Give me Sarkisian/Butch Jones at OC, and Gene Chizik at DC, and we’re straight...

I'm fine with Sark.

The other 2 are terrible choices and demonstrably bad coaches on their respective sides of the football.

how about no

edit to say I'd be good with Sarkisian. In fact, the first time I logged on and saw he was a candidate, I felt good about it. Just not so much for Jones as OC, but maybe another assistant position. As if I have a vote anyway.

Sarkisian as OC? Sure. Jones as OC? Hell no. I'm fine with Butch as an offensive assistant though. And lol no at Chizik.

No Cheeze....Sark as the OC and Da Butch as a position coach but Nick will name his as an assistant HC for a salary even though 10RC is paying Butch a bunch of money until 2021. 200k per month.

quote:

---

Chiz runs a completely different defense than what Saban does.

---

Kiffin ran a completely different offense too

quote:

---

Chizik knows defense and how to coach it.

---

Bull. shite.

Chizik was a pretty good OC at auburn and Texas, and then as the head man at Iowa State and auburn his defenses were awful and lacked the fundamental ability to tackle. When Rhodes took over at Iowa State, he was directly quoted as saying he had to go back and teach fundamentals like how to actually tackle a human because the defense didn't know. I read the article and quote with my own 2 eyes. Regarding his stint at NC, he took an awful defense and improved it some, but any half decent DC could achieve the same result. I have a friend who attended NC law school at the time, and the building overlooks the practice field. I have a bit of inside info there, and Chizik did a passable job at UNC, nothing more.

This is not good enough to coach defense at Bama, and I wouldn't put Chizik in the top 1/3 of DCs in CFB at the present time. Sure, a decade ago, he was much better. But for whatever reason, he hasn't been nearly as good in many years. He's also spoken at length about his heart not being in it anymore.

If you think Chizik is a good DC, you're living in the distant past. Today is today, and 10 years ago is just that - 10 years ago.

I love Butch on this staff but not scheming gameplans and calling plays. Let him coach up the receivers and recruit some elite players. He recruited pretty damned good at Tennessee his first two years, now he can sell Saban's Bama.

That isn't what Tampa 2 does against spread concepts though... basically as the offense gets less condensed the roamer in the center of the Tampa 2 is forced into increasingly difficult choices/decisions.



Obviously there are many blitzes/exotic coverages that can be used to adapt and change the Tampa 2, but at it's core the MLB is forced to make increasingly difficult decisions especially against RPO and 3 receivers on one side. With Shotgun being the prevalent formation this further disadvantages the LB who either has to start deeper in order to fulfill his deep drop responsibilities or be stuck backpedaling at the snap every play. Big plays and coverage breakdowns occur at a far greater rate in both the run and pass due to the MLB being stuck in limbo and the biggest advantage of the Tampa 2, keeping everything short and in front of you is negated.

quote:

---

Tampa 2

---

The Tampa 2 is an amazing defense, but it only works if the MLB is an other-worldly type athlete, as he's tasked with dropping and covering deep thirds on passing downs. Most MLB's don't have the ability to stop the downhill run game, tackle sideline to sideline, and also drop 30 yards deep in coverage.

The best example is Brian Urlacher, who is my opinion may be the best MLB of all time, given his diverse skill set. Derrick Brooks was another who was a good enough athlete to succeed in the Tampa 2.

Unless a team has has an incredible Athlete at MLB, who can play the run and drop deep into coverage with skill, the Tampa 2 is not for that team.