spot. The offense didn't turn the ball over (GB exception) to lose us games, the defense didn't do their jobs in a lot of cases. It ties to being left on the field since the offense didn't get first downs but if 'lack of execution' is the excuse on offense rather than playcalling it needs to be the same thing on defense (which was also ultra conservative in many second halves).

I am not however endorsing him as the next HC.. He burns his players out with his intensity and style and I don't think going from Grandpa Joe to crazy Uncle Gregg (second G is for Genius) would work for this team..

[Daseal]

I would not be surprised in one bit if we lost Al, Greg, or Saunders to other teams the offseason. Could be one, could be all, but I wouldn't be the least bit surprised to see our coaches poached.

The longer Gibbs sticks around, the less of a chance GWill becomes our next HC.

[SouperMeister]

Not only should Williams be retained, he should be the front runner for head coach whenever Gibbs steps down. I love the fact that he moved Landry to Free Safety to leverage his athleticism. The hit on Burress and the near interception later were great examples of Landry's range. I don't think that he'll ever quite be what Taylor would have been (a potential all-time great), but I'd be surprised if Landry isn't a Pro Bowler by year 3 in Williams' defensive scheme.

[onlydarksets]

I'm more inclined to call 2004 an aberration and ascribe 2006 to GW not having a field general out there. With Pierce gone, we had Washington leading the charge. I love the way Marcus plays out there, but the consensus is that he is not much of a student of the defensive game. With Fletcher, we're seeing a lot more cohesion out there.

Now, you can say that's the players, not the coach, but I think GW's system is back on track with the right core nucleus of players (intelligent MLB, FS with huge range, quick DE).

[Slingin Sammy 33]

Originally Posted by onlydarksets

I'm more inclined to call 2004 an aberration and ascribe 2006 to GW not having a field general out there. With Pierce gone, we had Washington leading the charge. I love the way Marcus plays out there, but the consensus is that he is not much of a student of the defensive game. With Fletcher, we're seeing a lot more cohesion out there.

Now, you can say that's the players, not the coach, but I think GW's system is back on track with the right core nucleus of players (intelligent MLB, FS with huge range, quick DE).

I understand what you're saying, but how do you account for us doing well in the first half of games and then having major let-downs in the second half. Based on the poll results I guess everyone blames the offense or it doesn't concern anyone but me? I know the offense hasn't done a great job this season, but the offense hasn't given up points or had critical turnovers in our own territory to cost us games. It isn't a player issue or we'd be getting beat from start to finish.

GW is one of, if not the highest paid assistant coach in the NFL. He has complete control of the defense and has had a major say in the personnel brought in to run it. To be responsible for losing the most or second most 1st half leads in the NFL in the last four years is not acceptable. Again, if we were getting beat from start to finish, fine, maybe it is a player issue, injury issue, or the offense just stinks, but we are getting the lead at half and then losing.

[rypper11]

I am for GW staying. I think sometimes he outthinks himself but when he doesn't trust the guys he goes vanilla (much like Saunders). I like that we don't give up big plays and that we force an offense to play a perfect game to win (like the Patriots).
How can GW be the heir apparent to Coach Joe? Don't the Skins have to interview a black coach should any position open? Would Blache be given a token interview like Green was given last time?

[hail_2_da_skins]

A big yes. Greg Williams has done an outstanding job. He should be the next in line if Gibbs decides to retire. The second half breakdowns are because of conservative and predictable offensive play calling that has left the defense on the field too long.

[SmootSmack]

You really have to take it on a game by game basis. The Packers loss was entirely on the offense (namely Moss' fumble), the Giants loss was probably a joint effort, the Eagles loss was on the defense (letting Westbrook run through them for a 50+ yard TD). The Tampa loss is on the offense turning the ball over 6 times. Some say the Bills' loss is entirely on Gibbs. I say why did the D give up such a huge pass down the middle to set up the final field goal.

And arguments can be made in almost all the above cases for the other side costing us the game.

Plus, let's not act like we had huge leads at the half. In most cases it was a TD or less.

[Paintrain]

Originally Posted by SmootSmack

You really have to take it on a game by game basis. The Packers loss was entirely on the offense (namely Moss' fumble), the Giants loss was probably a joint effort, the Eagles loss was on the defense (letting Westbrook run through them for a 50+ yard TD). The Tampa loss is on the offense turning the ball over 6 times. Some say the Bills' loss is entirely on Gibbs. I say why did the D give up such a huge pass down the middle to set up the final field goal.

And arguments can be made in almost all the above cases for the other side costing us the game.

Plus, let's not act like we had huge leads at the half. In most cases it was a TD or less.

SS, in every game lost, with the exception of possibly GB, we've had no less than a 10 point lead in every 2nd half.

[SmootSmack]

Originally Posted by Paintrain

SS, in every game lost, with the exception of possibly GB, we've had no less than a 10 point lead in every 2nd half.

I see what you're saying. I'm talking about the halftime lead specifically. Either way, I think it's way too simplistic to place the blame entirely on one side

[Slingin Sammy 33]

Originally Posted by SmootSmack

You really have to take it on a game by game basis. The Packers loss was entirely on the offense (namely Moss' fumble), the Giants loss was probably a joint effort, the Eagles loss was on the defense (letting Westbrook run through them for a 50+ yard TD). The Tampa loss is on the offense turning the ball over 6 times. Some say the Bills' loss is entirely on Gibbs. I say why did the D give up such a huge pass down the middle to set up the final field goal.

And arguments can be made in almost all the above cases for the other side costing us the game.

Plus, let's not act like we had huge leads at the half. In most cases it was a TD or less.

Giants: 17-3 Skins at Half / 21-0 NYG in 2nd L
Packers: 14-7 Skins at Half / 10-0 GB in 2nd L
Cards: 14-6 Skins at Half / 13-7 Cards in 2nd W
Eagles: 12-7 Skins at Half / 26-13 Eagles in 2nd L
Dallas: 10-7 Skins at Half / 21-13 Dallas in 2nd L
Bills: 9-2 Skins at Half / 15-7 Bills in 2nd L
Bears: 7-0 Skins at Half / 17-16 Skins in 2nd W

My problem is; how do you explain the defense going from good 1st half to bad 2nd half on a consistent basis other than the guy calling the defense not making good halftime adjustments or making bad defensive calls in the 2nd half. If there's another valid explanation I would love to hear it because I can't figure it out.

I don't think offensively Gibbs has changed very much, but I guess I was spoiled by watching Richie Pettibone's defense consistently hold small leads for Gibbs.