Rod Woodson

[vancelot23]

Lol. Yeah ok

 

[flamingrey]

One guy has been a coach for 6 years. The other might be unemployed after 1 year.

Not sure how you can see it any other way.

 

[vancelot23]

I see it as a minor deal. 2 of those 6 years were as a D-line coach. It's not going to make a significant difference either way.

 

[ckhokie]

Simply making the point that I'd rather have someone proven or least experienced. Regardless of circumstances concerning Woodson, with as porous as our secondary became last season, I want someone that absolutely knows what he's doing. Woodson is not that guy.

Like Jay Gruden?

 

[vancelot23]

Like Jay Gruden?

Rep for that my friend.

 

[cincygrad]

Jay Gruden had over 7 years of NFL experience when he was hired.

Jay Gruden had 10 years of head coaching experience, along with 2 championships, in minor football leagues.

I'm not sure how you could say he wasn't experienced.

 

[vancelot23]

For the record, I'm fine with the Carrier hire. I'd be fine with pretty much anybody. Carrier has a little experience, but it's not enough to make a huge difference in the direction of the team.

 

[ckhokie]

Jay Gruden had over 7 years of NFL experience when he was hired.

Jay Gruden had 10 years of head coaching experience, along with 2 championships, in minor football leagues.

I'm not sure how you could say he wasn't experienced.

The point is he had ZERO years as an NFL OC and did a pretty decent job as we all can agree, and the OP was complaining that a guy with ACTUAL NFL EXPERIENCE AT THAT COACHING POSITION 'wasn't experienced enough'

If you're going to claim 'head coaching experience' for a guy who coached in the Arena League, you can agree that taking a position coach from another NFL team isn't to far of a stretch.

 

[flamingrey]

The point is he had ZERO years as an NFL OC and did a pretty decent job as we all can agree, and the OP was complaining that a guy with ACTUAL NFL EXPERIENCE AT THAT COACHING POSITION 'wasn't experienced enough'

If you're going to claim 'head coaching experience' for a guy who coached in the Arena League, you can agree that taking a position coach from another NFL team isn't to far of a stretch.

That reeks of a backpedal.

If you consider "ACTUAL NFL EXPERIENCE AT THAT COACHING POSITION" a first year coach who coached his secondary to one of the worst secondaries in the league "experienced enough", then that's your prerogative. If you consider that same first year coach who coached his best CB to lead all CB's in penalties and TDs given up "experienced enough", then again, that's your own prerogative. There is no comparison between that and Jay Gruden.

Nobody said Woodson cannot become a good coach, but with the state of affairs on this team, only an experienced guy makes sense, not one who is trying to make it and has shown to suck in his only chance.

Furthermore, comparing Woodson to Gruden would be an apples and oranges comparison. The Bengals offense was starting from scratch, so it made sense to start over with a young, promising guy leading them. The defense on the other hand is seasoned and the strength of the team with the weakness of that defense being in the secondary. It would be foolish to take that same risk on a young, unproven guy and hope he doesn't fail again.

 

[ckhokie]

That reeks of a backpedal.

If you consider "ACTUAL NFL EXPERIENCE AT THAT COACHING POSITION" a first year coach who coached his secondary to one of the worst secondaries in the league "experienced enough", then that's your prerogative. If you consider that same first year coach who coached his best CB to lead all CB's in penalties and TDs given up "experienced enough", then again, that's your own prerogative. There is no comparison between that and Jay Gruden.

Nobody said Woodson cannot become a good coach, but with the state of affairs on this team, only an experienced guy makes sense, not one who is trying to make it and has shown to suck in his only chance.

Furthermore, comparing Woodson to Gruden would be an apples and oranges comparison. The Bengals offense was starting from scratch, so it made sense to start over with a young, promising guy leading them. The defense on the other hand is seasoned and the strength of the team with the weakness of that defense being in the secondary. It would be foolish to take that same risk on a young, unproven guy and hope he doesn't fail again.

