I'm not reading anyone in the media asking why Reese isn't being held accountable for the Haynesworth and Pacman draft picks.

For years, the selection of Kevin Dyson over Randy Moss was said to be due to character issues. Reese's first-round selections since taking Dyson include Kearse, Bulluck, Haynesworth, Woolfolk and Jones.

Both Haynesworth and Jones had a few "incidents" in their college days which appear to have been either judged to not be big enough to cause alarm or were ignored.

How much should Reese be held accountable if two first draft choices among the last three are lost because of character issues?

Personally - I think Reese has regreted not picking Moss. Dyse was ok, but I think with Moss, we would have won at least one superbowl between 1999-2003. Deep threat and big red zone target was a big missing piece during those winning years for us.

I think he should be somewhat accountable, but at some point it is out of their control how a player acts. I am more upset at the picks that have peformed poorly under his watch (Woolfolk, Calico, Laboy, Odom, etc...)

Haynesworth has played in how many games in how many years, and he loses control for 30 seconds. I don't think you can put that on Reese. Pacman is a different story, because his involves off the field problems and discipline problems. As Fisher says, I can't go home with him every night. Signing these guys can be a crapshoot sometimes. You bring them in and try to make them aware of the consequences but it doesn't always work. These guys aren't angels, but they have to fly below the radar.

I'm not reading anyone in the media asking why Reese isn't being held accountable for the Haynesworth and Pacman draft picks.

For years, the selection of Kevin Dyson over Randy Moss was said to be due to character issues. Reese's first-round selections since taking Dyson include Kearse, Bulluck, Haynesworth, Woolfolk and Jones.

Both Haynesworth and Jones had a few "incidents" in their college days which appear to have been either judged to not be big enough to cause alarm or were ignored.

How much should Reese be held accountable if two first draft choices among the last three are lost because of character issues?
Fisher wanted them both............thats why. He told FR that if he lost Samari he had to have a press CB............Reese was considering Rolle but many scouts and Fish felt he would wind up a S and not a press CB...........so they went with Adam. Reese's neck is not on the block like the scouts and Fishers are over Adam selection. Reese is in trouble with Bud for not doing enough to uncover the kids skeletons..............and bud knows about all the other teams taking him off their boards.............he just found out post draft......................and since Adams draft now the team hires its own PI firm to do in depth backrounds and no longer uses a clearing house method.

Reese seems to be better at negotitating contracts than evaluating talent

I am all for turning over personnel aquisition to Fisher and leaving the finances to someone else ..... and not necessarily Reese

I wonder who Reese would have selelcted this year had Bud not filled out the card himself

i think reeses sucks at evaluatng picks and negotiating contracts. what i think reese is good at is picking second day guys. he's found many late round gems

Nope...

A top general manager needs to have the guts to do what he thinks right not what the owner says. The very first draft pick ozzie newsome had with the ravens was in 1996 with the 4th pick. Art modell wanted him to draft lawrence phillips but newsome thought that jonathon ogden was a better value with less risk. Newsome then proceeded to draft a linebacker with the 22nd pick a guy named lewis. Not bad 2 hall of famers in your first 2 picks.

As for reese he has done a good job getting mid to lower picks that contribute but it's been a long long time since he has drafted a bonafide top player. The 2002-2004 drafts should be reaping big benefits now and we see little benefit. We used 2 second rd picks, a third and a fourth on defensive linemen in 2004 and not one of them is an outstanding player. We used a 3rd and 4th rd pick for CBs and both have done nothing..

We had 5, count them 5 worthless draft picks at the cornerback position from 2002-2004.

CBs
Beckham-4th
Echols-4th
Woolfolk-1st
Gardner--3rd
waddell--4th

D-line
Laboy-2nd
Odom-2nd
Starks-3rd
Long-4th
Scobel-4th

10 defensive players with little value to show for it. No wonder our defense sucks so bad..

Still, reese is save this year. Lets see what happends at next draf

We had 5, count them 5 worthless draft picks at the cornerback position from 2002-2004.

CBs
Beckham-4th
Echols-4th
Woolfolk-1st
Gardner--3rd
waddell--4th

D-line
Laboy-2nd
Odom-2nd
Starks-3rd
Long-4th
Scobel-4th

10 defensive players with little value to show for it. No wonder our defense sucks so bad..
Wha? It's only because Schwartz hasn't "coached 'em up".

;)

I know you are joking, but there is some truth too that TJ.

Woolfolk (1.14?) - for example - seemed to have all the tools and, as often seems to be the case, played well as a rookie. Then after total Schwartizification he not only does not develop - he regressed. He gets out of the doghouse sunday lets hope he makes the most of his romp around the yard.

I know you are joking, but there is some truth too that TJ.

Woolfolk (1.14?) - for example - seemed to have all the tools and, as often seems to be the case, played well as a rookie. Then after total Schwartizification he not only does not develop - he regressed. He gets out of the doghouse sunday lets hope he makes the most of his romp around the yard.
Yet a seventh-round pick is starting. So does Schwartz coach up Hill differently than Woolfolk?

