OC - Scott Turner incoming

[HigSkin]

 

[RemoveSnyder]

12 minutes ago, Jumbo said:

yeah, as far as early forecasting, after my more positive vibe of the first couple days it's back to an objective look at the new guard and won't believe much in "promise" until i see it on the field over the course of a season

 

This is why ultimately I feel like whoever Ron hires to be the "grocery getter," the new GM person, has got to be on-point in landing top tier talent for both sides of the ball.

Dare I say at the level of a Beathard. Because that's how Ron is going to succeed, with talent across the board and talent in depth, coming in every year with the standard percentage of turnover that happens each year. 

 

Specifically, I think the entire defensive 7 man coverage shell needs to be upgraded, particularly in the middle with the two stack Linebackers, the Rover safety (impromptu 3rd LB), the two Slot DBs, then the FS/SS combo pair, and the backup positions of the rotational CBs/SAFs and hybrids. (I know you are a hybrid and proud of it). 

 

The GM hire is so critical. 

[HigSkin]

1 hour ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

 

 

Some counter context...😂

 

 

[Skinsinparadise]

26 minutes ago, joeken24 said:

So here's the thing with the Scott Turner hire (as far as I see it):

 

Retaining KOC would have been based on a narrative and not production. I think everyone looked at McVay and created this fear factor about letting young coaches go.

 

 

You mention the thing about the Scott Turner hire but then make your point purely about O'Connell.  How does Turner contrast to your point about O'Connell?

 

I am not down on Scott.  I got an open mind about him.   And I don't care about his poor offensive stats and his lack of experience just like I didn't about O'Connell.  Context explains plenty IMO as for why our offense wasn't hot this year.  Ditto Carolina.   

 

I think Rivera has every right to hire whomever he wants.  So no crying from me about the change.   But if I am thinking purely on the point that Turner merits a stronger case than O'Connell based on some narrative -- that narrative doesn't come to me easily aside from Rivera should be able to hire whomever he chooses.

4 minutes ago, HigSkin said:

 

Some counter context...😂

 

 

 Lol, thanks, neither point is big with me -- S. Smith or Chad Ryan's.  I posted it for entertainment reasons.  The criticism about Scott from Joe Banner I take a little seriously though but he's just one opinion.  But Steve Smith like I said might have a grudge against Rivera. 😀

Edited January 9, 2020 by Skinsinparadise

[RemoveSnyder]

2 hours ago, Llevron said:

Sounds good! 

Unrelated but important.....you wanna job? Great benefits and wonderful accidental death and dismemberment plan. 

 

My heart belongs to the State comrade. Do you have a union? I could certainly come bye and observe your operation. You just need to speak up more loudly into my flower boutonniere so that I can hear you better. 

[Gibbs828791]

I saw were Smith was all excited on the Panthers hire. You know the guy that 99% of the people never heard of and had one year of NFL coaching. Sure Steve, thats going to work out great with a know it all, meddling, insufferable owner....good luck! I will take this higher and coaches all day and my guess is most people that work in the NFL would also.

[SoCalSkins]

7 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

You mention the thing about the Scott Turner hire but then make your point purely about O'Connell.  How does Turner contrast to your point about O'Connell?

 

I am not down on Scott.  I got an open mind about him.   And I don't care about his poor offensive stats and his lack of experience just like I didn't about O'Connell.  Context explains plenty IMO as for why our offense wasn't hot this year.  Ditto Carolina.   

 

I think Rivera has every right to hire whomever he wants.  So no crying from me about the change.   But if I am thinking purely on the point that Turner merits a stronger case than O'Connell based on some narrative -- that narrative doesn't come to me easily aside from Rivera should be able to hire whomever he chooses.

 

 

You have been crying about it. You wanted KOC because of Haskins. You stated it numerous times.  That is the main reason he should actually not be the OC.
 

The narrative why you don’t keep KOC aside from not having familiarity with Ron is because Haskins was entitled, not disciplined, not bought in and KOC enabled that or was unable to do anything about it. 
 

Haskins then lobbied for him on social media to get the job which was probably the death knell of it ever happening. Then the boy wonder coach was apparently clutching his pearls over the audacity of the head coach to ask to interview him a second time. That’s not a dynamic you continue as a head coach regardless of how wonderful of a 90 minute window of football they had together all year.