First off, I'm not backpeddling on anything and I stand by my original point which you are pretty much making for me.

And you pretty much continue to contradict yourself when you're comparing the coaching situations. Our offense was a blank slate and we brought in a totally I unproven guy. Our secondary (not entire defense, as we are talking about a secondary coach) really only has one guy, Hall, that is reasonable.

So to get this straight, you're ok bringing in a guy with no experience to start from scratch, but not a guy who has a year under his belt and was one of the best of all time at his position to do the same? Ok...

 

[DanBengalfan]

this is the Cincinnati Bengals, we had Kenny Anderson as our offensive coordinator one year.

we love to experiment, it's all we got.

 

[flamingrey]

First off, I'm not backpeddling on anything and I stand by my original point which you are pretty much making for me.

And you pretty much continue to contradict yourself when you're comparing the coaching situations. Our offense was a blank slate and we brought in a totally I unproven guy. Our secondary (not entire defense, as we are talking about a secondary coach) really only has one guy, Hall, that is reasonable.

So to get this straight, you're ok bringing in a guy with no experience to start from scratch, but not a guy who has a year under his belt and was one of the best of all time at his position to do the same? Ok...

You see, in football - the ultimate team sport - if even one piece of a unit falters, the entire unit will succumb. That goes for looking at the secondary as a unit and each position as an individual part AND it goes for looking at the entire defense as a unit and the entire secondary as an individual part.

To suggest because we aren't as talented in the secondary that we can afford to hire and take a chance on a guy with virtually no experience coaching - and the only experience was a failure - is ludicrous. You take the strength of your team and you proactively try to improve it with experience and proven commodities, not take a chance on potential. We all saw what happened to our defense from the first half of the season to the second half of the season when we lost Hall and our secondary fell apart. Our entire defense took a hit, especially the run defense. We don't need to get healthy and improve back there only to take a risk on an unproven and inexperienced coach and have him diminish any progress.

Furthermore, as it pertains to Gruden versus Woodson, going into 2011, the team was in official "rebuild" mode, so it made sense to go after potential all across the board - from the draft to FA signings and up to the coaching staff. Heading into 2012 coming off a playoff appearance with a top 10 defense and potential-laden offense, we're no longer in the same position nor seen in the same light. The more proven guys we can get from FA to the coaching staff, the better. THAT is the (not the only) difference you seem to not be able to see.

Additionally - if the above weren't enough - as grad pointed out, Gruden had PLENTY of experience AND success coaching - at all levels. The next place up for him in the NFL was OC. In fact, several teams in the years prior tried to pry him from the UFL/AFL to become their OC. There were also many football minds that spoke very highly of him as a coach. Woodson on the other hand is a complete unknown as a coach. To this point, he has done nothing but failed. Apples and oranges.

 

[ckhokie]

You see, in football - the ultimate team sport - if even one piece of a unit falters, the entire unit will succumb. That goes for looking at the secondary as a unit and each position as an individual part AND it goes for looking at the entire defense as a unit and the entire secondary as an individual part.

To suggest because we aren't as talented in the secondary that we can afford to hire and take a chance on a guy with virtually no experience coaching - and the only experience was a failure - is ludicrous. You take the strength of your team and you proactively try to improve it with experience and proven commodities, not take a chance on potential. We all saw what happened to our defense from the first half of the season to the second half of the season when we lost Hall and our secondary fell apart. Our entire defense took a hit, especially the run defense. We don't need to get healthy and improve back there only to take a risk on an unproven and inexperienced coach and have him diminish any progress.

Furthermore, as it pertains to Gruden versus Woodson, going into 2011, the team was in official "rebuild" mode, so it made sense to go after potential all across the board - from the draft to FA signings and up to the coaching staff. Heading into 2012 coming off a playoff appearance with a top 10 defense and potential-laden offense, we're no longer in the same position nor seen in the same light. The more proven guys we can get from FA to the coaching staff, the better. THAT is the (not the only) difference you seem to not be able to see.

