Jump to content

djhutch

BECAUSE Not Caldwell, So Then Who?

Recommended Posts

23 minutes ago, Nastradamus said:

I assume one of the major arguments on Patricia is that many believe Belichick is truly in charge of the D, as he produces a top 10 one most years regardless of DC. 

Yes, that is my argument. To what degree is it Patricia's defense? I would much rather have McDaniels.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, NYLion said:

 How exactly has he learned from his mistakes? 

“I made a lot of mistakes there. You know that,” McDaniels said Tuesday during Super Bowl XLIX media day. “But I think it was a great learning experience for myself, and hopefully I’ve grown from that and will continue to grow from that.”

“I think one of the things I really learned in Denver is the value of being a good listener,” McDaniels said. “When you do something like that for the first time, you feel like you have to run through everything and be in charge of too many things. And sometimes that’s a significant negative.

https://www.denverpost.com/2015/01/27/patriots-josh-mcdaniels-admits-to-mistakes-when-broncos-coach/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
58 minutes ago, Shelton said:

Disagree. If the lions had beat the cowboys or saints or Seahawks in the past appearances, it doesn’t make them any closer to a super bowl today. 

It’s just message board and talk radio fodder to rile up the fan base against a team that has been bad to mediocre for a while. 

This is how I see it as well.

If they won a play-off game, I think there would be some different damning metric trotted out to show how the Lions / Caldwell fell short.

I contend the only thing that would have satisfied folks was if they made the play-offs in at least 3 seasons with at least 2 of those being deep runs.  Partly, I think, because fans didn't want Caldwell in the first place and partly because fans do not want to **** away Stafford's career, and partly because of pent up frustration.

The irony is I don't think that highly of Caldwell and have no issue replacing him.  I just think any number of other coaches would not stand up particularly well to similar scrutiny if we applied it to their resume.  Especially when we consider they would be handed the Lions roster.

Which to me says the argument wants to be something more specific like they need a coach that specializes in x or addresses y rather than target a guy because he won a Super Bowl or a bunch of play-off games 10+ years ago.

Just my opinion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Nastradamus said:

I'm obsesses with SHanny, but not sure he's up to it any more. He'd be my first call though. 

Gruden basically was the reason both teams were in the SB the year he went. Rough spin on him. 

Gruden accomplishments 2003-2008 would have had everyone here calling for his head had he posted them here.  It got him fired in TB.

The argument for Gruden over Caldwell resides entirely in what Jon did 1998-2002.

I don't think that is rough at all.  I think that is an honest assessment from my perspective.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Mr. Bigglesworth said:

The irony is I don't think that highly of Caldwell and have no issue replacing him.  I just think any number of other coaches would not stand up particularly well to similar scrutiny if we applied it to their resume. 

In almost any pro sport - GMs are at least as important as coach's - maybe more so in the NFL because so many players need to be found every single year. You just don't get that many chances to see how two coaches compare when they have the same players and even that is a tricky comparison. It's still strikes me as a more unique set of skills to assemble a roster of pro players capable of winning than to manage them to wins once you have them. The 'science' of football on the field is pretty well known in terms of setting up the X's and O's and establishing practice procedures. Long story short - I think it's easier to find a coach who can win with good players than a GM who can give the coach those players - so I think we obsess too much over the coaching.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, MAROTH4MVP said:

Yes, that is my argument. To what degree is it Patricia's defense? I would much rather have McDaniels.

and fwiw that's the same issue people have with Josh. Is it his or Brady's offense?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Mr. Bigglesworth said:

I disagree.  I don't think a win over the Cowboys moves the needle much in most fans eyes.

I strongly disagree, but to each their own. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
45 minutes ago, Mr. Bigglesworth said:

Gruden accomplishments 2003-2008 would have had everyone here calling for his head had he posted them here.  It got him fired in TB.

The argument for Gruden over Caldwell resides entirely in what Jon did 1998-2002.

I don't think that is rough at all.  I think that is an honest assessment from my perspective.

