Official Search for a New Defensive Coordinator Thread - Bush Hired!

[nero THE zero]

Originally Posted by Keith

fyi - I renamed this thread to better encompass the conversation.

I think we can read this two ways. Either Marinelli is kicking our tires for a salary number he can take elsewhere to get more money from another team or the Texans are inclined to completely remake this into a cover-2 defense.

Regardless, I'm happy the team is talking to him, even if he isn't my first choice hire. It is a sign of progress, and a sign that Kubiak is willing to bring in a former HC to own that side of the ball here (assuming he's here to talk about the DC position... not sure why Kubiak would talk to DL candidates before DC ones).

Darn. Now I can't wait to see who else is interviewed next.

I think him coming in for the d-line position is a bunch of bull for 2 reasons:
1. He's already talked to 2 other teams that he has connections with (Chicago and Seattle) about a D-Line position

2. It's unlikely we would hire a d-line coach without our future DC's consent

So, in those ways, it wouldn't make sense for us to bring him in for a d-line position and it wouldn't make sense for him to come here for a d-line position.

Regarding our defense being remade to a Tampa-2, we're not far off are we? I was under the impression that our personnel on that side was due for a huge makeover regardless of who claims the DC post, but what do we really need to field a starting 11 for a Tampa-2? A speed rushing DE, another LB or 2 and another safety to pair with Wilson? Anything else? We have the penetrating DTs, we have Mario, we have the undersized LBs, we have the press CBs, and we have one safety with range and pop. Anything else?

[mussop]

Im hoping Philli looses this week because I really want McDormott.

[papabear]

Originally Posted by nero THE zero

I think him coming in for the d-line position is a bunch of bull for 2 reasons:
1. He's already talked to 2 other teams that he has connections with (Chicago and Seattle) about a D-Line position

2. It's unlikely we would hire a d-line coach without our future DC's consent

So, in those ways, it wouldn't make sense for us to bring him in for a d-line position and it wouldn't make sense for him to come here for a d-line position.

Regarding our defense being remade to a Tampa-2, we're not far off are we? I was under the impression that our personnel on that side was due for a huge makeover regardless of who claims the DC post, but what do we really need to field a starting 11 for a Tampa-2? A speed rushing DE, another LB or 2 and another safety to pair with Wilson? Anything else? We have the penetrating DTs, we have Mario, we have the undersized LBs, we have the press CBs, and we have one safety with range and pop. Anything else?

He makes sense for the D-Line to me...especially if Bush is going to be the next DC. Our line fits a tampa 2 pretty well. The DT's are more of the quick pentrating type, think Sapp, than the big hogs in the middle. I don't think we're going to switch, but Marinelli should be able to work with what we have along the D-line. I don't know if I want Demeco to have to haul but down field on every snap, and we definitely don't have the safeties for it, but I think certain elements of that system could mesh with what we have.

I think it would be a huge hire if it'w the D-Line, and I would be OK with him as DC....as long as he's willing to tailor things to what we have and not be a slave to "his" system. I think that will be a factor with any coach we hire. Kubiak's going to want someone who can work with what we have right now. Not someone who needs to overhaul a lot of things before it could work. In other words, I really think it's going to be Bush at DC.

[painekiller]

Originally Posted by papabear

He makes sense for the D-Line to me...especially if Bush is going to be the next DC. Our line fits a tampa 2 pretty well. The DT's are more of the quick pentrating type, think Sapp, than the big hogs in the middle. I don't think we're going to switch, but Marinelli should be able to work with what we have along the D-line. I don't know if I want Demeco to have to haul but down field on every snap, and we definitely don't have the safeties for it, but I think certain elements of that system could mesh with what we have.

I think it would be a huge hire if it'w the D-Line, and I would be OK with him as DC....as long as he's willing to tailor things to what we have and not be a slave to "his" system. I think that will be a factor with any coach we hire. Kubiak's going to want someone who can work with what we have right now. Not someone who needs to overhaul a lot of things before it could work. In other words, I really think it's going to be Bush at DC.

You do know they do not just run one type of defense, right? The Tampa 2 is just one of the coverages they all run.

