Richard Smith, am I the Only One?

[painekiller]

When I go to the different boards, I see a hatred for the our DC Richard Smith. I get the dissatisfaction, but wait a minute, let's think about it here for a second.

In year one we changed to a 4-3, many of players where better suited for the 3-4, though only slightly so. That said, we had to install a complete new defense to guys playing out of position, and we relied on rookies for the leadership during the transition.

Year two, the talent was getting better, and closer to a real NFL squad, but 17 player on the IR, and no team can survive. The fact that the defense continued to improve and two players may have broken into the All Pro ranks again shows excellent leadership.

As we start year 3, most fans still do not have a solid idea of the defenses persona, and that is a problem, but we have a DC who appears to be flexible enough to cater is playbook to suit his roster, and he and his coaches seem to be solid teachers.

I like Richard Smith, I have back to the the House of Pain days, and I like his coaches, Hoke, Holland, Bush, and Franklin. I hope we are able to keep the group together.

[KJ3]

i like his coaches more than i like him. you say he caters his playbook to the roster...that's a pretty picture to paint but i call it "watering down". i get most of what has been explained about his defense but i think he largely ignores certain players' ::cough::demeco::cough:: special attributes in favor of a blank defense. excuse me, not blank, "vanilla".

i will say with the d'line turning up the way it is, with the sudden depth we have now at LB, with all the returning from injury in the defensive backfield (don't forget about ray rhodes) we should see a much improved defense. i just don't know if i should attribute that to smith or to player development or to increased depth.

[cadams]

this will be the first year we really get an idea of what we have in him as a coach. with all teh injuries and changes . . .AND lack of depth he has been working with i dont know that anyone would be coachign up to their potential. i dont have a problem with "watering down" the defense last year. it appeared to work better than what we were doing earlier, and honestly that is what the coach is supposed to do, get them most out of what he has. if we stay relatively healthy this season we will be able to have a better idea of what we have in our DC

[Joshua]

I think a lot of people dislike him because they see a timid defense and want more aggressive play. What a lot of people forget is that the few times we have tried to be aggressive, it has backfired more often than not.

[Joshua]

I'm not a big Smith fan so I'm not sure why I'm defending him, but when you have suspect corners and safeties and linebackers (except for Demeco) who are terrible at blitzing, it's tough to run much more than a vanilla defense.

Let's face it, this team put its picks and money in the front four and our D will sink or swim based upon their ability to get to the passer with just a 4 man rush. So far, the results have been mixed. Mario - good, potentially great; Amobi - developing, high hopes; T. Johnson - somewhere between average and bust depending on your point of view; Weaver - disappointment, considering the money.

[papabear]

I don't really have an opinion on him. He gets a mulligan on the transition year from a 3-4 to a 4-3. I think our defense should have been better last year....but with as much turnover as we had in our already shaky secondary he gets a little bit of a break.

We have invested a lot in our defense, not only in the draft but with guys like Will Demps, Jaque Reeves, and no Colvin. I think we need to see something from the d as a unit this year. I don't know if it's quite time to say it's his make or break year....but its getting close.

I see a lot of disdain for him as well. I hear the "vanilla" complaints, and understand them to some extent, but I have some thoughts on that as well.

One big complaint that I hear is that we didn't blitz enough. I would like to see more blitzing, but I think some of the complaints aren't based on realistic expectations....maybe it's because of Madden. I have seen some stuff where it sounds like we never blitzed at all. Losing Dunta probably hurt us in this department as well. As much as we all loved Bennet last year, Dunta was the one corner the coaches felt, and rightly so, that they could leave on an island....freeing up other guys to blitz.

I want to see this defense really take a step forward this year and carve out some type of identity. Like a draft pick I will wait until the end of his third season to pass judgement.

[kravix]

Most people are unable to look at a def and realize that they are setup for a completly different call than they were the last snap. They see blitz, sack, tackle, int, and big plays against the def but fail to see everything else.

Smith's def may have been pretty watered down the last two years, and rightfully so with the transition and injuries, but it isnt like he has them go out in the same formation and play exactly the same every play.

Our off has been watered down the last two years also, and they are starting to open it up more this year, but no one is bitching about Kubiak's off being vanilla. Partly because its way better than the crap we had before, and partly because it is easier to see the production from the off.

I honestly dont know if Smith is a good coodinator, but we do know that Kubes wants a bend dont break style def and it is up to Smith to deliver. We know that Kubes preaches pressure from the front 4 and limited blitzing, and it is up to Smith to deliver.

Last year when TJ got his int because he was running to get into position from a last minute sub Kubiak was upset because he didnt want any subs in that position. The point is Kubiak isnt the HC that says I am good at Off so I am going to leave the def to someone else. Those types of HC's are glorified coordinators IMO. Kubiak has his fingers in both sides of the ball on and off the field.

Maybe the question shouldnt be does Smith suck, but does Kubiak's def philosophy suck? Which Smith has to adhere to.

[painekiller]

Originally Posted by kravix

Maybe the question shouldnt be does Smith suck, but does Kubiak's def philosophy suck? Which Smith has to adhere to.

I think we have a winner!

[KJ3]

Originally Posted by Joshua

I think a lot of people dislike him because they see a timid defense and want more aggressive play. What a lot of people forget is that the few times we have tried to be aggressive, it has backfired more often than not.

this is exactly why i don't appreciate his defense and philosophy of "bend don't break". except i remember it as when we took the aggression out good things happened. matter of perception i suppose?

one thing is certain: "bend but don't break" can REALLY EASILY be "bend over" and that's what happened for a majority of last year.

in my opinion a defense can be passive or aggressive. passive, which we employ, is too reactionary for my likes. i would LOVE to see more forcing action onto the offense instead of recieving all the action. aggressive isn't necessarily picking "engage eight" on madden every play blitzing of course would be the obvious gauge but really i just want to see some "f*ck yourself mr. opposing offensive player" attitude. corners jamming and not just giving up 7 yards every play, receivers wary of treading the middle, some big hits. aggressive play. don't just sit back and take it for 7 yards everytime because offenses will take a 7 yard pass every down and all the way down.

