Prospective head coaching candidates [Merge]

[Colts_Fan12]

On 11/24/2016 at 11:08 PM, jet1968 said:

I just don't see anybody out there that will be available that is better then what we have.(as far as coach goes). 

You are obviously blind chuck is nothing special 

[superrep1967]

18 hours ago, jskinnz said:

 

1) First off, the grammar is atrocious.  Had to read a few times to comprehend your last sentence.

 

2) Besides that, there are huge gaps in logic and reasoning in your post.  Clearly Belichick is universally regarded as the best coach in the game and maybe of all time.  He "boomed" (I think you meant bombed - see point # 1) out in Cleveland and failed to get close to a Super Bowl.  By your standards, the Pats would have never considered him.

 

Gruden won a Super Bowl yet he got fired.  Maybe that is not the be-all-end-all for a coach?  Perhaps there are other factors.

 

If they make a change, a guy like McDaniels would certainly warrant consideration.  He is clearly a bright offensive mind and comes from a winning culture.  And while his time in Denver was not a success, it is certainly is possible if not probable that he learned from the experience.  I mean who would have guessed that there is actually something to be learned when things don't quite go the way you hoped.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

What an arrogant response! I mean McDaniels got fired without winning a Super Bowl I guess that makes it better? But Gruden did win a Super Bowl and should have taken Oakland to the Super Bowl if it wasn't for a terrible call the tuck rule. You don't make a compelling argument at all. You brought up the idea that Bellichek got fired from Cleveland and still did well in New England everybody fails in Cleveland. But does it make it right that Josh basically failed in two places at least in his career? I mean when he arrived in St. Louis he was informed by the Rams that he wouldn't be involved any personnel decisions probably because of the Tebow fiasco. Then when Spagnuolo got fired he was told he could leave despite still being under contract. I believe this team needs discipline so maybe Tom Coughlin. But the coach I want is Harbaugh he is a great offensive mind as you referred to with the Josh guy but is tough on his players as well.  As far as my grammar goes I did get careless but nothing to get uptight about just relax. I know Harbaugh isn’t leaving Michigan but I can dream can’t I?

 

[jvan1973]

6 minutes ago, superrep1967 said:

What an arrogant response! I mean McDaniels got fired without winning a Super Bowl I guess that makes it better? But Gruden did and should have taken Oakland to the Super Bowl if it wasn't for a terrible call. You don't make a compelling argument at all. You brought up the idea that Bellichek got fired from Cleveland and still did well in New England everybody fails in Cleveland. But does it make it right that Josh failed in two places at least in his career? I mean when he arrived in St. Louis he was told that he wouldn't be making any personnel decisions. Then when  

How many offensive coordinators have control over personnel?   He didn't fall in St. Louis.   The head coach was fired.  It's pretty common that when the head coach is fired,  so is his staff

[superrep1967]

9 minutes ago, jvan1973 said:

How many offensive coordinators have control over personnel?   He didn't fall in St. Louis.   The head coach was fired.  It's pretty common that when the head coach is fired,  so is his staff

 

Maybe if he down better the coach wouldn't have been fired. 

[jimmy g]

On 12/18/2016 at 10:38 PM, Gavin said:

Luck=Favre

Except smarter than Favre.  Supposedly, Favre never studied- just went out and winged it!

[jskinnz]

12 minutes ago, superrep1967 said:

Maybe if he down better the coach wouldn't have been fired. 

 

Would you mind translating this response to English please?

[Mameluc]

I like Kyle Shanahan and Bevell from seahawks and also mcdaniels (DONT TELL ANYONE I FEEL DIRTY JUST SAYING IT).

Having said that, i dont think JIm is firing anyone this year.

[JColts72]

Colts will remain status quo with the Chuck/Ryan show of going nowhere.

[Mr_486lo]

On 10/17/2016 at 7:36 PM, Rally5 said:

There comes a time in every business where you have to ask yourself, where do I want to be, for the Colts that's clearly defined as a Champion yet again.  Then you have to access whether the people you have working to that end can assuredly get you there.  I think we have that sorted out at this point.  So I vote for people that we know have what it takes to build an NFL champion franchise.  No experimental assistants or college coaches for my vote.  I can't stand the Shanahans, Mike only made the Super Bowl because of John Elway in my opinion, he's been a .500 coach otherwise which I know is a contradiction but please allow me the one. I think with the allure of Andrew Luck you could pull a legitimate coach, this is my short list of "just get it done" candidates.

