Is Matt Burke A Good Dc? | Page 2 | FinHeaven - Miami Dolphins Forums

Is Matt Burke A Good Dc?

Is Matt Burke a good DC?

  • Yes

    Votes: 12 17.1%

  • No

    Votes: 30 42.9%

  • I Don't Know

    Votes: 28 40.0%
  • Total voters
    70
SCLSU Mud Dogs said:
Define "antiquated scheme" because there are a few teams (like the Eagles) who run a very similar scheme. And every time you bring this up, you mention something about the Wide 9 or an outdated scheme without actually providing any evidence as to why the scheme isn't good.

And how exactly has Burke not properly evaluated players' strengths and weaknesses? Because you like to say that a lot, as well, without actually providing any factual backing to the statement.

Because from the looks of it last year, Davon Godchaux, a 5th-round rookie, was playing high quality snaps.

Xavien Howard was playing some of the best ball of his career.

Reshad Jones was still a very solid player.

Miami was forced to play a 3rd round rookie at cb because of injuries to Lippett and the release of Byron Maxwell.

So when you're forced to play undrafted linebackers like Chase Allen and Mike Hull, how exactly is the middle of the defense supposed to be elite?

I don't think you've done research on the scheme. Your mind was made up about Burke from the beginning.
Click to expand...
OK, so here we go for the upteenth time, but once gain I will reiterate.The Wide 9 is a scheme that relies on the offense generating leads to be successful with the belief that this will put the opposing team in a situation were the pass is optimal to keep up and you can use the wider alignment of your DEs to generate a pass rush. Point number 1: Our offense, with last DC and our current one, has been less than effective at generating a lead and sustaining it. But did this matter to them? No. They made no adjustments to compensate for this. In my opinion, the system is antiquated because most of the league does not rely on the offense this heavily for the success of the defense. Sure the effectiveness of the Offense and Defense are factors in your success and they feed off each other. But most DCs see there job is to stop the offense all the time and it should not matter if you have the lead or not. The wide 9 uses the the LBs to fill the gaps left by the holes made by this scheme. Point number 2: Our LBs , with last DC and our current one, has been ineffective at filling the holes left by the scheme. But did this matter to them? No. Point number 3: This scheme is supposed to put more pressure on the QB and subsequently cause more in completions and turnovers. Last year the Defense generated 15 TOs. The NFL average was 22. Except for the Bengals and the Raiders, that was worst in the league. Did the scheme help our defensive completion %? No. A 64.2 completion % against put us on the wrong side of the ledger in comparison with other teams. Certainly not the worst, but nowhere near the best. Point number 4: Good DCs create a defense to dominate an opponent, not rehash an old scheme that relies so heavily on the offense. You are right that I did not blindly give my confidence to Burke and his system. He was going to have to prove to me that his system was going to be different than the one Joseph ran, being that he was a protege of the former. The first red flag was being hired just because he knew the system of the former DC that had been a disaster. There were incidences were where he did change things up, but when the going got tough he reverted back to the his roots. He failed miserably to show me that he was able to form a scheme that would adapt. Not generating a pass rush. Are you go to adjust? No. Getting killed on 3rd down. Are you go to adjust? No. Sure Howard had a good year and Jones is a good player. Godchaux is promising rookie. Injuries happen to every team. Once again, every team is forced to play a backup in different situations. The Wide 9 relies heavily on the pass rush and LBs for it's success. You have injuries at secondary and LB. Your secondary is relying on the great pass rush that is generated by your supposedly great system. What happens when that does not happen? You need your LBs to fill holes. What happens when that does not happen? Does that mean you run a scheme that is going to accentuate the negatives of those individuals?
 
Last edited:
fishfanmiami said:
We will see. He's got a few good additions and solid injured players coming back just needs to overcome the loss of Suh. Lets see what he can do with them however if the D does not improve this season he may be a goner.
Not really fair for a young first time DC but you don't get long to show what you can do in this league.
Click to expand...

Agreed it might not be fair, but I'd bet he has an even shorter leash than that...if we start out 0-4 ,1-5 or similar I could see him becoming a very easy scapegoat and even the fans demanding his firing at that point..Think its quite possible he is just in over his head and not the right man for the job at this moment....hope he improves more and proves me wrong but hes got so much responsibility and relatively very little experience
 
I do think that if there is any time for him to step up and become a good DC its this year...he has 1 year of DC experience under his belt and any first year nervousness/unawareness etc should be gone...

If we do start 0-3 or similar and the defense looks to be the main culprit Id probably be one of the many fans calling for his job and begging Ross to get a more experienced guy at that position before the season is lost completely...obviously I hope this doesnt happen at all..
 
DKphin said:
His reliance on an antiquated scheme ...
Click to expand...

