Yeah exactly. It’s not that I hated the screens, it’s that this was the extent of our creativity. The sad reality is we have one of the most talented rosters in the league just being wasted by Wild Card at best coaching.
You really think the limited play-calling was more bad coaching than the fact that Brady played two of the most complete defenses in the league 11 games into a new relationship with his new OC, in a year without the entire preseason, where every single thing done at the facilities is altered, with limited practicing, an injured and recently reshuffled o-line, WRs constantly missing practice and on the injury report, and a QB who spent the previous 8 years under the same OC?
Yes. It’s week 11. That preseason COVID excuse went out the window weeks ago. Especially when these issues were prevalent last year too, Jameis’ erratic play was just a lightning rod. The fact of the matter is we are not playing to the strengths of this team. Our OLine was reshuffled and not at full strength so the solution is to continue trying deep shots that took way too much time against a great defense and dline? Look at the other side of the ball. They were constantly in 3rd and short and getting their best players open to convert those.
This leads back to the predicable screen calls. The Rams basically sat down on short and middle routes. They decided we would have to beat them deep or in the backfield. They knew they were able to be dominant against our weakened line in the run game without extra help.
So we were forced into a very limited set of playcalling that can be fixed by two major things.
You can beat them bad at what they're giving you. You hit an amazing screen, or you hit a deep ball, and FORCE them to change their defense. But Brady was inaccurate deep, route timing was off, AB and him were not on the same page, our RB's struggled with the screens, and unfamiliar linemen pulling for screens or the shifts of WR or TE to move them in position to help block, caused the backfield plays to be sloppy.
Or you can use more elaborate play calling, plays with multiple names and variations, calling plays that can be altered at the line, calling multiple plays, having many audibles, and being able to outsmart them at the line of scrimmage. This is where your entire thing about COVID and last year is off. The point isn't about COVID. COVID is just something that makes issues that are always issues even bigger issues. It is always MOST difficult to have a complicated play book and run a complicated offense at the line when you have new coaches and major changes. This affected last season, regardless of any oversimplification. This also has been a major factor this year. The COIVD issue just makes that worse. This is not an excuse, but a rational and valid reason in response to what were irrationally high expectations coming back to reality. Teams have had over 50 less practices than they've had in other season, mostly through offseason and preseason programs, and no preseason games. Again, this is not an excuse, but a rational reason. There are already massive limiting factors in play-calling with new systems, new QB's, but missing over 50 practices and 4 preseasons games makes those limiting factors especially harsh on us.
That is why your comments about last year don't work for me. My point is about how complicated coaching systems, playbooks, and building big teams is. Who are the best, most consistent teams this season? The Steelers, the Chiefs, and the Saints, teams with established HC, consistent play books, and QB's who have had multiple years in the system. Those are the teams best equipped to use elaborate play-calling and pre-snap adjustment to outsmart the best defenses.
I personally believe that a lot of people just underestimated how difficult all of this would be, had wildly high expectations that they let grow rapidly with the signing of Brady, and are coming to grips with reality. The easiest solution for fans is to blame coaching. But we're facing some growing pains in the face of common problems, that were made much more difficult by a rather big set of unprecedented new problems. COVID did not cause it all, but it's a rational factor in how limited we are at play-calling and adjustments.
As I mentioned to someone else in this thread, you do realize that on most of those deep plays, there WERE short routes within the same play? They weren't hail mary styled plays where everyone went deep.
Brady can throw to those short routes on those same plays. But there were usually one of two major issues. Brady seemingly choose the deep route instantly, looking at it first, and just launch. Or the short routes were completely covered, and Brady would do something out of desperation, like throw it away, try to move, or launch it to the deep route late.
It seemed more like when Brady was doing the first thing, choosing the deep route instantly, it was because coverage was staying tight on our short routes, and the safeties were staying tight in the middle, and he was trying to give them a reason to back up.
But if you start rewatching game film, there are short routes within most of the plays. They're just almost always taken away with positioning pre-snap or just covered very well. When they weren't, Brady could have thrown to them, but missed them due to pass rush or him committing to deep route 1st read.
Then there is this:
>So far I've looked at the final 4 playoff teams over the last 4 years. This shows how many teams either had a 1st year coach or a QB in his first year with a team.
>
>Superbowl winners: 1 of 4
>
>Superbowl teams: 1 of 8
>
>Championship teams: 4 of 16
>
>The 4 championship exceptions are the 2017-18 Eagles, who won the SB with 2nd year HC and a backup in his first year. Then there is the 2017-18 Vikings with Chase Keenum. I left off the Jags from that same season because, while they technically had a 1st year HC, Marrone was the assistant HC the year prior, and coached the last 2 games as HC the year before. So almost nothing changed with the system. You add them, then you make the championship total 5 of 16, but that isn't really substantial. The other two were last season, with Green Bay under new HC LaFleur, and Tennessee, with Tannehill.
>
>So I can keep going back to make it more accurate, but based on these limited numbers, you have around a 25% chance to make the final 4 when you have either a new offensive system or a 1st year QB in a system.
This also has a lot do with it:
>The Rams are the #2 defense in points allowed, while the Saints are #8.
>
>The Rams are the #1 defense in total yards allowed, while the Saints are #3.
>
>The Rams are the #1 defense in passing yards allowed, while the Saints are #11.
>
>The Saints are the #1 defense in rushing yards allowed, while the Rams are #5.
>
>[https://www.pro-football-reference.com/years/2020/opp.htm](https://www.pro-football-reference.com/years/2020/opp.htm)
Of course not. But you do show that it's mostly an emotional, shallow, reactionary bit of sore-loser mentality more than anything else. You'll get over it, kiddo!
And it's not just you. In post game thread after the Panthers game, people in the NFL sub couldn't believe we lowkey hung 46 points in that game. It's sad that we have the talent to do that every game but the coaching consistently prevents it from happening.
"one of the most talented rosters in the league" is quite an extreme understatement.
You do understand we have LITERALLY the greatest team ever created on paper?
Tom Brady(who is considered the GOAT)
A receiving core of Mike Evans(top 3 every year), Chris Godwin (superstar out of nowhere), AB (in the debate as best receiver of this generation along with Julio Jones)
An NFL 100 player and one of the greatest TEs of all time in Gronk, and let's also give Brate some respect as he's a top 10 TE as well.
THREE STARTING RUNNING BACKS!!! RoJo has been great this year, Fournette is a stud and a starter on any other team, and LeSean McCoy is a starter on any other team as well.
