Is it realistic to expect the defense to improve even a little this year?

[Chan Fan]

For the record, Henning didn't implement the wildcat offense in Miami, it was the QB coach and former Arkansas offensive coordinator David Lee. And predictably teams started figuring that offense out later on in the year, they better not rely on it too much in 2009.

[magnus]

yep.. kinda makes the previous post look a little lost. Since we did get rid of Henning and our offense has improved. Interesting? Yes. Coincidence? No.

Henning had one good year, before you crown his ass, watch next year when teams have him figured out and he's still calling the same "imaginative" crap. Crow, to be eaten. Henning won't seem so wise next year.

And if we do have the same success after getting a new DC as we did when we fired our OC, then things should be pretty good.

But the defense could see quite a bit of improvement. The defensive plays won't be changing that much....

don't get me wrong, Henning isn't complete trash. I think the ideas were stale, I don't think he was as committed to the run as Fox was (three years straight before his firing, the pass O finished higher in ranking than run), and the feuding with players was a problem.

That Henning can succeed with a player he's coached before, in a Parcells-picked team, with a former offensive coordinator as head coach, and with him being forced to take an innovative QBs coach instead of a lackey? Sure.

Which is the type situation Henning succeeds in. He also succeeds when the "stud" of the "feed the stud" mindset is handed to him - and Ronnie Brown fits that bill. But drafting that player never worked - it's not like Deangelo Williams isn't good, right?

So I don't doubt that Dan will have some success next year. Brown, a little help on the line, and a continued, healthy Pennngton isn't a terrible offense. If any of those things don't work out, he's screwed. He doesn't adapt.

Maser, his choice as line coach, has already been dismissed. The success doesn't surprise me with Dan, but if they promoted Lee to OC and let him go I'd be no less surprised. Especially if Parcells isn't around.

[magnus]

For the record, Henning didn't implement the wildcat offense in Miami, it was the QB coach and former Arkansas offensive coordinator David Lee. And predictably teams started figuring that offense out later on in the year, they better not rely on it too much in 2009.

correct.

If Henning hadn't had a little experience with it, it probably would've had resistance, sure.

At any rate, I believe people were crediting Fox for the wildcat, not Henning.

[magnus]

Ridiculous. You're a known homer and you have no idea what you're talking about. I'm a hundred times smarter than you and have proven it repeatedly. We can take this debate to 15 pages if you want and I'll still be right.

(sorry, just trying to make you feel at home)

good show.

Yeah, I don't have much patience for that anymore.

[Mr. Scot]

good show.

Yeah, I don't have much patience for that anymore.

Thought you'd appreciate that

(in fairness, it happens here too; there just tend to be more people involved)

My read on Henning has long been that when he has the kind of players to run his system, it can work quite well. Unfortunately, while he gives lip service to 'adapting to changes' he doesn't really do it.

When he had Stephen Davis, all was well. But with Davis gone and DeShaun Foster the main option, his failure to adapt became obvious. Foster was clearly a cutback runner, but Henning continually designed and called plays that were made for a Davis style pounder.

It pretty much never worked, but he still kept trying to force a square peg into a round hole. Likewise, he was forever trying to force Delhomme to turn into a game manager rather than a gunslinger. It was at it's worst in 2005 and 2006, when he effectively neutered the offense.

Yes, with the right system players (a Parcells type roster and the afforementioned "stud" to feed) Henning can run an effective offense. But if he doesn't have the roster makeup he needs, or if an opposing defense has the right matchups to stop his "pound, pound, chuck it deep" attack, he's lousy at adapting.

[Brooklyn Bully]

Unless Fox and Meeks change the scheme, no, we will not improve. Not to mention we're losing our second best player on the D. To even get BACK to where we are now, we have to find talent to replace Pep and then sign some more talent in FA to make strides toward improving. But if sit back in zone coverage and don't blitz much we'll see more of the same. Crap, I thought we wanted to be like the Steelers?

