12-01-2023, 04:23 PM
(11-30-2023, 05:15 PM)Wyche Wrote: Probably. Look, I'm not a fan of everything the man does by any stretch of the imagination. I don't like not playing oline starters in preseason. One of the main things I liked about him early on was his aggression. He seems to have gotten more conservative lately, I don't like that. I wish he'd stick with the run sometimes, and sometimes I understand why he doesn't. It's not all unicorns and rainbow farts with me either. That said, I like to present the other side of the coin and make people think a little. This stuff about winning in spite of him is bullshit in my opinion. I've seen plenty of talented teams flounder because of bad coaches. We have talent now, and we haven't floundered until Joe went down. The first four weeks were rough, but after that the team was starting to hit a bit of a stride. Just a little devil's advocate without the uber contrarian schtick is good for conversation.
I'm sure I am too hard on Zach (and the other offensive play callers) but I feel like they aren't an overt strength of the team. I agree with all the beginning stuff you said about how he's changed since his first year or two. I don't think we've won in spite of him, especially in the regular season. I think there's definitely some argument that our offense was carried by the defense through our SB run and the Baltimore win. I think Zacs decisions and scheme deserves some of the blame for how bad the Oline looks and for how bad the run game is.
The first for 4 weeks were rough, as well as any time without a mostly full healthy Burrow. No one should think our offense should continue to produce the same with a back up. But I think it's fair to not think it should become one of the worst in the league, if Zac is as good at leading the offense like some want to say.