Hill is playing like a 7th round pick.

exactly.

Hill has failed to develop as well.

How many seventh-round picks do you see starting at CB in the NFL?

lol

again is that a golden nuggett found by Reese, or an indictment of Woolfolk. Probably some of each I guess.



How many other teams does Reynaldo Hill start on? How many does he fail to make the roster?


Ideal situation would be to have another CB (Woolfolk should have been it) and Hill as the Nickle.

How many other teams does Reynaldo Hill start on? How many does he fail to make the roster?
.

1) less than 5
2) more than 5

I also have concerns about FR's working relationship with Fisher. I really don't know an awful lot about the in's & out's of being a general manager but IMO if a coach says he needs a the best CB asvailable it should be the GM's job to make that happen.

A GM arguing with a head coach over who we should pick can't be a good scenario when a coach is trying to build a team.

It's not just draft picks we have to be concerned about but also the way player's contracts are structured. FR carries a portion of blame for the way our cap was managed as well as who we drafted.

I'm sensing that Reese won't be back next year, but Fisher will.
Don't know why, just how I feel.

Rumor Mill fodder...

I also have concerns about FR's working relationship with Fisher. I really don't know an awful lot about the in's & out's of being a general manager but IMO if a coach says he needs a the best CB asvailable it should be the GM's job to make that happen.

A GM arguing with a head coach over who we should pick can't be a good scenario when a coach is trying to build a team.

It's not just draft picks we have to be concerned about but also the way player's contracts are structured. FR carries a portion of blame for the way our cap was managed as well as who we drafted.


don't you think the OC and the DC are throwing their 2 cents in also on who they want with the first pick. Plus chances are you have Bud looking over your shoulder.
Plus you have scouts who have rated the players.

again is that a golden nuggett found by Reese, or an indictment of Woolfolk. Probably some of each I guess.
You know I am just messing with you, right? ;)

I do see some inconsistencies among the Schwartzie-bashers. I am not in the camp of those who feel the recent draft picks by Reese are not becoming the players we thought they would solely because of coaching. If that were the case, then no players would ever thrive under him.

In turn, I see a lot of bashing of Schwartz when defensive players play bad but, when they play well, he gets no credit.

I think all this falls somewhere in between. I'm no fan of Schwartz in many ways. But I also understand that more than a few of these recent higher draft picks on defense are no getting it done, often timess, the reasons go far beyond coaching.

don't you think the OC and the DC are throwing their 2 cents in also on who they want with the first pick. Plus chances are you have Bud looking over your shoulder.
Plus you have scouts who have rated the players.


Of course but surely they should have to air their needs & wants to the HC who would then give the OK to the GM to fill a need. Otherwise the co-ordinators would be undermining the head coach.

Man this is far from a clear cut scenario isn't it.

We seen guys run teams as both HC & GM get into trouble by spreading themselves too thin. Holmgren finally gave up on that as a viable solution.

Then on the other hand you can have a clueless GM like Matt Millen in Detroit who hires & fires coaches & picks a stream of #1 draft pick busts & the Lions never seem to improve.

We need a GM to be like a long snapper,doing a great job 99.9% of the time & an unsung hero. Reese likes to see his name in the papers too much.

I disagree that Reese wants his name in the paper. You noticed he has steered clear of some of the things that have happened. All in all I think he has done ok with the cap. I would hate to have to please all of those ego's wanting more money.

If that were the case, then no players would ever thrive under him.


Who has?
Bulluck? Not playing near his potential, imo.
Hope? Well a recent article described how he was allowed to play outside the system.
Haynesworth? They guy should be dominating, but we rarely see/saw it.

It will be sad to watch Hope next season as the Swartizification takes root. Schulters was a good football player when he arrived in Nashville too.

I disagree that Reese wants his name in the paper. You noticed he has steered clear of some of the things that have happened. All in all I think he has done ok with the cap. I would hate to have to please all of those ego's wanting more money.

All true dude. Like I said this is not a straight forward scenario & there's an awful lot to the job when you take the time to think about it.

Woolfolk's(man did I just spell that bad & have to edit it) resume as a college player show's he was a gamble & if it had paid off Reese woulkd have looked like a genius.

yeah, we have no clue as to what happens on draft day or leading up to it. I would like to sit in one time though.

Bulluck not playing near his potential? Are we getting picky now?

I'm no totally sure about Reese on the Jones pick because if Jones was the guy Fisher wanted then Fisher is the one accountable for that. Haynesworth was like the youngest kid in the NFL when we drafted him and with his size and potential you would have to think he would mature in his behavior. Certainly even with the head stomping incident Haynesworth seems to have fewer issues than Jones (who needs to be on medication IMO).

