Miami's Defense
- Thread starter IAFINFAN
- Start date
Stats lie.
Our D has it's problems. Soft middle that is exposed everytime we play someone who can stretch us out, especially on the road. What I don't like about Bates is the WAY he makes adjustments. Contrary to what I thought before, adjustments are being made just not firmly. There never seems to be an answer for an opposing player who is hot. In fact, once we get abused we always seem to get so timid, a sort of break but don't break approach. A perfect example is how could we continue to let Bledsoe stay clean in Buffalo, when he was so obviously on a roll, and, when everyone knows you stop bledsoe by getting in his face. Bates tried blitzing a couple of times but the first time Bledsoe burned that, blitzing became a four letter word. Instead, we just pulled back into a cover two hoping that our corners wouldn't slip.
Now with that said, I really wonder just how much of these problems are Bates fault. How much is Bates just being a good soldier? How much is really our admittedly conservative defensive head coach calling conservative plays within the conservative system? Is it Bates' fault that Freeman/ Fletcher/ Greenwood/ Rodgers have been so inconsistent? Is it Bates fault that we are a speedy defense that can be pushed around by size? Is it Bates fault that too much of our defense is built around the ends getting pressure (see KC game when JT was hurt). Is it Bates fault that Wanne shares JJ's they-are-a-dime-a-dozen attitude towards linebackers, leaving us exposed over and over in the middle and not really leaving us too many options to change up in our front seven approach?
I guess what I'm trying to say is while I don't really favor Bates, I think he does what he's suppossed to in the system that is in and with the players we have. An alternative wouldn't neccessarily be better for consistentancy and for the most part we play well. Improvements can be made however. Not for perfection, but in terms of Wanne, maybe Bates, trusting their veteran and talented players to be more aggressive when it counts.
Our D has it's problems. Soft middle that is exposed everytime we play someone who can stretch us out, especially on the road. What I don't like about Bates is the WAY he makes adjustments. Contrary to what I thought before, adjustments are being made just not firmly. There never seems to be an answer for an opposing player who is hot. In fact, once we get abused we always seem to get so timid, a sort of break but don't break approach. A perfect example is how could we continue to let Bledsoe stay clean in Buffalo, when he was so obviously on a roll, and, when everyone knows you stop bledsoe by getting in his face. Bates tried blitzing a couple of times but the first time Bledsoe burned that, blitzing became a four letter word. Instead, we just pulled back into a cover two hoping that our corners wouldn't slip.
Now with that said, I really wonder just how much of these problems are Bates fault. How much is Bates just being a good soldier? How much is really our admittedly conservative defensive head coach calling conservative plays within the conservative system? Is it Bates' fault that Freeman/ Fletcher/ Greenwood/ Rodgers have been so inconsistent? Is it Bates fault that we are a speedy defense that can be pushed around by size? Is it Bates fault that too much of our defense is built around the ends getting pressure (see KC game when JT was hurt). Is it Bates fault that Wanne shares JJ's they-are-a-dime-a-dozen attitude towards linebackers, leaving us exposed over and over in the middle and not really leaving us too many options to change up in our front seven approach?
I guess what I'm trying to say is while I don't really favor Bates, I think he does what he's suppossed to in the system that is in and with the players we have. An alternative wouldn't neccessarily be better for consistentancy and for the most part we play well. Improvements can be made however. Not for perfection, but in terms of Wanne, maybe Bates, trusting their veteran and talented players to be more aggressive when it counts.
Barbarian
Practice Squad
Fletcher covering Moss and Harrison. That alone should raise a gigantic red flag.
This team is the third ranked Defense despite having Bates, not because of it.
It SHOULD worry us that we all can figure out the problems with Bate's defensive scheeme, and while fortunately not all teams are equipped to take advantage of it, most of the teams that we will see in the playoffs are.
This team is the third ranked Defense despite having Bates, not because of it.
It SHOULD worry us that we all can figure out the problems with Bate's defensive scheeme, and while fortunately not all teams are equipped to take advantage of it, most of the teams that we will see in the playoffs are.
Last edited by a moderator:
I agree, there are many holes. Good teams will find them and destroy us. Teams in the playoffs will find them... Fletcher on Harrison and Moss is just wrong even if he had help. Why would you have 2 great CB's and put your semi struggling one on their best WR's in an almost win or die situation.
I can just see it, we make it to the superbowl and he puts Fletcher on say Owens or somebody and he kills us for the winning score in overtime. Maybe people will open their eyes then:cry:
I can just see it, we make it to the superbowl and he puts Fletcher on say Owens or somebody and he kills us for the winning score in overtime. Maybe people will open their eyes then:cry:
Last edited by a moderator:
Lets count all of Bates' new players. Chester, Burnett, Jay Williams, Fletcher, Freeman, O-gun. Other than O-gun every player has been criticized on this board. So really most of the players have been there just not playing as well as this year.
As far as Fletcher covering Moss or Harrison or any other super star its time to wake up. Fletcher is in the NFL and practically a starter the way we use him. You can't hide anyone in the NFL. Do you think the other OCs in the league don't know who to pick on and how to isolate them??? At least this scheme trys to minimize this reality even if you don't see it or understand it or agree with it.