[Baschski]

We'll be fine. We have a lot of talent on the defense. Besides, new coaches isn't necessarily a bad thing...it could turn out to be an excellent change for us.

[magnus]

Unless Fox and Meeks change the scheme, no, we will not improve. Not to mention we're losing our second best player on the D. To even get BACK to where we are now, we have to find talent to replace Pep and then sign some more talent in FA to make strides toward improving. But if sit back in zone coverage and don't blitz much we'll see more of the same. Crap, I thought we wanted to be like the Steelers?

Scheme isn't the reason we declined. I really wish people would get away from that and stop pretending that the other 31 teams bring 8 to the QB every down.

[magnus]

My read on Henning has long been that when he has the kind of players to run his system, it can work quite well. Unfortunately, while he gives lip service to 'adapting to changes' he doesn't really do it.

To a point, but 2006 is a good statement against that. He got Foster back. He got a 1st round RB to back him. He got Keyshawn to compliment Smith. We had, essentially, the team we wanted in 2006, right or wrong. And that didn't work. Granted, overall I agree; overall his best success was when someone handed him something that was very hard to get and he rode that. 2006 was a bit different, which is why 2006 was his last year here.

It pretty much never worked, but he still kept trying to force a square peg into a round hole. Likewise, he was forever trying to force Delhomme to turn into a game manager rather than a gunslinger. It was at it's worst in 2005 and 2006, when he effectively neutered the offense.

Yes, with the right system players (a Parcells type roster and the afforementioned "stud" to feed) Henning can run an effective offense. But if he doesn't have the roster makeup he needs, or if an opposing defense has the right matchups to stop his "pound, pound, chuck it deep" attack, he's lousy at adapting.

agree with Jake. Too often, it was run-run-dumpoff-run-run-chuck it deep. You're going to throw a lot of INTs when you keep 8 to block, 2 to release deep, and then just chuck it to hope it gets there. There was never a pump fake, a double route, a combo route underneath to throw to if Smith was covered. It was always just chuck deep, once maybe twice a game.

You have to make it what it is. People pointing to Miami and saying "well, I guess we see it was Fox" essentially just wait for reasons to say that.

[Ashor]

Rookies can be very successful and make an immediate impact as we've all witnessed first hand. I guess you can put our coaches under the rookie category. We were average in the defensive ranking amongst NFL. It's not that hard to do the same thing or better next season.

[Brooklyn Bully]

Scheme isn't the reason we declined. I really wish people would get away from that and stop pretending that the other 31 teams bring 8 to the QB every down.

That's not what I said. I said Richardson and Fox want to be like the Steelers. We're nothing CLOSE to that. And if you think we can be fine with that same zone scheme we used this year, you're fooling yourself. Something needs to be fixed on this team and it's either the scheme or the talent. There is no other option.

[magnus]

That's not what I said. I said Richardson and Fox want to be like the Steelers. We're nothing CLOSE to that. And if you think we can be fine with that same zone scheme we used this year, you're fooling yourself. Something needs to be fixed on this team and it's either the scheme or the talent. There is no other option.

Yeah, it's what you said.

Unless Fox and Meeks change the scheme, no, we will not improve.

We made it to the playoffs three times with "this crappy old scheme" that most of the league runs.

[cookinbrak]

yep.. kinda makes the previous post look a little lost. Since we did get rid of Henning and our offense has improved. Interesting? Yes. Coincidence? No.

And if we do have the same success after getting a new DC as we did when we fired our OC, then things should be pretty good.

How many playoff games have we won since we switched OC's?

[Brooklyn Bully]

Yeah, it's what you said.

We made it to the playoffs three times with "this crappy old scheme" that most of the league runs.

Making it to the Playoffs has nothing to do with me thinking we will not improve defensively. It's as simple as that. If we don't change the scheme we will have the same defense. How hard is that to understand? If you think the scheme works wonders, more power to ya.