 

1. Cowher
2 .Harbaugh

3. Gruden

 

That's it, go get one of these guys and let him run the franchise like we did with Polian, amateur hour over.

 

 

BOOM! 

~Mic drops~

[jvan1973]

52 minutes ago, superrep1967 said:

Maybe if he down better the coach wouldn't have been fired. 

He was there one season

[Beizy317]

John Gruden! John Gruden! John Gruden!

[NewColtsFan]

On 10/17/2016 at 4:36 PM, Rally5 said:

There comes a time in every business where you have to ask yourself, where do I want to be, for the Colts that's clearly defined as a Champion yet again.  Then you have to access whether the people you have working to that end can assuredly get you there.  I think we have that sorted out at this point.  So I vote for people that we know have what it takes to build an NFL champion franchise.  No experimental assistants or college coaches for my vote.  I can't stand the Shanahans, Mike only made the Super Bowl because of John Elway in my opinion, he's been a .500 coach otherwise which I know is a contradiction but please allow me the one. I think with the allure of Andrew Luck you could pull a legitimate coach, this is my short list of "just get it done" candidates.

 

1. Cowher
2 .Harbaugh

3. Gruden

 

That's it, go get one of these guys and let him run the franchise like we did with Polian, amateur hour over.

 

 

 

Well,   there's one small problem you've got there.

 

NONE of the three candidates has EVER been a GM or run a franchise.     They've never run a draft or worked with scouts as a GM has and stacked a board.

 

So,  there's no way to know if "amateur hour" would be over,  because these guys could be amateurs when it comes to the GM portion of the job.

 

[James Ducheteau]

What about Herm, say he showed interest..would ya give him a shot?

[shakedownstreet]

On 10/17/2016 at 7:47 PM, Rally5 said:

Ok.

 

interesting

[superrep1967]

1 hour ago, jskinnz said:

 

Would you mind translating this response to English please?

 

Yeah, Sorry again..lol I meant maybe if he'd been a better OC then maybe Spagnuolo wouldn't have been fired. He didn't do much with Bradford. 

[Ja'Crispy]

17 hours ago, Superman said:

 

He responded to that speculation by saying that it was unfounded, and he would love to be a head coach again.

 

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap3000000744405/article/josh-mcdaniels-i-would-love-to-be-head-coach-again

Thanks for that find.  We'll see how much better he is the second time around. 

[CoachLite]

4 hours ago, NewColtsFan said:

 

Well,   there's one small problem you've got there.

 

NONE of the three candidates has EVER been a GM or run a franchise.     They've never run a draft or worked with scouts as a GM has and stacked a board.

 

So,  there's no way to know if "amateur hour" would be over,  because these guys could be amateurs when it comes to the GM portion of the job.

 

I believe the topic is "coaching pool", not General Manager.

[loudnproudcolt]

Two quick thoughts. At the end of the season when Irsay makes a decision, and I assume we don't make the playoffs, he needs to think more about the division we play in. 8-8 in the AFC South would be 5-11 in many other divisions. Yes you can make the opposite argument about weaker divisions, but our division is weak, and it should be a factor.

 

Second, I have not heard the name yet, but what about New Orleans OC Pete Carmichael. He has worked under Payton, and I have heard nothing but good things about his play calling. I know it is a big step up, but his name was mentioned last year before Irsay surprised everyone!

[AZColt11]

5 hours ago, loudnproudcolt said:

Two quick thoughts. At the end of the season when Irsay makes a decision, and I assume we don't make the playoffs, he needs to think more about the division we play in. 8-8 in the AFC South would be 5-11 in many other divisions. Yes you can make the opposite argument about weaker divisions, but our division is weak, and it should be a factor.

 

Second, I have not heard the name yet, but what about New Orleans OC Pete Carmichael. He has worked under Payton, and I have heard nothing but good things about his play calling. I know it is a big step up, but his name was mentioned last year before Irsay surprised everyone!

The problem with your 2nd point is he has no NFL HC experience, and I think if a move is made, it should be for someone with that qualification.