 

You are really going to dislike the Scott hire when the starting QB in game 1 ends up being a QB Ron acquires this off-season.   You should prepare for that reality otherwise you are in for a lot of disappointment...

[Fresh8686]

On its face, I am kind of meh on losing KOC and getting Turner. I prefer KOC over Turner in an apples to apples comparison, but having Ken Zampese as the QB Coach and offensive “details guy” as jay Gruden called him when they worked together almost  tips the scales into the positive. 

 

 

[Conn]

I get the anti-nepotism argument because I've made it before as well and it's rampant in the NFL. Some analyst or another refers to it as "the cocoon" and I like that term for it. It works. 

 

But in this case it feels more than a bit disingenous to have been totally fine with the barely experienced and no-pedigree-at-all KOC just because Haskins liked him and looked better for 1.5 games at the end of the season, while being uncertain about the younger Turner.

 

He doesn't have much literal playcalling experience either, but Turner's been surrounded by a lot of the same assistants he'll have here for a while (for those into continuity and unity of purpose), and it sounds like he's had more than your typical QB coach duties under Norv for quite a while. He's been personally groomed by his dad to take over and has seen the inside of a proven offense and intimately learned the inner workings of scheming, gameplanning, situational playcalling, etc. in the same offense he's bringing with him, plus whatever modern tweaks he makes to it. And we have Zampese as a safety net imo.

 

Is that a rose-colored interpretation of Turner's qualifications? Absolutely. But so is any paragraph you'd read that would make KOC seem like an equally reasonable or even more qualified option. Turner's grooming is much more tangibly existent and deliberate if anything. 

 

If you wanted an experienced vet, I get where you're coming from. I wanted Shurmur personally. No argument towards anyone who feels that way.

 

But if you were a KOC guy hanging onto the narrative about him, aside from Haskins learning a new system you basically can't argue that Turner is a worse hire. In my opinion. All we have is the local media wanting him to be the next McVay. Not saying he'll be this kind of talent, but Turner has way more in common with Kyle Shanahan when he got his first OC gig than KOC has in common with really any of the guys DC media wants him to be like. 

Edited January 9, 2020 by ConnSKINS26

[Fresh8686]

So how do most people feel when it’s put this way?

 

KOC and Rattay vs Turner and Zampese

 

When talking about sample size would it be fair to say that Z has the largest successful sample size of the 4? 

Edited January 9, 2020 by Fresh8686

[HTTRDynasty]

3 minutes ago, Fresh8686 said:

So how do most people feel when it’s put this way?

 

KOC and Rattay vs Turner and Zampese

 

When talking about sample size would it be fair to say that Z has the largest successful sample size of the 4? 

 

Yeah, I'd definitely take the latter over the former.

[RandyHolt]

Buzz kill hearing Steve Smith poo pooing our shiny new OC

 

I want OCKOC back.

 

There is something to be said for a headcoach assembling the same staff from his previous position that he got fired from. 

Edited January 9, 2020 by RandyHolt

[Skinsinparadise]

27 minutes ago, SoCalSkins said:

 

You have been crying about it. You wanted KOC because of Haskins. You stated it numerous times.  That is the main reason he should actually not be the OC.

 

I haven't being crying about squat.  It's not hard to see you like to bring a school yard spitting match flavor to these discussions, I guess for entertainment purposes?   That's fine if it amuses you.  But it isn't always based by reality.  😉

 

If I had to pick the dude I'd want to stay above all it would be Kyle Smith.  And I've flat out said multiple times, if Rivera wanted even him gone.  I am cool with it.  I want him to have whatever and whomever he wants.

 

I said I prefer O'Connell to stay because of Haskins.  So what?  I also said if he gets let go fine. I said that before we even hired Rivera.   I liked the Rivera hire.  Still do.  Yet, I don't look at every Rivera hire as some victory lap like each hire means greatness in their respective role.  Otherwise it suggests Carolina had the best staff in the league last year.  If so I wonder what happened?

 

27 minutes ago, SoCalSkins said:

 

You are really going to dislike the Scott hire when the starting QB in game 1 ends up being a QB Ron acquires this off-season.   You should prepare for that reality otherwise you are in for a lot of disappointment...

 

You seem now all over the place on Haskins.  Hate him?  Love him?  Back to hate him now?  

