1. Welcome to San Diego Chargers NFL Football Podcast and Forum!
    Bolt Talk is one of the largest online communities for the San Diego Chargers.
    We host a regular Chargers podcast during the season.

    You are currently viewing our community forums as a guest user.

    Create an Account or

    Having an account grants you additional privileges, such as creating and participating in discussions. Furthermore, we hide most of the ads once you register as a member!

McCoy vs Whiz: playcalling

Discussion in 'Chargers Fan Forum' started by HollywoodLeo, Nov 25, 2013.

  1. HollywoodLeo
    Offline

    HollywoodLeo Trevor Phillips Enterprises

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2006
    Messages:
    13,706
    Ratings Received:
    +1,584 / 29 / -1
    I think some people here need to actively remind themselves that Ken Whisenhunt is the playcaller on the Chargers' offense, not Mike McCoy.

    We spent 6 years with Norv also operating as our Offensive Coordinator, so it made perfect sense to blame the head coach squarely for play calls. But that's not the operation being ran this time around. We actually have an actual, separate Offensive Coordinator on this staff so perhaps the focus should be less on Mike McCoy and more on Ken Whisenhunt if you disagree with playcalling.

    Now....I understand all the cliches. "Responsibility starts at the top". "McCoy could/should call an audible because he's in charge" and various other cliches. But here's the thing.

    1. If you're going to blindly look at "responsibility starts at the top" cliches, McCoy isn't at the top, he's just above the guy some of us want to ignore.

    2. I never see this blame dished out squarely on McCoy's feet when the defense screws up, yet the same cliched dynamic exists just as much on that side of the ball that John Pagano is in charge of.

    So, to recap, if you have a problem with play calling direct your pitch forks at Ken Whisenhunt, not Mike McCoy.
    • Like Like x 1
  2. Lance19
    Offline

    Lance19 BoltTalker

    Joined:
    Oct 2, 2011
    Messages:
    3,048
    Location:
    Wherever these Valkyries drop me...
    Ratings Received:
    +1,380 / 36 / -16
    I haven't seen any sort of strong words from the Chargers, declaring that Whisenhunt alone is deciding on play calls…
    and--given that McCoy came to us as a celebrated offensive coordinator--and he has been especially defensive
    re. never "second guessing" play-calling (in Tenn. & Wash)…since we fans don't really know…
    well, that's why yesterday I coined "McWhizzer"
  3. HollywoodLeo
    Offline

    HollywoodLeo Trevor Phillips Enterprises

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2006
    Messages:
    13,706
    Ratings Received:
    +1,584 / 29 / -1
    While I highly doubt NFL coaches operate in their own in a bubble without input from others, Ken Whisenhunt is the Offensive Coordinator. You don't hire somebody with Ken Whisenhunt's resume to run your offense if you're only looking for a figure head. You hire somebody like Clarence Shelmon for that.

    It doesn't matter whether or not the Chargers have chosen to appease the fan base with an official statement of who is play calling. Simple rational reasoning dictates that Ken Whisehunt is in charge of the offense, of which play calling is a huge part of.

    As for McCoy's pressers, of course he's going to respond to questions as if taking the stance of the entire staff like as though he fully agrees and supports them. That's what leaders do.
  4. Lance19
    Offline

    Lance19 BoltTalker

    Joined:
    Oct 2, 2011
    Messages:
    3,048
    Location:
    Wherever these Valkyries drop me...
    Ratings Received:
    +1,380 / 36 / -16
    You know I didn't say (or even imply) that Whiz is "only" there as "a figure head."
    No one is arguing that he has the same role as Shelmon did.

    But we also don't know how often McCoy weighs in, and there are solid reasons to believe he does.
    You, of course, are free to declare your belief otherwise…I'm just acknowledging that we honestly don't know.