I just don't see the benefit in splitting his career in parts. I don't think it aids the assessment at all. He's a guy who has frequently at least won his division and who won a SB. I'm not sure what more credentials a coach could have that you could reasonably expect to hire. If we hire Gruden and he stays here 11 years, wins 1 SB and 5 divisions, I won't give 2 ****s about the other 6 years. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
59 minutes ago, Mr. Bigglesworth said:

 

The irony is I don't think that highly of Caldwell and have no issue replacing him.  I just think any number of other coaches would not stand up particularly well to similar scrutiny if we applied it to their resume.  Especially when we consider they would be handed the Lions roster.

 

I do agree with this general concept, and I suppose that's why I like Gruden. I also like Caldwell similarly. Gruden has probably done a bit more though. Caldwell gets a bum rap because his errors(which all coaches make in abundance) are particularly noticeable if not particularly common and because his sideline demearnor isn't particularly engaging or charismatic. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I split it up to illustrate it has been a really long time since he was highly successful.

He hasn't coached in 10 years, which is a long time, hasn't been highly successful in 15.

I think that amount of time causes one to give pause, especially given the back half of his career was unremarkable.

Frankly, I don't know if I would consider him, but that is me.  He's have to impress the **** out of me in an interview at a minimum.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Nastradamus said:

I just don't see the benefit in splitting his career in parts. I don't think it aids the assessment at all. He's a guy who has frequently at least won his division and who won a SB. I'm not sure what more credentials a coach could have that you could reasonably expect to hire. If we hire Gruden and he stays here 11 years, wins 1 SB and 5 divisions, I won't give 2 ****s about the other 6 years. 

I'd like the guy to have accomplished things far more recently.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Mr. Bigglesworth said:

I split it up to illustrate it has been a really long time since he was highly successful.

He hasn't coached in 10 years, which is a long time, hasn't been highly successful in 15.

I think that amount of time causes one to give pause, especially given the back half of his career was unremarkable.

Frankly, I don't know if I would consider him, but that is me.  He's have to impress the **** out of me in an interview at a minimum.

Fair enough. To me, Caldwell is valuable because he is steady, consistent etc. To me if you fire a guy like that, at this point in our process, you're looking for high upside. I would argue Gruden has shown that, so you at least consider him. Interview is important though. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Shelton said:

Disagree. If the lions had beat the cowboys or saints or Seahawks in the past appearances, it doesn’t make them any closer to a super bowl today. 

It’s just message board and talk radio fodder to rile up the fan base against a team that has been bad to mediocre for a while. 

It's not just "some other football game" though. A win against Dallas in the playoffs would have been more memorable than a regular season win against whoever.  It also gives more legitimacy to Stafford and Caldwell's resume.  I think it also helps confidence going forward when you know that you're capable of winning a big game.

As the old saying goes "nobody remembers who came in 2nd place" but that doesn't mean that a playoff win is meaningless either IMO.  Of course it's all subjective though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, MAROTH4MVP said:

“I made a lot of mistakes there. You know that,” McDaniels said Tuesday during Super Bowl XLIX media day. “But I think it was a great learning experience for myself, and hopefully I’ve grown from that and will continue to grow from that.”

“I think one of the things I really learned in Denver is the value of being a good listener,” McDaniels said. “When you do something like that for the first time, you feel like you have to run through everything and be in charge of too many things. And sometimes that’s a significant negative.

https://www.denverpost.com/2015/01/27/patriots-josh-mcdaniels-admits-to-mistakes-when-broncos-coach/

That looks like a bunch of fluff to me.  What has he actually done to prove that he learned from his mistakes? Anybody can say that they learned from their mistakes.