Reese has done a decent job on the offensive side of the ball. We replenished our OL and through the draft and FA we do have some WRs. I guess we can give Reese credit for grabbing Young and White although I'm not sure he was the brains behind either pick.
Certainly Reese has mangled the defensive side of the ball in his draft picks. You can add LB to the list of positions Reese has not drafted well in recent years. Even the picks this year with the exception of Tulluch (we aren't sure he is any good yet either) don't look to be good picks.

getting a Left Tackle in round two makes up for a bust here in there in round two.............LT are very very tough to find, and most teams have to pony up a top 5 pick to get one. Reese gets no credit for that. And finding Stewart in 4 was just as good.

Who has?
Bulluck? Not playing near his potential, imo.
Hope? Well a recent article described how he was allowed to play outside the system.
Haynesworth? They guy should be dominating, but we rarely see/saw it.
You have got to be kidding me. Bulluck is considered one of the league's top five at OLB. Schwartz changed how he is using the SS vs. last year because of Hope's play. Haynesworth? He admits to not practicing the technique he's been taught over and over.

I guess Schwartz has also hurt KVB because he didn't lead the league in sacks last season?

For the umpteenth time, if you don't think these players are developing, then you need to look at the position coaches first who hammer technique into them day after day. If you don't like LT lining up five yards into the endzone on a third and goal from the two, then you can point the finger at Schwartz and the man who puts his stamp on the defensive scheme, Jeff Fisher.

getting a Left Tackle in round two makes up for a bust here in there in round two.............LT are very very tough to find, and most teams have to pony up a top 5 pick to get one. Reese gets no credit for that. And finding Stewart in 4 was just as good.
bell in the 5th was also very good.

You have got to be kidding me. Bulluck is considered one of the league's top five at OLB. Schwartz changed how he is using the SS vs. last year because of Hope's play. Haynesworth? He admits to not practicing the technique he's been taught over and over.

I guess Schwartz has also hurt KVB because he didn't lead the league in sacks last season?

For the umpteenth time, if you don't think these players are developing, then you need to look at the position coaches first who hammer technique into them day after day. If you don't like LT lining up five yards into the endzone on a third and goal from the two, then you can point the finger at Schwartz and the man who puts his stamp on the defensive scheme, Jeff Fisher.

You're the one who said that if Schwartz was the problem then no player would flourish under him. I ask you to point out who has and all you can come up with is one (1) first round pick (who imo is not playing as well as he should, certainly Bulluck has not been a gamebreaker for us in long timer, if ever).
Then you excuse another first round pick by saying he's not playing like he's being taught, but then why is he still playing? Surely that falls on the DC as well or maybe even all the way up to HC.

You're the one who said that if Schwartz was the problem then no player would flourish under him. I ask you to point out who has and all you can come up with is one (1) first round pick (who imo is not playing as well as he should, certainly Bulluck has not been a gamebreaker for us in long timer, if ever).
If you want to believe Bulluck isn't a top LB in the league, then there is pretty much no reason to continue this because your expectations of what a quality player is must be unattainable. Apparently, KVB' season last year didn't impress you and Hope's this year can't either.

Then you excuse another first round pick by saying he's not playing like he's being taught, but then why is he still playing?
Because he's better than anyone else we have based on pure physical talent. The same can be said about Hill, LT, Sirmon, Starks and LaBoy.

Surely that falls on the DC as well or maybe even all the way up to HC.Teaching technique falls on position coaches. So let's fire them. This means you gotta fire Schwartz who hired them followed by the guy who hired him. Goodness knows it can't be some of the players who were poor selections made by Reese.

There seems to be a pattern of players doing really well the first year under Schwartz, and then dropping off afterwards.

If you want to believe Bulluck isn't a top LB in the league, then there is pretty much no reason to continue this because your expectations of what a quality player is must be unattainable. Apparently, KVB' season last year didn't impress you and Hope's this year can't either.


I do believe Bulluck is a top level LB, I just don't think he's playing as well as he can.
KVB impressed me last season, but until last weeks game he's been neigh invisible and Hope, as I stated, is being allowed to freelance, which is why he is playing so well.


Because he's better than anyone else we have based on pure physical talent. The same can be said about Hill, LT, Sirmon, Starks and LaBoy.


Well that might be true, except that Sirmon is taking the MLB spot for the exact opposite reason. Probably LT too.


Teaching technique falls on position coaches. So let's fire them. This means you gotta fire Schwartz who hired them followed by the guy who hired him. Goodness knows it can't be some of the players who were poor selections made by Reese.

It falls under the position coaches allright, but someone is instructing them as to what to teach and what to emphasize and that would be the DC and/or HC.

And sure some of the players are just bad or at best inconsistent. I personally put Laboy, Starks and Hill squarely in that group. Odom's difficult to place because of his injury problems.

There seems to be a pattern of players doing really well the first year under Schwartz, and then dropping off afterwards.
How about Chow? He takes the helm and we get nada from Brown the second year under Chow. How about Bennett, Williams and Roby who are not close to what they produced last year. Add Troupe and Scaife to the list too. Has Piller or Olson improved in Chow's second year?

