Obviously "no history of success" is a bit harsh & extreme - but you acting like he has this long resume with achievement after achievement is just as ridiculous.
You are also admitting that he has zero experience developing "young high picks". So what makes you think that he would be good at it? He has legit no track record for successfully developing young talented LBs (that have been highly invested in). The closest thing he has to working with young talented LBs was his time at Ohio State. Nobody is going to tell you that he did a good job there - besides maybe himself. He had a room filled with future high end NFL talent, and managed to produce at the worst statistical level in recent Ohio State history.
"Admitting". It's called a careful examination by looking at his record. I have no dog in this fight; I'm not a pro-Davis or anti-Davis guy. I just can't sit back and read awful arguments without responding.
You do realize that a lot of what you see on the field on a Saturday or a Sunday is on the
coordinators right? You use the fact that the linebackers played better as an indictment against Davis, but you clearly are cherry picking what facts/opinions from the article you want to go with.
The Buckeyes ALSO changed defensive coordinators, and the article CLEARLY states that the new coordinator ran a much less complex defense that allowed the linebackers to think less. Maybe that has something to do with the linebackers playing better? Maybe? But that doesn't fit your narrative so you don't even address that.
Fair points. A lot of good coaches bounce around. It happens.
But you know - there's a lot of bad coaches that continuously get recycled. I've seen you burying Vance Joseph repeatedly in other threads for being terrible. He has had more coaching success than your boy Billy Davis. I guarantee you he will have another job waiting for him the moment he leaves Arizona.
Again - I've never once said that Bill Davis doesn't know football or is completely unqualified to be where he is today. What I have been saying is that his track record continuously shows that he is a poor teacher. I have no doubts that he can ramble on about the philosophy of defensive schemes and whatever and show you just how smart he is and how much he knows. But unfortunately, if you can't frame it up in a way where a 22 year old with little experience not only understands it, but can also apply it on the field - then you're going to make a lousy position coach.
You haven't demonstrated that he is a poor teacher....at all. Not even a little bit. Not once. You have demonstrated that Ohio State's defense got better, but I would say that the guy who actually calls the plays improved. That's a variable that's pretty big that you basically bury because it undermines your simple, poorly thought out argument. Just like how you post the article about Browning where he essentially said he was being pushed by daddy for years and once daddy was around he got a little lazier. His words, not mine.
You're missing the point here. It's a coach's job to do whatever it takes to get the best out of his players. If Browning did in fact "stop grinding" - when do we look at the coach? If you have a child who is struggling in school, do you just dismiss him for being naturally lazy - or do you maybe look at the parents?
No, I think you are missing the point while you cherry pick data to fit your argument. So this is what happened, and this is all factual so it's not really disputable: The Ohio State defense was lousy even with all these five star recruits in 2018. Todd Day fires the DC and some of the assistants. The new DC installs a simpler, less complex defense and the players play much better. You can assume that Davis was the root cause, but this is a stretch because
the article specifically states that the new defense was easier to run and the players thrived in it.
And it's not like it was just Browning that was underachieving during that time. The entire LB room at Ohio State was a disaster. A lot of the guys that were in that room are now productive players in the NFL. Was that whole room lazy too? And why did their production pick up drastically the year after Billy Davis was let go? Was that just a coincidence too?
Laziness may have been Browning's issue, and he clearly stated that he wasn't grinding that year. But the rest of the room clearly got better, because again, as the article stated and you clearly haven't addressed, there was a new coordinator! The good position coaches can teach technique all day long, but if the coordinator is playing a spaghetti on the wall defense, the players are never going to do anything well.
Just like
@Chopper0080 stated in another thread in regards to player rankings, there are clearly elite position coaches, there are clearly terrible position coaches, but the ones in the middle are HIGHLY debateable. The fact that so many different teams and coaches have hired Davis over the years means he at least has a pretty good reputation. Is he a top LB coach? Probably not, but to pin the problems at Ohio State on him is complete disingenuous and academically lazy when you consider that the guy who actually calls the defense on game days changed. The current Cardinals defensive problems are NOT linked to Davis. They are linked to the actually defensive coordinator calling a crap game. I would argue that the Cardinals LBs are a strength right now. Does Bill Davis get credit for that? Is it personnel?