    (Hence, my use of "McWhizzer™")
  5. AnteaterCharger
    Offline

    AnteaterCharger Calibrating Bolttalk, Podcast by Podcast Staff Member Super Moderator Podcaster

    Joined:
    Jan 19, 2006
    Messages:
    18,151
    Location:
    San Diego, CA
    Ratings Received:
    +2,448 / 19 / -4
    Whisenhunt is the play caller but McCoy is the one telling him the plan.

    If McCoy says he wants to sit on the lead, Whisenhunt has to call plays that meet that strategy
    • Agree Agree x 1
  6. Concudan
    Offline

    Concudan Caffeinated Commando

    Joined:
    Mar 5, 2006
    Messages:
    47,138
    Location:
    North side of So Cal
    Ratings Received:
    +3,706 / 39 / -8
    But that has never stopped you from acting as if you do, has it? ;)
  7. Concudan
    Offline

    Concudan Caffeinated Commando

    Joined:
    Mar 5, 2006
    Messages:
    47,138
    Location:
    North side of So Cal
    Ratings Received:
    +3,706 / 39 / -8
    Speculation. Is there an article that supports this? Or are we merely assuming because we failed to get a first down that this is the case?
    • Agree Agree x 1
  8. HollywoodLeo
    Offline

    HollywoodLeo Trevor Phillips Enterprises

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2006
    Messages:
    13,706
    Ratings Received:
    +1,584 / 29 / -1
    Exactly. We don't know how often he weighs in, so why are any of us just automatically assuming that's the case without first knowing the facts? Because a few pressers leads you to think that?

    Football is a team sport. There almost never exists a case where one person is solely to blame for anything. I'd almost go as far as to argue that the word "almost" shouldn't even be in that statement. But when playing the blame game for who's most at fault I typically try to find the guy with the majority of direct control over the matter....when it comes to the offense that guy is Ken Whisenhunt, not Mike McCoy.
    • Winner Winner x 1
  9. HollywoodLeo
    Offline

    HollywoodLeo Trevor Phillips Enterprises

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2006
    Messages:
    13,706
    Ratings Received:
    +1,584 / 29 / -1
    But how do you know McCoy wanted to sit on the lead? Maybe he just said bleed the clock and Whiz chose the wrong/ineffective run plays to do it?

    Maybe he didn't say anything and Whiz just wanted to run draw plays?

    We don't know.
  10. Lance19
    Offline

    Lance19 BoltTalker

    Joined:
    Oct 2, 2011
    Messages:
    3,048
    Location:
    Wherever these Valkyries drop me...
    Ratings Received:
    +1,380 / 36 / -16
    Well, since this thread began with
    "some people here need to actively remind themselves that Ken Whisenhunt is the playcaller"
    and I argued more that we don't know what's really going on behind the McWhizzer™ facade...
    I'll take the movement of this thread in that direction as success…my work here is done. :)
    • Funny Funny x 1
  11. Burlington Bolt Brother
    Offline

    Burlington Bolt Brother BoltTalker

    Joined:
    Sep 19, 2013
    Messages:
    876
    Ratings Received:
    +162 / 31 / -13
    It's not cliche to know that outside the play to play calling, McCoy is in charge of benching Mathews on goal lines. That was a multiple game policy that McCoy could have stopped anytime. Whether it was Wiz or the towel boy suggesting it, McCoy's call....and if it's not, that's as bad as Marty letting Cameron decide that his best receiver wont be playing in a playoff game over an argument they had. That decision to keep the ball away from Mathews does dictate play calling even if McCoy like totally and for surely like never ever makes play calls
  12. AnteaterCharger
    Offline

    AnteaterCharger Calibrating Bolttalk, Podcast by Podcast Staff Member Super Moderator Podcaster

    Joined:
    Jan 19, 2006
    Messages:
    18,151
    Location:
    San Diego, CA
    Ratings Received:
    +2,448 / 19 / -4
    It's absolutely the case too BUT i also know if the strategy was "Go for the jugular, end this game now!" there's no way those plays would've been called. That's why I think it's more McCoy's strategy vs Whisenhunt's tactics. Let me also say that that doesn't prevent Whisenhunt from getting blame for his poor play calling choice too.
    • Disagree Disagree x 1
  13. Concudan
    Offline

