Serious question. I never played the game, and didn't sleep at a Holiday Inn Express last night.

But it seems that anyone really competent at one (OC and DC) would almost inherently be pretty damned good at the other because you can't do it in a vacuum.

Bumped.

Very different you don't even draw it up the same on the board. Defense is about adaptation week to week to combat an offense's strength for the most part offense is more about perfecting what you do well. (Part of why we will always struggle with our take what the defense gives us philosophy)

Your logic is akin to a line of logic that good Defensive backs make good Quarterbacks because they understand how Defenses work. But obviously a QB needs height, arm strength and other intangibles that are opposite of a great DB.

Similarly, the techniques you teach to beat a defense have little to do with the techniques that make a great defense. This is why almost all head coaches favor one side of the ball and rely on a great coordinator on the other.

Saban: Defense
Sumlin: Offense
Muschamp: Defense
Spurrierffense

quote:

---

Very different you don't even draw it up the same on the board. Defense is about adaptation week to week to combat an offense's strength for the most part offense is more about perfecting what you do well. (Part of why we will always struggle with our take what the defense gives us philosophy)

---

So what you are saying is that for any one team the defense has to be a lot more flexible in their schemes than the offense? I can see where that is/could be the case in week to week game prep. But wouldn't that also add to the DC's overall knowledge base concerning offensive schemes?

quote:

---

Your logic is akin to a line of logic that good Defensive backs make good Quarterbacks because they understand how Defenses work. But obviously a QB needs height, arm strength and other intangibles that are opposite of a great DB.

---

Okay, I get that. But in that case it comes down to individual physical skills and capabilities.

quote:

---

Similarly, the techniques you teach to beat a defense have little to do with the techniques that make a great defense. This is why almost all head coaches favor one side of the ball and rely on a great coordinator on the other.

---

This is where I get lost. How does one teach techniques to beat a defense (or offense) without a profound knowledge of the defense (or offense) itself and the theory behind it?

quote:

---

quote:

---

This is where I get lost. How does one teach techniques to beat a defense (or offense) without a profound knowledge of the defense (or offense) itself and the theory behind it?

---

---

It's the same argument if looking at prosecutors versus defense attorneys. Sure, they know how the other side is going to react most of the time, but what sets them apart is their ability to exploit, wait lawyers don't do that.... ummm, anticipate how the other side is going to react.

Just because you are a good defense lawyer doesn't make you a good prosecutor and vise versa.

I think a good DC can probably come up with good offensive schemes (and vice versa), but maybe their ability to coach their players to execute/adapt may not be sufficient to translate it into on field success.

D-Co's= Samuel Jackson
O-Co's= Denzel Washington

Think about it.

I am very good at eating, therefore I should be very good at cooking.

quote:

---

quote:

---

Very different you don't even draw it up the same on the board. Defense is about adaptation week to week to combat an offense's strength for the most part offense is more about perfecting what you do well. (Part of why we will always struggle with our take what the defense gives us philosophy)

---

So what you are saying is that for any one team the defense has to be a lot more flexible in their schemes than the offense? I can see where that is/could be the case in week to week game prep. But wouldn't that also add to the DC's overall knowledge base concerning offensive schemes?

---

Yes but only how to stop teams that run those schemes not the philosophies on what make those schemes work such as play installation, read progressions etc defense is about protecting areas of the field not the angles or timing it takes to get players into those areas.

Thanks for the answers. Will ruminate some more on it.

quote:

---

D-Co's= Samuel Jackson
O-Co's= Denzel Washington

Think about it.

---

DC's have wallets that say "Bad A55 Mother****er"?

quote:

---

quote:

---

D-Co's= Samuel Jackson
O-Co's= Denzel Washington

Think about it.

---

DC's have wallets that say "Bad A55 Mother****er"?

---

Yes.

An OC has to know how defenses work, fronts and secondary's. How to attack all of them with his teams style of offense with the talent at hand. He does not need to be qualified to be a DC although I have known some that can do both.