Is there a reason why we don't fire Kliff today?

Ouchie-Z-Clown

I'm better than Mulli!
Joined
Sep 16, 2002
Posts
63,597
Reaction score
58,030
Location
SoCal
Nope. I've said Kliff should go. Just not now.

In my opinion if he goes now we likely end up with someone worse. In which case might as well let him hold the bag for next year while seeing if things improve with a new GM.
This makes no sense. Why would we end up with someone worse due to timing? The only time this team hires a new coach is when the existing fact pattern is completely dysfunctional. That’s not gonna change if they wait a season.
 

Ouchie-Z-Clown

I'm better than Mulli!
Joined
Sep 16, 2002
Posts
63,597
Reaction score
58,030
Location
SoCal
Sources say Kyler is the Stout of the Cardinals facility. Always cranky, always thinks the team sucks.

I think you two would get along. :)
So he’s the only realistic person on hardy. Got it.

I think this analogy really backfired on you.
 

DVontel

ASFN Icon
Joined
Jan 28, 2015
Posts
13,051
Reaction score
23,252

Scroll down to snap type and huddle. Is this what you’re looking for?
Yup. Thanks.

I’m starting to believe the QBs not going under center is a Kliff problem. Colt really doesn’t seem that far off than Kyler does. Even with less starts, I would’ve sworn Colt lined up a lot more under center than Kyler if you only read the criticism of Kyler “not preferring going under center” on here.

I know I said it early, but I guess we’ll fully see the whole picture with the next HC.
 

daves

Keepin' it real!
Supporting Member
Joined
Nov 2, 2003
Posts
3,530
Reaction score
7,224
Location
Orange County, CA

SoonerLou

ASFN Addict
Joined
Sep 15, 2019
Posts
8,158
Reaction score
12,277
Location
St Louis, MO
No? Coming off a season where we picked #1 and our QB would’ve been . . . Josh Rosen? We may have gotten the #1 pick again.
I dont think Rosen would have been as bad under Kliff.

I mean look how much better Tua is without Flores. Rosen was dealt the same hand.
And I still think we would have brought in another QB as well if he outright bombed.

Then add Bosa's impact on defense. I just dont see us as bad as the Bengals. We maybe could have been in Chargers territory, but just not sure.
 

DVontel

ASFN Icon
Joined
Jan 28, 2015
Posts
13,051
Reaction score
23,252
No? Coming off a season where we picked #1 and our QB would’ve been . . . Josh Rosen? We may have gotten the #1 pick again.
Having the #1 overall pick in back-to-back years is almost unprecedented. I’m pretty sure in modern Super Bowl history the Bucs & Jags have only done it.

I also been lol’ing at the “We could’ve had Bosa then Burrow or Herbert” as if Steve Keim would’ve made the right pick. That’s what’s really hilarious.
 

Ouchie-Z-Clown

I'm better than Mulli!
Joined
Sep 16, 2002
Posts
63,597
Reaction score
58,030
Location
SoCal

Ouchie-Z-Clown

I'm better than Mulli!
Joined
Sep 16, 2002
Posts
63,597
Reaction score
58,030
Location
SoCal
I dont think Rosen would have been as bad under Kliff.

I mean look how much better Tua is without Flores. Rosen was dealt the same hand.
And I still think we would have brought in another QB as well if he outright bombed.

Then add Bosa's impact on defense. I just dont see us as bad as the Bengals. We maybe could have been in Chargers territory, but just not sure.
Then you must think highly of kliff bc Rosen has bombed under how many coaches now?
 

Ouchie-Z-Clown

I'm better than Mulli!
Joined
Sep 16, 2002
Posts
63,597
Reaction score
58,030
Location
SoCal
Having the #1 overall pick in back-to-back years is almost unprecedented. I’m pretty sure in modern Super Bowl history the Bucs & Jags have only done it.

I also been lol’ing at the “We could’ve had Bosa then Burrow or Herbert” as if Steve Keim would’ve made the right pick. That’s what’s really hilarious.
There is that. But if he took bosa (which was kinda the no brainer if you weren’t taking kyler) he wouldn’t have had much choice but to pick a qb and we undoubtedly would’ve been picking in top 3-4, even if we didn’t get the #1. So that means we would’ve likely landed one of burrow, Herbert, or tua (likely tua, but would that be worse than kyler at this point?).
 

BritCard

ASFN Icon
Joined
Jan 10, 2020
Posts
22,491
Reaction score
41,041
Location
UK
I dont think Rosen would have been as bad under Kliff.

I mean look how much better Tua is without Flores. Rosen was dealt the same hand.
And I still think we would have brought in another QB as well if he outright bombed.

Then add Bosa's impact on defense. I just dont see us as bad as the Bengals. We maybe could have been in Chargers territory, but just not sure.

I don't think Flores has anything to do with it. He was a defensive HC, he wasn't calling plays or coaching Tua.

