Jump to content
Indianapolis Colts
Indianapolis Colts Fan Forum

Why Changing Coaches Could do More Harm than Good


Recommended Posts

Article from NFL.com:  http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap3000000449402/article/changing-coaches-makes-developing-nfl-talent-more-difficult

 

 

While I too have often been critical of Manusky on these boards I'll grant that he's working with a limited deck of play makers.  All the calls for changing coaches seems like a knee-jerk reaction to how badly the last three or four games have been.  This team is not right...truthfully in August I thought this team wasn't ready to make a run and that hasn't changed this season.  This defense needs more playmakers.  Period.  The offensive line never gelled and our stable of running backs quickly ran into injury problems.  

 

To make it deep into the playoffs you need solid defensive play and a run game that can go on the road and into tough stadiums and grind out offense.  We have neither.  I say, keep building the "monster"...whatever their vision is.  From what they've said they want a solid run game and balance with a defensive squad that Manning never really had except for 06' and parts of 07'.  

 

Grigson and the coaching staff have a lot of work to do this offseason.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Defense has improved in run game. I have been impressed with defense this year! With the right players and MORE DEPTH we could be dangerous. Just need to stay consistent.

Not sure if the offense needs more playmakers than it is the O Line is completely terrible. Plenty of playmakers but can't do anything because there is not enough time or anywhere close.

Time for a new OLine coach and blocking schemes. Can't really do any more harm to our offensive line schemes or coaching.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ha! Bleedin Blue, I was just about to post that link here.

With all the complaints and calling for heads 'round here I was laughing while reading that.

 

Plus, how many teams have been successful after firing a coach who has lead his team to double digit wins.

I think not many, Chicago/Lovie is a prime example.

 

I just think it's far to early to abandon ship on this regime.

Do I want to see better, hell yes, but blowing up the FO and coaching staff isn't the way to go...

YET!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Good defenses don't get blown out repeatedly. I read a stat someone gave on here where the Lions haven't given up more than 24 points this season except for one time. They don't even have a star in the secondary. Coaching is the problem.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Good defenses don't get blown out repeatedly. I read a stat someone gave on here where the Lions haven't given up more than 24 points this season except for one time. They don't even have a star in the secondary. Coaching is the problem.

Just how long has the Lions been working on getting their defense together? The Colts have been getting players for their defense for two seasons. The first draft was offensive and Grigson won a GM of the year with those picks. Year two is not going to tell us anything about what this team will look like when the five year plan is done.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just how long has the Lions been working on getting their defense together? The Colts have been getting players for their defense for two seasons. The first draft was offensive and Grigson won a GM of the year with those picks. Year two is not going to tell us anything about what this team will look like when the five year plan is done.

And the average NFL fan couldn't name a player in that secondary. Coaching. It was also trash the past few years. Then they change coaching. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

And the average NFL fan couldn't name a player in that secondary. Coaching. It was also trash the past few years. Then they change coaching. 

What has that have to do with veterans players and newer players? Just because a player is not an standout player that everyone knows don't mean they cant play. My point is the Lions have a few more veteran players than do the Colts.  A player don't have to be an all star to do the job.

Link to post
Share on other sites

And the average NFL fan couldn't name a player in that secondary. Coaching. It was also trash the past few years. Then they change coaching. 

 

Glover Quin (S) for Lions was named a pro-bowl starter -- James Ihedigbo was recently featured on NFL or ESPN where they were talking about the 2 of them being arguably best safety duo in league.  Ihedigbo was also starting safety for Ravens last year, a team known to have an excellent defense pretty much every year.

 

I think most average NFL fans have heard of Quin or Ihedigbo by this point.  We're talking about a pro-bowl starter and pro-bowl alternate.  Most on this board would probably also recognize Cassius Vaughn -- 5 game starter and regular at Nickel/Dime back for Detroit this year.

