And so I pose this question about Austin.

[lionstop1]

I can honestly say that when it comes to football, Im an offensive guy. I love the skilled players and Madden-like numbers and all that good stuff. Last year, with Lombardi, I can say I came away a bit disappointed, even shitty at times but I think thats during to expecting too much. It was like....coming into the season...I thought the offense would shine and the defense would have some issues. I consider Austin's and Lombardi's job just like any average person- starting new, you either shine or you dont so much.

In general, I dont think fans are being fair here, so I ask this:

What if Austin lost Suh for five games this season along with all three starting LBs for a lengthy time during the season? How about Ansah and Mosley for at least two or three games? Would Austin still have sustained a top defense over the year?

I dont think what Austin had to deal with on defense was equivalent to what Lombardi had to. The offensive line was in shambles with injuries, with a very average RB and one thats always hurt running behind it. CJ misses extended time, along will all of the TEs. With all that went down, I dont see no way for Lombardi to have as much success as most of us wanted. Austin did a phenomenal job, but he did have more to work with.

Now, argue with me

 

[Gulf of Brazil]

Lombardi may have brought some of these issues upon himself, IF, the allegations were true coming from Sims and Raiola regarding the complexity of the blocking scheme. That would have an adverse affect on all OL-men especially when you have (2) guys with 9+ yrs of experience in various blocking schemes, then add in (3) coming off as 1st yr starters. The injuries to the OL seemed to be a constant and a O-Line needs that chemistry, cohesion and continuity. The O-Line had none of the aforementioned. The O-Line wasn't as good as some may have thought in 2013 ? Stafford was still under a lot of pressure that season, he just threw it earlier, away or into coverage when/where he shouldn't have.


I'll credit Lombardi for dialing down Stafford's turnovers and to have more ball security and field awareness.


The one comment I actually despised coming from Lombardi was he didn't know "How to effectively use Megatron".
The learning curve associated with Megatron

 

[lionstop1]

Nah, I completely understand why that was tough for Lombardi. How could he know exactly what to do with him when defenses were throwing different things out all the time? Im sure with a year under his belt, that wont be so much of an issue. People have to remember that Linehan had a ton of experience coming in.

 

[broncosmitty]

I can honestly say that when it comes to football, Im an offensive guy. I love the skilled players and Madden-like numbers and all that good stuff. Last year, with Lombardi, I can say I came away a bit disappointed, even shitty at times but I think thats during to expecting too much. It was like....coming into the season...I thought the offense would shine and the defense would have some issues. I consider Austin's and Lombardi's job just like any average person- starting new, you either shine or you dont so much.

In general, I dont think fans are being fair here, so I ask this:

What if Austin lost Suh for five games this season along with all three starting LBs for a lengthy time during the season? How about Ansah and Mosley for at least two or three games? Would Austin still have sustained a top defense over the year?

I dont think what Austin had to deal with on defense was equivalent to what Lombardi had to. The offensive line was in shambles with injuries, with a very average RB and one thats always hurt running behind it. CJ misses extended time, along will all of the TEs. With all that went down, I dont see no way for Lombardi to have as much success as most of us wanted. Austin did a phenomenal job, but he did have more to work with.

Now, argue with me

Austin did lose his very, very solid MLB for like 13 games. Fairley for half the year and didn't have his starting Strong Safety for a decent chunk at the beginning of the season.

Joe did lose Reggie for awhile. No surprise, that's like the sun coming up. And there were dents and dings on the OLine. And a couple games with Tight End issues, aside from the ones Lombardi created himself. Staff locked onto Tate while CJ was gone, so no slack will be cut from me on that one. Ravioli reminded us again that he's a POS....

Am I supposed to be arguing why Lombardi sucked? Or what?

Hope yer right Yao. Maybe he'll stop sucking.

 

[LPinSLC]

Austin did much more with less. Bentley, Lawson, Tulloch, Van Noy, and Fairly. That's after already being what most considered to be a weak defense.

Lombardi was not good and there is no need to defend it. Hopefully he and that Jim can improve upon a weak offense.

 

[lionstop1]

LP,

Fairley and Digs were probably the most significant losses on the defense, those other guys werent even starters with the exception of Bentley. If Suh or Levy miss time, no way the defense survives some of those games and you guys know it. Even Austin's role players played decent while the backup olinemen blew.