As hard as it is to believe, there are more factors involved here than just the DC and OC in the production we are seeing on the field.

and Hope, as I stated, is being allowed to freelance, which is why he is playing so well.
Freelance? He's being allow to "freelance" based on a conscious decision by Schwartz based on his abilities and production. It IS part of the scheme. You act as if Hope is just doing what he wants with Schwartz's blessing.

It falls under the position coaches allright, but someone is instructing them as to what to teach and what to emphasize and that would be the DC and/or HC.
Eh? You think the defenses coaches have a meeting and Schwartz tells Washburn how to teach Haynesworth technique? Washburn was hired because he knows more about DL technique than the DC and HC. It is his job to.

And sure some of the players are just bad or at best inconsistent. I personally put Laboy, Starks and Hill squarely in that group. Odom's difficult to place because of his injury problems.
So we have some cogs in the machine not functioning properly. And we want to put all the blame on the DC?

I hope this isn't too far off topic but

Anyone miss Jeff Diamond ?

You have to wonder if things (not just on the field) would be different if he was still with the Titans. Underwood came to town very quietly and seems to be non existent when issues come up that I would think he would address. I know he's never liked facing the media but it would be interesting to get his take on AH, Pac ect. I'd like to be a fly on the wall at BSP at times, I'm sure it's interesting.

It will also be interesting to see what happens with Floyd after the season is over and if Underwood wants him to remain or not.

Freelance? He's being allow to "freelance" based on a conscious decision by Schwartz based on his abilities and production. It IS part of the scheme. You act as if Hope is just doing what he wants with Schwartz's blessing.


That's pretty much what I got from the interview with Hope, yes.


Eh? You think the defenses coaches have a meeting and Schwartz tells Washburn how to teach Haynesworth technique? Washburn was hired because he knows more about DL technique than the DC and HC. It is his job to.


But it's the DC's call whether they should teach pass rushing techniques, run stuffing techniques, combo moves and stunts, etc.
It certainly wouldn't work very well if the DL coach spends all day teaching bull rushes and the DC always calls slanting stunts.


So we have some cogs in the machine not functioning properly. And we want to put all the blame on the DC?

When the company's not working right you usually fire from the top down and not just because it's easier to replace one guy than 5 or 6.
And I still can't help but think of the pathetic Cleveland Browns D-line that got shipped to Denver along with the D-line coach and all of a sudden became much better.

That's pretty much what I got from the interview with Hope, yes.
I meant "without" Schwartz's blessing. The point being that Hope is playing within the guidelines Schwartz has established.

Diamond was a nobody here in Nashville................and he was terrible at contract structure.

Maybe so, but we sure didn't have all the negative "hoopla" during his tenure.

just wake me up when we hire a new D coordinator

Floyd had a helluva an offseason last year with cap dollars available. He has had some success with undrafted rookie free agents. But at the end of the day, he is largely evaluated based on first day of draft talent. No bigger gamble than what he did last year. So far VY is making him look good ... AH and Pac leave you scratching your head ... and AW just leaves you scratching.

I bet he stays. But I'm an optimistic like that. If we lost 7 of the last 9, I would guess he and Jeff will be holding moving sales.

Wow. I think I just had a Code sighting.

Why should users of TitanCentral.net have all the fun?
I'm just on doctors orders to try to counteract bongo's firefisheritis throughout the web world. So far, have not had much luck. But
bongo and I have agreed to continue to disagree agreeably.

Glad to be back where it all started so many years ago.

It's always good to see a familiar name. Welcome back.

code is my buddy.................he is the ying to my yang.

BTW, thanks for the note TJ. Never had anything against the site. And I admit that I miss Starkiller making all my brilliant points look idiotic with his dad gum fact checker. Got a little free time tonight and thought it would be fun to stir it up over here.

The place looks great and its amazing to see how active your universe of users has become.

Heh, I do try. I just don't post as much anymore...

Diamond was a nobody here in Nashville.....................and he was terrible at contract structure.


That may be true, but we sure didn't have all the negative "hoopla" during his tenure.

Why should users of TitanCentral.net have all the fun?
I'm just on doctors orders to try to counteract bongo's firefisheritis throughout the web world. So far, have not had much luck. But
bongo and I have agreed to continue to disagree agreeably.

Glad to be back where it all started so many years ago.

As always, great to see you!

Heck when you are 32nd in the league in total defense there is plenty of blame to go around and both have not done their jobs. Reese has helped himself by bringing in some good FAs to make up for his less than steller picks on the defensive side. Reese failed with his picks of odom and laboy but he sure made up for it with KVB didn't he? And while long and starks were hardly studs we did pick up robaire this year. Hope has been a sensational pickup and thornton has been solid.

When you look at those 4 guys thornton-hope-KVB-smith and you combine them with a guy we like to think of as one of the leagues elite linebackers(bulluck) you have a pretty good nucleus. Add haynesworth(he is still a titan) and we have the core of a decent defense. Almost average anyway even if aboy-odom-starks-hill-sirmon and thompson are considered no more than servicable. Nobody can deny that pacman has great talent and finnegan has done some good things.