 

I still think Suh, Nick Fairley and DeAndre Levy play a huge role regarding the secondary's success (and probably success of coaching staff).  The offense with Stafford, Megatron, G. Tate, Bush, J. Bell, etc.. also plays a role in their success as they are very high-powered and force teams to throw on them a lot (allowing the d-line to focus on rushing passer and secondary to have a lot of opportunities).

 

This thread is about avoiding coaching changes - as I am writing this post I am hoping I am not misreading your post as something that was meant to be sarcastic, but if you recall just 3 years ago we were 2-14 and pretty much every Colts' fan wanted Jim Caldwell's head to be ripped off... now that he's had some success in Detroit,  is he the answer to our problems?

Link to post
Share on other sites

My thinking is this team had over achieved the 1st 2yrs of the rebuild. I think its great that the team had done so well, but i think the 1st 2yrs a worse record have yielded high Draft picks. The free agents that were signed were main gap fillers till better players could be drafted and developed. I think that plan went out the window when the Colts made the playoffs lucks 1st year. I think that why the Richardson trade happened. Expectations changed big after that 1st year. I think this year should have been lucks 1st playoff berth, but with the Colts quick growth and houstons quick collapse the Colts are back in control of the division. I think the next 2yrs will be when the monster gets its teeth and stays to control the afc.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ya, I don't think its time to change coaches yet. The defense is a couple of players away from being pretty darn good IMO. Lets not forget that Mathis is out and if he were playing at 100% this is a different defense. As far as the offense goes I think the fact that when Pep came in he stated that they were going to have a power run game has really disappointed. I think if you look at the rushing numbers, remove Luck's numbers, the yards being produced by the RB's exclusively has just bad. Compounding the problem is the injuries at the position. Bradshaw I believe was near 5 yards per carry which is great but when our offense gets behind like they did vs Pitt, NE, Dallas the running game had to be abandoned. I just think if they set out to be a power run team they have failed miserably. Time for everyone to do a better job.

Link to post
Share on other sites

This team is REGRESSING and that's due to coaching. As far as liking the way this D has played this year I really don't know what games anyone is watching other than the pathetic offenses and QB`s in the AFC south. Just about every team we faced with a Good offense has totally embarrassed our D.

Link to post
Share on other sites

"Why Changing Coaches Could do More Harm than Good".

There is always that chance, but not if Irsay/Grigson/Consultant do their due diligence.

There is also a good chance that the team improves with better coaching, preparation, player evaluation and accountability.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Article from NFL.com: http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap3000000449402/article/changing-coaches-makes-developing-nfl-talent-more-difficult

While I too have often been critical of Manusky on these boards I'll grant that he's working with a limited deck of play makers. All the calls for changing coaches seems like a knee-jerk reaction to how badly the last three or four games have been. This team is not right...truthfully in August I thought this team wasn't ready to make a run and that hasn't changed this season. This defense needs more playmakers. Period. The offensive line never gelled and our stable of running backs quickly ran into injury problems.

To make it deep into the playoffs you need solid defensive play and a run game that can go on the road and into tough stadiums and grind out offense. We have neither. I say, keep building the "monster"...whatever their vision is. From what they've said they want a solid run game and balance with a defensive squad that Manning never really had except for 06' and parts of 07'.

Grigson and the coaching staff have a lot of work to do this offseason.

When is enough enough? 10 years? 14?

Link to post
Share on other sites

And the average NFL fan couldn't name a player in that secondary. Coaching. It was also trash the past few years. Then they change coaching.

Look what happened when the 49ers replaced Mike Singletary with Jim Harbaugh. In 5 to 10 years, Singletary may have become a good coach. In 5 - 10 years, the Colts coaching staff may become very good, too. No fans may be around to see it. Can you say Matt Millen? I really liked Millen, but he was a terrible GM.

