Harry
ASFN Consultant and Senior Writer
I saw Budda Baker characterized the season as a roller coaster. I see it more as a death spiral.
The recent Athletic article about Kingsbury was accurate as far as it went. I agreed with all the negatives and a few of the positives. I just reached a different conclusion about his tenure. Most of the negatives were ones I’d previously presented here but they missed numerous other valid criticisms, like receiver routes, excessive penalties, wasted timeouts and others so numerous it pointless to rehash.
The most valid endorsement is that the offensive personnel is weak. Better players would certainly have produced better outcomes. Are we sure better players will be something that gets fixed? I look at the major personnel issues Carroll has overcome in Seattle or the Rams overcame in their season ending regular season game. I understand the salary cap makes game planning around your weaknesses part of the job. Has Kingsbury shown the ability to do that? I already posted much of this falls on Keim.
Where our opinions diverge the most is in the belief that Kingsbury will change and improve. When Tech fired Kingsbury they noted, “It's not based on one game. This type of decision is not based on one season. This decision was made based on a three-year pattern, a three-year pattern of inconsistency," athletic director Kirby Hocutt said during a campus news conference. "We saw progress, but we also saw lapses of progress in key critical areas." I would say Kingsbury’s entire college tenure reflected this.
I don’t believe Kingsbury’s history indicates such improvement is likely. He wants to be head coach, offensive coordinator and quarterback coach. He basically sees the defense as somebody else’s problem. Sure he occasionally designs a good play but not a good game plan. Also that play is often not repeated. His play calling is atrocious for someone who’s been a head coach for so long. Why hasn’t he learned how to call a consistent game by now? Players don’t typically learn to shoot free throws after they reach the NBA. There are adjustments first time NFL coaches must make but there shouldn’t be this many adjustments needed. The author asks if the Cards let Kingsbury go can they find someone to develop Murray? I’d argue most of what Kingsbury does has not moved Murray forward. Murray’s running is instinctive. His passing mechanics are crude. His ability to read defenses seems severely limited. Murray rarely uses progressions. He is not being coached to be a leader of men. I’d like to know how much film he studies. Finally I think most good coaches could integrate Murray’s talent. Giving Murray a dedicated QB coach who would focus on traditional passing technique might fill a void of knowledge with which Murray struggles. I don’t think you can be a successful QB based on solely running. A winning QB must possess some pocket passing skills. I haven’t seen Murray improve these skills under Kingsbury’s tutelage.
My feeling is that next year the Cards will have a similar record. They will show some statistical improvement due to better personnel. However the excuse will be Kingsbury hasn’t had long enough to integrate the new players. The Kingsbury defenders will still be there, continuing to be thinking numbers not fundamentals.
What was totally ignored in the article was my belief the league has adapted to what few unique elements Kingsbury brought to the offense. I’ve been waiting for Kingsbury to adjust to the changed defenses. Simply put, he appears to be out of ideas. This lack of adjustment was just covered by ESPN, which reached the same conclusion that he’d failed to adjust.
So instead of continuing to beat this drum let’s assume the Kingsbury stays, which is the path of least resistance. That’s the Cards’ traditional route. There should be some conditions to his continuing in his role. First the hiring of a QB coach should be non-negotiable. Of course Kingsbury would be involved in the selection but could not be the only voice. My preference would be to hire an offensive coordinator as well. The obvious problem is Kingsbury is not really a head coach. As far as we can tell he has little or no involvement in the defense or special teams. So if he’s not wholly in charge of the offense what’s his role? So I guess an OC is out.
I would make it clear Kingsbury needs to be in the defensive scheming & the special teams’ decision if only as an empowered observer. These coaches report to him and they should feel like they’re being held accountable. In my mind the only other coach who should be in jeopardy is Joseph. Between Covid, excessive injuries, poor personnel and no head coach assistance Joseph has not been functioning in an ideal situation. Still I’ve seen too much inconsistency of game plans. Too many inexperienced QBs were too effective. Too many players seemed confused about their responsibility, especially in zone. Receivers were constantly left uncovered. On running plays to the edge were often left open. Their penalty counts reflected too little discipline. Joseph was part of the problem, not the solution. He must go.
