NFL VII

[Jaime L]

I love your posts here, man, but I think Jamie was right on that particular point. Injuries are the worst thing that can happen to a decent team in football. (Barring the unimaginable tragedy that also happened to the team in question.)

Let's be frank here, shall we? If you could turn off in juries in real life like in Madden, the Patriots win the Super Bowl last year, because Peyton can;t throw all over the Pats backup linebackers. But you know what? Injuries are real, and they can be the difference between a mediocre and a very good team.

The Skins are a mediocre team by record, but they possess (possessed) the talent to be a top ten team. They certainly had the talent to run with Dallas and Green Bay. It's a bloody shame, really.

Joe Gibbs ain't the best anymore, but he's easily a top 5 coach in the NFL.

Really impressed by these sentiments. Would not expect a non-Skins fan to assert this. I believe this to be true, and despite homeristic moments, I think I see this team relatively clearly. Some of the time anyway. There's enough talent there to justify the continued optimism I've felt about this team despite all the struggles the last couple years. Their failings are many but the overall talent level isn't one of 'em.

Sadly, Taylor's death means this the talent-level is no longer comparable to the NFC Elite.

[Per Iocum]

I don’t see Gibbs as a top-five coach. Off the top of my head, and in no particular order, Fisher, Dungy, Belichick, Gruden, Holmgren, Reid and McCarthy are better coaches. Frankly, Gibbs would be lost without Saunders and Williams (Though it seems like he ignores Saunders a fair amount).

I agree that there’s talent on the team but talent alone won’t get you far. The Cardinals have had talent the past couple years but the other stuff, like you know coaching, has been missing.

[Ser Paladin]

He might be in the top 5 of the 80s (and very early 90s), but he isn't presently a top 5 head coach.

A classic "the business has passed him by" sort of guy. Since his return to football, he's got 1 season over .500, while the other three NFC East teams all average over .500 in that time period. Only team not to win the division since his return. He's basically made a team move from mediocre to mediocre. Not exactly a value add.

[Stego]

Yeah I'm crazy. I know not of what I speak.

I mean, I said Mario Williams was the right choice on the day of the draft, and EVERYONE that argued with me(which was everyone) was right!

I'm also the crazy guy that called David Garrard as a top end NFL QB! Obviously I was way off base as all the people on the board here told me.

Yawn.

Joe Gibbs is a top 5 Head Coach in this league. I can accept that possibly Peyton Manning is a better head coach, but do not fucking attempt to tell me Dungy is better. He is not even the head coach. (Any HC that lets himself be trumped by the wishes of his QB is not a head coach. He is a figurehead.)

1. Belichick

2. Shanahan

3. Reid

4. Fisher

5. Gibbs

6. Jauron

[Lord O' Bones]

Jauron ahead of Holmgren? Por que?

[Per Iocum]

I can accept that possibly Peyton Manning is a better head coach, but do not fucking attempt to tell me Dungy is better.

Are we going to argue this? Sure, Manning is the reason for a lot of the success but he’s an excellent coach. Don’t forget all the success with Tampa Bay. He can win without an all-star quarterback. Unlike, say, Bill Belichick.

[DanteGabriel]

I can accept that possibly Peyton Manning is a better head coach, but do not fucking attempt to tell me Dungy is better. He is not even the head coach. (Any HC that lets himself be trumped by the wishes of his QB is not a head coach. He is a figurehead.)

I would argue that Dungy's value was in constructing a competitive, low-budget defense to pair with the dominant offense built around Manning.

Are we going to argue this? Sure, Manning is the reason for a lot of the success but he’s an excellent coach. Don’t forget all the success with Tampa Bay. He can win without an all-star quarterback. Unlike, say, Bill Belichick.

Dungy certainly built a top-tier defense in Tampa, but he didn't win a title, did he? The furthest he got was a defeat in the NFC Championship game. I suspect Belichick could have managed that level of winning without an all-star QB. But it's pointless to argue that, because it's all supposition.

[Per Iocum]

I suspect Belichick could have managed that level of winning

Nope. He managed to compile a losing record with the Browns never came close to the success in Tampa under Dungy.

[Bazzlebane]

Trying to argue at this point that Bill Bilichik is an inferior coach (to any current coaches)...words fail me. Love him, hate him, but acknowledge he is good at what he does.

[Per Iocum]

Love him, hate him, but acknowledge he is good at what he does.

He's good. One of the best. But Cleveland/Tampa is an interesting comparision.

[DanteGabriel]

Nope. He managed to compile a losing record with the Browns never came close to the success in Tampa under Dungy.

And did Belichick have players comparable to Simeon Rice, Warren Sapp, John Lynch and Derrick Brooks when he was in Cleveland? Belichick didn't have the same support from ownership in Cleveland that he's got in New England.

This whole argument is ridiculous. I feel dumber for having engaged.

[CelticBrennus]

He can win without an all-star quarterback. Unlike, say, Bill Belichick.

This is an argument that can only be made by looking at the raw stats of Belichik's tenure in Cleveland, and ignoring the overall picture of the improvement made prior to the jump the Baltimore.