But mainly that offensive roster was awful. Garbage O line. Garbage receivers and garbage RBs. They drafted Waddle last year but outside him and Gesicki the rest was still ass.
 

kerouac9

Klowned by Keim
Joined
Feb 14, 2003
Posts
38,406
Reaction score
29,805
Location
Gilbert, AZ
Having the #1 overall pick in back-to-back years is almost unprecedented. I’m pretty sure in modern Super Bowl history the Bucs & Jags have only done it.

I also been lol’ing at the “We could’ve had Bosa then Burrow or Herbert” as if Steve Keim would’ve made the right pick. That’s what’s really hilarious.
Cleveland did it with Garrett and Mayfield.
 

DVontel

ASFN Icon
Joined
Jan 28, 2015
Posts
13,051
Reaction score
23,252
There is that. But if he took bosa (which was kinda the no brainer if you weren’t taking kyler) he wouldn’t have had much choice but to pick a qb and we undoubtedly would’ve been picking in top 3-4, even if we didn’t get the #1. So that means we would’ve likely landed one of burrow, Herbert, or tua (likely tua, but would that be worse than kyler at this point?).
We probably would be in a worse spot with Tua than Kyler. Tua is starting to tumble the past month while having the best WR duo + brilliant offensive mind. I like Tua, but Burrow & Herbert we would be the clear-cut better options.
 

Ouchie-Z-Clown

I'm better than Mulli!
Joined
Sep 16, 2002
Posts
63,597
Reaction score
58,030
Location
SoCal
We probably would be in a worse spot with Tua than Kyler. Tua is starting to tumble the past month while having the best WR duo + brilliant offensive mind. I like Tua, but Burrow & Herbert we would be the clear-cut better options.
No doubt. I meant would we be any worse off if we had tua instead of kyler (not burrow or Herbert). The reasoning being it would’ve been keim and tua had been hyped for two years and keim woulda bought the hype.
 

kerouac9

Klowned by Keim
Joined
Feb 14, 2003
Posts
38,406
Reaction score
29,805
Location
Gilbert, AZ
No doubt. I meant would we be any worse off if we had tua instead of kyler (not burrow or Herbert). The reasoning being it would’ve been keim and tua had been hyped for two years and keim woulda bought the hype.
I dunno. Reports have been that McDaniels has been relentlessly upbeat with Tua since he arrived, but part of that is how he’s been beaten down the past couple years.
 

pemory09

ASFN Lifer
Joined
Jan 3, 2016
Posts
2,544
Reaction score
3,092
Sure, there’s a reason we don’t fire Kliff today. It’s just not a good one. ;)
 

slanidrac16

ASFN Icon
Supporting Member
Joined
Jul 11, 2002
Posts
15,625
Reaction score
15,971
Location
Plainfield, Il.
Yup. Thanks.

I’m starting to believe the QBs not going under center is a Kliff problem. Colt really doesn’t seem that far off than Kyler does. Even with less starts, I would’ve sworn Colt lined up a lot more under center than Kyler if you only read the criticism of Kyler “not preferring going under center” on here.

I know I said it early, but I guess we’ll fully see the whole picture with the next HC.
The problem with us playing under center was 99.9% of the time it was a run. The opposition KNEW It was a running play.
 

BritCard

ASFN Icon
Joined
Jan 10, 2020
Posts
22,491
Reaction score
41,041
Location
UK
The problem with us playing under center was 99.9% of the time it was a run. The opposition KNEW It was a running play.

Stats say that from 27 snaps under C 10 were runs and 17 were passes this season.

Which surprised me too.
 

daves

Keepin' it real!
Supporting Member
Joined
Nov 2, 2003
Posts
3,530
Reaction score
7,224
Location
Orange County, CA
You found one!

(Just as an inquiry: why was this question important enough for you to take time to research it?)
Didn't have to research it, i remembered when it happened - it was only 11 months ago and it was discussed a fair amount on this board - and it took me 5 seconds to Google "Quentin Harris GM interview".

Just as an inquiry: why was it important enough for you to take time to respond as above when I simply corrected your erroneous memory? Do you think it's good for false statements to go uncorrected?

...dbs

P.S. Funny, in February I was skeptical that Harris was taken seriously as a GM candidate despite that interview... but your brother had no problem pulling up a bunch of links to support his claim that Harris IS a legit GM candidate "around the league". :shrug:

 
Last edited:

Ouchie-Z-Clown

I'm better than Mulli!
Joined
Sep 16, 2002
Posts
63,597
Reaction score
58,030
Location
SoCal
Didn't have to research it, i remembered when it happened - it was only 11 months ago and it was discussed a fair amount on this board - and it took me 5 seconds to Google "Quentin Harris GM interview".

Just as an inquiry: why was it important enough for you to take time to respond as above when I simply corrected your erroneous memory? Do you think it's good for false statements to go uncorrected?

...dbs

P.S. Funny, in February I was skeptical that Harris was taken seriously as a GM candidate despite that interview... but your brother had no problem pulling up a bunch of links to support his claim that Harris IS a legit GM candidate "around the league". :shrug:

I didn’t make a statement. I asked a question.
 
Top