Next time we’ll look in detail about the offensive personnel. I warn you ESPN just wrote, “This is a roster that can win big next year.” I disagree.
The recent Athletic article about Kingsbury was accurate as far as it went. I agreed with all the negatives and a few of the positives. I just reached a different conclusion about his tenure. Most of the negatives were ones I’d previously presented here but they missed numerous other valid criticisms, like receiver routes, excessive penalties, wasted timeouts and others so numerous it pointless to rehash.
The most valid endorsement is that the offensive personnel is weak. Better players would certainly have produced better outcomes. Are we sure better players will be something that gets fixed? I look at the major personnel issues Carroll has overcome in Seattle or the Rams overcame in their season ending regular season game. I understand the salary cap makes game planning around your weaknesses part of the job. Has Kingsbury shown the ability to do that? I already posted much of this falls on Keim.
Where our opinions diverge the most is in the belief that Kingsbury will change and improve. When Tech fired Kingsbury they noted, “It's not based on one game. This type of decision is not based on one season. This decision was made based on a three-year pattern, a three-year pattern of inconsistency," athletic director Kirby Hocutt said during a campus news conference. "We saw progress, but we also saw lapses of progress in key critical areas." I would say Kingsbury’s entire college tenure reflected this.
I don’t believe Kingsbury’s history indicates such improvement is likely. He wants to be head coach, offensive coordinator and quarterback coach. He basically sees the defense as somebody else’s problem. Sure he occasionally designs a good play but not a good game plan. Also that play is often not repeated. His play calling is atrocious for someone who’s been a head coach for so long. Why hasn’t he learned how to call a consistent game by now? Players don’t typically learn to shoot free throws after they reach the NBA. There are adjustments first time NFL coaches must make but there shouldn’t be this many adjustments needed. The author asks if the Cards let Kingsbury go can they find someone to develop Murray? I’d argue most of what Kingsbury does has not moved Murray forward. Murray’s running is instinctive. His passing mechanics are crude. His ability to read defenses seems severely limited. Murray rarely uses progressions. He is not being coached to be a leader of men. I’d like to know how much film he studies. Finally I think most good coaches could integrate Murray’s talent. Giving Murray a dedicated QB coach who would focus on traditional passing technique might fill a void of knowledge with which Murray struggles. I don’t think you can be a successful QB based on solely running. A winning QB must possess some pocket passing skills. I haven’t seen Murray improve these skills under Kingsbury’s tutelage.
My feeling is that next year the Cards will have a similar record. They will show some statistical improvement due to better personnel. However the excuse will be Kingsbury hasn’t had long enough to integrate the new players. The Kingsbury defenders will still be there, continuing to be thinking numbers not fundamentals.
What was totally ignored in the article was my belief the league has adapted to what few unique elements Kingsbury brought to the offense. I’ve been waiting for Kingsbury to adjust to the changed defenses. Simply put, he appears to be out of ideas. This lack of adjustment was just covered by ESPN, which reached the same conclusion that he’d failed to adjust.
So instead of continuing to beat this drum let’s assume the Kingsbury stays, which is the path of least resistance. That’s the Cards’ traditional route. There should be some conditions to his continuing in his role. First the hiring of a QB coach should be non-negotiable. Of course Kingsbury would be involved in the selection but could not be the only voice. My preference would be to hire an offensive coordinator as well. The obvious problem is Kingsbury is not really a head coach. As far as we can tell he has little or no involvement in the defense or special teams. So if he’s not wholly in charge of the offense what’s his role? So I guess an OC is out.
I would make it clear Kingsbury needs to be in the defensive scheming & the special teams’ decision if only as an empowered observer. These coaches report to him and they should feel like they’re being held accountable. In my mind the only other coach who should be in jeopardy is Joseph. Between Covid, excessive injuries, poor personnel and no head coach assistance Joseph has not been functioning in an ideal situation. Still I’ve seen too much inconsistency of game plans. Too many inexperienced QBs were too effective. Too many players seemed confused about their responsibility, especially in zone. Receivers were constantly left uncovered. On running plays to the edge were often left open. Their penalty counts reflected too little discipline. Joseph was part of the problem, not the solution. He must go.
Next time we’ll look in detail about the offensive personnel. I warn you ESPN just wrote, “This is a roster that can win big next year.” I disagree.
