Open Letter To Tarnow, Re: Bruce Arians

Here, read this. It's very smart, and more or less agreeable.

I've said it before, I'm not opposed to Bruce Arians the coach, I'm opposed to Bruce Arians the playcaller. I don't like it when our offense makes an easy situation much harder than it needs to be, and I tend to blame him for that. I love that our veteran playmakers are finding continued success and that our younger guys are developing very rapidly. That's a great sign, and that's something which also has to be the result of the coaching.

The article I linked you to above is very smart. However, it's predicated on a lot of wishful thinking. Being able to articulate what we like about BA and what we don't, and then requesting that he just make the necessary changes doesn't really work. We're bloggers; not real people with actual influence.

The case for why Bruce Arians should be retained is simple and unimpressive: he's not the reason we didn't make the playoffs, and he won't be in the future. Losing continuity by firing him a year before his contract is up seems to be rash in light of that. I'm not for congratulating him, like the other blogger is; more like grudgingly accepting his retention as a safe move in uncertain times.

Let me explain.

Yes, he's a fuck. But his players like him. It's important to keep them happy, because things could get real crazy on the other side of the ball. We have major holes to fill on the D-line and in the secondary, all while the LBing corps ages. I'm not saying doom and gloom for the D, but it's hard to imagine that next year's unit will be a "special" group. It'll be a year in transition, which isn't always fun, but also isn't always bad.

So here's what I'm proposing: let Bruce do his thing, one more time, while giving the D a year to rebuild and reset itself. It probably won't be championship caliber football, but firing Bruce Arians wasn't going to make it that anyway.

I think the proposition that the NFL is changing and Bruce is a forward thinker is bullshit. As soon as we've got a solidified defense and Bruce's contract is over, I'm ready to go back to power running. Come to think of it, I'm ready for that now, but not at the expense of ruffling feathers before we're ready to take off.

Now as far as specific concerns, I share all of the one's listed, and would like to expand on several points.

The thing about not letting Ben get sacked so much is interesting. I'm not sure that our O-line coach was the problem. Heads had to roll somewhere, but I'm with the author of the post in assigning the blame more to the guy calling the plays and giving Ben his orders, than to the linemen. Granted, they're bad. But remember how excited we all were when Kemoeatu learned to pull-block this year? Or when Max Starks completely neutralized Jared Allen? Or how about that time when Willie Colon paid enough attention to pick up Miami's DT who had pancaked Hartwig? Yeah, they're really bad players, but I thought I saw some actual development. When they had terrible games, more often than not, it struck me that the playcalling was setting them up for failure.

Look at this:

1st Down- 14/198
2nd Down- 13/171
3rd Down- 23/132

The first number is the times Ben was sacked, and the second number is how many times he got off a pass on that down. All this shows is that a defense stands a better shot at Ben when they know what's coming. Therefore, in a 3rd down situation where picking up the yards via running is a reasonable option, it's batshit insane to take that option off the table. I'm not saying we should run the ball every time like the other author is; but running MUST be a threat. The defense must not be allowed to sell out on the pass rush, which is what happened in the Cleveland game when Ben kept lining up in the shotgun on 3rd and manageable.

Now let's talk about that Cleveland game. The other blogger brings up the point that Bruce needs to respect the weather conditions and make smart game plans accordingly. That's true, but ultimately I hang that on Tomlin. I love the guy to death, but for him to approve of that pass happy game plan on the -16 degree windchill night was the worst coaching he's done to date. Yes, Bruce needs to run more when we're playing the elements; but Tomlin needs to be the smarter man and take over when that's not happening.

The Time of Possession thing is pretty big. It's the one aspect of Bruce's influence that reaches the defense, and in that sense, retaining him does place a burden on the reboot effort. However, the case isn't clear cut. Yes, running the ball eats up more clock. But, the other way to win TOP is for the defense to do their part in getting off the field. Bruce Arians was the OC in 2008 when we were eating up the clock; and he was here this year when we weren't. The difference was largely due to the D allowing 3rd and 4th down conversions, and that's an Aaron Smith and Troy Polamalu thing. Should BA be doing his part to make things easier on a fragile and aging defense? Yes, of course. Will he? Probably not.

Anything to do about it? Not really.

Just blog.