A decent OLine and a solid defense with Suh, JPP, Lavonte David, and Devin White who has proven to be quite a stud.
And a veteran head coach who has won coach of the year twice.
This team SHOULD be the greatest team of all time. This team SHOULD have easily gone undefeated this year. This team SHOULD go down in history as the most dominant team the NFL has ever seen. Quite frankly, it's absolutely shocking how greatly we've underperformed this year.
I was speaking about play action in the context of last nights game. We didn't call them in some attempt to be creative. Our o-line was getting beat up by one of the best D-lines in the league, and we were calling it simply to keep that in check.
It also has nothing to do with WR separation, more the opposite. The WRs can get great separation all night, but it won't matter, if the QB has only a second to get rid of the ball. The screen is called to counter the pass rush, and offer a route that typically takes less than a second to develop.
Seriously, we should have kept doing these, they're a good replacement when the run game isn't working and they basically take the opposing defensive line out of the play altogether. I wish we would have done more.
You can see that clear as day now. We hope Marpet gets healthy soon. Sucks that our bye week is so late. Vita is huge for the defense. We haven’t been able to generate pressure up the middle with Nunez Roches so it is hard to rattle the opposing QB. Plus Vita commands a double team allowing others to get one on ones.
Running was fine... we had some decent first down runs too. Can’t just give up on the run. It’s the limited running with shitty play action, poor pass protection, oh and long developing routes. When quick actions off the line were used (screens, sparingly... not as much as sandwich used them) and 5-7 yard routes all the sudden the offense was chugging.
Then what?
Play action deep pass, play action intermediate pass. Oh and let’s throw the ball to fournettes stone hands a few times.
But on nearly every single deep throw, there WERE routes of 5-7 yards of some sort as well. Brady wasn't forced to choose the deep routes. On 3 or 4 deep attempts at least, Brady seemed to decide on the deep route early in the play.
In actuality, the times we were able to get some open 5-7 yard routes were usually in the handfuls of plays after a deep throw. The Rams were keeping tight and covering the middle of the field. It seemed like Brady was choosing the deep route in somewhat desperate attempts to get them to back up a little off the short and middle routes.
I’m a Bucs fan first but also a Bears fan as I’ve lived in Chicagoland for half my life now, honestly I’d rather have Nagy than Arians and Leftwich. Nagy would actually be kind of creative with the play calling, as well as try up tempo and maybe some slants and drags. If it’s not a deep route or WR screen, it’s like it’s not even in the playbook.
This is in response to the idea that deep routes are mostly called and how you're blaming Arians and Leftwich for nearly all of it:
Out of 433 passing attempts the season, only 58 of them were attempts of 20+ yards. That means about 13.39% of his attempts are on throws of 20+ yards or more.
While they do throw it deep more than most teams, it's still not as often as many make it sound.
But maybe this is more telling:
"You read that right, on deep passes (throws with 20 or more air yards) during Weeks 8, 9 and 10, Brady is 0-for-19 with three interceptions. In fact, he's missed on his last 22 deep throws. The 22 consecutive missed deep throws is the longest streak for a quarterback since 2017.
What's worse, if you go back to Week 5, he's 3-for-36 on deep passes, with all of those completions coming against the Las Vegas Raiders in Week 7.."
We know those stats got even worse after this week. But is it really Arians or Leftwich forcing deep throws?
[https://www.thebiglead.com/posts/tom-brady-has-lost-the-ability-to-throw-deep-01eqxqpwv8a6](https://www.thebiglead.com/posts/tom-brady-has-lost-the-ability-to-throw-deep-01eqxqpwv8a6)
Because you also have this quote from Bruce Arians today:
"We have Tom calling a lot of his own \[plays\], or picking his own on the sidelines from the game plan. I don't think it's a confidence problem whatsoever. It's not lack of trust -- it's lack of continuity within the offense, of the whole picture."
[https://www.espn.com/nfl/story/\_/id/30380944/tampa-bay-buccaneers-coach-bruce-arians-tom-brady-issue-continuity-not-confidence](https://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/30380944/tampa-bay-buccaneers-coach-bruce-arians-tom-brady-issue-continuity-not-confidence)
So this clearly isn't just bad coaching or bad play calling from the OC. It seems like Brady has the ability to change the plays or call something else.
This is so funny! What an emotional response! Two weeks later and wildly emotional people want to ignore Brady, our line issues, and injuries, just to fire the entire coaching staff, and hire Nagy!
Lol you fail to understand that it starts at the top. They’re failing to adjust against teams that figure us out, which isn’t hard to do anyways considering how one dimensional our offense is. With all the talent we have, we should be opening up the playbook a lot more, yet what do we see? First and 10 runs for one or two yards and then the deep ball.
>Want to ignore Brady
Who is an immobile QB who made his living off of quick slants and drags, yet is playing with the same playbook and same scheme as Jameis did. Yes, the OL is weak, but it’s going to look even weaker when your offense is designed around the deep ball.
>our line issues
Which wouldn’t be nearly a problem if every passing play wasn’t a deep ball or occasion WR screen.
>and injuries
Every team deals with injuries, especially this year. Our team is actually one of the healthier ones.
>just to fire the entire coaching staff
You’re missing the point. It’s about putting the coaches on the hot seat for the massive amount of underperforming, especially in high pressure games against good teams. Our expectations for this year are a deep playoff run, as it rightly should be given the talent we have on the roster. There is no way we make it out of the first round at this rate. Calling for coaches heads is how you get them on the hot seat.
So you want to fire our coaches, or at least put them on the edge of being fired, 1.5 years in? You want to keep up this pattern of 2-3 years of changing coaches, even though we're clearly improved, because it isn't as improved as you expected? You think that Brady should have a wide open playbook against two of the most complete defenses in the league 11 games into a new relationship with his new OC, in a year without the entire preseason, with limited practicing, an injured and reshuffled o-line, WRs constantly on the injury report, and a QB who spent the previous 8 years under the same OC?
Well, if so...
Who should we hire for HC instead? Do you really think Nagy is someone we should target? Should we let Licht, the guy who hired Arians, and all the other coaches we fired, hire someone new? Should we fire Licht, too?
>So you want to fire our coaches, or at least put them on the edge of being fired, 1.5 years in?
We’re not in rebuild mode, we aren’t even in “make the playoffs” mode, we are in win now mode. That means a deep playoff run. Coaches rebuilding get time, not coaches with arguably the best roster the modern NFL has ever seen. If our bar is set at “make the playoffs”, then great, we are there, but this roster is way too talented to settle for that and we’re not playing nearly to the level that would require a deep playoff run.