Nobody can convince me this is the worst talent in the league even with haynesworth out. The fact we are the worst indicates problems with the coaching. No doubt about that.

http://www.norfolkroots24.co.uk/norfolkRoots/content/HowTo/Guide/img/preacher.jpg

Preach on brother RollTide

No question the pain of this rebuilding period could have been lessened if Reese had made better picks over the last 4 years on defense. I agree however that the talent level is still closer to average than bottom of the league where we sit statiscally. Imagine where we would be if Henry had not had those nice games running the ball.

Let's look at Reese's selections since 2000 in the first three rounds and grade him:

2001
First Round: The first-rounder was traded for Carter who, IMO, never played at the level many expected but it was a late-first pick.

Second Round:
Andre Dyson - a quality starter.

Third Round:
Meier - a head-scratcher who was always hampered by injury.

Grade: B


2002
First Round:
Haynesworth - runs hot and cold but admits to not playing with the technique he is taught. Had a rep in college which caused a few teams to pass on him.

Second Round: Tank Williams - Williams started out well then had injury issues which hampered him. He never developed then had the ACL.

Third Round:
Calmus - showed flashes but was limited with injury.

Grade: C-


2003
First Round:
Woolfolk - showed flashes early but had a number of injuries and has never developed when healthy.

Second Round:
Calico - both showed flashes early. Hampered with injuries.

Third Round:
Brown - another injury-ridden career. Produced at points in his career but giving the team nothing now.

Grade: D-


2004
First-round pick traded for more players which was an outstanding move by Reese.

Second Round:
Troupe - has shown flashes. Hampered by injuries in his second season. Still hasn't lived up to potential and has been recently called out by Fisher.

LaBoy - another injury-ridden career. Appears to only be effective if he plays a limited number of snaps. Not strong against the run.

Odom - has shown flashes but not close to being the force many felt he could be. Injuries has also slowed him.

Third Round:
Starks - started out strong but hasn't developed.

Gardner - never did anything.

Grade: C


2005

First Round:
Pacman Jones - flashes potential but overshadowed by off-the-field issues.

Second Round:
Roos - may be the best draft pick made since Bulluck.

Third Round:
Roby - some injury issues but not showing much yet.

Brandon Jones - looks like an excellent pick so far despite an ACL injury.

Grade: B


Conclusion
The first three rounds of draft picks MUST become the core players on the team. Injuries have killed the chances of so many of these picks and/or they've simply not developed which points to a poor selection.

The Titans are playing now for poor drafts in '02 and '03 because these players should be entering their prime. The '04 class should be contributing at a much higher level in their third season.

It's probably too early to judge '05 but it could be considered a quality draft if Pacman can get his act together.

Overall, I give Reese a C- for these picks which would point that he should be on the hot seat right now. However, I don't know how much you can blame Reese for the bad luck of many of these picks who have been hurt so often.

TJ- agree with your draft analysis. The poorest year was 2003 by far- I'd give it an F. Unfortunately, that was a critical year for having solid "low cost" players available when we flushed the cap issues in 04/05. They just weren't producing and that is why we sucked so bad.

I think Reese has performed adequately enough to keep his job. I think we have acquired plenty of "potential" talent in the drafts (except '03) and in FA. I am most intrigued by our lack of PLAYER DEVELOPMENT. I don't know if Reese is to blame for that. I agree with Roll Tide that development and utilization of a player's talent falls on the coaches.

Overall, I think he deserves to stay. I'm also uncertain as to the validity of the Fisher-Reese escalating conflict that is being reported. I think the Titans need some coaching changes (DC, OC) before I'd dump Fisher or Reese.

I think TJ is being kind with his grading but I generally agree with the analysis.

Fisher had a man crush on Carter and wanted him badly.

Carter looked like a nice pickup at the time but in hind sight his contribution was dissapointing especially considering his huge CAP numbers that really hurt us the last few years of his tenure.

Conclusion
The first three rounds of draft picks MUST become the core players on the team. Injuries have killed the chances of so many of these picks and/or they've simply not developed which points to a poor selection.

The Titans are playing now for poor drafts in '02 and '03 because these players should be entering their prime. The '04 class should be contributing at a much higher level in their third season.

It's probably too early to judge '05 but it could be considered a quality draft if Pacman can get his act together.

Overall, I give Reese a C- for these picks which would point that he should be on the hot seat right now. However, I don't know how much you can blame Reese for the bad luck of many of these picks who have been hurt so often.

Everything you said was spot on, especially about the 1st 3 rounds of the draft making up a teams core group of productive players.

When you look around at other teams drafts though many have been has hit & miss as we have. Sometimes the talent pool in a draft just isn't that great. For example 2002 is acknowledged as a poor draft year.

