do we miss rak ?

[Stymietee]

NO disrespect dude.. but I think you are reaching to prop up the WHY of Griffins failure. MAtt Ryan never went through QB School. Neither did Ben Rothlisberger, Payton or Eli Manning, Joe Flacco, Russell WIlson... and I could likely name 10 more QBs who have either won Super Bowls since the advent of the internet, or are at minimum considerewd franchise QBs in their own right. Griffin didnt fail because of a lack of a QB coach, or for lack of people trying. Cousins isnt failing due to a lack of QB school or for a lack of people trying. Now their reasons for failing are very different... but your whole QB school concept died out with land lines and dial up.

If your point is.....some guys need it some guys don't I can't argue with that. Guess you better feed that other nonsense to the Packers about QB school concept dying with land lines and dial up. Still works for them and keep this between us, wouldn't want it to get out but they are by far a better organization and team than we have been since dial up and land lines.

Mike McCarthy's quarterback school works

 

[Sportster 72]

Is this no longer about Orakpo?

 

[SoCalWizFan]

Is this no longer about Orakpo?

LOL. It always comes back to RG3 (no matter what cute nickname people currently choose to use for him now).

 

[ehb5]

sorry i meant 16th however 16 is directly in the middle of 32 isnt it and by definition avg ? and that is if you go solely by stats alone

KC is an avg qb at this point he looks to be a career backup but again if he is ranked 43rd which i will accept for the point of arguments sake that would make him 9 spots off of avg of all qbs if they all have 2 qbs ( which we all know they dont ) so again he would be pushing middle of the pack

I still don't understand what he's 16th in. An arbitrary ranking. You can't tell me he's average when he has horrible numbers in INTs, TDs, yds/att etc.

And did you really just try to justify he's average by saying if we were taking 2 QBs from every team??

He's an average backup maybe. That's not an average qb. He's a horrible qb.

 

[Sportster 72]

He is the lowest paid starting QB in the league at $800k so ya'll quit expecting $4 million worth!!!!

 

[ehb5]

As for coaches you're the one who's latched onto arians. It's simply a fact that we will be able to find somebody to take the job after gruden and a fact that that person can be a good coach without being a big name. That's not really up for debate. It doesn't mean that person will be, but the possibility can't be denied

that is your quote . i said you brought arians up first which you did so who latched on to whom first ?

so lets recap . kelly took over for reid after he served a decade as HC

arians took over for whisenhunt who had been there for 5 years and add to it you dont get much hotter the AP nfl coach of the year

quinn to over for smith , he held it for 6 years

rex ryan took over for mangini 3 yrs

harbuagh i dont know which one , john took over for billick after billick got 9 years

jim barbaugh took over for mike singletary 3 years

payton took over for hazmat 6 years

whisenhunt took over for dennis green who got 3 years

so every person you named took the job they got after the previous HC got 3 years or more which isnt the premise of what i said which is you wont get a credible coach if you are only going to give him 2 years or less

and all of this goes back to where you have "proven me wrong " which clearly that is in question

Holy shit, the point of Arians is that before he won COTY he was not a highly sought after name. We could have hired him before he became COTY. Bruce Arians is a good coach. Bruce Arians would have been a good coach for us too.

I really dont know how to make that any more simple for you.

Same goes for Harbaugh btw. Not a big name, could have hired him - would have been a good coach.

Not sure why you're mentioning those other names. Are we not discussing whether we can hire a good coach after only having the previous one for 2 years? Stating those other guys replaced people who had been there a while doesnt mean that we cant hire a good coach.