EDIT: oh yea, whoever said kubiak's offense is vanilla needs help watching the games hahaha...

DOUBLE EDIT: i also wanted to throw in that i'm loving the type of player this regime has brought to defense though!!!

[kravix]

Originally Posted by KJ3

EDIT: oh yea, whoever said kubiak's offense is vanilla needs help watching the games hahaha...

I guess vanilla was a bad word to use.

I meant that the off was watered down and not 100% implimented. Which is basically what we have seen from the Def. Sage said it in an interview not to long ago. He also said that they were opening up things that they hadnt been able to do in the past because the system is finally in and they arent in the learing curve at mini camps and OTA's.

Now I could be halucinating here on this point so feel free to correct me or support me... I think i remember from the first year talk from the coaches and players on def about the def system actually being very complex. They had tried to impliment it all at once and then pulled it all back to a very basic scheme because it was way too much for the players to digest in the short period of time and they ended up playing very basic again last year because of so many secondary players going down.

[NBT]

Originally Posted by painekiller

When I go to the different boards, I see a hatred for the our DC Richard Smith. I get the dissatisfaction, but wait a minute, let's think about it here for a second.

In year one we changed to a 4-3, many of players where better suited for the 3-4, though only slightly so. That said, we had to install a complete new defense to guys playing out of position, and we relied on rookies for the leadership during the transition.

Year two, the talent was getting better, and closer to a real NFL squad, but 17 player on the IR, and no team can survive. The fact that the defense continued to improve and two players may have broken into the All Pro ranks again shows excellent leadership.

As we start year 3, most fans still do not have a solid idea of the defenses persona, and that is a problem, but we have a DC who appears to be flexible enough to cater is playbook to suit his roster, and he and his coaches seem to be solid teachers.

I like Richard Smith, I have back to the the House of Pain days, and I like his coaches, Hoke, Holland, Bush, and Franklin. I hope we are able to keep the group together.

I also remember the House of Pain, and I have also railed against DC Richard Smith because he wasn't aggressive enough for my tastes. Yes he works under the Kubiak constraint of only rush 4 down linemen. I can understand the reasoning. We were woefully undermanned. Perhaps I was wrong. I am willing to go along with you PK, at least for this season. Smith now has the DL to guard against the run and to rush to passer. He also has a much better LBing corp. The one intangible is the secondary. Dunta being out will adversely affect the way the CB defend the pass. They will probably still give a 7 yard cushion. The safeties should be better, if for no other reason than that there is so many of them competing for only two spots. I would like to revisit this post just before the end of the season just to see how accurate many of us were.

[infantrycak]

Originally Posted by NBT

They will probably still give a 7 yard cushion.

Given their comments regarding the Reeves signing, that does not seem to be their intention.

[papabear]

Originally Posted by infantrycak

Given their comments regarding the Reeves signing, that does not seem to be their intention.

Why do you say that? I remember their comments as being that they think he is better suited to the man scheme that we run....wouldn't that mean that they plan on doing the same thing we've been doing with Reeves that we have done with other corners?

....or am I missing something?

[infantrycak]

Originally Posted by papabear

Why do you say that? I remember their comments as being that they think he is better suited to the man scheme that we run....wouldn't that mean that they plan on doing the same thing we've been doing with Reeves that we have done with other corners?

....or am I missing something?

As I recall, they also made several comments about him playing better in bump and run rather than with a big cushion. There was also a comment by Bennett I believe about working on hand work for bump and run with Ray Rhodes.

[papabear]

Originally Posted by infantrycak

As I recall, they also made several comments about him playing better in bump and run rather than with a big cushion. There was also a comment by Bennett I believe about working on hand work for bump and run with Ray Rhodes.

I guess I missed that ....or it just didn't stick. Either way I think it is a good idea to mix it up a little and let the corners be a little more aggressive occasionally.

[kravix]

Originally Posted by infantrycak

As I recall, they also made several comments about him playing better in bump and run rather than with a big cushion. There was also a comment by Bennett I believe about working on hand work for bump and run with Ray Rhodes.

Thats what I remember from the post signing interviews also. It would mean no more Faggins and a 12 yard cushion and more press at the line and disturb routes.

[cadams]

7 yard cushion was necessary last year. does anybody really want petey doing bump and run coverage?

[papabear]

Originally Posted by cadams

7 yard cushion was necessary last year. does anybody really want petey doing bump and run coverage?

That's not necessarily going to be any worse. I wouldn't think he has the size to effectively "bump" some of today's big WR, but some guys are just better playing tighter press coverages. Some are better if they can sit in a zone and read everything.

I'm not saying that Petey is going to be better as bump and run corner. Only that it's not automatic that if a guy struggles with one technique that he will automatically struggle just as badly in another.

[NBT]

Originally Posted by infantrycak

Given their comments regarding the Reeves signing, that does not seem to be their intention.

While I was writing that, I was hoping in my heart, they would not. If Reeves can play bump and run, mano a mano, maybe it will give us yet another dimension to be excited about.

For what it's worth, i hope Petey doesn't even make the final squad.

[edo783]

Originally Posted by NBT

For what it's worth, i hope Petey doesn't even make the final squad.

While I think Petey is a fairly solid nickel/dime guy, I would also like to see him go. That would mean we have upgraded the secondary a lot.