I think the exact opposite.I don't really have a dog in this fight, but in general, I believe that both Offensive and Defensive Coordinators get too much credit... and too much blame over how their charges perform.
A team full of great players will generally perform well, and lousy ones, not.
So when people point to how a team rated statistically, I think it has a lot less to do with the coordinator than it does with the talent (and health) of the players.
I believe that what is most important is whether a coaching staff, players, and front office is on the same page.
Football, more than any other sport, is driven by how well the coaches put the players in a position to succeed.
If the defensive coordinator dials up the perfect CB blitz against a slow developing offensive play, it doesn’t matter if it’s Brandon Jones blitzing (who’s great at it) or a CB who is just okay at it - he’s getting to the QB.
Of course the quality of the players matter, but scheme and playcalling is so important.
That’s why all of you bitch about Olivadetti (before my time) up and down.
That’s why I think our biggest culprit for falling short this season (other than injuries) was MM offensive playcalling and our inability to adjust.
It also doesn’t make sense that we can score 70 against the Broncos but only 7 against KC… so you’re of the belief that the KC defensive players are 10x better? Of course not.
The talent level is typically so close in the NFL. Front office is more important here than in any other sport. And the more players on the field at the same time, the less the impact individual talent is.
That’s why Dan Marino can play a career without really coming very close to a championship and why Michael Jordan won it every year.