The offense should've been ranked higher but no way should it have been tops. Plus, Bell and Bush and Ross are on the weak end of things.

 

[lionstop1]

Smitty,

Tulloch. Just. Aint. That. Good. Bruh.

 

[Microwahevo]

Even Austin's role players played decent while the backup olinemen blew.

I tend to think that says more about Austin getting everything he can(and sometimes more) from his players than Lombardi.

Coming into the season I had a ton of faith in Austin based in his previous success with secondaries. I was on the "wait and see" approach with Lombardi. Well....I waited...I saw....and I'm still waiting. I'd love for him to prove me wrong and turn our offense into a more consistent one. He's got one more season imo. But I still won't go into next year with much faith. But I won't rag on him all season long. I'll simply let it play out.

 

[lionstop1]

While I agree that Austin may have had a hand in having those guys prepared, I still hold players accountable for their performances. Cant have it both ways. When Stafford plays shitty, its not always because the coaches havent prepared him.

 

[lionstop1]

Lombardi had to deal with some shitty players for whatever reason that they were shitty.

 

[Naughtymax]

Austin did lose Fairley and Tulloch and Van Noy for most/all of the season, and inserted the next guy without missing a beat.

Lombardi had plenty of talent but couldn't make it work. I partially excuse because the OL is the most important unit on any football team and he lost the right side.

 

[tpaulus_2]

Smitty,

Tulloch. Just. Aint. That. Good. Bruh.

Yes. He. Is.

There's no way around it- he's a tackling machine and holds up well in coverage. In the 5 seasons prior to blowing his MCL this year he racked up 639 tackles, or an average of 128 a year. That's some impressive sustained production. Add in 11.5 sacks, 21 passes defensed, and 4 INTs during that same span, and there's no way you can honestly say he's not that good.

He's that good and then some.

 

[tpaulus_2]

I realize that Tulloch will not be back at his current salary, but I really hope he'll take a pay cut to stick around. I think he's one of the most under-rated MLBs in the game. I think his height, intentionally or not, really counts against him when people evaluate MLBs. There's not many who are better against the run than Tully...

 

[lionstop1]

Yeah TP, his stats show that he's good but I dont think he's that good. I dont think he's good enough to come back.

 

[tpaulus_2]

Yeah TP, his stats show that he's good but I dont think he's that good. I dont think he's good enough to come back.

I don't get it? His stats mirror his production. He's very productive. Productive = good, at least in this case, imo.

He's not a play-making "splash" guy at MLB, but Levy is that guy in our LB corps. I think of Tulloch in the same vein as Zach Thomas and London Fletcher- two very good, very productive MLBs who were unfairly docked for not being taller, rangier guys. First and foremost a middle linebacker needs to tackle, and that's where Tulloch shines. He stacks and sheds and gets the RB on the ground as good as any of them, imo...

 

[RobBase]

Lombardi had so much more to work with. Linehan did more w less than Lombardi had.

 

[RobBase]

I do not expect Tulloch back. Schwartz' guy, over 30 coming off injury. Our LB's are good.

 

[lionstop1]

He's good but I've never seen where he has stood out. With him in the lineup, I was still wondering where our good tacklers and playmakers were.

 

[tpaulus_2]

He's good but I've never seen where he has stood out. With him in the lineup, I was still wondering where our good tacklers and playmakers were.

I guess I don't know what to say to that, then. You're obviously entitled to your own opinion, but I think you're missing the boat on this guy simply because he isn't a flashy player. You say that you've never seen where he has stood out, but I'll point you to his sheer volume of tackles. I'm relatively sure he led the league in tackles in 2010, and averaging over 125 per year for the last 5 years straight is nothing to sneeze at.

At the time of his injury, prior to halftime of the 3rd game of the season, he'd already amassed 20 tackles on the season. Basically, if you project that out that's another 120-130 tackle season.

Now I'll give you that he's not flashy, but he racks up tackles like a beast, rushes the passer well (2 sacks in 2.5 games this year), and isn't a liability in coverage.

I'm going to have to stick by my guns here and insist that you're selling too low on this guy.

 

[Dr. Evil-er]

Tulloch injured himself For that reason alone I don't want him back. The $ just makes it a certainty.

Whitehead stepped in and was excellent and quite frankly I thought he made more impact plays then I remember out of Tulloch over his several seasons. Can't wait to see him next year now that he has some experience under his belt.