I'm just trying to figure out what he's done to earn a head coaching promotion.  At least Patricia has made a poor defense on paper look respectable, whether or not that is due more to Belichick is pure speculation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

• Detroit Lions: With the Lions eliminated, I moved this one from the “maybe” [to the Likely/Done] pile, as rumblings have held for a few weeks that Jim Caldwell would be in trouble if he missed the playoffs. I’d expect Patriots defensive coordinator Matt Patricia to be a consideration if Caldwell gets whacked, with the possibility that Jim Bob Cooter and the offensive staff stay.

https://www.si.com/nfl/2017/12/28/nfl-coaches-black-monday-firings-hirings

I don't know where he gets the last part of this, but it is a scary thought. Cooter is young and may still have a lot of upside, but he needs someone who can build a running game. If there is a coaching change like the one described above, that doesn't lead to an obvious upgrade in the run game, it will be a failure.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Jason_R said:

https://www.si.com/nfl/2017/12/28/nfl-coaches-black-monday-firings-hirings

I don't know where he gets the last part of this, but it is a scary thought. Cooter is young and may still have a lot of upside, but he needs someone who can build a running game. If there is a coaching change like the one described above, that doesn't lead to an obvious upgrade in the run game, it will be a failure.

I don't think fixing the  Lions' running game has much to do with Caldwell or Cooter one way or the other. The team doesn't have an A level running back and the OLine has been too injury wracked and is mostly too young to be very good yet even it could get on the field together.

Lion running game will  more likely be fixed (or not) by healing, the OLine getting playing time together as a unit, and new talent at RB.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Gehringer_2 said:

I don't think fixing the  Lions' running game has much to do with Caldwell or Cooter one way or the other. The team doesn't have an A level running back and the OLine has been too injury wracked and is mostly too young to be very good yet even it could get on the field together.

Caldwell has more than a little something to do with it.

Quote

16 full seasons: Eight at Wake Forest, three for the Indianapolis Colts, one for the Baltimore Ravens, four for the Detroit Lions, and yet there were only two players in all that time who managed [a 1,000 yard season] and neither of them were in the NFL.

https://www.prideofdetroit.com/2017/11/29/16713124/detroit-lions-should-hire-run-game-coordinator-2018-jim-caldwell

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, Jason_R said:

https://www.si.com/nfl/2017/12/28/nfl-coaches-black-monday-firings-hirings

I don't know where he gets the last part of this, but it is a scary thought. Cooter is young and may still have a lot of upside, but he needs someone who can build a running game. If there is a coaching change like the one described above, that doesn't lead to an obvious upgrade in the run game, it will be a failure.

I think Prince ends up being the fall-guy if Cooter stays as OC... Maybe all of the RB and OL coaches...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, 84 Lives!!! said:

I think Prince ends up being the fall-guy if Cooter stays as OC... Maybe all of the RB and OL coaches...

Prince should have been the fall guy a long time ago. But one of Caldwell's faults is that he is too loyal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

PS: telling I think is Patricia's vast dissection of film to get an advantage against the opponent. With detailed analysis and breakdowns given from him to the players. I think this is both very Belichek-like and also, exactly what Quinn will be looking for: the ability to outcoach the other team. That doesn't say he wins playoff games for us... But I think that's a good place to start...

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, Jason_R said:

Caldwell may be a hack, and may hate to run the ball, but his NFL history proves little in this regard. As OC in Balt, his team rushed rushed for 1900 yards, pretty much equal to what the opposition ran the ball against the Ravens. In '13 the rushing output dropped, but his  offense won the Superbowl, so I'm not going to knock it. In Ind the offense was built around Manning and the team structure was put in place by Tony Dungy. He was hired to maintain continuity and wasn't really there long enough recreate that team into anything other than what it already was. They ran for about the same yards under Caldwell as Dungy and it didn't even change much the 1st year under Pagano. The real test for Caldwell as a coach in general would have been what he would have done in Ind in 2012 with Luck as compared to what Pagano did, but we don't get to know that.

Absolutely Caldwell came into the league as a passing and QB guy, but that doesn't mean the Lions' running woes this season aren't still injury and personal based.

The lions run game had been crap for years because our OLine was never built to run the ball. Quinn is changing that but hasn't gotten there yet.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×