Maximus...
So people can praise lovey smith for that great bears defense and bill belechick for the pats success on defense but jeff fisher gets no credit or blame for this teams defense? When our defense was good in 99 and 2000 it was called jeff fisher's defense. Not now? Fisher is at all the practices, he is at all the meetings, he is there when the game plans are made. The buck stops with him not jimmy s. That is his side of the ball and that is where his expertise lies. If the defense is poorly prepared to play it's as much on him as anyone else.
And yes fisher hired jimmy s and has kept him on for the last 5 years.
Want to say that fisher can still win and is a good coach? Fine but a great coach? A top 5 coach? Not after this year. This was one of the poorest prepared teams i have ever seen with no fire, no intensity. Problems or deficiancies were either not addressed or not addressed soon enough and it wasn't until the last week of the season before he even seemed disturbed by this team .
So people can praise lovey smith for that great bears defense and bill belechick for the pats success on defense but jeff fisher gets no credit or blame for this teams defense? When our defense was good in 99 and 2000 it was called jeff fisher's defense. Not now? Fisher is at all the practices, he is at all the meetings, he is there when the game plans are made. The buck stops with him not jimmy s. That is his side of the ball and that is where his expertise lies. If the defense is poorly prepared to play it's as much on him as anyone else.
And yes fisher hired jimmy s and has kept him on for the last 5 years.
Want to say that fisher can still win and is a good coach? Fine but a great coach? A top 5 coach? Not after this year. This was one of the poorest prepared teams i have ever seen with no fire, no intensity. Problems or deficiancies were either not addressed or not addressed soon enough and it wasn't until the last week of the season before he even seemed disturbed by this team .
Has the change of defensive philosophies(46 to the patty cake Schwartz is running) alienated Fisher from his defensive minded coaching??
RollTide said:
Yeah, it was all the coach's fault.
At what point does Floyd Reese start to take some of the heat for the mess that has been created with this franchise? :irked:
yeah, i'm sure not being able to field a 53 man roster half of the '04 season didnt hurt his chances of winning.RollTide said:
maximus said:
I completely agree with that assessment. Fisher is too enamored with Schwartz, IMO. Schwartz is too comfortable because of that, IMO. Those two need to be broken up like classmates if Schwartz can't find the fire to turn up the heat on the defensive unit. I'm sure everyone here would agree, if it came down to it, Schwartz goes before Fisher. Fish needs to wake up from the dream and get over it.
Thats the only player I would even think of giving a 1st for, but not a top 10 pick.
moose4now said:Yeah, it was all the coach's fault.
At what point does Floyd Reese start to take some of the heat for the mess that has been created with this franchise? :irked:
what mess?
we are rebuilding, it was going to always happen, Floyd delayed it as much as he could and we got an extra shot in the playoffs.
I'd like to see Mort in print report that.
Smells fishy. He can sell that somewhere else.
I ain't buying.
Smells fishy. He can sell that somewhere else.
I ain't buying.
RollTide said:
When people praised Lovie Smith's defense or Bill Bs defense they also praised the DC. I do not believe that the defense that we see on the field is Jeff Fisher's defense. Too much zone and no blitzs, very little of the old 46 defense. Compare the play calling of the 2000 defense with the 2005 defense-we play more zone-Fisher is a man coverage guy
Moose...
Why don't you read the posts because i also bashed reese on this thread and have been critical of him many times. I never said it was all the coaches fault but i'll be damned if i'm going to sit here and sing the praises of our head coach when we have only won 9 games in 2 years. Reese and fisher both have done a crappy job of late.
It is totally moronic for anyone to bash jimmy scwartz and the defense independantly of jeff fisher. I'm watching the pats jags game right now and to here them talk the pats don't even have a defensive coordinator this year.
In the last 5 years the titans have been 25th-11th-13th-30th-29th respectively in scoring defense. That's an average ranking of 22nd and not once did we finish in the top 10. That sucks! The buck stops with jeff fisher and he comes from that side of the ball.
Why don't you read the posts because i also bashed reese on this thread and have been critical of him many times. I never said it was all the coaches fault but i'll be damned if i'm going to sit here and sing the praises of our head coach when we have only won 9 games in 2 years. Reese and fisher both have done a crappy job of late.
It is totally moronic for anyone to bash jimmy scwartz and the defense independantly of jeff fisher. I'm watching the pats jags game right now and to here them talk the pats don't even have a defensive coordinator this year.