I hope no one gets fired because someone is angry with them. I hope people get fired because it is the right thing to do.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It goes without saying that some coaching changes hurt teams, but it also goes without saying that some coaching changes help teams.  Firing Singletary and hiring Harbaugh certainly helped the 49ers.  Firing Mangini and hiring Rex certainly helped the Jets in the first couple of seasons.  But you get to a point where you need a change.  Manusky has been on and off during his time here (and everywhere, when you look at it) whereas Rex has turned his defenses into some of the best units in the league.  Breer is making a point of keeping players with coaches so they can develop; while that's a great idea, it doesn't always happen that way.  Since Breer makes a point of discussing offense, I think we're fine with that.  Luck is with a coordinator he's familiar with and he's been able to run the same offense a few years in a row now.  But defensively, I think we need a coaching change

Link to post
Share on other sites

My thinking is this team had over achieved the 1st 2yrs of the rebuild. I think its great that the team had done so well, but i think the 1st 2yrs a worse record have yielded high Draft picks. The free agents that were signed were main gap fillers till better players could be drafted and developed. I think that plan went out the window when the Colts made the playoffs lucks 1st year. I think that why the Richardson trade happened. Expectations changed big after that 1st year. I think this year should have been lucks 1st playoff berth, but with the Colts quick growth and houstons quick collapse the Colts are back in control of the division. I think the next 2yrs will be when the monster gets its teeth and stays to control the afc.

 

I think the T-Rich trade happened because Ballard and Bradshaw were injured and because Donnie Brown hadn't been able to prove he could stay healthy to that point in his career.  We needed to do something to address the RB position when we pulled the trigger on that trade.

 

This team is REGRESSING and that's due to coaching. As far as liking the way this D has played this year I really don't know what games anyone is watching other than the pathetic offenses and QB`s in the AFC south. Just about every team we faced with a Good offense has totally embarrassed our D.

 

I don't really think you can say we are regressing and especially not REGRESSING.  We've still won 10 games (maybe 11 depending how tomorrow goes).  Cincy is 5 in the league in rushing, and if you took our shutout over them and their 3 point game against Cleveland out, they are a top 8 scoring offense.  We dominated them (sure, they didn't have AJ Green, but their run game is what powers that offense anyway).  New England, Philly and Denver are all top 4 scoring teams and Dallas and Pittsburgh are at 6 and 7 overall for scoring.  I'd hardly say Philly and Denver embarrassed us -- we should have won that Philly game, our game plan vs. them was sound, unfortunately Luck threw a bad pick at the end of the game to allow them to beat us.  And, I don't think it is fair to blame all these losses on our D -- in Pittsburgh Luck threw 2 picks, in Denver Luck threw 2 picks, in Philly the pick at the end cost us the game but they also scored after T-Rich fumbled in our territory, in Dallas Luck threw 2 picks and Hasselbeck fumbled... the only game we lost big and won the turnover battle against was New England and even that game we were down by 1 score in the 4th quarter before they added 2 late TD's.

 

Like Pagano always says -- we need to reduce our self-inflicted wounds and this team can play with anyone.  It is hard to fault the defense for points on the board that are a result of turnovers from our offense.

 

Baltimore is the 8th ranked scoring team, we beat them and held them to 13 points. 

 

The NFL has been extremely odd this year.  New England barely beat the NY Jets last week, after looking dominant against many teams much better than the Jets (us, Denver, Detroit, Cincy, KC, Miami to name a handful).  Pittsburgh was dominated by Cleveland a few weeks before they beat us and had already lost to Tampa Bay, then they turned around and got beat pretty handily by NY Jets and have also lost to the Saints since playing us (2 teams with losing records).  Denver got dominated by St. Louis not too long ago and beaten pretty handily by Cincy last week.  Two of Washington's 4 wins have come against Dallas and Philly...etc, etc..