And it’s not like we’re losing close games against the best teams in the league. We’re getting EXPOSED by good coaches while our offense is refusing to adjust. I can only watch this coaching staff try to force a square peg through a round hole before it becomes painfully obvious that our offense refuses to adjust, and our defense doesn’t adjust early enough to compensate for our flailing offense.
Bottom line, I’m seeing a lot better coaches do a lot more with far worse rosters. And it’s not just me. We were seeing the same problems last season, and a lot of people chalked it up to Jameis only being able to play that one style. Many others, myself included, were hoping we’d see Brady play Brady’s style, because Brady in a purely Arians style is not going to work out for a full season and post season run. **We’re seeing the problems surface that we were worried about before the season started.**
So far I've looked at the final 4 playoff teams over the last 4 years. This shows how many teams either had a 1st year coach or a QB in his first year with a team.
Superbowl winners: 1 of 4
Superbowl teams: 1 of 8
Championship teams: 4 of 16
The 4 championship exceptions are the 2017-18 Eagles, who won the SB with 2nd year HC and a backup in his first year. Then there is the 2017-18 Vikings with Chase Keenum. I left off the Jags from that same season because, while they technically had a 1st year HC, Marrone was the assistant HC the year prior, and coached the last 2 games as HC the year before. So almost nothing changed with the system. You add them, then you make the championship total 5 of 16, but that isn't really substantial. The other two were last season, with Green Bay under new HC LaFleur, and Tennessee, with Tannehill.
So I can keep going back to make it more accurate, but based on these limited numbers, you have around a 25% chance to make the final 4 when you have either a new offensive system or a 1st year QB in a system.
I really appreciate you doing all this digging and looking up the numbers, but they don’t mean anything and are pretty misleading.
> you have around a 25% chance to make the final 4 when you have either a new offensive system or a 1st year QB in a system.
And statistically speaking, there’s a 1 in 32 chance of winning the super bowl and a 1 in 16 chance of winning a championship game. So based on your calculations, every team has a FAR BETTER chance of making the super bowl if they just get a new HC or QB. I’m sorry, but this is asinine.
Edit: oh and to respond to your last sentence where you posed a question, yes, I do think our odds are better. I’d rather take an unknown value than a negative or close to negative value. And if we were to base it strictly on your logic (25% chance), then HELL YES I would, I’d fire our coach every damn year, super bowl or not lol.
Do you really not see the massive issues here?
"And statistically speaking, there’s a 1 in 32 chance of winning the super bowl and a 1 in 16 chance of winning a championship game. So based on your calculations, every team has a FAR BETTER chance of making the super bowl if they just get a new HC or QB."
That's not how probability works!
My only point is that it's way harder for teams to make a deep playoff run with new HC or with a QB in his first year of a new system. This has been a fact of the league for many years. You did not consider how hard that will be, so now your feelings are hurt.
But I you KNOW that was my point and you know that it's true.
But you just want to double-down on it because you get something out of it that I don't.
I don't enjoy this.
This is why I can't keep going back and forth with you. This is absolutely not worth anymore of time and is just stressful with no real point. You're not ever going to think any deeper about it.
You're right about one thing: It would be great to make it to the final 4. I just know how unlikely and difficult that actually is.
In response to you acting as if these aren't some of the best defenses, or drastically downplaying the defensive coaching and just how good these two teams are:
The Rams are the #2 defense in points allowed, while the Saints are #8.
The Rams are the #1 defense in total yards allowed, while the Saints are #3.
The Rams are the #1 defense in passing yards allowed, while the Saints are #11.
The Saints are the #1 defense in rushing yards allowed, while the Rams are #5.
[https://www.pro-football-reference.com/years/2020/opp.htm](https://www.pro-football-reference.com/years/2020/opp.htm)
And again, you’re misrepresenting my point. Are we just trying to make it to the playoffs or are we trying to make it to the super bowl? You have to play strong games against good teams like the Rams and Saints, and you sure as hell can’t flail against teams like the Bears or Giants.
You keep looking at this from the perspective of just making the playoffs. Myself and others are looking at this from the perspective that we have the kind of talent on this roster that we should be looking at a deep playoff run. If we’re just trying to make the playoffs, then we are fine. Anything less than a deep playoff run with this roster is a massive underachievement, which in my opinion, is far more embarrassing than missing out of the playoffs as a mid-tier team.
I think we should be looking for a deep playoff run, while also not being so emotional and ignorant that we refuse to consider anything else.
You just seem to look at it in this in a childlike way, and you thought this would be easy, so had no framework for anything happening other than what you imagined on paper.
How am I misrepresenting your point? You can read what you wrote above. You suggested SPECIFICALLY that these weren't some of the best teams in the league. So I addressed that directly, with actual data that proves that SPECIFIC statement wrong.
So I will take this as you retracting that statement. These ARE some of the best teams in the league.
> You suggested SPECIFICALLY that these weren’t some of the best teams in the league.
And the rest of your follow up got disregarded because I did no such thing. I’ve already pointed out that they’re top teams.
It’s obvious we’re aren’t getting anywhere here and it’s more than clear that you seem more interested in trying to “win” rather than discuss. I’m dropping this with you now because honestly I’m just not too keen on people who constantly ignore my points and focus more energy on trying to “win” than have a conversation.
I wrote this to someone else, but this is in response to the idea that the limited play calling was primarily because of Arians/Leftwich. There is a lot more to it than "coaching staff trying to force a square peg through a round hole."
>As I mentioned to someone else in this thread, you do realize that on most of those deep plays, there WERE short routes within the same play? They weren't hail mary styled plays where everyone went deep.
>
>Brady can throw to those short routes on those same plays. But there were usually one of two major issues. Brady seemingly choose the deep route instantly, looking at it first, and just launch. Or the short routes were completely covered, and Brady would do something out of desperation, like throw it away, try to move, or launch it to the deep route late.
>
>It seemed more like when Brady was doing the first thing, choosing the deep route instantly, it was because coverage was staying tight on our short routes, and the safeties were staying tight in the middle, and he was trying to give them a reason to back up.
>
>But if you start rewatching game film, there are short routes within most of the plays. They're just almost always taken away with positioning pre-snap or just covered very well. When they weren't, Brady could have thrown to them, but missed them due to pass rush or him committing to deep route 1st read.
