Nope, I was in a coma last year. Of course I saw them. Where did I make a point one way or the other, I was asking what the logic was.
Is the offense improved, of course, but it isn't special. So you're saying we could have kept Rosen and KK would have taken out bad offense and made it mediocre like it is now? Or if KM is the reason our offense is better then it is a knock on KK because by that logic Wilks should have won more games had he had KM and the offensive assets we have this year. If you're saying it is a combo of KK and KM then it is a knock on both of them because their contributions individually were pretty marginal.
What are the key defensive pieces we lost this year you speak of?
Yes, we were not blown out of as many games, but we had 4 losses last year decided by 3 pts or less. This year we had 4 losses decided by 3 pts or less. Yes, the season isn't over so maybe we get more wins or close losses, but this same time last year we had 3 wins, same as right now.
If KK eeks out two more wins then it makes the case for him much better. But just because you made a bad offense better after getting the #1 QB and other picks on offense while making a below avg D bad doesn't make a strong case.
You could argue that KK isn't responsible for the D and the blame lays with the DC, but by that logic Wilks wouldn't have been responsible for the O since he was a defensive guy and the fault should lay with the OC, not him.