In the last 5 years the titans have been 25th-11th-13th-30th-29th respectively in scoring defense. That's an average ranking of 22nd and not once did we finish in the top 10. That sucks! The buck stops with jeff fisher and he comes from that side of the ball.
Maximus...
You miss the point because it doesn't matter if this is stylistically fisher's defense or schwartz's. The defense sucks and fisher at that point MUST take a greater hand in things. To sit back and let schwartz fail is negligence and even worse when he keeps the guy around. Sure it was probably easy for fisher when greg williams was there and we had better players. In 99 or 2000 fisher only needed to sit back and let williams do his thing. But when things are not going well and the defense is even quitting in the 4th quarter fisher needs to get more involved and make some changes. Whether the change is strategic or attitudinal he MUST take responsibility!
Remember we had veteran players all over our defensive front and at safety. Guys that have been around a while like haynesworth, bulluck, sirmon, tank. Even our 2nd year players have to be considered vets because they played a lot last year. Youth is not an excuse for this defense and injuries were not either. We were healthier on the defensive front than we have been in years.
You miss the point because it doesn't matter if this is stylistically fisher's defense or schwartz's. The defense sucks and fisher at that point MUST take a greater hand in things. To sit back and let schwartz fail is negligence and even worse when he keeps the guy around. Sure it was probably easy for fisher when greg williams was there and we had better players. In 99 or 2000 fisher only needed to sit back and let williams do his thing. But when things are not going well and the defense is even quitting in the 4th quarter fisher needs to get more involved and make some changes. Whether the change is strategic or attitudinal he MUST take responsibility!
Remember we had veteran players all over our defensive front and at safety. Guys that have been around a while like haynesworth, bulluck, sirmon, tank. Even our 2nd year players have to be considered vets because they played a lot last year. Youth is not an excuse for this defense and injuries were not either. We were healthier on the defensive front than we have been in years.
I agree that Fisher has to do something with the defense. If that means becoming the DC also, then so be itRollTide said:
Gunny...
You call that rebuilding? I call that an abortion! Even with mason, rolle and carter this team probably doesn't win more than 6 games. This was a pathetic team that couldn't run the ball or stop the run despite those 2 areas of the team had the most experienced players. We were healthier on the offensive and defensive fronts than we have been since 2000! Do you know that?
Haynesworth missed just one game all year. KVB, odom, starks and long played every game. We had one missed start on the offensive line all year. Hopkins missed one game. Our offensive and defensive fronts were full of veteran players. The only rookie starter on either front was roos and he actually played pretty good. We didn't suck because we were some young inexpienced team gunny we lost because our veteran players sucked. The only issue that was resolved for the future was at CB but even there we have a question mark. Pacman is a mental moron who has a much chance of being in prison some day as being in the pro bowl.
This team sucked due to poor management and coaching. What good does it do to have all these young players if they suck? What good does it do to be experienced at a position if the players suck? We lost 4 games to horrible teams and didn't win a singl;e game against a good team. Without question we were a worse team in the end than in the beginning so i can't see how we rebuilt a damn thing.
You call that rebuilding? I call that an abortion! Even with mason, rolle and carter this team probably doesn't win more than 6 games. This was a pathetic team that couldn't run the ball or stop the run despite those 2 areas of the team had the most experienced players. We were healthier on the offensive and defensive fronts than we have been since 2000! Do you know that?
Haynesworth missed just one game all year. KVB, odom, starks and long played every game. We had one missed start on the offensive line all year. Hopkins missed one game. Our offensive and defensive fronts were full of veteran players. The only rookie starter on either front was roos and he actually played pretty good. We didn't suck because we were some young inexpienced team gunny we lost because our veteran players sucked. The only issue that was resolved for the future was at CB but even there we have a question mark. Pacman is a mental moron who has a much chance of being in prison some day as being in the pro bowl.
This team sucked due to poor management and coaching. What good does it do to have all these young players if they suck? What good does it do to be experienced at a position if the players suck? We lost 4 games to horrible teams and didn't win a singl;e game against a good team. Without question we were a worse team in the end than in the beginning so i can't see how we rebuilt a damn thing.
I agree fully..to sit back and allow Schwartz to fail time and time again while instilling a pu$$y attitude in our defenders makes me lose respect for Fisher.
we were the youngest team in the league. all of those "vets" on the d-line were in their second year.RollTide said:
Bigtitan nonsense...