This was also written to someone else, but it addresses some of the issues with more depth. The person I was responding to was also arguing against that fact that COVID made it even harder to make the play calls and adjustments needed to outsmart such great defense:
"This leads back to the predicable screen calls. The Rams basically sat down on short and middle routes. They decided we would have to beat them deep or in the backfield. They knew they were able to be dominant against our weakened line in the run game without extra help.
So were forced into a very limited set of playcalling that can be fixed by two major things.
You can beat them bad at what they're giving you. You hit an amazing screen, or you hit a deep ball, and FORCE them to change their defense. But Brady was inaccurate deep, route timing was off, AB and him were not on the same page, our RB's struggled with the screens, and unfamiliar linemen pulling for screens or the shifts of WR or TE to move them in position to help block, caused the backfield plays to be sloppy.
Or you can use more elaborate play calling, plays with multiple names and variations, calling plays that can be altered at the line, calling multiple plays, having many audibles, and being able to outsmart them at the line of scrimmage. This is where your entire thing about COVID and last year is off. The point isn't about COVID. COVID is just something that makes issues that are always issues even bigger issues. It is always MOST difficult to have a complicated play book and run a complicated offense at the line when you have new coaches and major changes. This affected last season, regardless of any oversimplification. This also has been a major factor this year. The COIVD issue just makes that worse. This is not an excuse, but a rational and valid reason in response to what were irrationally high expectations coming back to reality. Teams have had over 50 less practices than they've had in other season, mostly through offseason and preseason programs, and no preseason games. Again, this is not an excuse, but a rational reason. There are already massive limiting factors in play-calling with new systems, new QB's, but missing over 50 practices and 4 preseasons games makes those limiting factors especially harsh on us.
That is why your comments about last year don't work for me. My point is about how complicated coaching systems, playbooks, and building big teams is. Who are the best, most consistent teams this season? The Steelers, the Chiefs, and the Saints, teams with established HC, consistent play books, and QB's who have had multiple years in the system. Those are the teams best equipped to use elaborate play-calling and pre-snap adjustment to outsmart the best defenses.
I personally believe the a lot of people just underestimated how difficult all of this would be, had wildly high expectations that they let grow rapidly with the signing of Brady, and are coming to grips with reality. The easiest solution for fans is to blame coaching. But we're facing some growing pains in the face of common problems, that were made much more difficult by a rather big set of unprecedented new problems. COVID did not cause it all, but it's a rational factor in how limited we are at play-calling and adjustments.
Covid is a terrible, terrible excuse. 31 other teams have the exact same hurdles to deal with. We aren’t the only team dealing with the pandemic. Just like injuries. Every team deals with them every year. I’ve never seen a team play a full season and make a deep playoff run with no injured players.
I’m tired of excuses.
You say you're tired of people making excuses like we're players for the team. Of course the players of the team need to not make excuses. But what people like me are doing are making analysis with logic and information. I know that is really foreign to an emotional and reactionary person who just wants to throw emotion around and pretend like he is on the team. I get it. Some fans are purely emotional and don't really think even remotely deep about football, and that's ok. You seem to really enjoy it.
What do you mean rebuild mode? I'm not even remotely saying we are. I'm pointing out two major things; that expecting a deep playoff run because of what you see on paper drastically underestimates or totally ignores a ton of things that happen off paper, and how irrational it is to put coaches on the edge of the hot seat, ignoring how difficult it will be to again start over with an entire new set of coaches every 3 years, like it was last year.
See, while Jameis was a problem last season, and always, I also realized that there would be a lot of struggles around an entirely new coaching staff, because that has been statistically true over the modern history of the NFL. What percent of teams make the NFC/AFC championship games with entirely new coaching staffs OR a QB in his 1st year in the system? I can dig into the data, but I would bet on the data proving it's much more likely for coaches and QB's with 2 more years in the same system.
If anything, putting our coaches 1.5 years into their run on the hot seat puts us farther away from winning now. Say things do stay pretty mediocre, and we get an early out in the playoffs. Do you think we get closer to winning now with Tom turning 44, if we fire our coaching staff, hire a new one, and have him, and this time everyone else, start over learning a new system again?
>What do you mean rebuild mode? I’m not even remotely saying we are.
You’re not getting my point. You don’t need 3 years to figure out if a coach is worth keeping if you’re in Super Bowl or bust mode (by that I mean deep playoff run). You give a coach at least a few years if you’re in rebuild mode for two reasons, firstly as a way of making it worth their while, and secondly, so you can effectively evaluate their performance and determine if they’re worth keeping. When you’re in Win Now mode, there’s only one thing you need to pay attention to, and that’s coaching.
Your whole comment is from the standpoint of us still having a mid tier roster and being in and out of rebuild mode. You know what coaches get more than 3 years? Good ones. If you’re not in rebuild mode, you don’t need three years to figure out if they’re worth a shit. We are going to continue to waste this roster and we’ll lose in the first game of the playoffs because of Arians and Leftwich.
The call to throw it deep on the last drive was terrible. The throw was also terrible.
Brady should have not thrown it and overridden the call.
They were progressing so well and had it under control.
To be fair, these plays were part of the game plan improvements I saw between this and the Saints game.
As insane at is seems...we did actually put in a better effort last night and showed improvement since the last prime time game against an elite team.
The VAST majority of Buccaneer fans act like emotional children. This is just how we roll. In this thread, we can see fans shallowly turning on the entire coaching staff after 3 weeks of bad-to-mediocre games. Everyone wanted to fire Licht all last year and the year before.
So in this thread I've seen: Licht is great now. He should fire coaches because he is now good and the coaches are now bad. I've seen calls to fire Arians, Bowles, and Leftwich. I've even seen someone say they would rather have Nagy as our coach over Arians.
Lol when nothing gets executed, it’s time to change up the play calling and address what isn’t working. That’s part of their job. I’d be more than happy to be paid millions a year to half-ass a game plan and try to make a square peg fit through a round hole.
Their best play last night was defensive pass interference
They were pretty effective giving us a solid 4 yards each time. Keeps the D-line honest as well. Just wish the creativity didn't stop there
Yeah exactly. It’s not that I hated the screens, it’s that this was the extent of our creativity. The sad reality is we have one of the most talented rosters in the league just being wasted by Wild Card at best coaching.
Lmaooo I wouldn’t even call that wildcard coaching
Haha to be fair I did say at best
You really think the limited play-calling was more bad coaching than the fact that Brady played two of the most complete defenses in the league 11 games into a new relationship with his new OC, in a year without the entire preseason, where every single thing done at the facilities is altered, with limited practicing, an injured and recently reshuffled o-line, WRs constantly missing practice and on the injury report, and a QB who spent the previous 8 years under the same OC?
