lostknight
01-17-2011, 10:08 PM
If Josh McDaniels had been fired last year, and John Fox hired, we would have hired someone with one of the best winning ratios of active coaches in the NFL. Ten losses last year was is a insane outlier from a coach who has either dominated, or at worse been average around the middle of the pack. Yet this year we hired the one coach in the league who had a worse record then the man he replaced.
It's imperative to try and figure out what the difference is between Super John - who has gotten three ten plus win seasons, average John who floats around 7-9, and McDaniels edition John, who finishes dead last in the NFL. If Fox repeats his earlier success, we are back to having a team that competes every year. If he repeats last year, nothing good will come of it, and we may someday see the LA Broncos instead of the Denver Broncos.
Every year the NFL varies pretty wildly depending on how good offenses, defense, special teams are. In addition, offenses and defenses vary according to how the other units do, the strength of schedule, etc. So I plotted efficiency (via Football outsiders) DVOA for each unit and then compared it to the winning percentage (not including post-season) for each season. (For the more pedantic I reversed the sign on the defensive DVOA to keep things consistent). This would tell us if Fox failed, where he failed.
The result is this:
http://aeon.alaethia.net/fox.png
In the NFL, you need one really great unit. A insanely good offense, or a insanely good defensive unit will usually keep you competitive in the NFL. However, even when that happens it's the quality of the other unit that determines the difference between being a also ran - Fox was consistently around 7-9 when he offense stalled or being dominating.
His successes came on the rare year that he had both a above average defense (which he almost always had), and a above average offense (which was rare). This means that we should be somewhat skeptical of any offensive philosophy from Mr. Fox. His offenses have not been consistent enough to warrant it.
McDaniels edition Josh was a direct reflection of Fox's failure to be able to develop what was supposedly the most NFL ready quarterback in the draft last year - Clausen. Given all of the things that have come out about Tebow's combine and pro-day with Fox, it's a safe bet that if Tebow was there at the top of the second, Carolina would have grabbed him instead of Clausen. But if Clausen's failure Clausen himself, or a reflection of a HC and a OC that were systematically unable to tailor the offense to the needs of a young Quarterback.
A strong defense isn't enough to save you when you have a ineffectual quarterback and wide receivers. Moore's injury and Clausen's collapse doomed a team that had never been worse then 7-9, to a 2-14 season. How well will he do with Tebow?
We are putting a lot of hope on McCoy and the offensive coaches to do what Fox fell flat on his face in Carolina trying to do. I'm not encouraged about hearing that Gase won't be WR coach. The WR's and QBs have been spectacular prior to Fox's arrival, and Fox's hope of doing well is tied to the offense doing well.
There is also the issue with ZBS. If Tebow is in there, ZBS is a huge asset. If Orton is in there, ZBS is a huge liability. ZBS is really problematic when it comes to giving the quarterback time to make plays in the pocket in pass only situations. It excels at giving them a mechanism to run the ball, but also to give the quarterback ways to escape the pocket if need be. Above the intangiables - The team really did fight when he was on the field, and he is quite capable of carrying the team - Tebow is a much better fit if we go ZBS.
If we go Orton, why is there any reason to think that results will be different from what Fox normally gets? Middle of the run offensive production and heart attacks while pray that the defense bails out a ineffectual offense? Saldy, in my mind there is no question that if Fox had stuck with Jake D, he might still be employed in Carolina, where going to a rookie QB screwed him. I don't think Tebow is the shoe in we fans think he is.
If we go Tebow, is there any reason to think that the coach will tailor things to him like all rookies need? Remember that Jay Cutler's pro-bowl year was with a severely restricted playbook that simplified his reads - and that was his third year in the NFL. More and more I wonder if the Fox era won't look a lot like the Elway under Reeves Era. A offense so mediocre outside of tebow that the head coach limits what the offense does, while the D keeps them in it. Then, when the game is on the line, he unleashes the Tebow?
The good news is that if, by some miracle, we do build a offense that is effective, and a defense that is great Fox, unlike Norv Turner, has proven that when he has both, he can dominate the league and manage a team to victory.
