No big surprise. The two were close here as the article states.

Sucks to see him go.

 

Why? The DL was pretty bad last year.

 

Agreed, dude had studs at his disposal and they were pretty dog **** at the end of the year. Couldn't stop the run, couldn't rush the passer...

 

I think he gets a mulligan here.

His units are traditionally very good and he's considered one of the best position coaches in the league.

Personally, I think age/fatigue began affecting some of the stalwarts on that line.

 

Kacy Rodgers is a really good defensive line coach and I'm not sure why you would blame the line playing extraordinarily well then poorly on him.

There hasn't been any sort of failure to develop talent, teach technique, or anything like that. The issue with the line play was largely coaching and personnel based.

 

Don't blame coaching; blame coaching. OK.

I agree that Rodgers is not at fault for the DL's decline this year, but this is a rather contradictory way to make that argument.

 

I think he meant Coyle's failure to adjust plus personnel not doing their jobs.

 

I'm not into divining meaning from contradictory sentences.

 

You honestly can't decipher from a good position coach is not to blame for a poor Defensive coordinator? I don't think it's contradictory if you understand the context. Don't want to speak for Disgustipate but that's how I read it.

 

Coaching means coaching. Defending a coach by blaming coaching is like defending the police by blaming policing. Logic does not work that way.

Disgustipate is perfectly capable of getting offended at posts that point out issues with his statements without external assistance.

 

It's not particularly good writing but you should be able to figure it out.

 

Apparently not. Context is lost on him.

 

If you're a black and white thinker incapable of understanding context then it would be illogical. Come on D you're smarter than that.

 

Nothing would go over your head because you would catch it, right?

 

Can't blame Kacy for Coyle's incessant need to overuse stunting across the line.

 

:lol:

 

I don't know that stunting was inherently the problem- I think that's the direction you kinda have to go in once you make the decision to go with Earl Mitchell/Randy Starks as your 1-techniques. I don't know it was particularly well done.

I think the big issue was how bad the adjustments were when the line was flat out getting its *** kicked. That isn't on Rodgers, it's on Coyle.

 

Thanks for agreeing.

Clarity of communication is a real and important thing.

If I said you were a bad poster and then referenced your good posting in the same paragraph, you too would be confused.

 

This is a message board, not a press conference.

 

Understanding of context is equally important. I think you were the only one confused by the way he stated his opinion. Soooo.......

 

tomato potato its not all the same to me. ok so okra is okra but beer is courage since we are into that jive

I want to know if we are going to replace these coaches that leave with coaches that are better or worse ? I pray for the better but I fear the worst .

 

It's almost certainly going to be worse, Kacy Rodgers is a pretty damn good DL coach.

How much worse depends on who is making the decision. If Coyle is fired and Philbin takes the reigns, I think it's going to be bad.

 

Who can you say he developed? Wake? no because we signed him cause he was a beast. Odrick? No because he was a first round pick and some could argue has not become much of a force for a number 1. Starks was a solid vet before he came here, so he isn't one either.

 

That's not really particularly rational set of criteria, you seem to be suggesting that he can basically only be credited for guys who came out of nowhere and played well. It's more technical than that, you want to look at how guys improved, what technical skills they gained, and how they've improved. I'd credit him strongly with Paul Soliai, Randy Starks, Olivier Vernon, and Kendall Langford as particularly good examples of his work.

For example, Paul Soliai was an absolute dumpster fire when Rodgers took over. He was atrocious as a rookie to a degree that was pretty shocking. He got pushed around to an extent that you rarely see from someone with that kind of size advantage, and he basically ended up getting deactivated for the last part of the season. He was immature and had work ethic issues, and he was perpetually a guy a lot of people expected to be cut.

Rodgers had to do a hell of a lot of work with him. Turning him into a good technician, at a 2-gap technique no less is a pretty big deal.

 

So he did good with Soliai. I would give not credit on Starks. Starks was a solid veteran when he got here. Langford was solid, perhaps he helped him some, but Langford has been gone several years now. Developing 1 player in 7 years does not really excite me too much.

 

Puts the kibosh on the whole "Kacy was unhappy here stuff and that's why he left us"...

 

I don't think Starks qualified as a particularly well-rounded or developed guy when he got here. He was a guy who had talent but couldn't hold a starting job down, and mostly won with quickness. He was OK in Tennessee.

He became a guy who was pretty good and showed flashes of excellence in Miami, became an all-down player, and I think made a lot of strides on being able to contribute when blocked. He got better at using leverage and getting off blocks, and even eventually became a capable 2-gap DE despite not having the kind of reach or brute strength that makes guys successful there.

In terms of Rodgers, I don't think there is any situation where he ostensibly failed. I think the closest situation was Phillip Merling, but the biggest problem there wasn't Rodger's call. Merling didn't hold the weight well, they kept him there too long, and too many other guys were successful.