[NewColtsFan]

7 hours ago, CoachLite said:

I believe the topic is "coaching pool", not General Manager.

 

Perhaps you're right....

 

But the poster I was responding to was using lines like "building a franchise" and letting them run the franchise...

 

Here's a line that he wrote...

 

That's it, go get one of these guys and let him run the franchise like we did with Polian, amateur hour over.

 

Made me think he wants the HC to also be the GM.     If not,  he used a poor choice of words....   then again, using a poor choice of words is incredibly common on this site...

 

[superrep1967]

On 10/17/2016 at 7:36 PM, Rally5 said:

There comes a time in every business where you have to ask yourself, where do I want to be, for the Colts that's clearly defined as a Champion yet again.  Then you have to access whether the people you have working to that end can assuredly get you there.  I think we have that sorted out at this point.  So I vote for people that we know have what it takes to build an NFL champion franchise.  No experimental assistants or college coaches for my vote.  I can't stand the Shanahans, Mike only made the Super Bowl because of John Elway in my opinion, he's been a .500 coach otherwise which I know is a contradiction but please allow me the one. I think with the allure of Andrew Luck you could pull a legitimate coach, this is my short list of "just get it done" candidates.

 

1. Cowher
2 .Harbaugh

3. Gruden

 

That's it, go get one of these guys and let him run the franchise like we did with Polian, amateur hour over.

 

 

 

 

Yes, My thoughts exactly!

[VocableLoki]

Jon Gruden is interesting but is being more highly rated in hindsight. He won a Super Bowl in 2002 and then only made the playoffs two more times in Tampa, with his teams never being serious contenders post-championship.

 

His teams did well offensively in Oakland but were "meh" to bad in Tampa. Not totally convinced he would be the best possible coach for Luck. 

 

Defensively, he inherited one of the best units since '00 that had been built by Dungy/Kiffin, he will have to work to build a defense essentially from scratch here (how many long-term defensive starters are currently on the roster? Not many). 

 

I don't understand the love for Cowher. He's been out for so long and the Colts re not built the way his Steelers teams were at all. He had a long time with that franchise but the Colts are looking for more of an immediate spark as Luck enters the prime of his career. 

 

Overall I am open to Gruden and not confident in Cowher at all. Harbaugh would be great but it would be incredibly surprising if he left Michigan, same goes for Meyer/Saban.

 

McDaniels/Shanahan make a lot of sense but would still need to find a good coordinator to pair with them in order to build the defense up again. Maximizing Luck is important but our defense needs a lot of work right now, really old and devoid of talent. It's going to take someone with a good drafting eye to get that unit back together. 

[jet1968]

On 12/19/2016 at 11:04 PM, Colts_Fan12 said:

You are obviously blind chuck is nothing special 

Well I'm not blind at least not yet. I agree Chuck is nothing special either is Grigson. But I sure dont see no have to haves out there either. Grass isnt always greener on the other side of the fence. Changing coaches and coordinators every year sure isnt going to fix anything. My opinion is we need better talent evaluators. #1 problem the Colts have is a lack of superior talent in key positions.

[Jason_]

20 hours ago, CoachLite said:

I believe the topic is "coaching pool", not General Manager.

 

maybe try reading the post that NCF was responding to

[Jason_]

On 12/20/2016 at 10:27 AM, Mr_486lo said:

BOOM! 

~Mic drops~

 

~Mic picked up so that I can remind you and others that no, amateur hour would absolutely not be over.  it would be STARTING OVER because neither of the 3 candidates he listed have ever been GM like Polian.  Polian had already had 12 years of experience as a GM when Indy hired him and gave him control.  Making Gruden, Harbaugh or Cowher our new GM would be no different at all than hiring Ryan Grigson, who had never been a GM prior to his position here.  So amateur hour, what you guys want to end, would only start over anew with one of those guys that you guys want~

 

~mic redropped~

[jskinnz]

48 minutes ago, jet1968 said:

Well I'm not blind at least not yet. I agree Chuck is nothing special either is Grigson. But I sure dont see no have to haves out there either. Grass isnt always greener on the other side of the fence. Changing coaches and coordinators every year sure isnt going to fix anything. My opinion is we need better talent evaluators. #1 problem the Colts have is a lack of superior talent in key positions.