The main thing is he coaches 4-3 as opposed to 3-4.

[mussop]

This is the D I want.


2. The MLB is freed to roam and ad-lib to make plays, allowing us to take full advantage of DeMeco’s range/instincts. (Seriously, DeMeco was born to play in this system.)

3. Rather than read-and-react at the line when fulfilling gap responsibilities, the initial responsibility for the D-line in this system is to get 1.5 to 2 yards up field, then flow to the ball.

4. The D-line is freed to stunt and twist more than in a standard 4-3.

[papabear]

Originally Posted by painekiller

You do know they do not just run one type of defense, right? The Tampa 2 is just one of the coverages they all run.

The main thing is he coaches 4-3 as opposed to 3-4.

um yea.....In my world Tampa 2 refers to a "system" and a cover 2 refers to a basic type of coverage that everyone runs. I also realize that the term "Tampa 2" is almost as overused as "west coast offense". When I say Tampa 2 I am referring to a system that emphasizes speed over size from the front 7, 2 safeties covering the deep half (hence the 2), CB's who generally press at the LOS on WR's without being asked to play man coverage. In this system the MLB is often asked to get a very deep drop to protect the middle. Yes, I understand that there is literally thousands of different things so-called Tampa 2 teams can do within this scheme.

My point is that I see elements of that that match our personnel and others that don't. Regardless of who we hire I just want someone who will figure out what our personnel does best and fit his scheme to match that. Not just use the same things that worked for him on another team.

[nero THE zero]

Originally Posted by papabear

He makes sense for the D-Line to me...especially if Bush is going to be the next DC. Our line fits a tampa 2 pretty well. The DT's are more of the quick pentrating type, think Sapp, than the big hogs in the middle. I don't think we're going to switch, but Marinelli should be able to work with what we have along the D-line. I don't know if I want Demeco to have to haul but down field on every snap, and we definitely don't have the safeties for it, but I think certain elements of that system could mesh with what we have.

I think it would be a huge hire if it'w the D-Line, and I would be OK with him as DC....as long as he's willing to tailor things to what we have and not be a slave to "his" system. I think that will be a factor with any coach we hire. Kubiak's going to want someone who can work with what we have right now. Not someone who needs to overhaul a lot of things before it could work. In other words, I really think it's going to be Bush at DC.

I think you misunderstood me. I agree that our personnel is a better fit than some may think. What I'm saying is that it doesn't make sense for either us, nor Marinelli, for him to come in and interview for the d-line position.

If Bush was the DC-in-waiting, as you suggest, why wait to announce so until after his position coaches are hired? Do you think we are trying to be deceptive and lure potential position coaches in under the supposition that they have a shot at the DC spot? Also, if Bush is the DC-in-waiting, why even give the notion that Marinelli has the opportunity at the DC spot?

For Marinelli, it makes no sense to come to Houston to interview for a D-line job when he has two teams that he is connected with who have already interviewed him for the same position. Granted, money is a consideration, as is the talent he would have to work with here in Houston. But, you'd have to think that his next tenure at d-line coach (if there is one in his future) will be a short one. So, I think it'd be more advantageous for him to work with his guys and his system to have quick success and to facilitate connections that could blossom into a DC gig faster than a semi-rebuilding job here in Houston.

And, I keep coming back to the sticking point that a team looking for a coordinator generally looks for the coordinator first and then lets him fill in his positional vacancies. To do otherwise would undermine your chances at landing a quality coordinator.

I just don't think it makes sense for us to bring him in for the d-line position.

[papabear]

Originally Posted by nero THE zero

I think you misunderstood me.

I just don't think it makes sense for us to bring him in for the d-line position.

I didn't misunderstand you as much as just got off on a rambling tangent. After looking at the article I don't think the Chronicle knows anything more than he is here. I suspect he's here for the DC, but it could be nothing more than they just asked him to come to town and talk. He has nothing to lose by interviewing for either position or both if for no other reason than leverage.

Garrett interviewed for the Cowboys head coaching name and then was named the OC....not that I want to model things on the way Jerrah does it.

