By I hear you is you making the point that its so obvious that those who don't agree have their head in the sand, and even though a few like yourself are saying it, you don't see why 100% of the people here don't agree with you. The way that comment came off to me is your criticisms of Kliff as a playcaller are bordeline fact based on the rationale you provided, so how can anyone disagree?
And the comment that there are worse than Kingsbury. That comment didn't come off to me that you think he's one of the top tier guys especially in the context of all your criticisms of him. It came off to me that he's among the bottom tier guys but not the bottom. If I go about how much I don't like Quan Martin's play but heck he's not the worst safety in the league -- my point at least to me would come off like he's among the bottom safeties but there are worse than him.
So you are saying I don't hear you, and don't have a read on your thoughts. OK. I trust of course you know your thoughts better than I know your thoughts. But my interpretation of your thoughts aren't in malice. If I made the same points you did in the way you made them, that's what the emotions would be for me behind those thoughts if I expressed them the same way. So I responded accordingly. You are saying I am reading you wrong, sorry about that, just trying to talk football, and on that front in short I am not down on Kliff.
Ok I apologize, there are a few on the board who seem to jump down your throat anytime any criticism of Kliff is made. You sounded like you were going down that road with your older reply, but I see you were interpreting my words a specific way. I hope you know regardless of my tone I appreciate all of your insight and research, and a difference of opinion on Kliff is just that, not a big deal.
It is hard (at least to me) to judge Kliff. I do think that even the ardent Kliff supporters have started to agree he has some weird playcalling inside the 20 (it seems it was noticed more recently but it has been a trend over the full time he has been here I think). I haven’t done the research so could be wrong but inside the 10 it seems like he has very high percentages (predictive) on down/distance plus personnel (McNichols vs CRod vs Bill in particular). Frankly all over the field I think he has some high percentages.
The point I was making is “Kliff has some obvious playcalling issues” - I can confidently say people have their heads in the sand because it is a vague point that is easily agreeable, who doesn’t have “some?” If you disagree, it’s like Kliff is perfect. The specific issues seemed to get large scale agreement recently- the goal line repeated pass attempts.
That doesn’t mean he is “bad.” I know we won’t have large scale agreement on that jump of assertion. To start with “some obvious playcalling issues” I had thought was a pretty simple starting point.
If DQ is let go after next year (way too early to assume, obviously, but if things roll that way), it will be (just like any HC) also on his coordinator selection. With DQ and the amount of delegation he likes doing, it will be more so than others. In this specific regard, DQ does seem like Ron. Behind the scenes though- I think DQ does talk to Kliff about playcalling (specifically running) more than Ron did. It even felt this last game that may have happened. There was a shift in one aspect (goalline calls). Regardless those conversations happen because Kliff said they did last year and again DQ and Kliff disagreed multiple times in weekly pressers on playcalling.
We will see how it goes. Personally, and yes it is a leap because of the injuries, I think that Kliff has a lot of tells and tendencies. I think when he breaks them, and he does for just one or max two drives a game, boom we score a TD. It could also be a timing thing (later game defensive prevent) but I don’t think so because in some of those games the defensive alignment didn’t seem grossly shifted at all; it just looked like they didn’t predict aspects of the call as they may have earlier). It has strongly seemed that way to me and I don’t say it lightly. Even last year, I had some issues with Kliff. I thought he called like three or four games really well, and other games there was too much magic by JD. That’s not a repeatable formula.
I hoped the OL help meant less magic would be needed.
One really disturbing game I don’t understand arguments over:
Atlanta.
Atlanta came into that game with a top ranked pass D and a lower ranked rushing D. We changed very little of our playcalling.
It seems a lot of the great coordinators do a better or different job of exploiting weaknesses (and personal strengths!) instead of just thinking their scheme is so good it will win. Kliff is adapting *sometimes* so that is good, but it doesn’t seem he is situationally tailoring as much as I would like to see.
Carter was out last week. Finally CRod up the gut and just brutalize the Eagles D (make them cry) would have been beautiful on that first drive inside the 5. At least second down and if CR gets to the 1, heck maybe third. Based on the year of playcalling I didn’t expect to see it. I don’t think the Eagles did either, they were right, 0 points. Later Kliff runs multiple times over and over, TD.
It just looks like we have some unfortunate tendencies that don’t get broken frequently.
I know mine is a fan opinion. My point about DQ not liking Kliff playcalling wasn’t to say it was a big deal, but only to say NFL coaches (our own!) also not thrilled. He said so, because he said we need to run even when we are only getting 1-2 ypc, and Kliff wasn’t doing that. And still doesn’t *tend to.*
I do want to make one last point.
Last year we beat “the teams we should” if we were a tier 2 team (make the playoffs consistently, sniff the SB sometimes at least). This year we didn’t. My issue isn’t Kliff being a tier 2 OC. That’s a good OC btw. My issue is, is he tier 1? Can he beat the best DCs?
My read is no. Teams are at their best in the playoffs, bring their best. Prep, execution, all. I mainly worry about that. That is the equivalent of something you said which I wholeheartedly agree with: rather be a 4 win team and know we need change than be a 9 win team and think we are ok.
If he changes, no issue. He could be great. I don’t predict him to change.
If things roll right, I feel like what I saw the last two years kind of caps us at tier 2 and only if everything rolls right. I don’t think either coordinator we had last year was that force multiplier coach that you need who makes the sum greater than the parts.
This year it is hard to judge with injuries, I think other OCs would find ways to lean more on running, maybe go 60/40 running and play action because we were so injured at WR. Other options exist too. We didn’t. It seemed strange, I think the year could have been “better” (not a good season at all mind you).
 }})