We were the youngest team in the league but many of our youngest players were on the bench.
1. A second year defensive lineman IS a vet! How long do you think it takes to be productive at that position? Jevon kearse had his best season a rookie for crying out loud. What is even more stupid about that point is that starks and odom didn't improve at all. So what's the point? All our 2nd year d-lineman played a lot in 2004. They were not green players who don't know what they are doing.
2. KVB is a 5th year player. Albert haynesworth is a 5th year player. Sirmon and bulluck are 6th year players. Kassell was a 4th year player. Our starting front 7 averaged 4.2 years experience per man! Our 2 safeties were 4th year players. Our entire starting defense averaged 3.6 years experience per man and we had 2 third year players in significant roles in woolfolk and long. So don't give me that crap bout us being too young! Super bowl defenses have been less experienced than that.
We were the youngest team in the league but many of our youngest players were on the bench.
1. A second year defensive lineman IS a vet! How long do you think it takes to be productive at that position? Jevon kearse had his best season a rookie for crying out loud. What is even more stupid about that point is that starks and odom didn't improve at all. So what's the point? All our 2nd year d-lineman played a lot in 2004. They were not green players who don't know what they are doing.
2. KVB is a 5th year player. Albert haynesworth is a 5th year player. Sirmon and bulluck are 6th year players. Kassell was a 4th year player. Our starting front 7 averaged 4.2 years experience per man! Our 2 safeties were 4th year players. Our entire starting defense averaged 3.6 years experience per man and we had 2 third year players in significant roles in woolfolk and long. So don't give me that crap bout us being too young! Super bowl defenses have been less experienced than that.
Interesting...
The starting front 7 for the 1985 chicago bears averaged the same experience per man as the titans 2005 front 7. 4 years a man. How could that be? The 1985 bears started a rookie at defensive tackle named williams perry. The 2005 titan defensive line had no rookie players. The 1985 bears started a 2nd year man at linebacker named wilbur marshall. How did marshall even know what to do being so young?
Did you know that the 1992 dallas cowboys were the youngest team in the nfl and won a super bowl? Daaaaaaaaa..
Did you know that the 1981 49ers won a super bowl with 3 rookies starting in the defensive backfield? Nooooo.
But the 2005 titans were too young and inexperienced to win more than 4 games and jeff fisher is one of the greatest coaches ever! oh yeah! Great job fish!
Finally did you notice how much better the titans got through the year as they got more experience? No because they got worse! We sucked even more at the end of the year. Must be the great coaching!
The starting front 7 for the 1985 chicago bears averaged the same experience per man as the titans 2005 front 7. 4 years a man. How could that be? The 1985 bears started a rookie at defensive tackle named williams perry. The 2005 titan defensive line had no rookie players. The 1985 bears started a 2nd year man at linebacker named wilbur marshall. How did marshall even know what to do being so young?
Did you know that the 1992 dallas cowboys were the youngest team in the nfl and won a super bowl? Daaaaaaaaa..
Did you know that the 1981 49ers won a super bowl with 3 rookies starting in the defensive backfield? Nooooo.
But the 2005 titans were too young and inexperienced to win more than 4 games and jeff fisher is one of the greatest coaches ever! oh yeah! Great job fish!
Finally did you notice how much better the titans got through the year as they got more experience? No because they got worse! We sucked even more at the end of the year. Must be the great coaching!
Interesting again...
Geez, the colts starting front 7 averages the same experience as the titans this year. 4.2 years per man. But the titans were too young to be expected to perform right?
And talking about 2nd year players? 2 starters in the colts secondary are in their 2nd years. sanders and david. We all know that a second year player can hardly be expected to play well.:sad2:
Geez, the colts starting front 7 averages the same experience as the titans this year. 4.2 years per man. But the titans were too young to be expected to perform right?
And talking about 2nd year players? 2 starters in the colts secondary are in their 2nd years. sanders and david. We all know that a second year player can hardly be expected to play well.:sad2:
How many first and second year players do they have coming off the bench?? They don't have two rookies at corner, either.... It's not just having young starter that make a difference it's depth. We have young starters and we're very young at depth as well. Comparing our D to a D with two Hall Of Famers like the 85' Bears is hardly fair. We have the youngest team in the league which isn't an excuse for playing as poorly as we did, there's no excuse for looking that bad, but it certainly helps to have quality vets on the field.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.