 

I am far from a dude who has killed for Haskins on that Haskins thread.  I am not totally sold.  I am not unsold either.  But I didn't blast him like you did -- nobody did.  I believe the kid deserves a chance.   Whatever happens with Haskins, happens.  I don't sweat it.  😉

16 minutes ago, Fresh8686 said:

So how do most people feel when it’s put this way?

 

KOC and Rattay vs Turner and Zampese

 

When talking about sample size would it be fair to say that Z has the largest successful sample size of the 4? 

 

Yep as for Zampese.    One beat guy, I think it was Finlay said he heard Rattay wasn't that highly regarded in the building this year.

Edited January 9, 2020 by Skinsinparadise

[joeken24]

26 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

You mention the thing about the Scott Turner hire but then make your point purely about O'Connell.  How does Turner contrast to your point about O'Connell?

 

I kind of rushed through that take to be honest. The thing about the Scott Turner was more of twitter type catch phrase than the start of a dissertation.

 

But I guess my point is that Scott was chosen to be the OC based on what the new head coach saw from a production standpoint...not potential or some media narrative. I could be totally wrong. But IMO, KOC did nothing to show me that he deserved authority to fill out his own offensive staff, which was apparently the reason he's not the OC for the Redskins. Plus if he were that guy, you would think he would have already been given the reigns over the offense when Gruden was here. If I recall, Gruden handed over the play calling to McVay in his second year as head coach. Again, I just think KOC has been grouped with McVay and Shanny by the media and we the fans ran with it.  As a matter of fact, KOC might be on the outside looking in if McDaniel doesn't take the Brown's gig. Of course I hope the best for the man. I'm sure he'll land somewhere based on reports.

[Skinsinparadise]

28 minutes ago, joeken24 said:

I kind of rushed through that take to be honest. The thing about the Scott Turner was more of twitter type catch phrase than the start of a dissertation.

 

But I guess my point is that Scott was chosen to be the OC based on what the new head coach saw from a production standpoint...not potential or some media narrative. I could be totally wrong. But IMO, KOC did nothing to show me that he deserved authority to fill out his own offensive staff, which was apparently the reason he's not the OC for the Redskins. Plus if he were that guy, you would think he would have already been given the reigns over the offense when Gruden was here. If I recall, Gruden handed over the play calling to McVay in his second year as head coach. Again, I just think KOC has been grouped with McVay and Shanny by the media and we the fans ran with it.  As a matter of fact, KOC might be on the outside looking in if McDaniel doesn't take the Brown's gig. Of course I hope the best for the man. I'm sure he'll land somewhere based on reports.

 

Scott Turner has never called plays for Rivera and only called plays as the lead offensive coordinator for 4 games.  So I am gathering if anything its more about potential than production with him.  My point though is that's fine.  I got no beef with judging anybody that way.  My only point in this context is I doubt Rivera was betting on experience-production versus potential-expectation.  I think it was more apples to apples than that.  If Rivera hired Shurmur than I would think experience-production prevailed.

 

As for the whole KOC is the next McVay stuff.  I don't think anyone can say anything that's going down right now either strengthens or weakens that argument.  I recall the victory laps like yesterday about how Kyle Shanahan was an overrated play-caller and good riddance back in time.   No one blinked an eye when Lafleur left.  Heck even McVay was criticized some here. 

 

So whether KOC left because he wanted to go (as suggested by some including Paulsen today) or because Rivera thought he was an overhyped bust of a coach -- it matters not IMO.  His story on that front has yet to be written one way or another.  Will see.  Personally I got no clue.  But Rivera's move here with him to me has no bearing IMO on the dude's future.  Heck Kyle was let go here and then in Cleveland right after that -- did that vindicate the powers that be at that moment?.  Many see him as the best play caller in the league now.   Will O'Connell be that type of guy?  You got me but I am not ruling out his hype just because Rivera isn't retaining him. 

Edited January 9, 2020 by Skinsinparadise

[SoCalSkins]

Scott is Ron’s advantage in landing Teddy Bridgewater as his QB should the Saints retain Brees. Scott was his QB coach in Minnesota with Norv as OC...

[joeken24]

OMG he said we have a system. That kind of sounded like we have a plan. Eeek!

But he mentioned he liked Haskins coming out of college and was actually a coach on that team we beat the **** out of every year (I'm from Ohio). I like that he's worked with a number of QBs and has brought in one the best QB coaches out there. Kind of cool that he's from here, not that that creates more wins. 