 

I would not be surprised by anything on January 2nd.  I think there has been more than enough swings and misses by both Grigson & Pagano in their respective roles to warrant a change.  I also really like those stable franchises who have the courage stay the course when a season or two does not go as planned.  And Grigson's and Pagano's overall resume is really pretty good.  So there I am - squarely on the fence.

 

I like your thoughts that the grass is not necessarily greener elsewhere.  There is certainly no guarantee that they become world-beaters with a regime change.  

 

But to you last sentence - would you still be saying that about Grigson if Colts had won the games they really should have won?  They could be very realistically be 9-5 or 10-4.  My point is that they were good enough talent wise to win those games but a Pagano brain-fart here or a bad play from Luck there and they snatched defeat from the jaws of victory.

[jet1968]

4 minutes ago, jskinnz said:

 

I would not be surprised by anything on January 2nd.  I think there has been more than enough swings and misses by both Grigson & Pagano in their respective roles to warrant a change.  I also really like those stable franchises who have the courage stay the course when a season or two does not go as planned.  And Grigson's and Pagano's overall resume is really pretty good.  So there I am - squarely on fence.

 

I like your thoughts that the grass is not necessarily greener elsewhere.  There is certainly no guarantee that they become world-beaters with a regime change.  

 

But to you last sentence - would you still be saying that about Grigson if Colts had won the games they really should have won?  They could be very realistically be 9-5 or 10-4.  My point is that they were good enough talent wise to win those games but a Pagano brain-fart here or a bad play from Luck there and they snatched defeat from the jaws of victory.

I get the talent thought from the failed 1st round fiascos.

Werner- BUST

Richardson-BUST

Dorsett- Not worthy of a 1st round selection

 

And you are probably right if the Colts were 10-4 I would probably not assume the talent wasnt as much of the problem

[21isSuperman]

3 hours ago, VocableLoki said:

Jon Gruden is interesting but is being more highly rated in hindsight. He won a Super Bowl in 2002 and then only made the playoffs two more times in Tampa, with his teams never being serious contenders post-championship.

 

His teams did well offensively in Oakland but were "meh" to bad in Tampa. Not totally convinced he would be the best possible coach for Luck. 

 

Defensively, he inherited one of the best units since '00 that had been built by Dungy/Kiffin, he will have to work to build a defense essentially from scratch here (how many long-term defensive starters are currently on the roster? Not many). 

 

I don't understand the love for Cowher. He's been out for so long and the Colts re not built the way his Steelers teams were at all. He had a long time with that franchise but the Colts are looking for more of an immediate spark as Luck enters the prime of his career. 

 

Overall I am open to Gruden and not confident in Cowher at all. Harbaugh would be great but it would be incredibly surprising if he left Michigan, same goes for Meyer/Saban.

 

McDaniels/Shanahan make a lot of sense but would still need to find a good coordinator to pair with them in order to build the defense up again. Maximizing Luck is important but our defense needs a lot of work right now, really old and devoid of talent. It's going to take someone with a good drafting eye to get that unit back together. 

As one of the more vocal supporters of Gruden, I'll respond with my thoughts.  I don't have anything for or against Gruden defensively.  I'd expect he would hire a DC and stay mostly out of the defensive stuff.  He'd give the DC full control. 

 

1) Gruden has Super Bowl experience.  You can say he took Dungy's team to the Super Bowl, which is an inherently flawed argument (if it was Dungy's team, why didn't Dungy take them there?), but he played a big role in helping Tampa beat Philly and a big role in game planning for the Super Bowl against Oakland

 

2) Gruden and Luck both know the WCO very well.  They could finish each other's sentences (watch the QB Camp with Luck and they do finish each other's sentences at some points).  Gruden would give us a head coach who is on the exact same page as Luck.  This wouldn't be a drastic change in offensive systems for Luck since he has so much experience from his time at Stanford.  The main reason Gruden hasn't ever had a solid franchise QB is because his offensive system is very verbose.  That is difficult and intimidating for younger players, but a guy like Luck has the intelligence and familiarity with the system to process it all.

 

3) With Gruden calling the plays and controlling the offense, changes in OC wouldn't hurt us as much.  We wouldn't require Luck to learn a new offensive system every year.  Nor would we have situations like we did last year where Chud calls a play to another coach and that coach translates it to Luck.  It would stabilize our offense for the next several years

 

4) Gruden can work with Luck to improve some of the other things in his game.  Not only would the play calling almost certainly change and there would be more short passes - which has a whole host of benefits - but he can work with Luck to help him throw the quick/short routes more often instead of always looking for the deep pass.  He can help Luck get rid of the ball quicker, which is something many would like to see

 

4) Gruden's coaching style will help keep players more accountable than Pagano.  Gruden is a no-nonsense type of coach.  We need more accountability on the sidelines, which we aren't seeing with this staff.

[Jason_]

3 minutes ago, 21isSuperman said:

As one of the more vocal supporters of Gruden, I'll respond with my thoughts.  I don't have anything for or against Gruden defensively.  I'd expect he would hire a DC and stay mostly out of the defensive stuff.  He'd give the DC full control. 

 

1) Gruden has Super Bowl experience.  You can say he took Dungy's team to the Super Bowl, which is an inherently flawed argument (if it was Dungy's team, why didn't Dungy take them there?), but he played a big role in helping Tampa beat Philly and a big role in game planning for the Super Bowl against Oakland

 

2) Gruden and Luck both know the WCO very well.  They could finish each other's sentences (watch the QB Camp with Luck and they do finish each other's sentences at some points).  Gruden would give us a head coach who is on the exact same page as Luck.  This wouldn't be a drastic change in offensive systems for Luck since he has so much experience from his time at Stanford.  The main reason Gruden hasn't ever had a solid franchise QB is because his offensive system is very verbose.  That is difficult and intimidating for younger players, but a guy like Luck has the intelligence and familiarity with the system to process it all.

 

3) With Gruden calling the plays and controlling the offense, changes in OC wouldn't hurt us as much.  We wouldn't require Luck to learn a new offensive system every year.  Nor would we have situations like we did last year where Chud calls a play to another coach and that coach translates it to Luck.  It would stabilize our offense for the next several years

 

4) Gruden can work with Luck to improve some of the other things in his game.  Not only would the play calling almost certainly change and there would be more short passes - which has a whole host of benefits - but he can work with Luck to help him throw the quick/short routes more often instead of always looking for the deep pass.  He can help Luck get rid of the ball quicker, which is something many would like to see

 

4) Gruden's coaching style will help keep players more accountable than Pagano.  Gruden is a no-nonsense type of coach.  We need more accountability on the sidelines, which we aren't seeing with this staff.

 

I agree with points 1-4a (though hopefully going forward we'll see more of what we saw against the Vikings in terms of short passes and getting the ball out quicker).

 

Point 4b though came from and should remain here:

 

[BloodyChamp]

Gruden's competitive juices are as dead as Ditka's. That's not where the similarities end either. Gruden went so far so fast and hasn't been the same since. He's probably a tier below Ditka in that regard even. A couple of those Buccs teams since the SB flat out stunk. You can just tell by the way he walks and talks, not that there's anything wrong with that, it's just the reality of it all. Actually here's a better comparison...John Madden. I love the guy but he hasn't belonged near a clipboard since 1978 lol!

 

I'm not exactly sure about Cowher either. The 2006 Steelers weren't the same and there was talk of him quitting before the end of the season iirc. And just listening to him talk also...just seems like he's done.

 

I honestly don't know who I'd pick, but I know there are several guys available who were good coaches just not good head coaches. I would see maybe about signing them on and picking a guy who could harness them correctly. Guys like Frasier, Johnson, Singletary (lol right but tell me the Colts didn't need somebody like him this year).

[21isSuperman]

7 hours ago, Jason_S said:

 

I agree with points 1-4a (though hopefully going forward we'll see more of what we saw against the Vikings in terms of short passes and getting the ball out quicker).

 

Point 4b though came from and should remain here:

 

Oops, that should be 5

 

To clarify on point 4b/5, I don't think this coaching staff puts the best players out there to help us win.  Jon Harrison over Shipley despite Harrison's many shortcomings and flaws and the OL performing better with Shipley, Trent Richardson over anyone despite having the vision of a carrot, an old and injured Reggie Wayne being force-fed the ball to continue his 3-catch/game streak, Andre Johnson being force-fed the ball in our first game against the Texans, etc.  Pagano is too much of a nice guy, in my opinion.  He plays favourites (or was interfered with by Grigson, if you believe that) and doesn't put the best players out there, thereby not putting us in the best position to win.

[VocableLoki]

On 12/21/2016 at 1:44 PM, 21isSuperman said:

As one of the more vocal supporters of Gruden, I'll respond with my thoughts.  I don't have anything for or against Gruden defensively.  I'd expect he would hire a DC and stay mostly out of the defensive stuff.  He'd give the DC full control. 

 

1) Gruden has Super Bowl experience.  You can say he took Dungy's team to the Super Bowl, which is an inherently flawed argument (if it was Dungy's team, why didn't Dungy take them there?), but he played a big role in helping Tampa beat Philly and a big role in game planning for the Super Bowl against Oakland

 

2) Gruden and Luck both know the WCO very well.  They could finish each other's sentences (watch the QB Camp with Luck and they do finish each other's sentences at some points).  Gruden would give us a head coach who is on the exact same page as Luck.  This wouldn't be a drastic change in offensive systems for Luck since he has so much experience from his time at Stanford.  The main reason Gruden hasn't ever had a solid franchise QB is because his offensive system is very verbose.  That is difficult and intimidating for younger players, but a guy like Luck has the intelligence and familiarity with the system to process it all.

 

3) With Gruden calling the plays and controlling the offense, changes in OC wouldn't hurt us as much.  We wouldn't require Luck to learn a new offensive system every year.  Nor would we have situations like we did last year where Chud calls a play to another coach and that coach translates it to Luck.  It would stabilize our offense for the next several years

 

4) Gruden can work with Luck to improve some of the other things in his game.  Not only would the play calling almost certainly change and there would be more short passes - which has a whole host of benefits - but he can work with Luck to help him throw the quick/short routes more often instead of always looking for the deep pass.  He can help Luck get rid of the ball quicker, which is something many would like to see

 

4) Gruden's coaching style will help keep players more accountable than Pagano.  Gruden is a no-nonsense type of coach.  We need more accountability on the sidelines, which we aren't seeing with this staff.

I agree that Gruden will be motivational and fiery in the short term and probably be very good for our team. Agreed that having a consistent offensive philosophy would be great, just not sure what Gruden's would be after not coaching nearly eight years. 

 

My point was more along the lines that Gruden's Oakland teams improved a lot in a short time frame and his offense really worked for a little while. It's hard to tell how things would have gone going forward, given Oakland fell apart two years after he left. I don't think it's flawed to point out that those Tampa teams (in terms of personnel and even defensive philosophy) were built and ready for him when he arrived. His Tampa teams didn't improve over the time he had, obviously starting with a Super Bowl victory sets the bar high but his career ended with very average to bad results after that Super Bowl. He even had two losing seasons immediately after winning in 02. 

 

I think he's great motivation wise but so is Pagano. My overall point is I am wary of another coach who is great with short-term motivation/winning but struggles with building for longer success. 

 

It also feels like we've heard for years that the offense will change with Luck getting the ball out quicker, etc, that was all the noise I heard when Pep was hired at least, but it never comes to fruition. Even when we come out with that kind of plan it doesn't always work as Luck really excels with deeper routes, he just doesn't have time to pull that off. 

 

I'm more or less just not convinced that Gruden will change a whole lot,  a little more yelling and intensity but we need someone who can rebuild our defense and fine-tune our offense (particularly the line), I'm not sure if Gruden is the ideal candidate. Maybe I will be proven wrong but for now I am cautious if his hire.   

[21isSuperman]

1 hour ago, VocableLoki said:

I agree that Gruden will be motivational and fiery in the short term and probably be very good for our team. Agreed that having a consistent offensive philosophy would be great, just not sure what Gruden's would be after not coaching nearly eight years. 

 

My point was more along the lines that Gruden's Oakland teams improved a lot in a short time frame and his offense really worked for a little while. It's hard to tell how things would have gone going forward, given Oakland fell apart two years after he left. I don't think it's flawed to point out that those Tampa teams (in terms of personnel and even defensive philosophy) were built and ready for him when he arrived. His Tampa teams didn't improve over the time he had, obviously starting with a Super Bowl victory sets the bar high but his career ended with very average to bad results after that Super Bowl. He even had two losing seasons immediately after winning in 02. 

 

I think he's great motivation wise but so is Pagano. My overall point is I am wary of another coach who is great with short-term motivation/winning but struggles with building for longer success. 

 

It also feels like we've heard for years that the offense will change with Luck getting the ball out quicker, etc, that was all the noise I heard when Pep was hired at least, but it never comes to fruition. Even when we come out with that kind of plan it doesn't always work as Luck really excels with deeper routes, he just doesn't have time to pull that off. 

 

I'm more or less just not convinced that Gruden will change a whole lot,  a little more yelling and intensity but we need someone who can rebuild our defense and fine-tune our offense (particularly the line), I'm not sure if Gruden is the ideal candidate. Maybe I will be proven wrong but for now I am cautious if his hire.   

I don't know all that much about the Bucs, but my understanding is they didn't build the team well.  While he had some good picks here and there with guys like Ruud and Cadillac Williams, the Bucs drafted just one Pro Bowler from 2003 to 2007.  One Pro Bowl player in 5 years worth of draft picks is no way to build a team.

 

Let the Bucs fans explain it, since they'll do a better job of it than me

http://www.bucsnation.com/2009/9/6/1012083/why-jon-gruden-didnt-work-out-in

 

In Oakland, Gruden took a 4-12 team to 12-4 in 3 years.  His offensive system is very QB-centric.  You need an intelligent and veteran QB to make it work; that's why Rich Gannon was such a good fit.  To me, Luck is a perfect fit for him.  It's not just about getting a guy who is fiery; it's about finding a guy who can get the most out of our elite talent at QB.  Some postulate that the reason why we've had the offenses with so many deep routes is because that's the type of offense Pagano prefers, which is why he has hired the OCs he has.  I think Gruden comes with a better balance of short, medium, and deep route combinations.

 

Defensively, it would depend on who he hires as his DC.  I imagine it would be a situation where he hires a good DC and lets the DC take care of the defensive stuff while he focuses on the offense.

[Mr. Too Proud]

Nice read on Kyle Shanahan 

 

http://mmqb.si.com/mmqb/2016/10/06/kyle-shanahan-nfl-coaching-carousel-list-notebook

[Mr. Too Proud]

Just not a fan on McDaniels. Brady won with Charlie Weis and Bill O’Brian. To my untrained eyes their offensive system never changed between the 3 coordinators. I understand he throws in a wrinkle here and there but at the end of the day do you believe that the student (Mcdaniels) can beat the teacher (The Hoodie)? If not why hire someone to hang AFC championship banners until the hoodie retires?

[VocableLoki]

32 minutes ago, 21isSuperman said:

I don't know all that much about the Bucs, but my understanding is they didn't build the team well.  While he had some good picks here and there with guys like Ruud and Cadillac Williams, the Bucs drafted just one Pro Bowler from 2003 to 2007.  One Pro Bowl player in 5 years worth of draft picks is no way to build a team.

 

Let the Bucs fans explain it, since they'll do a better job of it than me

http://www.bucsnation.com/2009/9/6/1012083/why-jon-gruden-didnt-work-out-in

 

In Oakland, Gruden took a 4-12 team to 12-4 in 3 years.  His offensive system is very QB-centric.  You need an intelligent and veteran QB to make it work; that's why Rich Gannon was such a good fit.  To me, Luck is a perfect fit for him.  It's not just about getting a guy who is fiery; it's about finding a guy who can get the most out of our elite talent at QB.  Some postulate that the reason why we've had the offenses with so many deep routes is because that's the type of offense Pagano prefers, which is why he has hired the OCs he has.  I think Gruden comes with a better balance of short, medium, and deep route combinations.

 

Defensively, it would depend on who he hires as his DC.  I imagine it would be a situation where he hires a good DC and lets the DC take care of the defensive stuff while he focuses on the offense.

Interesting read and yes I do think Gruden was a good offensive mind when he coached, however, his QB coaching camps and work on MNF are not quite enough to convince me that he is ready to jump in and install his offense, though maybe "Y Banana Spider" will rule the day here.

 

The article does confirm my main concerns, specifically that Gruden had a great defensive coordinator in Kiffin and that he seemed to aggressively pursue short-term free agents. That's not what we need, we need to continue to stockpile some young talent. Hopefully the Minnie game shows that maybe some of our younger linemen will continue to improve and we can be stable in 3/4 years. Hopefully Gruden's broadcasting/ESPN draft work has helped him stay up to date in evaluating young talent. 

 

Whoever comes in as a coach/coordinators has to be a long-term solution. We are looking at potentially the fourth offensive coordinator of Luck's career and the third defensive in as many years, assuming everyone leaves if Pagano is fired. 

[21isSuperman]

3 hours ago, VocableLoki said:

Interesting read and yes I do think Gruden was a good offensive mind when he coached, however, his QB coaching camps and work on MNF are not quite enough to convince me that he is ready to jump in and install his offense, though maybe "Y Banana Spider" will rule the day here.

 

The article does confirm my main concerns, specifically that Gruden had a great defensive coordinator in Kiffin and that he seemed to aggressively pursue short-term free agents. That's not what we need, we need to continue to stockpile some young talent. Hopefully the Minnie game shows that maybe some of our younger linemen will continue to improve and we can be stable in 3/4 years. Hopefully Gruden's broadcasting/ESPN draft work has helped him stay up to date in evaluating young talent. 

 

Whoever comes in as a coach/coordinators has to be a long-term solution. We are looking at potentially the fourth offensive coordinator of Luck's career and the third defensive in as many years, assuming everyone leaves if Pagano is fired. 

My understanding about the organization in Tampa was that McKay/Allen were the GMs and made the final decisions about draft picks and free agents.  I'm sure Gruden had his input, but I think the GMs made the final call.  I imagine that's similar to what we currently have with Pagano and Grigson.  As such, failed or short term free agents would fall more on the shoulders of the GM than Gruden

[Rally5]

On 12/20/2016 at 10:51 PM, NewColtsFan said:

 

Perhaps you're right....

 

But the poster I was responding to was using lines like "building a franchise" and letting them run the franchise...

 

Here's a line that he wrote...

 

That's it, go get one of these guys and let him run the franchise like we did with Polian, amateur hour over.

 

Made me think he wants the HC to also be the GM.     If not,  he used a poor choice of words....   then again, using a poor choice of words is incredibly common on this site...

 

 

Well, I might criticize you for not being able to stay on topic which was about the coaching pool, no matter, if you want to critique my choice of "lead the franchise" I suppose that's fair.  My comment was about coaching and not GM's that is accurate.  Indeed, I don't like the dual role, I think it's too much responsibility for one person.  Some people can do it but not most....I again apologize for my incredibly insensitive remarks regarding the use of the word 'leadership' to include to example fo Bill Polian which was incorrect for my part. 

[jskinnz]

On December 21, 2016 at 1:44 PM, 21isSuperman said:

 

 

 

2) Gruden and Luck both know the WCO very well.  They could finish each other's sentences (watch the QB Camp with Luck and they do finish each other's sentences at some points).  Gruden would give us a head coach who is on the exact same page as Luck.  This wouldn't be a drastic change in offensive systems for Luck since he has so much experience from his time at Stanford.  The main reason Gruden hasn't ever had a solid franchise QB is because his offensive system is very verbose.  That is difficult and intimidating for younger players, but a guy like Luck has the intelligence and familiarity with the system to process it all.

 

 

 

I deleted all but the one point above that I found interesting.  HIs verbose offense is not anything close to the reason he never had a franchise QB, which in itself is a debatable point.  Rich Gannon was pretty damn good with Gruden.

[NewColtsFan]

4 hours ago, Rally5 said:

Well, I might criticize you for not being able to stay on topic which was about the coaching pool, no matter, if you want to critique my choice of "lead the franchise" I suppose that's fair.  My comment was about coaching and not GM's that is accurate.  Indeed, I don't like the dual role, I think it's too much responsibility for one person.  Some people can do it but not most....I again apologize for my incredibly insensitive remarks regarding the use of the word 'leadership' to include to example fo Bill Polian which was incorrect for my part. 

 

Nothing to apologize for.....     I was only trying to point out my confusion.

 

The thread was about the coaching pool.      But reading your comment,  it looked like you were talking about having those three guys be the head coach and the GM.    

 

Sorry I didn't understand your meaning...    thanks for the explanation....    all is good....