 

This is the most parity we've seen in the NFL in a very long time -- the Raiders, Titans, Jets, and Redskins (4 of 5 worst records in league) have all beaten at least 1 team with a winning record. Jacksonville beat Cleveland who had a winning record at the time and will finish the season 7-9 or 8-8.  A lot of teams have lost rematches vs. other teams (e.g., Cincy lost to Cleveland 24-3 then turned around and beat them 24-0).  I am confident we can play with any of the teams that have beaten us.  New England and Pittsburgh scare me the most, but I'd bet my money on us if we had to play Denver or Philly again.  Right now, I think Pittsburgh, New England and Dallas are the top 3 teams to beat in the entire NFL -- but if our offense is clicking and we limit our turnovers, I think we can at least hang in there with the big dogs.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't believe we need wholesale changes across the board but we need to get better in 2 places. That offensive line is horrific. I'm not sure if the guys are mostly all bad, the coaching is mediocre or the scheme doesn't match the talent. For example, last week against Dallas, their starting RT is out and a backup is in. We don't get 6 feet from Romo. We have seen our starters in and watched backups light our line up and get a hit at minimum on Luck. So is our RT guys so god awful that most anyone can get around or through them? Are the competition teams stocked with such superior back ups that our healthy starters can't get to a QB?

So if the answer is we have such bad talent on the line, who is the guy responsible for saying this guy is a good fit on our line? If the guy they picked isn't a good fit for our scheme play isn't replaced or the scheme altered to match the talent, who does this fall on? I will never understand what's going on with the center spot. Last year, everyone seen a better player in AQ Shipley but watched in horror Satele playing. Then the team ships him off only to get him back and let's him start a few games after saying Holnes was our man. To me either the coaching and front office are not on the same page or the line coach is schizophrenic.

The second need is at rushing the passer. Yes I know Mathis is out, I also realize Mathis is aging as well. We are pinning our hopes on an aging star caught with an illegal substance in his system(maybe or maybe not used for the right reason) and then coming off an Achilles tear. That's not a great recipe for speed and age. Saying all that, he is out and has been and we haven't been able to reap havoc like we have wanted to. With Davis on the outside and Adams playing a solid safety spot, your telling me our d-coordinator can't manufacture better?

I'm all for Pagano being a rah rah coach and having his players want to play for his team but he has to hold his coaching staff to a higher standard. Since his leukemia scare, he is not the same hard core football man he was in Balt. We haven't seen the same fruits we expected, no identity for our defense, or offense for that matter.

If it were me, I'd change the oline coach at a minimum and think hard about a Rex Ryan defensive coordinator change. His system would consist of tweaks, not wholesale changes imo.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Article from NFL.com:  http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap3000000449402/article/changing-coaches-makes-developing-nfl-talent-more-difficult

 

 

While I too have often been critical of Manusky on these boards I'll grant that he's working with a limited deck of play makers.  All the calls for changing coaches seems like a knee-jerk reaction to how badly the last three or four games have been.  This team is not right...truthfully in August I thought this team wasn't ready to make a run and that hasn't changed this season.  This defense needs more playmakers.  Period.  The offensive line never gelled and our stable of running backs quickly ran into injury problems.  

 

To make it deep into the playoffs you need solid defensive play and a run game that can go on the road and into tough stadiums and grind out offense.  We have neither.  I say, keep building the "monster"...whatever their vision is.  From what they've said they want a solid run game and balance with a defensive squad that Manning never really had except for 06' and parts of 07'.  

 

Grigson and the coaching staff have a lot of work to do this offseason.

 

im hoping Manusky gets a head coaching job. Considering how bad and desperate the Redskins were last season, i can see them picking Manusky up...lol jk.

 

I just think it goes beyond defense. If the offense doesnt produce, the defense stays all game and gets tired. Its come to a point where the defense performs the 1st half while the offense doesnt so D gets tired. Then the offense shows up second half playing catchup while the defense is so tired, they let the other team score...

Link to post
Share on other sites

My thinking is this team had over achieved the 1st 2yrs of the rebuild.

 

I'm not sure overachieving is the accurate term for it.  One, they've been lucky to play in a weak division.  Two, Luck saved them repeatedly from bad play, bad coaching and the disaster that was Trent Richardson with ridiculous comeback after ridiculous comeback.  Simply put, outside the QB, this is a bad team, with bad coaching and bad management IMO.

 

Doing nothing might be the most dangerous thing Irsay could do.  At some point this turns into an Atlanta Braves situation where people just stop showing up, renewing season tickets, etc.  It's not only three years of this.  This is on the heels of the 14 year waste of Manning's career.  They lucked into two once in a generation QBs, and to save their lives, cannot build any sort of reasonably balanced teams around them.  In 17 years, by drawing names out of a hat or throwing darts at a draft board, you would think you could do it once.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It goes without saying that some coaching changes hurt teams, but it also goes without saying that some coaching changes help teams.  Firing Singletary and hiring Harbaugh certainly helped the 49ers.  Firing Mangini and hiring Rex certainly helped the Jets in the first couple of seasons.  But you get to a point where you need a change.  Manusky has been on and off during his time here (and everywhere, when you look at it) whereas Rex has turned his defenses into some of the best units in the league.  Breer is making a point of keeping players with coaches so they can develop; while that's a great idea, it doesn't always happen that way.  Since Breer makes a point of discussing offense, I think we're fine with that.  Luck is with a coordinator he's familiar with and he's been able to run the same offense a few years in a row now.  But defensively, I think we need a coaching change

If your asking me, do I think a DC change is necessary? Let's just say I'm not opposed to bringing in Rex Ryan for a conversation. But, I still say INDY's biggest problem is strengthening our o-line because our defense can still make critical 3rd down stops &, if Robert Mathis was healthy, I highly doubt many members on the forum would be hammering that point much personally like the anarchist said in post # 10.

Link to post
Share on other sites

...

I'm all for Pagano being a rah rah coach and having his players want to play for his team but he has to hold his coaching staff to a higher standard. Since his leukemia scare, he is not the same hard core football man he was in Balt. We haven't seen the same fruits we expected, no identity for our defense, or offense for that matter.

....

Yeah, Pagano would be more effective on the sidelines in with the cheerleaders waving pom-poms.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't believe we need wholesale changes across the board but we need to get better in 2 places. That offensive line is horrific. I'm not sure if the guys are mostly all bad, the coaching is mediocre or the scheme doesn't match the talent. For example, last week against Dallas, their starting RT is out and a backup is in. We don't get 6 feet from Romo. We have seen our starters in and watched backups light our line up and get a hit at minimum on Luck. So is our RT guys so god awful that most anyone can get around or through them? Are the competition teams stocked with such superior back ups that our healthy starters can't get to a QB?

So if the answer is we have such bad talent on the line, who is the guy responsible for saying this guy is a good fit on our line? If the guy they picked isn't a good fit for our scheme play isn't replaced or the scheme altered to match the talent, who does this fall on? I will never understand what's going on with the center spot. Last year, everyone seen a better player in AQ Shipley but watched in horror Satele playing. Then the team ships him off only to get him back and let's him start a few games after saying Holnes was our man. To me either the coaching and front office are not on the same page or the line coach is schizophrenic.

The second need is at rushing the passer. Yes I know Mathis is out, I also realize Mathis is aging as well. We are pinning our hopes on an aging star caught with an illegal substance in his system(maybe or maybe not used for the right reason) and then coming off an Achilles tear. That's not a great recipe for speed and age. Saying all that, he is out and has been and we haven't been able to reap havoc like we have wanted to. With Davis on the outside and Adams playing a solid safety spot, your telling me our d-coordinator can't manufacture better?

I'm all for Pagano being a rah rah coach and having his players want to play for his team but he has to hold his coaching staff to a higher standard. Since his leukemia scare, he is not the same hard core football man he was in Balt. We haven't seen the same fruits we expected, no identity for our defense, or offense for that matter.

If it were me, I'd change the oline coach at a minimum and think hard about a Rex Ryan defensive coordinator change. His system would consist of tweaks, not wholesale changes imo.

Quotes like this will give you time off around here!
Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not sure overachieving is the accurate term for it.  One, they've been lucky to play in a weak division.  Two, Luck saved them repeatedly from bad play, bad coaching and the disaster that was Trent Richardson with ridiculous comeback after ridiculous comeback.  Simply put, outside the QB, this is a bad team, with bad coaching and bad management IMO.