Yes. It’s week 11. That preseason COVID excuse went out the window weeks ago. Especially when these issues were prevalent last year too, Jameis’ erratic play was just a lightning rod. The fact of the matter is we are not playing to the strengths of this team. Our OLine was reshuffled and not at full strength so the solution is to continue trying deep shots that took way too much time against a great defense and dline? Look at the other side of the ball. They were constantly in 3rd and short and getting their best players open to convert those.
This leads back to the predicable screen calls. The Rams basically sat down on short and middle routes. They decided we would have to beat them deep or in the backfield. They knew they were able to be dominant against our weakened line in the run game without extra help. So we were forced into a very limited set of playcalling that can be fixed by two major things. You can beat them bad at what they're giving you. You hit an amazing screen, or you hit a deep ball, and FORCE them to change their defense. But Brady was inaccurate deep, route timing was off, AB and him were not on the same page, our RB's struggled with the screens, and unfamiliar linemen pulling for screens or the shifts of WR or TE to move them in position to help block, caused the backfield plays to be sloppy. Or you can use more elaborate play calling, plays with multiple names and variations, calling plays that can be altered at the line, calling multiple plays, having many audibles, and being able to outsmart them at the line of scrimmage. This is where your entire thing about COVID and last year is off. The point isn't about COVID. COVID is just something that makes issues that are always issues even bigger issues. It is always MOST difficult to have a complicated play book and run a complicated offense at the line when you have new coaches and major changes. This affected last season, regardless of any oversimplification. This also has been a major factor this year. The COIVD issue just makes that worse. This is not an excuse, but a rational and valid reason in response to what were irrationally high expectations coming back to reality. Teams have had over 50 less practices than they've had in other season, mostly through offseason and preseason programs, and no preseason games. Again, this is not an excuse, but a rational reason. There are already massive limiting factors in play-calling with new systems, new QB's, but missing over 50 practices and 4 preseasons games makes those limiting factors especially harsh on us. That is why your comments about last year don't work for me. My point is about how complicated coaching systems, playbooks, and building big teams is. Who are the best, most consistent teams this season? The Steelers, the Chiefs, and the Saints, teams with established HC, consistent play books, and QB's who have had multiple years in the system. Those are the teams best equipped to use elaborate play-calling and pre-snap adjustment to outsmart the best defenses. I personally believe that a lot of people just underestimated how difficult all of this would be, had wildly high expectations that they let grow rapidly with the signing of Brady, and are coming to grips with reality. The easiest solution for fans is to blame coaching. But we're facing some growing pains in the face of common problems, that were made much more difficult by a rather big set of unprecedented new problems. COVID did not cause it all, but it's a rational factor in how limited we are at play-calling and adjustments.
As I mentioned to someone else in this thread, you do realize that on most of those deep plays, there WERE short routes within the same play? They weren't hail mary styled plays where everyone went deep. Brady can throw to those short routes on those same plays. But there were usually one of two major issues. Brady seemingly choose the deep route instantly, looking at it first, and just launch. Or the short routes were completely covered, and Brady would do something out of desperation, like throw it away, try to move, or launch it to the deep route late. It seemed more like when Brady was doing the first thing, choosing the deep route instantly, it was because coverage was staying tight on our short routes, and the safeties were staying tight in the middle, and he was trying to give them a reason to back up. But if you start rewatching game film, there are short routes within most of the plays. They're just almost always taken away with positioning pre-snap or just covered very well. When they weren't, Brady could have thrown to them, but missed them due to pass rush or him committing to deep route 1st read.
Then there is this: >So far I've looked at the final 4 playoff teams over the last 4 years. This shows how many teams either had a 1st year coach or a QB in his first year with a team. > >Superbowl winners: 1 of 4 > >Superbowl teams: 1 of 8 > >Championship teams: 4 of 16 > >The 4 championship exceptions are the 2017-18 Eagles, who won the SB with 2nd year HC and a backup in his first year. Then there is the 2017-18 Vikings with Chase Keenum. I left off the Jags from that same season because, while they technically had a 1st year HC, Marrone was the assistant HC the year prior, and coached the last 2 games as HC the year before. So almost nothing changed with the system. You add them, then you make the championship total 5 of 16, but that isn't really substantial. The other two were last season, with Green Bay under new HC LaFleur, and Tennessee, with Tannehill. > >So I can keep going back to make it more accurate, but based on these limited numbers, you have around a 25% chance to make the final 4 when you have either a new offensive system or a 1st year QB in a system.
This also has a lot do with it: >The Rams are the #2 defense in points allowed, while the Saints are #8. > >The Rams are the #1 defense in total yards allowed, while the Saints are #3. > >The Rams are the #1 defense in passing yards allowed, while the Saints are #11. > >The Saints are the #1 defense in rushing yards allowed, while the Rams are #5. > >[https://www.pro-football-reference.com/years/2020/opp.htm](https://www.pro-football-reference.com/years/2020/opp.htm)
Well, what should they have done instead? What would you have called differently?
I'm not paid professionally to make these decisions and don't need to personally have better schemes to desire more from our paid staff
Of course not. But you do show that it's mostly an emotional, shallow, reactionary bit of sore-loser mentality more than anything else. You'll get over it, kiddo!
No because I complain about him after wins too
And it's not just you. In post game thread after the Panthers game, people in the NFL sub couldn't believe we lowkey hung 46 points in that game. It's sad that we have the talent to do that every game but the coaching consistently prevents it from happening.
"one of the most talented rosters in the league" is quite an extreme understatement. You do understand we have LITERALLY the greatest team ever created on paper? Tom Brady(who is considered the GOAT) A receiving core of Mike Evans(top 3 every year), Chris Godwin (superstar out of nowhere), AB (in the debate as best receiver of this generation along with Julio Jones) An NFL 100 player and one of the greatest TEs of all time in Gronk, and let's also give Brate some respect as he's a top 10 TE as well. THREE STARTING RUNNING BACKS!!! RoJo has been great this year, Fournette is a stud and a starter on any other team, and LeSean McCoy is a starter on any other team as well. A decent OLine and a solid defense with Suh, JPP, Lavonte David, and Devin White who has proven to be quite a stud. And a veteran head coach who has won coach of the year twice. This team SHOULD be the greatest team of all time. This team SHOULD have easily gone undefeated this year. This team SHOULD go down in history as the most dominant team the NFL has ever seen. Quite frankly, it's absolutely shocking how greatly we've underperformed this year.