 

[ehb5]

shark i believe ebb 5 believes KC is less the avg . i can see him picking stats that back his POV . calling someone AVG is subjective but by however number of qbs you want to compare him to , overall he comes in right around avg whether its 32 starting qbs or 64 + qbs in the NFL

as for the coaches well i showed the facts of the guys he named , not me

now i didnt come out and say i chewed up ebb 5 like he implied in this thread so i went back and pulled the numbers

ebb 5 , to me is like many posters , they say we need stability , we need to develop players etc etc etc until losses pile up then they sing a different tune

they dont answer how we got a zorn or spurrier . they forget coaches turning us down left and right

i am not saying gruden is the answer , what i am saying is give him the 3rd year to make it work then you can get a coach who wont be a gruden under a different guise but i guy who would feel he will get a fair shot to get his program in place

and when i say that when we get a new coach it will take 3 more years they put their blinders on and go to the land of theory . look if the guy was going to take a team that had an established qb and good depth throughout the roster then perhaps they could succeed early and often but we dont have that type of team right now . we have a team that is half rebuilt at best .

lets be real how many players on this roster start for the pats ? . perhaps a handful . go through the roster and tell me i am wrong , how many start for the packers ? or broncos ?

am i crazy here shark ?

Yup you are crazy if you think Cousins is average. First of all obviously we were discussing whether hes an average staring QB. I didnt cherry pick stats - I picked stats that are important to showing how good a QB is and oh look surprise Cousins sucks in all of them. Somehow you ignored all that information to come up with the idea that hes an average starting QB. That is a mind bogglingly stupid statement. If youre argument is that hes an average backup than who the hell cares? That means he sucks and we agree.

 

[skinsdad62]

Holy shit, the point of Arians is that before he won COTY he was not a highly sought after name. We could have hired him before he became COTY. Bruce Arians is a good coach. Bruce Arians would have been a good coach for us too.

I really dont know how to make that any more simple for you.

Same goes for Harbaugh btw. Not a big name, could have hired him - would have been a good coach.

Not sure why you're mentioning those other names. Are we not discussing whether we can hire a good coach after only having the previous one for 2 years? Stating those other guys replaced people who had been there a while doesnt mean that we cant hire a good coach.

and again every one of those coaches replaced a guy with 3 years or more

and how much more of a big name do you need after you win COY ?

 

[ehb5]

and again every one of those coaches replaced a guy with 3 years or more

and how much more of a big name do you need after you win COY ?

Are you implying that those coaches were successful because they replaced somebody who coached for 3 years?

And I don't know why you keep bringing up arians as a big name. I clearly said we could have hired him BEFORE he was a big name.

 

[skinsdad62]

Are you implying that those coaches were successful because they replaced somebody who coached for 3 years?

And I don't know why you keep bringing up arians as a big name. I clearly said we could have hired him BEFORE he was a big name.

do you not remember that you are debating me about ? why i feel no good coach will come here to coach if we give him 2 years or less ? not because they replaced a coach with 3 years . i am implying that they took those jobs because they felt they would get a chance to implement their programs

this team has a recent history of not giving a coach a chance to implement his program . now will some coach take the job ? sure but what you most likely will get is a zorn or gruden

you brought those names up , not me , to refute my stance which none did because none took over for a guy 2 years or less . i also said what GOOD coach would take the job not a NAME coach under the circumstances i laid out

 

[Sharkinva]

Are you implying that those coaches were successful because they replaced somebody who coached for 3 years?

And I don't know why you keep bringing up arians as a big name. I clearly said we could have hired him BEFORE he was a big name.

I think what he is suggesting ( and correctly I might add) is that coaches who walk into franchises with some form of stability have a much greater chance of success. Where as most coaches that take over teams in constant change and flux are LUCKY to hold the job for three years.

 

[ehb5]

do you not remember that you are debating me about ? why i feel no good coach will come here to coach if we give him 2 years or less ? not because they replaced a coach with 3 years . i am implying that they took those jobs because they felt they would get a chance to implement their programs

this team has a recent history of not giving a coach a chance to implement his program . now will some coach take the job ? sure but what you most likely will get is a zorn or gruden

you brought those names up , not me , to refute my stance which none did because none took over for a guy 2 years or less . i also said what GOOD coach would take the job not a NAME coach under the circumstances i laid out

No I brought those names up because you said a coach couldn't have success immediately. Those coaches were not brought up in relation to the current debate aside from harbaugh and arians.

Harbaugh and arians are examples of types of coaches who could come here if we fired gruden and be potentially successful.

 

[ehb5]

I think what he is suggesting ( and correctly I might add) is that coaches who walk into franchises with some form of stability have a much greater chance of success. Where as most coaches that take over teams in constant change and flux are LUCKY to hold the job for three years.

