Stan Hixon

[cpayne5]

I think it's funny that people want to blame Hixon for the WR troubles. It's an easy assumption to make -that he's the problem- but the arguments are baseless, or shallow at best.

We have no idea what his duties are behind the scenes. Yes, he's the WR coach, but what does that entail under Zorn? Does he come up with his own teaching tools, or use those dictated by Zorn and/or Sherman Smith? How much time does he get to "teach" each week? What do the players think about his coaching skills?

There are hundreds of pertinent questions like these that we just do not know the answers to. Without that knowledge, I don't think anyone here is qualified to give an opinion, with any expectation respectability, about the replacement of coach Hixon.

[GMScud]

Originally Posted by cpayne5

I think it's funny that people want to blame Hixon for the WR troubles. It's an easy assumption to make -that he's the problem- but the arguments are baseless, or shallow at best.

We have no idea what his duties are behind the scenes. Yes, he's the WR coach, but what does that entail under Zorn? Does he come up with his own teaching tools, or use those dictated by Zorn and/or Sherman Smith? How much time does he get to "teach" each week? What do the players think about his coaching skills?

There are hundreds of pertinent questions like these that we just do not know the answers to. Without that knowledge, I don't think anyone here is qualified to give an opinion, with any expectation respectability, about the replacement of coach Hixon.

Well, our WRs are NEVER open downfield, and Malcolm Kelly and Devin Thomas struggled big time with the learning curve from college to pros. I know that's not all Hixon's fault, but he has to shoulder some of that blame. I'd say that's a bit more than shallow and baseless.

[cpayne5]

Originally Posted by GMScud

Well, our WRs are NEVER open downfield, and Malcolm Kelly and Devin Thomas struggled big time with the learning curve from college to pros. I know that's not all Hixon's fault, but he has to shoulder some of that blame. I'd say that's a bit more than shallow and baseless.

Sorry, but I haven't seen Hixon run those routes or call those plays. Like I said, we don't know what his job responsibilities are. There are three people in the equation here, 1) the WRs, 2) Zorn and 3) Hixon. We know the responsibilities of two of the 3. The WRs are supposed to get open, and learn the offense. That's part of being a professional, rookie or not. Zorn's responsibilities involve calling plays that will utilize the strengths of the WRs to put them into position to succeed. We don't know what Hixon's responsibilities are. So yes, the conclusions being drawn do seem awfully shallow and baseless considering what we know (which is next to nothing).

[GMScud]

Originally Posted by cpayne5

Sorry, but I haven't seen Hixon run those routes or call those plays. Like I said, we don't know what his job responsibilities are. There are three people in the equation here, 1) the WRs, 2) Zorn and 3) Hixon. We know the responsibilities of two of the 3. The WRs are supposed to get open, and learn the offense. That's part of being a professional, rookie or not. Zorn's responsibilities involve calling plays that will utilize the strengths of the WRs to put them into position to succeed. We don't know what Hixon's responsibilities are. So yes, the conclusions being drawn do seem awfully shallow and baseless considering what we know (which is next to nothing).

We know he's the WRs coach. We know production from our WRs has been severely lacking since he's been here. Sure, none of us sit in on coaching meetings or attend practices, but I would think as a WRs coach his job is to, well, coach the WRs and make them better at their responsibilities.

If a team as a whole plays poorly year after year, the head coach usually gets fired. Why should it be any different if a certain position performs poorly year after year?

[SBXVII]

Originally Posted by cpayne5

Sorry, but I haven't seen Hixon run those routes or call those plays. Like I said, we don't know what his job responsibilities are. There are three people in the equation here, 1) the WRs, 2) Zorn and 3) Hixon. We know the responsibilities of two of the 3. The WRs are supposed to get open, and learn the offense. That's part of being a professional, rookie or not. Zorn's responsibilities involve calling plays that will utilize the strengths of the WRs to put them into position to succeed. We don't know what Hixon's responsibilities are. So yes, the conclusions being drawn do seem awfully shallow and baseless considering what we know (which is next to nothing).

Lets take a look at your scenario. ...If we agree that we have not had WR production in 5 yrs or more then lets look at what has remained the same through all those yrs. Its not Zorn, he's new this year. So now your looking at either WR's or WR Coach. I could agree we need better talent. The only player I would keep from yrs past is Moss and he even is slipping with all his injuries. but you can't say it's all the WR when we bring in what many teams had as top 1st round talent in Kelly and Thomas and they can't produce. So the constant has been Hixon. Through Gibbs whole tenure. Two OC's during Gibbs term could not get production and now Zorn. I can't blame Zorn for that. I can blame Zorn for developing piss pour plays and not adjusting during game or season which I would hope Christensen would be able to teach since he already once was an OC.

[30gut]

Originally Posted by cpayne5

I think it's funny that people want to blame Hixon for the WR troubles. It's an easy assumption to make -that he's the problem- but the arguments are baseless, or shallow at best.

We have no idea what his duties are behind the scenes. Yes, he's the WR coach, but what does that entail under Zorn? Does he come up with his own teaching tools, or use those dictated by Zorn and/or Sherman Smith? How much time does he get to "teach" each week? What do the players think about his coaching skills?

There are hundreds of pertinent questions like these that we just do not know the answers to. Without that knowledge, I don't think anyone here is qualified to give an opinion, with any expectation respectability, about the replacement of coach Hixon.

I think that Hixon should be replaced because he doesn't know the WCO.
One of the WR coaches duties under the traditional Bill Walsh WCO scheme
is to create part of the weekly game plan. IMO a coach that knows the WCO
will have a huge advantage over Hixon in the gameplanning department and
can add overall WCO 'know how' to the coaching staff.

It would be different IMO if Hixon was a young coach or if he had an
accomplished track record for receiver developement. But, he doesn't.
Also, IMHO part of any coaches job is to get his players ready to produce
and Devin Thomas and Malcolm Kelly didn't. If they had a hard time picking
up the playbook he should have spoon fed it to them.

[Beemnseven]

Originally Posted by cpayne5

I think it's funny that people want to blame Hixon for the WR troubles. It's an easy assumption to make -that he's the problem- but the arguments are baseless, or shallow at best.

We have no idea what his duties are behind the scenes. Yes, he's the WR coach, but what does that entail under Zorn? Does he come up with his own teaching tools, or use those dictated by Zorn and/or Sherman Smith? How much time does he get to "teach" each week? What do the players think about his coaching skills?

There are hundreds of pertinent questions like these that we just do not know the answers to. Without that knowledge, I don't think anyone here is qualified to give an opinion, with any expectation respectability, about the replacement of coach Hixon.

If you believe that a coach's ulitmate responsibility is to get players ready to play, then the WR coach has failed miserably. If you disagree that this was Hixon's most basic duty, then what do you think his job entails, exactly?

If by week 17 Devin Thomas is still behind James Thrash on the depth chart, then I'm sorry. Rookie season or not, that's a huge problem.