When you compare us to the Patriots(pundits blueprint for success) though, it's scary what they've done with their drafts compared to us:

01 1 R Seymour DE starter

2 M Light T no real contribution

3 B Williams CB cut in 01/02?

02 1 D Graham TE core player

2 D Branch WR stud/traded for to Seattle for a #1 pick in 07

03 1 T Warren DE starter

2 E Wilson FS starter

2 B Johnson WR traded to saints in exchange for 03 #6 pick DL J Sullivan(cut)

04 1 V Wilfork DT starter

1 B Watson TE starter

2 M Hill DE back up

3 G Scott FS cut-now in houston

05 1 L Mankins G starter

3 E Hobbs CB starter

3 N Kaczur T back up


:hmm:

I would agree to the statements above but I would love to have Carter back playing on the other side of KVB.

For those of you who think the Titans have as much defensive talent as anyone in the league, here's a quote from Fisher when asked about his defense which is ranked last in the league:

"We don't have necessarily the talent level to carry a balanced defensive plan in and so, given the opportunity over the last several weeks, we elected to spend more attention to not giving up the big plays then we did to the run game," Fisher said.

that should change when AH returns, and AH is a big part of declaring that the D is badly Coordinated instead of untalented.

FWIW Fisher should cut the untalented defensive players today.

Carter looked like a nice pickup at the time but in hind sight his contribution was dissapointing especially considering his huge CAP numbers that really hurt us the last few years of his tenure.Carters trade was the undoing of this franchise..............we gave up a one and surrunderes close to 35 million for a very avg player.................it cost us Kearse Mason and others................it was the beginning of the end.............and Fisher was totally behind this move..............he wanted Carter over Mac in 95...................now FR did do it too so I blame both...............the reason I want Fish gone his his stubborness on vets and keeping schwartz....................he has to go.

For those of you who think the Titans have as much defensive talent as anyone in the league, here's a quote from Fisher when asked about his defense which is ranked last in the league:

"We don't have necessarily the talent level to carry a balanced defensive plan in and so, given the opportunity over the last several weeks, we elected to spend more attention to not giving up the big plays then we did to the run game," Fisher said.

While we are making blanket statements like Fisher why don't we look at our defensive talent. Bulluck and Thornton at OLB? Not bad and I would say better than average (if not much better). Sirmon is a problem at MLB but Fisher is the one keeping him in the lineup. Pacman and Hill? Certainly average if not better. Some teams have their #2 CB better than Hill but Pacman is solid as anyone.
DL? I guess without AH we might be a little weak there but KVB is an all-pro last year and Smith and Starks aren't terrible. Laboy is questionable but he was an early 2nd round pick. If Fish has a problem with Laboy and Odom he needs to talk to Reese. S? Hope has been playing like an all-pro and again it is Fisher who wanted LT, insists on playing LT and if he has a problem with the talent level at that S spot he needs to make a change. We have young guys like Fuller and Lowry who should be getting a look. If Fisher is really limited by guys like LT, Sirmon and Hill he has players on the bench he can insert any time he likes.

Carters trade was the undoing of this franchise..............we gave up a one and surrunderes close to 35 million for a very avg player.................it cost us Kearse Mason and others................it was the beginning of the end.............and Fisher was totally behind this move..............he wanted Carter over Mac in 95...................now FR did do it too so I blame both...............the reason I want Fish gone his his stubborness on vets and keeping schwartz....................he has to go.

My thoughts exactly. We should have dumped Carter and kept Mason and Rolle and this team would not have been nearly as bad the last couple of years. Who knows, that #1 pick we gave up might have been a difference making player.

Losing Runyun and Godfrey was the beginning of it all. Kearse was no loss....he was always injured (out the rest of the year for the Eagles now). We should have offed McNair sooner, but glad we got something for him. Carter was pretty steady, I wish he were back. We can't seem to keep linemen on the field. Long being hurt early hasn't helped either..not a run stopper but a good pass rusher. Odom is coming along...not sure Starks will ever develop. AH and Mahelona may make a great 1-2 at that position. We do need a MLB and and OLB, Bulluck is just getting too old. If we had a Porter type guy in the middle......wow.

bulluck is too old? he's 29. he plays like he's 18. derrick brookes is like 35 and still playing at a high level.

If Fisher is really limited by guys like LT, Sirmon and Hill he has players on the bench he can insert any time he likes.
That might provide us with a little insight on the backups because Fisher must feel they are not a better option.

I think Fisher's comments hold a lot of water. I find it refreshing that he is finally being a little more realistic about where this team is. It's well overdue.

Losing Runyun and Godfrey was the beginning of it all. Kearse was no loss....he was always injured (out the rest of the year for the Eagles now). We should have offed McNair sooner, but glad we got something for him. Carter was pretty steady, I wish he were back. We can't seem to keep linemen on the field. Long being hurt early hasn't helped either..not a run stopper but a good pass rusher. Odom is coming along...not sure Starks will ever develop. AH and Mahelona may make a great 1-2 at that position. We do need a MLB and and OLB, Bulluck is just getting too old. If we had a Porter type guy in the middle......wow.

:huh:

For those of you who think the Titans have as much defensive talent as anyone in the league, here's a quote from Fisher when asked about his defense which is ranked last in the league:

"We don't have necessarily the talent level to carry a balanced defensive plan in and so, given the opportunity over the last several weeks, we elected to spend more attention to not giving up the big plays then we did to the run game," Fisher said.