 

Weird thought.... what if Rivera flops and Scott becomes the interim and starts winning. 

 

Edited January 9, 2020 by joeken24
add

[MartinC]

11 hours ago, purbeast said:

Continuity in a scheme that had a team 4-20 in their past 24 games.

 

Yeah sounds really important.

Of verbiage and concepts. It’s is.

 

Execution and talent is another question.

47 minutes ago, SoCalSkins said:

Scott is Ron’s advantage in landing Teddy Bridgewater as his QB should the Saints retain Brees. Scott was his QB coach in Minnesota with Norv as OC...

Teddy is going to get a contract in the 18-22M a year range. We are paying Smith 16M still next year. 21.4M cap number.
 

We will not be paying a vet contract starting money next year.

[SoCalSkins]

2 minutes ago, MartinC said:

Teddy is going to get a contract in the 18-22M a year range. We are paying Smith 19M still next year. 

 

We will not be paying a vet contract starting money next year.

Our cap situation can handle it. We are rolling over Trent’s salary from 2019. Ron will have a competent veteran who can start game 1 in addition to Haskins. Just like Gibbs did with Brunell and Ramsey. 
 

He has to make that decision in the next 8 weeks. He’s not rolling the dice on Haskins alone. If he was, KOC would be the OC. My bet is on Teddy given the Scott connection...

[bowhunter]

4 minutes ago, SoCalSkins said:

Our cap situation can handle it. We are rolling over Trent’s salary from 2019. Ron will have a competent veteran who can start game 1 in addition to Haskins. Just like Gibbs did with Brunell and Ramsey. 
 

He has to make that decision in the next 8 weeks. He’s not rolling the dice on Haskins alone. If he was, KOC would be the OC. My bet is on Teddy given the Scott connection...

If our next GM gets on board with paying TWO (potentially) non-starting QBs at a cost of roughly $35M a year, Imma say he's not a very bright guy.

[SoCalSkins]

7 minutes ago, bowhunter said:

If our next GM gets on board with paying TWO (potentially) non-starting QBs at a cost of roughly $35M a year, Imma say he's not a very bright guy.

Our GM is Ron. This is a coach centric approach. He has all the power. Alex Smith is a sunk cost. Doesn’t matter that his position is QB. That money is off the table and this is the last year we are on the hook.

 

Ron is going to get a competent veteran capable of starting day 1. Book it. That means a cap number north of 15 million per year. He’s not rolling with Haskins alone. It’s simply naive to think otherwise and he has said as much. That means legitimate competition which has an associated salary of $15M+ per year. 
 

Gibbs did it with Brunell. This is no different. We will know in March. I was right about KOC not being here and this one is even more likely now that he’s gone.

 

 

Edited January 9, 2020 by SoCalSkins

[MartinC]

27 minutes ago, SoCalSkins said:

Our cap situation can handle it. We are rolling over Trent’s salary from 2019. Ron will have a competent veteran who can start game 1 in addition to Haskins. Just like Gibbs did with Brunell and Ramsey. 
 

He has to make that decision in the next 8 weeks. He’s not rolling the dice on Haskins alone. If he was, KOC would be the OC. My bet is on Teddy given the Scott connection...

Yeah. We have divergent views here.

[bowhunter]

10 minutes ago, SoCalSkins said:

 I was right about KOC not being here and this one is even more likely now that he’s gone.

I somehow remember your stance being that IF KOC was kept that it would be due to meddling by the owner, not that he would be gone.

[Conn]

Paying a backup QB starting QB money just because Haskins needs the competition is a horrible use of resources. Having a rookie QB on that rookie contract and building around that is one of the biggest advantages in roster construction in the NFL...and we're already sunk on that Alex Smith money, obviously. It would be a horribly inefficient usage of resources to sign a guy like Bridgewater unless Rivera really doesn't like Haskins--in which case he could do anything at QB and I wouldn't be surprised, including pulling an ARI and trading him on draft day while taking Tua at #2. Note: I don't actually think that's going to happen, but what I'm saying is that if Rivera is so iffy on Haskins' potential that he'd pay another QB starting money in FA to compete with him...anything is on the table at the QB position at that point. 

[SoCalSkins]

1 minute ago, MartinC said:

Yeah. We have divergent views here.

That’s what makes the offseason great! It’s no fun if we all have the same opinion.