I'm curious about this, how exactly is the scheme antiquated? What does that mean to you? Also, I may be wrong but this scheme just won a superbowl. (Look up their D-Coordinator and the hate that is poured on his head when describing Miami's scheme that is rooted in his, um, gym shorts or something)
 
It's impossible to judge him after 1 season as a complete rookie coordinator

With that said let's go over the stats from 2016 to 2017

335 ypg given up (16th) in 2017 compared to 382 ypg (29th) in 2016

24.6 ppg given up (29th) in 2017 compared to 23.8 (18th) in 2016

225 ypg in the air (16th) in 2017 compared to 242 ypg (15th) in 2016

110 ypg on the ground (14th) compared to 140 ypg (30th) in 2016

30 sacks (26th) in 2017 compared to 33 (19th) in 2016

15 turnovers in 2017 compared to 25 in 2016 i don't have the rankings on this

So it's a mixed bag


The biggest thing I wanna see this year is more sacks and turnovers. That should also translate to better numbers in all the other areas. Particularly in scoring
 
Last edited:
DKphin said:
OK, so here we go for the upteenth time, but once gain I will reiterate.The Wide 9 is a scheme that relies on the offense generating leads to be successful with the belief that this will put the opposing team in a situation were the pass is optimal to keep up and you can use the wider alignment of your DEs to generate a pass rush. Point number 1: Our offense, with last DC and our current one, has been less than effective at generating a lead and sustaining it. But did this matter to them? No. They made no adjustments to compensate for this. In my opinion, the system is antiquated because most of the league does not rely on the offense this heavily for the success of the defense. Sure the effectiveness of the Offense and Defense are factors in your success and they feed off each other. But most DCs see there job is to stop the offense all the time and it should not matter if you have the lead or not. The wide 9 uses the the LBs to fill the gaps left by the holes made by this scheme. Point number 2: Our LBs , with last DC and our current one, has been ineffective at filling the holes left by the scheme. But did this matter to them? No. Point number 3: This scheme is supposed to put more pressure on the QB and subsequently cause more in completions and turnovers. Last year the Defense generated 15 TOs. The NFL average was 22. Except for the Bengals and the Raiders, that was worst in the league. Did the scheme help our defensive completion %? No. A 64.2 completion % against put us on the wrong side of the ledger in comparison with other teams. Certainly not the worst, but nowhere near the best. Point number 4: Good DCs create a defense to dominate an opponent, not rehash an old scheme that relies so heavily on the offense. You are right that I did not blindly give my confidence to Burke and his system. He was going to have to prove to me that his system was going to be different than the one Joseph ran, being that he was a protege of the former. The first red flag was being hired just because he knew the system of the former DC that had been a disaster. There were incidences were where he did change things up, but when the going got tough he reverted back to the his roots. He failed miserably to show me that he was able to form a scheme that would adapt. Not generating a pass rush. Are you go to adjust? No. Getting killed on 3rd down. Are you go to adjust? No. Sure Howard had a good year and Jones is a good player. Godchaux is promising rookie. Injuries happen to every team. Once again, every team is forced to play a backup in different situations. The Wide 9 relies heavily on the pass rush and LBs for it's success. You have injuries at secondary and LB. Your secondary is relying on the great pass rush that is generated by your supposedly great system. What happens when that does not happen? You need your LBs to fill holes. What happens when that does not happen? Does that mean you run a scheme that is going to accentuate the negatives of those individuals?
Click to expand...

But once again though, Miami runs a hybrid front and mixes up use of the wide 9 and other defensive line alignments.

The Eagles run a very similar defense and had one of the top units in the NFL. Which shows you it's more about personnel, not scheme.

And to reiterate on several other of your points, it's not the scheme that relies so heavily on the offense.

On another point, most secondaries rely on pressure to limit time in coverage. That's completely independent of scheme.

Miami's struggles are personnel based, not scheme based. And it's pretty easy to see that
 
SCLSU Mud Dogs said:
But once again though, Miami runs a hybrid front and mixes up use of the wide 9 and other defensive line alignments.

The Eagles run a very similar defense and had one of the top units in the NFL. Which shows you it's more about personnel, not scheme.

And to reiterate on several other of your points, it's not the scheme that relies so heavily on the offense.

On another point, most secondaries rely on pressure to limit time in coverage. That's completely independent of scheme.

Miami's struggles are personnel based, not scheme based. And it's pretty easy to see that
Click to expand...

Makes sense, but how do you explain the previous DC who made chicken salad out of chicken ....
 
finomenal said:
Makes sense, but how do you explain the previous DC who made chicken salad out of chicken ....
Click to expand...
You think Vance was good? He only gave up the most yards in franchise history lol

I will say this, if it's Burkes fault we ran out 2 SSs that's on him. 2 SSs don't work and for obvious reasons lead to less turnovers
 
nick1 said:
I'm sorry what does that have to do with us last year?
Click to expand...

Was he not referring to the Eagles DC previous to Schwartz? Maybe not. It’s entirely possible I need more coffee.

Edit: Never mind. He wasn’t. But I still say injuries played a large part in what schemes Burke was able to run. Nate Allen may not have been a great free safety, but losing him was more impactful than many realize.
 
The Goat said:
Was he not referring to the Eagles DC previous to Schwartz? Maybe not. It’s entirely possible I need more coffee.
Click to expand...
I could be wrong but i thought he meant Miami and Vance Joseph
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom