Dan Henning

I don't think it's true either. I don't think it's a part of my argument at all.

Davidson gets a hit against him for Jarrett. Even though Jarrett looks like he could become a productive player for us by next year. The part you seem to want to negate is that Davidson has Jarrett, and for every Jarrett there's a group of kids who didn't become anything for Henning. He got plenty of production out of, let's say every other vet, but

Most OCs won't publicly feud with the player in the media, so in that regard Henning was special. Since your argument is that Shelton should be an exception, tell me about the draftees he made. Gross? OK. Wharton? Sure, but had him at tackle when we now know clearly he's a better guard. Williams? Not really. Foster? When was he ever consistent? He was honestly more consistent under Davidson, and led the league in first down runs before wearing down when he was finally healthy. Otherwise, he was spending big to get guys to replace players we should've been able to develop.



Gantt's words about Henning lacking energy was a new take on things. That was a good read. This didn't have anything to do with responding to your post, but I felt like throwing in some commentary since this argument has lacked substance.

You could say that the approach just became too different from what we wanted. 03 was what we wanted. After that the runs became less effective, less meaningful. 06 wasn't what we wanted - a run first team suddenly trying to pass so much more, with a cranky out of touch OC living in a hotel and badmouthing players.

 

I just think it is a reach to blame the OC because the players we brought in did not pan out. Fox and Hurney have the final say on players we draft and sign.

I think you judges an OC on his play calling and game planning.

 

It's on both groups, but it's just as stupid to absolve Henning of it as it is to put it all on Fox/Hurney.

 

He's better than Davidson.

Most OC's probably are, with the possible exception of Ron Turner.

 

yeah, coaches shouldn't be judged on their ability to coach.

 

If you're going to put that on anybody, put that on the position coaches. They're doing the most hands-on stuff.

 

Times like this I wish that clip of Maser dressing down Mathis was still on youtube.

 

We did fire one of the position coaches as well, but position coaches aren't going to have the input into the needs, scheme, and have the head coach or GM's ear. Since most of the position coaches have remained the same, and production of youth has dramatically increased, well, I shouldn't have to spell that out.

 

You don't think it's possible that we've just hit better on some of these picks? If Davidson is so great with the youngsters, why is highly-anticipated Fiametta sucking so much dick?

 

I don't think it's possible that I suddenly change my mind and think Henning is what you think he is, no. I don't know that I'd say we just suddenly went from making one of four O players useful to suddenly making more than half useful.

Fiammetta? Same with Goodson. Doesn't mean that we fire or blame Skipper.

Some guys take time to develop. 10 games might not do it. We don't have the luxury of stating what Davidson's guys did through their rookie contracts in some situations. I know there are more guys I'd take in three years of this goober's time than five of the guy before.