[Roy P]

Originally Posted by papabear

I suspect he's here for the DC, but it could be nothing more than they just asked him to come to town and talk. He has nothing to lose by interviewing for either position.

We have nothing to lose either by interviewing him. Nobody knows what may be gleened from the interview. Perhaps during the course of the interview, the Texans may be persuaded that the Tampa-2 is or is not the best system to utilize for our roster.

I'm imagining one of those HGTV shows where a couple of designers show what they want to do on a project. The family then decides that one of the options is closer to their tastes. It is sometimes easier to determine what you like by seeing what you don't like.

I'm thinking about the Colts and Bucs and trying to contemplate a John Lynch or Bob Sanders on our roster.

[Roy P]

Anybody watch what Charlie Strong is doing to Oklahoma? I wonder if he'd like a shot at an NFL Defensive Coordinator position.

[Nconroe]

The Gators were tough weren't they? I was hoping for Big 12 but ...

[nunusguy]

Originally Posted by Roy P

Perhaps during the course of the interview, the Texans may be persuaded that the Tampa-2 is or is not the best system to utilize for our roster.

I dunno, what are the implications personnel wise in a conversion to Tampa-2/Cover-2 ? One thing I'm aware of is a team does not require as much man coverage by its corners, so the search for premiere cover CBs is no longer required since they routinely get help from a safety. Of course this may just shift the needs of the Def-Backfield to acquiring more versitale, competant safeties ?
What about the personnel requirements for the front 7 in the Cover-2 , or is that independant of the DB schemes ?

[gunn]

I really hope they, at the very least, bring in McDermott to interview for the job.

[papabear]

Originally Posted by nunusguy

I dunno, what are the implications personnel wise in a conversion to Tampa-2/Cover-2 ? One thing I'm aware of is a team does not require as much man coverage by its corners, so the search for premiere cover CBs is no longer required since they routinely get help from a safety. Of course this may just shift the needs of the Def-Backfield to acquiring more versitale, competant safeties ?
What about the personnel requirements for the front 7 in the Cover-2 , or is that independant of the DB schemes ?

Based on my understanding of the Tampa 2 system, which is probably wrong, our front seven would fit. It emphasizes speed over size, and needs penetrating interior lineman. I think our CB's are better suited to man coverage. Reeves was better here, relatively speaking, than in Dallas where he was asked to play more zone. Robinson is on record saying that he prefers man. I think our corners would be OK in this system, but the safeties is what worry me. I'm also not sure if the Tampa 2 would be the best system for Demeco....everybody has a little different flavor of the scheme, like the "west coast offense", so it's really hard to say. I know Urlacher is often asked to take a deep drop to the middle of the field in the bears scheme. I would like Demeco to have a little freedom though.

[Roy P]

Originally Posted by nunusguy

I dunno, what are the implications personnel wise in a conversion to Tampa-2/Cover-2 ? One thing I'm aware of is a team does not require as much man coverage by its corners, so the search for premiere cover CBs is no longer required since they routinely get help from a safety. Of course this may just shift the needs of the Def-Backfield to acquiring more versitale, competant safeties ?
What about the personnel requirements for the front 7 in the Cover-2 , or is that independant of the DB schemes ?

Well, I will submit that when Sapp was doing his thing, he had the benefit of Booger McFarland. When Tommie Harris was healthy and playing like a Pro-Bowler, he had Tank Johnson beside him. I don't consider Travis Johnson to be either to allow Okoye to become "Baby Sapp" by any stretch of the imagination.

As for our CBs, Fred Bennett and Molden would be ideal in terms of size. However, I'm not convinced that playing zone with them is their strong suit. Generally, Cover-2 CBs are big, slow, and excel in Zone coverage. This year's draft has an ideal candidate in Victor Harris from Va Tech.Bennett, Molden, Robinson, and Reeves were not brought here for that. Could they do it? Possibly, but I'm not thinking that is using your players' strengths.

The FS position is generally a large college CB who is converted to play S. Dunta Robinson might be moved to that position, but he does lack the typical size.

DeMeco running down the middle of the field with Dallas Clark worries me considerably.

Other than that, we'd fit like a hand in a glove running the Tampa-2.