Prior to Belichick, the Browns went 3-13, his first year they improved to 6-10, then 7-9, 7-9, before making the jump to 11-5, and going 1-1 in the playoffs, beating the Patriots, before falling to Pittsburgh in the Divisional round.

They then collapsed the next year after starting 3-1 when Model announced the move to Baltimore and losing all but one of the rest of their games, with Model firing the man who got them to the playoffs.

In short Belichick took over a shitty ass team going 3-13 and in 3 years rebuilt them with one of the best D's in the league, and took them to the playoffs with a 11-5 record. Cant win huh....

[Per Iocum]

And did Belichick have players comparable to Simeon Rice, Warren Sapp, John Lynch and Derrick Brooks when he was in Cleveland?

I agree, he made poor personnel decisions and the Buccaneers did not.

I'm not claiming Bill is a bad coach. But two men stepped into similar situations with poor teams and one succeeded and the other failed. Don't call Bill's time in Cleveland a success. He had one winning season and one trip to the post-season.

[DanteGabriel]

I agree, he made poor personnel decisions and the Buccaneers did not.

You just totally ignored the point about Belichick not having front office support in Cleveland, didn't you? Your bias is so laughably obvious, pointing to the poor personnel decisions that he made while referring to the good decisions that the Buccaneers, as a collective, made. I suspect you don't know shit about front office politics in Belichick's time in Cleveland.

Never mind. CB rebutted your shallow argument well enough.

[CelticBrennus]

Don’t call Bill’s time in Cleveland a success. He had one winning season.

Yeah, and immediately after that season, one that most teams would kill for, the owner announced a move, which killed the team for the rest of the year. Look at the trend, going from horrible, to ok, to pretty good.

Most teams that go 3-13 would be estatic to see someone improve them like Belichik did in Cleveland.

Nevermind that he also won two superbowls with Parcells - whose career was never the same after Belichick left.

[Per Iocum]

You just totally ignored the point about Belichick not having front office support in Cleveland, didn't you? Your bias is so laughably obvious, pointing to the poor personnel decisions that he made

I might be incorrect but I thought Bill made personnel decisions in Cleveland. In Tampa McKay was General Manager.

They were 3-4 before the move was announced. It was not a great team. Am I biased? Sure. But Cleveland fans never seemed to care for Belichick either.

Nevermind that he also won two superbowls with Parcells - whose career was never the same after Belichick left.

As stated earlier he's a great coach.

[CelticBrennus]

The fans hated him since he dumped Bernie Kosar for Vinnie Testaverde. The fans hated him for that, and he didnt know how to deal with media and fans yet.

I might be incorrect but I thought Bill made personnel decisions in Cleveland.

He did, and he made a bunch of good choices with who to go after. In three years he took a pathetic 3-13 team, and turned them into a legit playoff contender with one of the best D's in the league.

Frankly PI, you are grasping at straws here, and ignoring the actual facts for simple bias.

[DanteGabriel]

I might be incorrect but I thought Bill made personnel decisions in Cleveland. In Tampa McKay was General Manager.

JM: Why is Belichick's time as Cleveland Browns head coach looked upon as a failure?

DH: There were four problems, a volatile owner in Art Modell, high expectations from fans, an aging and fading team and the fact that while he was ready to be a head coach technically, Belichick had not mastered the people skills necessary to do the job. He was not entirely in command of personnel and not good at the public relations part of the job. He does not bend to be popular. He came into an impossible situation with a hometown quarterback (Bernie Kosar) whose skills had eroded. When Bill took the job, he didn't know that he was running against Kosar. The team's move to Baltimore also was a problem. Years later, a reporter asked Belichick what he learned in Cleveland. He answered, "Not to move your team to another city in the middle of the season."

http://www.bostonsportsmedia.com/archives/...erstam_waxe.php

(Of course, in this interview, Halberstam also says that Belichick wouldn't take Randy Moss on his team even if he could get him at a good pay rate...)

Ironically enough, one of Bill's biggest obstacles in Cleveland was a fading all-star. I guess we should count ourselves lucky that Mo Lewis knocked out Bledsoe and gave Brady a chance, otherwise Belichick might have had another QB controversy on his hands.

As stated earlier he's a great coach.

He's a "great coach" but he can't win without an all-star quarterback? I call bullshit. You're trying to back off from that initial dumb assertion.

[Per Iocum]

Okay, break it down. We’ll examine the first four seasons and discount the fifth due to the announcement.

Bill:

6-10

7-9

7-9

11-5

Post-season: 1-1

Tony:

6-10

10-6

8-8

11-5

Post-season: 2-2

In their first four seasons Bill was outperformed. Both teams were built on defense and neither had a great quarterback.

He's a "great coach" but he can't win without an all-star quarterback? I call bullshit. You're trying to back off from that initial dumb assertion.

One winning season w/out Brady.

[DanteGabriel]

I'd just like to know how a coach who can't win without an all-star QB should be considered a "great coach".