(12-26-2020, 07:24 AM)The Real Marty Wrote: It's a great question, but it's an illustration of why the rebuilding process starts with a GM who not only knows how to select the best talent, but also has a plan for how the build the roster in a way that fits an overall scheme.  And then he has to select a coach who is on the same page.  You don't just pick the best players; you pick players that fit the blueprint that is laid out by the coach and GM.  

I'm sure I'm preaching to the choir here.  

But it all starts with the GM.  We can banter around all we want about who we want to draft, who we want to be our defensive coordinator, which players we want to keep.  But it has to start with an overall plan, and that starts with the GM, who then selects the HC, who then selects the assistant coaches, and the GM and the HC draw up a blueprint for that kind of team they want and how to build it.

And that's why selecting the GM is the most critical decision this team has to make this offseason.

I don't think the GM was the cause of the problems with guys like Allen and Chaisson. Having coaches that don't really understand defense, but instead just know how to run a system someone else thought up is the problem. Great coaches figure out how to get people into position to succeed, bad (for the NFL level) coaches just have a system they run, and if the player doesn't fit they put them in the wrong place and then declare the player the problem because they can't be the guy that the original coach had in that spot to make that system work when the original coach invented the scheme.

It's why I've been a big proponent of churning coaches, like GM's usually churn the bottom of the roster, until you find one that's actually competent. I really think most coaches in the nfl aren't much better than a well informed fan with a good understanding of the rules would be, they're just part of the insular big money group that keeps things in the family, which is the NFL.

---