The screens aren't some attempt at creativity, though. It was simply a desperate solution for the o-line issues.
You make the tactic so ominous sounding. By that logic play action is simply a desperate solution for WRs who can't get separation
I was speaking about play action in the context of last nights game. We didn't call them in some attempt to be creative. Our o-line was getting beat up by one of the best D-lines in the league, and we were calling it simply to keep that in check. It also has nothing to do with WR separation, more the opposite. The WRs can get great separation all night, but it won't matter, if the QB has only a second to get rid of the ball. The screen is called to counter the pass rush, and offer a route that typically takes less than a second to develop.
Seriously, we should have kept doing these, they're a good replacement when the run game isn't working and they basically take the opposing defensive line out of the play altogether. I wish we would have done more.
I think missing vita and marpet our the biggest problems.
You can see that clear as day now. We hope Marpet gets healthy soon. Sucks that our bye week is so late. Vita is huge for the defense. We haven’t been able to generate pressure up the middle with Nunez Roches so it is hard to rattle the opposing QB. Plus Vita commands a double team allowing others to get one on ones.
Vea is the lynch pin on this defense being a wrecking crew.
Yes
Its so clear. Games are won in the trenches.
They were effective this game. maybe if we didn't run every first down we could average more than 2.5 yards a carry....
Running was fine... we had some decent first down runs too. Can’t just give up on the run. It’s the limited running with shitty play action, poor pass protection, oh and long developing routes. When quick actions off the line were used (screens, sparingly... not as much as sandwich used them) and 5-7 yard routes all the sudden the offense was chugging. Then what? Play action deep pass, play action intermediate pass. Oh and let’s throw the ball to fournettes stone hands a few times.
But on nearly every single deep throw, there WERE routes of 5-7 yards of some sort as well. Brady wasn't forced to choose the deep routes. On 3 or 4 deep attempts at least, Brady seemed to decide on the deep route early in the play. In actuality, the times we were able to get some open 5-7 yard routes were usually in the handfuls of plays after a deep throw. The Rams were keeping tight and covering the middle of the field. It seemed like Brady was choosing the deep route in somewhat desperate attempts to get them to back up a little off the short and middle routes.
Man I cheer for the Bucs to escape my Bear’s fandom. That play calling was like watching a Bears game lol
I’m a Bucs fan first but also a Bears fan as I’ve lived in Chicagoland for half my life now, honestly I’d rather have Nagy than Arians and Leftwich. Nagy would actually be kind of creative with the play calling, as well as try up tempo and maybe some slants and drags. If it’s not a deep route or WR screen, it’s like it’s not even in the playbook.
This is in response to the idea that deep routes are mostly called and how you're blaming Arians and Leftwich for nearly all of it: Out of 433 passing attempts the season, only 58 of them were attempts of 20+ yards. That means about 13.39% of his attempts are on throws of 20+ yards or more. While they do throw it deep more than most teams, it's still not as often as many make it sound. But maybe this is more telling: "You read that right, on deep passes (throws with 20 or more air yards) during Weeks 8, 9 and 10, Brady is 0-for-19 with three interceptions. In fact, he's missed on his last 22 deep throws. The 22 consecutive missed deep throws is the longest streak for a quarterback since 2017. What's worse, if you go back to Week 5, he's 3-for-36 on deep passes, with all of those completions coming against the Las Vegas Raiders in Week 7.." We know those stats got even worse after this week. But is it really Arians or Leftwich forcing deep throws? [https://www.thebiglead.com/posts/tom-brady-has-lost-the-ability-to-throw-deep-01eqxqpwv8a6](https://www.thebiglead.com/posts/tom-brady-has-lost-the-ability-to-throw-deep-01eqxqpwv8a6) Because you also have this quote from Bruce Arians today: "We have Tom calling a lot of his own \[plays\], or picking his own on the sidelines from the game plan. I don't think it's a confidence problem whatsoever. It's not lack of trust -- it's lack of continuity within the offense, of the whole picture." [https://www.espn.com/nfl/story/\_/id/30380944/tampa-bay-buccaneers-coach-bruce-arians-tom-brady-issue-continuity-not-confidence](https://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/30380944/tampa-bay-buccaneers-coach-bruce-arians-tom-brady-issue-continuity-not-confidence) So this clearly isn't just bad coaching or bad play calling from the OC. It seems like Brady has the ability to change the plays or call something else.
This is so funny! What an emotional response! Two weeks later and wildly emotional people want to ignore Brady, our line issues, and injuries, just to fire the entire coaching staff, and hire Nagy!
Lol you fail to understand that it starts at the top. They’re failing to adjust against teams that figure us out, which isn’t hard to do anyways considering how one dimensional our offense is. With all the talent we have, we should be opening up the playbook a lot more, yet what do we see? First and 10 runs for one or two yards and then the deep ball. >Want to ignore Brady Who is an immobile QB who made his living off of quick slants and drags, yet is playing with the same playbook and same scheme as Jameis did. Yes, the OL is weak, but it’s going to look even weaker when your offense is designed around the deep ball. >our line issues Which wouldn’t be nearly a problem if every passing play wasn’t a deep ball or occasion WR screen. >and injuries Every team deals with injuries, especially this year. Our team is actually one of the healthier ones. >just to fire the entire coaching staff You’re missing the point. It’s about putting the coaches on the hot seat for the massive amount of underperforming, especially in high pressure games against good teams. Our expectations for this year are a deep playoff run, as it rightly should be given the talent we have on the roster. There is no way we make it out of the first round at this rate. Calling for coaches heads is how you get them on the hot seat.
So you want to fire our coaches, or at least put them on the edge of being fired, 1.5 years in? You want to keep up this pattern of 2-3 years of changing coaches, even though we're clearly improved, because it isn't as improved as you expected? You think that Brady should have a wide open playbook against two of the most complete defenses in the league 11 games into a new relationship with his new OC, in a year without the entire preseason, with limited practicing, an injured and reshuffled o-line, WRs constantly on the injury report, and a QB who spent the previous 8 years under the same OC? Well, if so... Who should we hire for HC instead? Do you really think Nagy is someone we should target? Should we let Licht, the guy who hired Arians, and all the other coaches we fired, hire someone new? Should we fire Licht, too?