    Concudan Caffeinated Commando

    Joined:
    Mar 5, 2006
    Messages:
    47,138
    Location:
    North side of So Cal
    Ratings Received:
    +3,706 / 39 / -8
    Whaaaaa? Ant, stop and think about what you are saying. You are saying that only passing plays can win a game. We ran the ball twice. As a team we had 2 rushing TDs and almost 100 yards (99) rushing against one of the better defenses in the league. To expect that we would abandon the run game is silly, not only would it make us one dimensional, but allow the D to attack the pass more. Your hypothesis is silly at best. Further, if you 'strategy' vs 'tactics' theory holds any water. We still have to try and attack their D, keep them guessing. If you think that going 100% pass is the answer it isn't. Very few times will you see a drive where 100% passing works. Do you understand why that is?

    Further the suggestion that the coaching staff does not want to gain a first down is a uneducated one at best, something I expect from those trying to revise the grand history of Norv.

    Sitting at a 3rd and 6, the KC defense pressured the pocket and Rivers released early. Gates still had a chance to catch the ball. The game of football is not played with only one team on the field at a time, and the opposition will at times stop what you are trying to do. To try and highlight one drive as the coaching staff giving up because we did not get the first down is rather myopic. You want to say the OL failed to execute, ok. You want to say Brown hesitates at the LOS... agree... You want to blow this into some grand conspiracy, well, its not worth the electrons it is written on.

    Look back at Martyball, where we spent a whole half being conservative and you will see the examples of what you try and illustrate with one failed drive.
  14. AnteaterCharger
    Offline

    AnteaterCharger Calibrating Bolttalk, Podcast by Podcast Staff Member Super Moderator Podcaster

    Joined:
    Jan 19, 2006
    Messages:
    18,151
    Location:
    San Diego, CA
    Ratings Received:
    +2,448 / 19 / -4
    We had 2 rushing TDs and almost 100 yds with MATHEWS and an occasional run from Woodhead. But we didn't have Mathews, we had Woodhead and Brown. You have to at least make an effort to stay balanced even with your best runner on the bench, so I perfectly understood one run and agreed with it. You do have to keep the opposition off balance and you have to make them understand we can and will run. But the two in a row didn't make any sense and there was nothing that was gained by it.
  15. Concudan
    Offline

    Concudan Caffeinated Commando

    Joined:
    Mar 5, 2006
    Messages:
    47,138
    Location:
    North side of So Cal
    Ratings Received:
    +3,706 / 39 / -8
    Why? Because the first run didn't work?
  16. AnteaterCharger
    Offline

    AnteaterCharger Calibrating Bolttalk, Podcast by Podcast Staff Member Super Moderator Podcaster

    Joined:
    Jan 19, 2006
    Messages:
    18,151
    Location:
    San Diego, CA
    Ratings Received:
    +2,448 / 19 / -4
    Because it was very unlikely to work without your top running back
  17. Concudan
    Offline

    Concudan Caffeinated Commando

    Joined:
    Mar 5, 2006
    Messages:
    47,138
    Location:
    North side of So Cal
    Ratings Received:
    +3,706 / 39 / -8
    I throw the BS flag.

    Are you suggesting the Brown did not have a 13 yard run yesterday? Against the same defense? You are simply going off of hindsight and judging the series because it failed to produce a first down.

    Regardless of what you think should have been done, we have to play through injuries. We don't stop passing because Royal was out. We don't stop running because RM24 was out. There is ZERO assurances that if we would have passed twice in a row we would have gotten the first.