 

Doing nothing might be the most dangerous thing Irsay could do.  At some point this turns into an Atlanta Braves situation where people just stop showing up, renewing season tickets, etc.  It's not only three years of this.  This is on the heels of the 14 year waste of Manning's career.  They lucked into two once in a generation QBs, and to save their lives, cannot build any sort of reasonably balanced teams around them.  In 17 years, by drawing names out of a hat or throwing darts at a draft board, you would think you could do it once.

 

Winning a superbowl is very tough to do. Peyton got to 2 of them, won 1 of them, and was always in contention.  Please don't say we 'wasted' his 14 years here.  The reason we got him was because our team was a 3 win joke and we got the first pick -- it took Peyton until his 3rd or 4th year to really get in a groove.  He didn't always play that well in the playoffs... I love Peyton, still think he's the best QB to ever play, but he did make his fair share of mistakes when the time came to it (e.g., the pick 6 vs. New Orleans in super bowl we lost).  The fact that we are in the playoffs and have a franchise that expects greatness is not something to blame on Irsay or anyone in this organization.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Look what happened when the 49ers replaced Mike Singletary with Jim Harbaugh. In 5 to 10 years, Singletary may have become a good coach. In 5 - 10 years, the Colts coaching staff may become very good, too. No fans may be around to see it. Can you say Matt Millen? I really liked Millen, but he was a terrible GM.

I hope no one gets fired because someone is angry with them. I hope people get fired because it is the right thing to do.

Just stop, really are you bringing Matt Millen into this?  Were the lions 33-15 in his first three seasons?  No, they weren't.  

Grigson has gotten far more right than wrong.  He has pieced together a solid team from the ashes of a 2-14 season and the offseason cleanout of an entire organization. 

 

So yeah the Richardson trade did not work out how they hoped, so what it happens.  They gave up one pick for him.  They didn't give up an RGIII type haul to get him.  

 

People that blame Grigson have no idea how hard it is to build a competitive roster.  You cannot build an entire team overnight.  I am sure he would love to have a better o-line and for Richardson to have worked out.  They arent the Yankees, you cant just buy who you want.  

Link to post
Share on other sites

Most defense look good against Brian Hoyer, Charlie Whitehurst, Chad Henne, Blake Bortles, Ryan Fitzpatrick, Tom Savage, and Colt McCoy.  8 of our 11 wins were against these guys.  Our other 3 were Flacco, Dalton, and Eli Manning.  The only good QBs we saw all year (P. Manning, Brady, and Roethlisberger) absolutely shredded us. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Colts have won almost 70% (69% if you want to be exact) of their games under Pagano.  Only he and Harbaugh have started their careers by winning 11 or more games their first three seasons as a head coach. This comes after taking over a 2-14 team that most people outside of the Colts franchise thought was going into a thee of four year rebuilding process.  Instead they have overachieved and been in the playoffs all three years won two division titles and have a playoff win.  There isn't going to be a coaching change. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just stop, really are you bringing Matt Millen into this?  Were the lions 33-15 in his first three seasons?  No, they weren't.  

Grigson has gotten far more right than wrong.  He has pieced together a solid team from the ashes of a 2-14 season and the offseason cleanout of an entire organization. 

 

So yeah the Richardson trade did not work out how they hoped, so what it happens.  They gave up one pick for him.  They didn't give up an RGIII type haul to get him.  

 

People that blame Grigson have no idea how hard it is to build a competitive roster.  You cannot build an entire team overnight.  I am sure he would love to have a better o-line and for Richardson to have worked out.  They arent the Yankees, you cant just buy who you want.

I'm not blaming Grigson at all. I'm criticizing teams that put off making obvious personnel decisions to the detriment of the team - especially because they are "nice guys" and/or veterans. This pertains to our coaching, all coaching positions. They are re-arranging the deck chairs on the Titanic.

