Game Balls

Hey, stat rat. Coaching is as much about attitude as it is stats.

I don't give a shit if Dungy's offense was ranked as high. Check out what TB did in the PLAYOFFS, ASSHAT. The offense ripped three good teams apart. Oh, and so if an LB misses a tackle, the runner doesn't get credit for making the player miss? Come on.

You had asserted in the past that Belichick is overrated. Again, Playoffs. Caroll did not accomplish shit in the playoffs. Sure, Brady came in. I won't marginalize that. But don't you think that Weis and Beilchick had a little something to do with his development? I mean, just a little bit?

Billick coached a fine team to a title. He deserves a bit of credit. That was all I said about that. He dumbed down the offense, and he was a good coach for that.

To me, it doesn't much matter how many SB's Shannahan and Holmgren have won since their last one. They won them. They are champions. As much as we hate to say it, Switzer is one too.

Do you think that the Eagles would have become the mainstay in the NFC over the past 5 years with, say, Mike Tice. How about Dennis Erickson in New England? Dave Shula in Pittsburgh?

Last time, bozo. I never said it was ALL THAT MATTERED. I am just stating my belief that it does matter somewhat, contratry to your musings.

Now, go be a good boy and fetch me the latest on the Royals' bullpen.

 

#1) As already noted, don't get on your high horse about how I'm such "a miserable fuck" only for you to be just as insulting yourself. I understand that you're frustrated about being exposed as ignorant and certainly about getting obliterated in this argument, but get over it. It's fine to complain about my negativity or to dish it out yourself, but doing both at the same time makes you look like hypocritical fool that you are.

#2) You argued that "Coaching matters as much as the players." That's where you're undeniably wrong. I never said that coaching made no difference at all, and in fact I pointed out that coaches certainly are responsible for schemes that put players in a position to execute. But there's simply no denying that players are more important than the coaches in the National Football League.

Christ, you are honestly like the biggest moron on earth. Of course the player gets credit for creating a missed tackle, but the coach does not. That's the whole god damned point, you idiot.

 

But you wrote those yards that Juerevicus got off on bad defense exclusively. It was a good player by one of Gruden's receivers.

 

Game Ball to Jake Delhomme.

 

I'm beginning to think that you're typing this from a special ed class. You tried to argue that Gruden made Tampa Bay's offense better. I showed that they actually got worse from Dungee's last season to Gruden's first, and that their success in the NFC Championship game cannot be credited to Gruden either. He's a good coach (and so is Dungee), but the reason they won the Super Bowl is because their players played better than they had previously.

 

So..I guess I'm hearing that Don Capers, Steve Spurrier, and (insert piss poor coach here) are all not bad just surrounded by bad talent. They could have taken any of the last 10 years of Super Bowl winners to the show and won it all? Hmm, interesting theory you have there Collin. How many other gee-golly "Master" students share your same vision?

 

Coaches coach...players play...and the front office puts them together.

One does not exist with out the other. A good front office will get good players, but without good direction (coaching) the final product will be dilluted. Likewise, take a great coach and a shitty FO/players and your looking at middle of the road.

It's a puzzle and all the peices must fit properly for there to be success...and there must also be a little bit of luck in there to push them over the top.

 

I also think it's bullshit to blame a GM for a deficiency on a team solely. For one, the GM's out to get what the coach wants. If a GM should overrule a coach on a want, chances are that a concession back to the coach's want would come soon thereafter, rather than a complete shutout for that year or years.

 

Actually you guys share my vision as well. Didn't you, magnus, and other Capers haters claim that we made the NFC Championship because of the players and not Capers? Doesn't that mean that players are more important than the coaches? I think the "bad" coaches are really few and far between in this league, with Mike Tice and Barry Switzer among them. But the Cowboys won Switzer a Super Bowl, and I'd certainly argue that the Vikings struggle because they have immature, underachieving players. Good coaches do make some impact, but they're simply not as important as the players themselves.

And no, it's wrong to suggest that a GM will always do what a coach wants. When the coach is intended to have authority over personnel, he is given the GM role.

 

I get it now. I now understand fully, and it makes sense.

An elitest Intellectual
A 'journalist', 'writer'
Possesses the most knowledge of sports.



"Who's the Biggest Ass known on the TBR Forum, Alex."

"Correct!"

"I'll take 'Biggest Asses' for $500, Alex."