I'm sure the coach in Cleveland said the same about Kennard Lang, Mike Myers, Gerrard Warren and Ekuban...

And I think it's a little bit naive to believe that LT and Sirmon are playing because they're head and shoulders above their backups. While we don't get to see what happens at practice some of the backups have looked very impressive in the limited gameaction they've seen.

And I think it's a little bit naive to believe that LT and Sirmon are playing because they're head and shoulders above their backups. While we don't get to see what happens at practice some of the backups have looked very impressive in the limited gameaction they've seen.
Got any examples? Tulloch looking good against scrubs in a preseason game?

Let's be realistic here. Fisher's head is on the chopping block. Do you honestly believe he is doing anything less than what he thinks gives the Titans their best chance to win?

Got any examples? Tulloch looking good against scrubs in a preseason game?


Finnegan has looked good. Fuller, though seeing suprisingly little time, also looked good. Even Lowry has in my mind looked better than LT.


Let's be realistic here. Fisher's head is on the chopping block. Do you honestly believe he is doing anything less than what he thinks gives the Titans their best chance to win?

Oh I'm sure he's doing what he thinks is best, I just don't think he's right.

Oh I'm sure he's doing what he thinks is best, I just don't think he's right.
Then that is where you may want to focus your efforts to get someone fired. With Fisher gone, you get rid of Schwartz and everything else you want.

Got any examples? Tulloch looking good against scrubs in a preseason game?

Let's be realistic here. Fisher's head is on the chopping block. Do you honestly believe he is doing anything less than what he thinks gives the Titans their best chance to win?


That's exactly it. People clamoring for the rookies always amaze me. The coaches see these guys in practice every day....they know if they are ready to be put on the field. It's not just how athletic you are, but do you understand coverages and defensive formations....do you recognize offense sets or know what to do if a QB checks off. Tulloch may look good for 7 out of 10 plays, but that won't get it done in the NFL.

Losing Runyun and Godfrey was the beginning of it all. Kearse was no loss....he was always injured (out the rest of the year for the Eagles now). We should have offed McNair sooner, but glad we got something for him. Carter was pretty steady, I wish he were back. We can't seem to keep linemen on the field. Long being hurt early hasn't helped either..not a run stopper but a good pass rusher. Odom is coming along...not sure Starks will ever develop. AH and Mahelona may make a great 1-2 at that position. We do need a MLB and and OLB, Bulluck is just getting too old. If we had a Porter type guy in the middle......wow.i disagree..............losing Runyan was smart.............we got Godfrey and Miller for him and saved some money......................and truthfully Runyan has not been worth what he got up there in his first deal and he signed a below market deal last yr to stay in philly...............................the 01 trade for Carter cost so much free cash it rippled down and we got very little in return for the cap spent..............was KC a good player sure...............but like EG he was not worth what we gave him and those dollars could have went elsewhere................and it caused us to lose other guys..............................the other killer was EG's contract right after 2000 and his subsequent injury..............he was never the same but we paid him elite money.........and Fisher compounded it by staying too long with eddie and backing him....................wycheck last deal was no good either.................even he admits it......................then the bad drafts occured...............and things snowballed.

That's exactly it. People clamoring for the rookies always amaze me. The coaches see these guys in practice every day....they know if they are ready to be put on the field. It's not just how athletic you are, but do you understand coverages and defensive formations....do you recognize offense sets or know what to do if a QB checks off. Tulloch may look good for 7 out of 10 plays, but that won't get it done in the NFL.your post asssumes Fisher has no coaching biases............and to a degree so does TitanJeff's position...................Fisher has repeatedly shown to favor vets over rookies because of his preconcieved biases............the roster decisions are littered with guys cut for scrubs.............and for backups stuck behind starting scrubs.........gusy wanting to bury FR love to overlook that fact.........................and Fisher is singlehandedly responsible for JS and his performance since 01 and has protected him...............................and that alone is reason enough to think change maybe good.......................if Fisher would budge on some things I think I would be OK with keeping him but when guys like KB sit for two yrs and guys like Sirmon and LT play over others something should be rightfully questioned.

Then that is where you may want to focus your efforts to get someone fired. With Fisher gone, you get rid of Schwartz and everything else you want.

I know. The problem is Fisher is also responsible for the offence and ST, and I approve with the way that's heading (especially now that Piller's out), so he's doing 33% bad and 66% good, so on the whole I'd like to keep him, just get a serious adjustment on defence.

It's not just how athletic you are, but do you understand coverages and defensive formations....do you recognize offense sets or know what to do if a QB checks off. Tulloch may look good for 7 out of 10 plays, but that won't get it done in the NFL.

What good is recognition if you can't get there in time to make the play (ie. Sirmon)? I'd rather have someone who makes 7 out 10 plays because he misses a read on 3 of them, rather than one who misses 10 out of 10 because he doesn't have the physical tools to get it done.