True, but also a simplified look at things. There's more than one factor that goes into that and I don't think stability is the biggest one. Since we were discussing whether a coach could be successful after the previous coach was here for 2 years, those examples he mentioned aren't really relevant hence my question.

 

[skinsdad62]

most certainly will new coach, new scheme new needs

Not true. Plenty of coaches have had success in year 1. Dont forget it would be a Mcgloughan coach so Mcglouhan would continue to add his players. On top of that this team has decent talent. LB, CB, DL, OL, RB, WR, TE all have some talent. Not gonna win the super bowl but I think it all comes down to who's playing QB for us.

most dont and i have seen this movie here before book it new coach 3 years more of rebuilding and the coach we get will be a new bee

i made my case in another thread

you fire a guy in year 2 then who do you get ? another roll of the dice . he should get 3 years

well you better buy it because that is how you got gruden

That literally makes no sense. We got somebody to take the job didnt we.....? Kind of disproving your own point there...

you dont get it do you ? you will get another gruden type coach . a young coordinator , who will be like the 5th choice , he will get hired , then in a year and a half long before he gets his system in and the players he wants you will want him fired as well

wash rinse and repeat

You know getting a young up and coming coordinator is a goods thing? Like that's perfectly ok. Just because gruden might not work out doesn't mean that all young coordinators won't. Having a real gm hire his guy should be helpful.

and when that fails as well because the fan base is impatient where will you be ? selling me on another new young coordinator . or the newest college savior ?

give the guy a fair shot less then 2 years isnt

If the new hire is that bad then yea. You forget that he doesn't have to be though.

3 or the last 4 hires were 2 years and that was it . and we are still stuck

bruce arians is 63 yrs old , he had a 9-3 record as an interim HC he certainly doesnt qualify as young when he got his gig he was 60 yrs old and yes he was a "hot coach " because he was AP coach of the year for his 9-3 work


our history has us with the old ball coach (2 years ) zorn (2 years ) gruden ( 2 years )

what we are looking at is bevell from seatle , shaw from stanford and i doubt they take the job if all they get is 2 years to prove it

i dont care how you slice it , it takes one year to see what you have and where to go , the 2nd year is getting "your " guys and year 3 should be the "jelling point "

no coach , who is any good, will take a job with this team , its owner , and its roster and get only 2 years to be a winner sorry not going to happen

gruden in year one got saddled with RGme , hazmat , no real draft picks and crap roster and he gets only 2 years ( or less) to make it happen ?

On the contrary, a coach who knows what he is doing will likely understand that us moving on from bad coaches does not mean that he is doomed. He will know that his success or lack thereof will determine his job safety.

Also if we had hired Arians a year earlier would he have been any less successful? No.

The point is that there are coaches out there who would make good head coaches. That is a fact. They are also not only the big name guys. If the guys are out there (which they are) we have to try and find them.

i made my case in another thread

you fire a guy in year 2 then who do you get ? another roll of the dice . he should get 3 years

the above quotes clearly show that i was debating that no decent coach will take the job if he is given 2 years or less and that you should plan on another 3 years of rebuilding

 

[Sharkinva]

True, but also a simplified look at things. There's more than one factor that goes into that and I don't think stability is the biggest one. Since we were discussing whether a coach could be successful after the previous coach was here for 2 years, those examples he mentioned aren't really relevant hence my question.

I will call a spade a spade on this one. For a coach to come into a completely dysfunctional environment and have early success is generally sheer luck dude. More often than not, the new guy coming into a situation like ours is likely to fail because we have established a track record of impatience. If Gruden gets fired, it likely means we finished poorly, very poorly. Which means the next coach to come in is looking for more than just a QB. Throw in the fact that while we have some talent, we also have some AGE to consider. HAving no QB in that situation, and needing to replace Hatcher, Jackson, Garcon AND still find a QB... even with Scott Mc running things, the odds that we get

1. A top notch coach
2. Replace all of the needed parts within two off seasons
3 Also find a QB.....

Lets just say that I wouldnt bet on those odds.