    To suggest we stop running because Brown is in as opposed to RM24 is foolish. That is unless you want the D to know what we are doing based on personnel packages.
  18. HEXEDBOLT
    Offline

    HEXEDBOLT Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2006
    Messages:
    12,894
    Ratings Received:
    +1,576 / 44 / -6
    The McWhizzoy are joined at the hip concerning offense would be my guess, as that is directly in both of their backgrounds.
  19. Lance19
    Offline

    Lance19 BoltTalker

    Joined:
    Oct 2, 2011
    Messages:
    3,048
    Location:
    Wherever these Valkyries drop me...
    Ratings Received:
    +1,380 / 36 / -16
    Yep…and that's why I've been using McWhizzer™.
    There's no question that McCoy is influencing play-calling…how directly and often is a mystery to us.
    Hey Super Bowl hater :p, The Oxford English Dictionary is clear that McWhizzer
    (mək'(h)wiz-ər) is the current accepted terminology…McWhizzoy is archaic...
  20. HEXEDBOLT
    Offline

    HEXEDBOLT Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2006
    Messages:
    12,894
    Ratings Received:
    +1,576 / 44 / -6
    I hate every Super bowl the Chargers don't win!!!!! McWhizzoy, MCWhizzer After a long hard day does it really matter???
  21. Lance19
    Offline

    Lance19 BoltTalker

    Joined:
    Oct 2, 2011
    Messages:
    3,048
    Location:
    Wherever these Valkyries drop me...
    Ratings Received:
    +1,380 / 36 / -16
    Damn right it matters, corporal!!!
    Next you'll be saying it's okay to call a Quarter Pounder a "Le Royal Cheese."
    Not on my watch, Turtle…not on my watch.

    (p.s. Yes, Bolt Talkers…Samuel L. Jackson mis-lead you…)
  22. HEXEDBOLT
    Offline

    HEXEDBOLT Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2006
    Messages:
    12,894
    Ratings Received:
    +1,576 / 44 / -6
    You can have the rights to the "McWhizzoy" free of charge. BY the way I'm not French, and I still wouldn't order a QP no matter what you called it. We got a deal Jules????
  23. Dublin Bolt
    Offline

    Dublin Bolt BoltTalker

    Joined:
    Aug 12, 2006
    Messages:
    4,349
    Location:
    Dublin, Oul Sod.
    Ratings Received:
    +413 / 7 / -1
    Wow.... so Pro McCoy and Anti McCoy fan/non fan clubs seem to have been formed.

    Some saw my posts as a single swing at McCoy, that's not the case. But McCoy is the HC and he "should" be able to make decisions for all... i.e. not let Whiz decide what the strategy is at all times. So yes, perhaps McCoy said let's end this game on this 2nd to last drive i.e. run the clock down and Whiz chose to call the plays he did even though he did not have his no.1 back. So it's Whiz's fault for calling crappy plays?... perhaps........

    Either way someone needs to grow a pair and go win the game instead of playing not to lose.
    Last edited: Nov 27, 2013
    • Agree Agree x 1
  24. Riff Raff
    Offline

    Riff Raff BoltTalker

    Joined:
    Mar 16, 2013
    Messages:
    490
    Location:
    Transsexual, Transylvania
    Ratings Received:
    +226 / 8 / -4
    Wow - San Diego fans are a direct representation on the team - pussy is as pussy does.
    • Like Like x 1
  25. Lance19
    Offline

    Lance19 BoltTalker

    Joined:
    Oct 2, 2011
    Messages:
    3,048
    Location:
    Wherever these Valkyries drop me...
    Ratings Received:
    +1,380 / 36 / -16
    Mushrooms.jpg
  26. EOTL
    Offline

    EOTL BoltTalker

    Joined:
    Jan 17, 2013
    Messages:
    183
    Location:
    Gotham City
    Ratings Received:
    +81 / 0 / -0
    Food for thought:

    Yes, McCoy helps to put together the game plans and Whisenhunt does call the plays, but let's not forget the Rivers gets a ton of free reign at the line and calls a ton of audibles based on what he's seeing from the defense.

Share This Page