What’s going on with Malcolm Koonce and his lack of use on defense? Las Vegas Raiders head coach Pete Carroll spoke on the matter recently.
Carroll’s explanation for why Koonce disappeared on defense sounds like a master class in saying a lot but not making it clear.
Yes, Koonce’s snaps are down. Yes, his special-teams workload is up. And yes, apparently the culprits are “heavy personnel,” the game script, and the philosophical need to “take some reps off other guys.” If that sounds less like a plan and more like a weather report, that is because it is.
What is going on with Raiders defensive end Malcolm Koonce?
Koonce, when healthy and properly deployed, has been one of the Raiders’ few consistent sources of edge disruption. He is not a situational curiosity nor is he a developmental flyer. He is a proven rotational rusher who wins with burst, leverage, and effort—precisely the traits a struggling defense should be amplifying, not redistributing to punt coverage.
Yet here we are, being told that because the Raiders fell behind (again), opponents leaned into heavier personnel (predictably), which somehow justified leaning away from a pass rusher who thrives against exactly that kind of script. In theory, trailing teams should see more pass attempts. In reality, the Raiders keep finding themselves in games where logic quietly excuses itself and leaves the room.
Carroll’s explanation also underscores a familiar organizational habit: treating symptoms instead of addressing causes. The issue is not that Koonce can help on special teams. That is admirable. The issue is that the Raiders’ defensive rotation appears to be governed by convenience rather than optimization. “Taking reps off other guys” sounds practical until one remembers that those “other guys” are often part of the reason the defense is struggling in the first place.
This is not a special-teams critique…
It is a roster management one. Good teams use special teams to supplement their depth. Bad teams use them to rationalize underuse of productive players. Koonce’s background on punt coverage should be a bonus, not a justification for shrinking his defensive role during meaningful snaps.
What makes the explanation land with unintended comedy is its passive framing. Snaps were not reassigned; they were “taken away.” Personnel groupings were not countered; they “happened.” Weeks passed. Trends continued. Accountability drifted quietly off-screen.
At some point, the Raiders must decide whether they are developing a coherent defensive identity or merely reacting to whatever formation the opponent rolls out next. If Malcolm Koonce is healthy enough to sprint downfield on punt coverage, he is healthy enough to rush the quarterback.
Otherwise, this is not rotation. It is misallocation dressed up as strategy—and Raider Nation has seen enough of that to recognize it on sight.
Well, what are your thoughts on the situation, Raider Nation? Is this a matter of another player falling out of favor with Carroll?
*Top Photo: Getty Images