But it's all going to come down to if he can fix the defense, while keeping just enough of Josh McDaniel's weapons - the wide receivers, Orton and Tebow - to consistently perform.
It's imperative to try and figure out what the difference is between Super John - who has gotten three ten plus win seasons, average John who floats around 7-9, and McDaniels edition John, who finishes dead last in the NFL. If Fox repeats his earlier success, we are back to having a team that competes every year. If he repeats last year, nothing good will come of it, and we may someday see the LA Broncos instead of the Denver Broncos.
Every year the NFL varies pretty wildly depending on how good offenses, defense, special teams are. In addition, offenses and defenses vary according to how the other units do, the strength of schedule, etc. So I plotted efficiency (via Football outsiders) DVOA for each unit and then compared it to the winning percentage (not including post-season) for each season. (For the more pedantic I reversed the sign on the defensive DVOA to keep things consistent). This would tell us if Fox failed, where he failed.
The result is this:
http://aeon.alaethia.net/fox.png
In the NFL, you need one really great unit. A insanely good offense, or a insanely good defensive unit will usually keep you competitive in the NFL. However, even when that happens it's the quality of the other unit that determines the difference between being a also ran - Fox was consistently around 7-9 when he offense stalled or being dominating.
His successes came on the rare year that he had both a above average defense (which he almost always had), and a above average offense (which was rare). This means that we should be somewhat skeptical of any offensive philosophy from Mr. Fox. His offenses have not been consistent enough to warrant it.
McDaniels edition Josh was a direct reflection of Fox's failure to be able to develop what was supposedly the most NFL ready quarterback in the draft last year - Clausen. Given all of the things that have come out about Tebow's combine and pro-day with Fox, it's a safe bet that if Tebow was there at the top of the second, Carolina would have grabbed him instead of Clausen. But if Clausen's failure Clausen himself, or a reflection of a HC and a OC that were systematically unable to tailor the offense to the needs of a young Quarterback.
A strong defense isn't enough to save you when you have a ineffectual quarterback and wide receivers. Moore's injury and Clausen's collapse doomed a team that had never been worse then 7-9, to a 2-14 season. How well will he do with Tebow?
We are putting a lot of hope on McCoy and the offensive coaches to do what Fox fell flat on his face in Carolina trying to do. I'm not encouraged about hearing that Gase won't be WR coach. The WR's and QBs have been spectacular prior to Fox's arrival, and Fox's hope of doing well is tied to the offense doing well.
There is also the issue with ZBS. If Tebow is in there, ZBS is a huge asset. If Orton is in there, ZBS is a huge liability. ZBS is really problematic when it comes to giving the quarterback time to make plays in the pocket in pass only situations. It excels at giving them a mechanism to run the ball, but also to give the quarterback ways to escape the pocket if need be. Above the intangiables - The team really did fight when he was on the field, and he is quite capable of carrying the team - Tebow is a much better fit if we go ZBS.
If we go Orton, why is there any reason to think that results will be different from what Fox normally gets? Middle of the run offensive production and heart attacks while pray that the defense bails out a ineffectual offense? Saldy, in my mind there is no question that if Fox had stuck with Jake D, he might still be employed in Carolina, where going to a rookie QB screwed him. I don't think Tebow is the shoe in we fans think he is.
If we go Tebow, is there any reason to think that the coach will tailor things to him like all rookies need? Remember that Jay Cutler's pro-bowl year was with a severely restricted playbook that simplified his reads - and that was his third year in the NFL. More and more I wonder if the Fox era won't look a lot like the Elway under Reeves Era. A offense so mediocre outside of tebow that the head coach limits what the offense does, while the D keeps them in it. Then, when the game is on the line, he unleashes the Tebow?
The good news is that if, by some miracle, we do build a offense that is effective, and a defense that is great Fox, unlike Norv Turner, has proven that when he has both, he can dominate the league and manage a team to victory.
But it's all going to come down to if he can fix the defense, while keeping just enough of Josh McDaniel's weapons - the wide receivers, Orton and Tebow - to consistently perform.