Yes if Gruden gets fired SOME ONE will take the job. But the odds of it being another Gruden, Zorn or Spurrior go up with every game this season. Now ours might not be totally dysfunctional at the end of the year. But firing Gruden with three years left on his deal does not paint the model of a place where a coach will be given time to fix what ails this team. Thus no one WORTH a real shot is going to be itching to take this job.

 

[skinsdad62]

True, but also a simplified look at things. There's more than one factor that goes into that and I don't think stability is the biggest one. Since we were discussing whether a coach could be successful after the previous coach was here for 2 years, those examples he mentioned aren't really relevant hence my question.

we arent debating that or at least i am not . i have consistently said if you fire gruden in 2 years or left no decent coach will take the job because he wont get to put in his system

i believe it will take 3 years for a new coach to year 1 , see what he has , year 2 get the players he wants , year 3 everything to jell

a decent coach is going to want to go into a situation that he has a chance to succeed in . this team needs a qb has age in some key areas and an impatient owner with off field drama to boot

 

[Sharkinva]

we arent debating that or at least i am not . i have consistently said if you fire gruden in 2 years or left no decent coach will take the job because he wont get to put in his system

i believe it will take 3 years for a new coach to year 1 , see what he has , year 2 get the players he wants , year 3 everything to jell

a decent coach is going to want to go into a situation that he has a chance to succeed in . this team needs a qb has age in some key areas and an impatient owner with off field drama to boot

IM also going to throw it out there that Gruden is likely 9 months behind that schedule because he had to spend time trying to adapt his system to players that dont fit for his first year. Now he is partly to blame for this mind you. But I honestly think most of last year, and the bulk of this off season were basically wasted trying to fix/adjust the QB position.

 

[Stymietee]

IM also going to throw it out there that Gruden is likely 9 months behind that schedule because he had to spend time trying to adapt his system to players that dont fit for his first year. Now he is partly to blame for this mind you. But I honestly think most of last year, and the bulk of this off season were basically wasted trying to fix/adjust the QB position.

When you have an owner who acts like a fan, impetuousness is the result and more often than not two years is all you get. For better or worse that was Dan Snyder, hopefully he's settled down a bit as most of us do. I honestly believe that there is a strange new dynamic going on in our front offices and that is an nearly complete purging of players and coaches bought here by Bruce Allen. The fight will come to a head when SM ( ironically an Allen hire) will want to bring his own guy in. When does it happen? Right now I'm thinking next year.

 

[Sharkinva]

When you have an owner who acts like a fan, impetuousness is the result and more often than not two years is all you get. For better or worse that was Dan Snyder, hopefully he's settled down a bit as most of us do. I honestly believe that there is a strange new dynamic going on in our front offices and that is an nearly complete purging of players and coaches bought here by Bruce Allen. The fight will come to a head when SM ( ironically an Allen hire) will want to bring his own guy in. When does it happen? Right now I'm thinking next year.

Ironically if SM is smart, he will realize that firing Gruden will make the list of guys who want the job about as long as Dan Snyder is tall. Or rather, the list of guys who are worth hiring.

 

[ehb5]

I will call a spade a spade on this one. For a coach to come into a completely dysfunctional environment and have early success is generally sheer luck dude. More often than not, the new guy coming into a situation like ours is likely to fail because we have established a track record of impatience. If Gruden gets fired, it likely means we finished poorly, very poorly. Which means the next coach to come in is looking for more than just a QB. Throw in the fact that while we have some talent, we also have some AGE to consider. HAving no QB in that situation, and needing to replace Hatcher, Jackson, Garcon AND still find a QB... even with Scott Mc running things, the odds that we get

1. A top notch coach
2. Replace all of the needed parts within two off seasons
3 Also find a QB.....

Lets just say that I wouldnt bet on those odds.

Yes if Gruden gets fired SOME ONE will take the job. But the odds of it being another Gruden, Zorn or Spurrior go up with every game this season. Now ours might not be totally dysfunctional at the end of the year. But firing Gruden with three years left on his deal does not paint the model of a place where a coach will be given time to fix what ails this team. Thus no one WORTH a real shot is going to be itching to take this job.

I just disagree. I think there are plenty of quality future coaches out there and I think you could get some of them to take the job.