And Sirmon is neither big and strong enough to take on blockers head on nor is he fast enough to make plays on edges.

your post asssumes Fisher has no coaching biases............and to a degree so does TitanJeff's position...................
Let's not put words in my mouth.

Yes, Fisher sometimes stays with a vet well past their prime. But Fisher also will take consistency over a playmaker if that playmaker makes too many mistakes. Vets tend to be those types of players.

We see someone like Tulloch who has much better speed than Sirmon and hits hard. A guy like that might make some stops behind the line. But you have to weigh that against the times the guy will blow an assignment and be the key reason a big play is given up.

We can't know how Tulloch is doing in practice being where he is supposed to be. Same for Fuller and Lowry.

If these guys are outplaying the starters consistently in practice and Fisher still doesn't play them, then he should be shown the door. But as important as it is for Fisher to win this season, I can't see him playing the loyalty game.

Also, he's moved Sirmon from his preferred position and has openly called out LT. That doesn't sound like a coach who is playing favorites.

Jeff we are dead last against the run with Sirmon at MLB ..............and I know we can be dead last with Tulloch there............................my betand that of others is we are better with Tulloch in the Middle.................that is precisely why Fisher is questioned.............and should be.

everyone knows Sirmon is history next yr..................so when exactly should we evaluate what we have in Tulloch..............next preseason? Logic would say we are 2-5 on our way to maybe 4 wins.................put the young kid in .....................the same reason we wasted 3.5 mil on KCollins...................Fisher biases are wasteful.

Jeff we are dead last against the runwe're 31st, Indy is dead last

But your point is taken

Jeff we are dead last against the run with Sirmon at MLB ..............and I know we can be dead last with Tulloch there............................my betand that of others is we are better with Tulloch in the Middle.................that is precisely why Fisher is questioned.............and should be.

I agree.
What time is the familly reunion Saturday?:))

so when exactly should we evaluate what we have in Tulloch..............next preseason?
I'm not saying I necessarily agree with Fisher. It's his history though.

If you read some older threads here, you'll see I have been very critical of Fisher at times. For example, I pointed out a lot of issues during the '05 bye week before much of the media began questioning his handling of Pacman. And I was for our current OL configuration before the season began. I'm still baffled Piller is on the team.

the same reason we wasted 3.5 mil on KCollins...................Fisher biases are wasteful.
$3.5 mil? He wishes. ;)

Even more amazing when you consider Brad Johnson is only making $1.2 (about what we are paying KC I believe). Yes, Fisher stays with vets to a fault sometimes, but he plays it safe for the most part. Those down on Sirmon confuse me, I don't see him playing that bad at all. Bulluck has just as much trouble getting off blocks. Sirmon isn't Urlacher, but then, no one is. EG was probably here a year too long, but before that he was fine. We didn't run EG to get 150 yards a game, we ran him to punish people and slow down the pass rush. He was good at that until he lost a step, then it was hard to watch holes open up and he couldn't get there.

Those down on Sirmon confuse me, I don't see him playing that bad at all.Yeah, well those who said Andre Woolfolk was a good tackler because he was always a step late in coverage confuse me too.

Sirmon is two steps too slow. You don't see him playing that bad becuase he not even in the play.

brutal but true

I'm not saying I necessarily agree with Fisher. It's his history though.

If you read some older threads here, you'll see I have been very critical of Fisher at times. For example, I pointed out a lot of issues during the '05 bye week before much of the media began questioning his handling of Pacman. And I was for our current OL configuration before the season began. I'm still baffled Piller is on the team.




I have been down on Fisher at times too. He has made some real questionable decisions during games. While people think he is a great coach, he is barely above .500 in the won/loss percentage. I was posting before regular season that Bell would never be a tackle, and still don't know why they had him over there. It is becoming more appearent Fish doesn't have much say so in regards as to who we draft, or what position. I would really love to know how much input he is allowed.

Reese has said that the people who have the most influence over his draft decisions are the scouts. (He also said that Bud could always have the final say-so.) I've also heard that draft day is a good day for the coaches to go play golf.

i disagree..............losing Runyan was smart.............we got Godfrey and Miller for him and saved some money......................and truthfully Runyan has not been worth what he got up there in his first deal and he signed a below market deal last yr to stay in philly...............................the 01 trade for Carter cost so much free cash it rippled down and we got very little in return for the cap spent..............was KC a good player sure...............but like EG he was not worth what we gave him and those dollars could have went elsewhere................and it caused us to lose other guys..............................the other killer was EG's contract right after 2000 and his subsequent injury..............he was never the same but we paid him elite money.........and Fisher compounded it by staying too long with eddie and backing him....................wycheck last deal was no good either.................even he admits it......................then the bad drafts occured...............and things snowballed.

The backloading of contracts was what crippled us in the salary cap hell scenario.

It looks great to lock up a stud player in his prime to a longterm contract but backloading it & putting off the hit now means your committed to having to pay that player way more than they're worth when their best years are behind them.

We weren't able to cut players without still carrying a big chunk of their salary so we kept playing them.

I just hope Reese/Underwood have learned from the bad days of cap management.