The Colts as a team are under-performing. Maybe the reason is injuries. Maybe it's lack of strategy and preparation, at least a mis-fit for our strategy to our personnel. Maybe, it is lack of education and training for the techniques to play the positions. I think the last two maybes have a lot to do with the team's underperformance and execution.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Colts have won almost 70% (69% if you want to be exact) of their games under Pagano.  Only he and Harbaugh have started their careers by winning 11 or more games their first three seasons as a head coach. This comes after taking over a 2-14 team that most people outside of the Colts franchise thought was going into a thee of four year rebuilding process.  Instead they have overachieved and been in the playoffs all three years won two division titles and have a playoff win.  There isn't going to be a coaching change.

Yes, and Jim Harbaugh just got fired (OK, by mutual agreement ...). A lot of people on these forums think that our problems stem from the lack of talent of the players. Football is a team sport, and coaches are very much a part of that team. If the play of the team is "dazed and confused", where do you think that starts?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, and Jim Harbaugh just got fired (OK, by mutual agreement ...). A lot of people on these forums think that our problems stem from the lack of talent of the players. Football is a team sport, and coaches are very much a part of that team. If the play of the team is "dazed and confused", where do you think that starts?

Harbaugh wasn't fired because of anything that happened on the field he was fired/left because he had worn out his welcome by all accounts.  That is not the case with Pagano and company.  He's not getting fired and thinking he is going to get fired is wishful thinking by some.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd be about as shocked that Pagano gets fired as I would if our president came on the air and said he was resigning from the Oval Office.

Now I would not be shocked, and am hopeful, we hear about positive changes in the oline coach position. I wouldn't be sad if we heard about a change in the defensive coordinator spot either, although I don't see that happening. And deep down, I kinda wouldn't mind seeing a college team offer Pep a head coach position and we go out and get a more seasoned offensive caller.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd be about as shocked that Pagano gets fired as I would if our president came on the air and said he was resigning from the Oval Office.

Now I would not be shocked, and am hopeful, we hear about positive changes in the oline coach position. I wouldn't be sad if we heard about a change in the defensive coordinator spot either, although I don't see that happening. And deep down, I kinda wouldn't mind seeing a college team offer Pep a head coach position and we go out and get a more seasoned offensive caller.

some poistion coaching changes I could see happening. Personally I think for the most part Pep has done fine as the OC here.
Link to post
Share on other sites

Pagano is safe as long as he keeps having 11-5 seasons because of Andrew.

If Andrew ever goes down for a long time, Pagano will get those 5-11 seasons that reflect his ability.

so other than BB name me another coach who could lose his super star QB for a long period of time and still win most of his games?

Also if it wasn't for Lucks turnover Pagano probsbly has at least one more win this year in the Eagles game. While I am not suggesting Luck needs to go let's not pretend he's perfect either. He makes mistakes too.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Changing coaches does more harm? Tell that to the Raiders, 49ers, Jets, Falcons,and Bears. Kinda hard to argue with numbers and production. I wonder if people think Pags is better for us than Arians. If not then there are guys out there that might do more help than harm. Ijs.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Changing coaches does more harm? Tell that to the Raiders, 49ers, Jets, Falcons,and Bears. Kinda hard to argue with numbers and production. I wonder if people think Pags is better for us than Arians. If not then there are guys out there that might do more help than harm. Ijs.

tell that to the 06 Chargers who fired Marty after a 14-2 season because he had taken the Chargers as far as he could and then hired Norv and never really sniffed 14-2 again or the Jags who fired Coughlin who went on to win two Super Bowls for Jack Del Rio, or the Colts remember when they opted to let Marchabroda's contract expire after the 95 AFC championship game for Lindy Infante which after two years lead to the first pick in the draft. Think some of those teams wouldn't like a do over on firing their coach?
Link to post
Share on other sites

so other than BB name me another coach who could lose his super star QB for a long period of time and still win most of his games?

Also if it wasn't for Lucks turnover Pagano probsbly has at least one more win this year in the Eagles game. While I am not suggesting Luck needs to go let's not pretend he's perfect either. He makes mistakes too.

BB wouldn't win most of his games either

And that INT vs the eagles wasn't on Luck

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
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...