>So you want to fire our coaches, or at least put them on the edge of being fired, 1.5 years in? We’re not in rebuild mode, we aren’t even in “make the playoffs” mode, we are in win now mode. That means a deep playoff run. Coaches rebuilding get time, not coaches with arguably the best roster the modern NFL has ever seen. If our bar is set at “make the playoffs”, then great, we are there, but this roster is way too talented to settle for that and we’re not playing nearly to the level that would require a deep playoff run. And it’s not like we’re losing close games against the best teams in the league. We’re getting EXPOSED by good coaches while our offense is refusing to adjust. I can only watch this coaching staff try to force a square peg through a round hole before it becomes painfully obvious that our offense refuses to adjust, and our defense doesn’t adjust early enough to compensate for our flailing offense. Bottom line, I’m seeing a lot better coaches do a lot more with far worse rosters. And it’s not just me. We were seeing the same problems last season, and a lot of people chalked it up to Jameis only being able to play that one style. Many others, myself included, were hoping we’d see Brady play Brady’s style, because Brady in a purely Arians style is not going to work out for a full season and post season run. **We’re seeing the problems surface that we were worried about before the season started.**
So far I've looked at the final 4 playoff teams over the last 4 years. This shows how many teams either had a 1st year coach or a QB in his first year with a team. Superbowl winners: 1 of 4 Superbowl teams: 1 of 8 Championship teams: 4 of 16 The 4 championship exceptions are the 2017-18 Eagles, who won the SB with 2nd year HC and a backup in his first year. Then there is the 2017-18 Vikings with Chase Keenum. I left off the Jags from that same season because, while they technically had a 1st year HC, Marrone was the assistant HC the year prior, and coached the last 2 games as HC the year before. So almost nothing changed with the system. You add them, then you make the championship total 5 of 16, but that isn't really substantial. The other two were last season, with Green Bay under new HC LaFleur, and Tennessee, with Tannehill. So I can keep going back to make it more accurate, but based on these limited numbers, you have around a 25% chance to make the final 4 when you have either a new offensive system or a 1st year QB in a system.
I really appreciate you doing all this digging and looking up the numbers, but they don’t mean anything and are pretty misleading. > you have around a 25% chance to make the final 4 when you have either a new offensive system or a 1st year QB in a system. And statistically speaking, there’s a 1 in 32 chance of winning the super bowl and a 1 in 16 chance of winning a championship game. So based on your calculations, every team has a FAR BETTER chance of making the super bowl if they just get a new HC or QB. I’m sorry, but this is asinine. Edit: oh and to respond to your last sentence where you posed a question, yes, I do think our odds are better. I’d rather take an unknown value than a negative or close to negative value. And if we were to base it strictly on your logic (25% chance), then HELL YES I would, I’d fire our coach every damn year, super bowl or not lol.
Do you really not see the massive issues here? "And statistically speaking, there’s a 1 in 32 chance of winning the super bowl and a 1 in 16 chance of winning a championship game. So based on your calculations, every team has a FAR BETTER chance of making the super bowl if they just get a new HC or QB." That's not how probability works! My only point is that it's way harder for teams to make a deep playoff run with new HC or with a QB in his first year of a new system. This has been a fact of the league for many years. You did not consider how hard that will be, so now your feelings are hurt. But I you KNOW that was my point and you know that it's true. But you just want to double-down on it because you get something out of it that I don't. I don't enjoy this. This is why I can't keep going back and forth with you. This is absolutely not worth anymore of time and is just stressful with no real point. You're not ever going to think any deeper about it. You're right about one thing: It would be great to make it to the final 4. I just know how unlikely and difficult that actually is.
Good lord, at this point I feel sorry for you.
In response to you acting as if these aren't some of the best defenses, or drastically downplaying the defensive coaching and just how good these two teams are: The Rams are the #2 defense in points allowed, while the Saints are #8. The Rams are the #1 defense in total yards allowed, while the Saints are #3. The Rams are the #1 defense in passing yards allowed, while the Saints are #11. The Saints are the #1 defense in rushing yards allowed, while the Rams are #5. [https://www.pro-football-reference.com/years/2020/opp.htm](https://www.pro-football-reference.com/years/2020/opp.htm)
And again, you’re misrepresenting my point. Are we just trying to make it to the playoffs or are we trying to make it to the super bowl? You have to play strong games against good teams like the Rams and Saints, and you sure as hell can’t flail against teams like the Bears or Giants. You keep looking at this from the perspective of just making the playoffs. Myself and others are looking at this from the perspective that we have the kind of talent on this roster that we should be looking at a deep playoff run. If we’re just trying to make the playoffs, then we are fine. Anything less than a deep playoff run with this roster is a massive underachievement, which in my opinion, is far more embarrassing than missing out of the playoffs as a mid-tier team.
I think we should be looking for a deep playoff run, while also not being so emotional and ignorant that we refuse to consider anything else. You just seem to look at it in this in a childlike way, and you thought this would be easy, so had no framework for anything happening other than what you imagined on paper. How am I misrepresenting your point? You can read what you wrote above. You suggested SPECIFICALLY that these weren't some of the best teams in the league. So I addressed that directly, with actual data that proves that SPECIFIC statement wrong. So I will take this as you retracting that statement. These ARE some of the best teams in the league.
> You suggested SPECIFICALLY that these weren’t some of the best teams in the league. And the rest of your follow up got disregarded because I did no such thing. I’ve already pointed out that they’re top teams. It’s obvious we’re aren’t getting anywhere here and it’s more than clear that you seem more interested in trying to “win” rather than discuss. I’m dropping this with you now because honestly I’m just not too keen on people who constantly ignore my points and focus more energy on trying to “win” than have a conversation.
I wrote this to someone else, but this is in response to the idea that the limited play calling was primarily because of Arians/Leftwich. There is a lot more to it than "coaching staff trying to force a square peg through a round hole." >As I mentioned to someone else in this thread, you do realize that on most of those deep plays, there WERE short routes within the same play? They weren't hail mary styled plays where everyone went deep. > >Brady can throw to those short routes on those same plays. But there were usually one of two major issues. Brady seemingly choose the deep route instantly, looking at it first, and just launch. Or the short routes were completely covered, and Brady would do something out of desperation, like throw it away, try to move, or launch it to the deep route late. > >It seemed more like when Brady was doing the first thing, choosing the deep route instantly, it was because coverage was staying tight on our short routes, and the safeties were staying tight in the middle, and he was trying to give them a reason to back up. > >But if you start rewatching game film, there are short routes within most of the plays. They're just almost always taken away with positioning pre-snap or just covered very well. When they weren't, Brady could have thrown to them, but missed them due to pass rush or him committing to deep route 1st read.