Additionally - if the above weren't enough - as grad pointed out, Gruden had PLENTY of experience AND success coaching - at all levels. The next place up for him in the NFL was OC. In fact, several teams in the years prior tried to pry him from the UFL/AFL to become their OC. There were also many football minds that spoke very highly of him as a coach. Woodson on the other hand is a complete unknown as a coach. To this point, he has done nothing but failed. Apples and oranges.

You're not going to convince me that one of the best corners of all time wouldn't be able to teach a thing or two to the crap secondary.

We are most definitely in need of rebuilding of our secondary. And like you say we need to draft and look at FA to improve.
Our defense isn't that great either. We played well against bad teams last year. Losing one decent player in Hall for a couple games isn't why our run D mysteriously went to shit.

And for gods sake, we're talking about a position coach. Not a new head coach or even D coordinator. Everyone's got to get a start somewhere. Why not take a hall of famer?

 

[flamingrey]

Sure he could teach a thing or two, but hire him as an advisor or some sort of assistant.

You should look up Joe Whitt Jr. and some of his game film videos. He's the Packers secondary coach and is known as one of the best secondary coaches in the league. His knowledge and understanding of the game and his ability to portray that at a coaches level is impressive. His players speak very very highly of him, and he's given much of the credit for their secondary's success.

"Under Whitt’s guidance, both Woodson and Williams have produced single-season career highs in all major categories."

There's no such thing as just a position's coach. But feel free to continue to downplay their importance/contributions to a team.

 

[cincygrad]

Again, just because a guy was a superstar at the position, does not mean he'll be a good coach. In fact, most of the best coaches were guys that were no better than average players. Coaching is a different animal.

And I disagree with the notion that it isn't important. Look at how people like Hall and Joseph talked about Kevin Coyle. They gave him tons of credit on his way out.

 

[DanBengalfan]

I can't keep up.

 

[ckhokie]

There's no such thing as just a position's coach. But feel free to continue to downplay their importance/contributions to a team.

whatever dude. I'm done arguing with you. My only point was that we hired an OC with no NFL experience at that title, and it worked out pretty well for us, so it seems pretty hypocritical to claim that we shouldn't give a guy, who actually has some experience under his belt, a shot because 'he isn't experienced enough' - it has nothing to do with whether he would be a good fit or not.

I think you would be hard pressed to pull a positions coach from the Packers laterally, to the Bengals without any type of promotion, but if you really think that's going to happen, I'll cheer for you.

alright [/end]

 

[flamingrey]

Even disregarding the state of the offense last year versus the defense this year, the funniest part of this whole thing is your implication that Gruden coming into last season was LESS prepared/experienced for his role as OC than Woodson would be going into this season as secondary coach. That is ludicrous.

 

[ckhokie]

Even disregarding the state of the offense last year versus the defense this year, the funniest part of this whole thing is your implication that Gruden coming into last season was LESS prepared/experienced for his role as OC than Woodson would be going into this season as secondary coach. That is ludicrous.

LOL

One guy's 'experience' at the position he has with the Bengals was being an OC for an Arena League team

The other has a year of NFL coaching experience in that role, and a hall of fame career playing it.

Please tell me which one is more ludicrous.

 

[flamingrey]

Yeah, what was I thinking?

1 failed year as a secondary coach trumps over 7 years of NFL experience as some sort of assistant coach on a SB winning team and 10 years of offensive coordinator and head coaching experience in minor football.

If you have 10 years of DC experience, just because you do not have actual head coaching experience, it does not mean you are not qualified or do not have the resume for a head coaching position. In fact, you are probably actually a very good candidate for the position. Gruden likewise had a great resume.

A player with ZERO coaching experience with the exception of 1 failed year....well, speaks for itself.