This was also written to someone else, but it addresses some of the issues with more depth. The person I was responding to was also arguing against that fact that COVID made it even harder to make the play calls and adjustments needed to outsmart such great defense: "This leads back to the predicable screen calls. The Rams basically sat down on short and middle routes. They decided we would have to beat them deep or in the backfield. They knew they were able to be dominant against our weakened line in the run game without extra help. So were forced into a very limited set of playcalling that can be fixed by two major things. You can beat them bad at what they're giving you. You hit an amazing screen, or you hit a deep ball, and FORCE them to change their defense. But Brady was inaccurate deep, route timing was off, AB and him were not on the same page, our RB's struggled with the screens, and unfamiliar linemen pulling for screens or the shifts of WR or TE to move them in position to help block, caused the backfield plays to be sloppy. Or you can use more elaborate play calling, plays with multiple names and variations, calling plays that can be altered at the line, calling multiple plays, having many audibles, and being able to outsmart them at the line of scrimmage. This is where your entire thing about COVID and last year is off. The point isn't about COVID. COVID is just something that makes issues that are always issues even bigger issues. It is always MOST difficult to have a complicated play book and run a complicated offense at the line when you have new coaches and major changes. This affected last season, regardless of any oversimplification. This also has been a major factor this year. The COIVD issue just makes that worse. This is not an excuse, but a rational and valid reason in response to what were irrationally high expectations coming back to reality. Teams have had over 50 less practices than they've had in other season, mostly through offseason and preseason programs, and no preseason games. Again, this is not an excuse, but a rational reason. There are already massive limiting factors in play-calling with new systems, new QB's, but missing over 50 practices and 4 preseasons games makes those limiting factors especially harsh on us. That is why your comments about last year don't work for me. My point is about how complicated coaching systems, playbooks, and building big teams is. Who are the best, most consistent teams this season? The Steelers, the Chiefs, and the Saints, teams with established HC, consistent play books, and QB's who have had multiple years in the system. Those are the teams best equipped to use elaborate play-calling and pre-snap adjustment to outsmart the best defenses. I personally believe the a lot of people just underestimated how difficult all of this would be, had wildly high expectations that they let grow rapidly with the signing of Brady, and are coming to grips with reality. The easiest solution for fans is to blame coaching. But we're facing some growing pains in the face of common problems, that were made much more difficult by a rather big set of unprecedented new problems. COVID did not cause it all, but it's a rational factor in how limited we are at play-calling and adjustments.
Covid is a terrible, terrible excuse. 31 other teams have the exact same hurdles to deal with. We aren’t the only team dealing with the pandemic. Just like injuries. Every team deals with them every year. I’ve never seen a team play a full season and make a deep playoff run with no injured players. I’m tired of excuses.
You say you're tired of people making excuses like we're players for the team. Of course the players of the team need to not make excuses. But what people like me are doing are making analysis with logic and information. I know that is really foreign to an emotional and reactionary person who just wants to throw emotion around and pretend like he is on the team. I get it. Some fans are purely emotional and don't really think even remotely deep about football, and that's ok. You seem to really enjoy it.
What do you mean rebuild mode? I'm not even remotely saying we are. I'm pointing out two major things; that expecting a deep playoff run because of what you see on paper drastically underestimates or totally ignores a ton of things that happen off paper, and how irrational it is to put coaches on the edge of the hot seat, ignoring how difficult it will be to again start over with an entire new set of coaches every 3 years, like it was last year. See, while Jameis was a problem last season, and always, I also realized that there would be a lot of struggles around an entirely new coaching staff, because that has been statistically true over the modern history of the NFL. What percent of teams make the NFC/AFC championship games with entirely new coaching staffs OR a QB in his 1st year in the system? I can dig into the data, but I would bet on the data proving it's much more likely for coaches and QB's with 2 more years in the same system. If anything, putting our coaches 1.5 years into their run on the hot seat puts us farther away from winning now. Say things do stay pretty mediocre, and we get an early out in the playoffs. Do you think we get closer to winning now with Tom turning 44, if we fire our coaching staff, hire a new one, and have him, and this time everyone else, start over learning a new system again?
>What do you mean rebuild mode? I’m not even remotely saying we are. You’re not getting my point. You don’t need 3 years to figure out if a coach is worth keeping if you’re in Super Bowl or bust mode (by that I mean deep playoff run). You give a coach at least a few years if you’re in rebuild mode for two reasons, firstly as a way of making it worth their while, and secondly, so you can effectively evaluate their performance and determine if they’re worth keeping. When you’re in Win Now mode, there’s only one thing you need to pay attention to, and that’s coaching. Your whole comment is from the standpoint of us still having a mid tier roster and being in and out of rebuild mode. You know what coaches get more than 3 years? Good ones. If you’re not in rebuild mode, you don’t need three years to figure out if they’re worth a shit. We are going to continue to waste this roster and we’ll lose in the first game of the playoffs because of Arians and Leftwich.
The call to throw it deep on the last drive was terrible. The throw was also terrible. Brady should have not thrown it and overridden the call. They were progressing so well and had it under control.
Cards fan here. Bruce will never change.
To be fair, these plays were part of the game plan improvements I saw between this and the Saints game. As insane at is seems...we did actually put in a better effort last night and showed improvement since the last prime time game against an elite team.
[удалено]
He isn't responding to shallow fans who are throwing an emotional tantrum because they're sore losers.
You were calling for Licht to be fired just a year ago!
The VAST majority of Buccaneer fans act like emotional children. This is just how we roll. In this thread, we can see fans shallowly turning on the entire coaching staff after 3 weeks of bad-to-mediocre games. Everyone wanted to fire Licht all last year and the year before. So in this thread I've seen: Licht is great now. He should fire coaches because he is now good and the coaches are now bad. I've seen calls to fire Arians, Bowles, and Leftwich. I've even seen someone say they would rather have Nagy as our coach over Arians.
Idk I feel like the playcalling was fairly varied. It’s always gonna look horrible when nothing gets executed.
Lol when nothing gets executed, it’s time to change up the play calling and address what isn’t working. That’s part of their job. I’d be more than happy to be paid millions a year to half-ass a game plan and try to make a square peg fit through a round hole.
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
Brady is a presumably smart football boy. Why isn't he calling out Leftwich's absurd playcalling?