To the Chuck Haters: Here's Your Best Argument...

[NewColtsFan]

 

I'm offering up this post in the hope that it will bring more peace and harmony here to the website.     That it will move the two sides -- the Chuck Haters and the Chuck Defenders --- closer together and there will be less vitriol on the website.

 

I offered some of this in a post in another thread,  but I think it's worthy of it's own thread,  so please, bear with me.....

 

I often try and break things down in the 32 team NFL like this.....    Top-10,  Bottom-10,  and the Middle-12.      Makes things a little easier for me, perhaps it will for you.

 

So, it goes like this.....

 

I don't think anyone here thinks Pagano is a top-10 coach.     If there is such a poster,  I have not read their post.     But I think there's a large, or at least, a LOUD group who thinks Pagano belongs in the bottom-10,  some even have called him the worst.      I think there's another group who thinks of Chuck as somewhere in the middle.    On his best day,   maybe he's 11th,  and on his worst day, he's maybe 22nd.    More typically,  he's somewhere in the middle. 

 

Honestly,  I don't think there's an argument that Chuck Pagano belongs in the bottom-10.    He's never had a losing season and he's had three seasons where his team has won 11 games.   He's won 3 playoff games.   His worst seasons are 8-8.       And all this with a roster that's never been better than average, and more recently,  below average. 

 

If you want to make your STRONGEST ARGUMENT that Pagano should be fired,  it goes like this.....    Pagano is average and the Colts need a better than average HC to get the most out of the Andrew Luck years.      I used the exact same argument when I called for Pep Hamilton to be fired.      His numbers said he was average but that we needed better.

 

The numbers didn't say Pep was bad and they don't say that Chuck is bad.     Arguments that say he is are both silly and divisive.

 

But IF you claim he's average,  NOW you've got a more reasonable argument.     What's the pushback to that?     Who's going to claim he's a top-10 HC?      No one, as far as I can tell.    You've practically won the argument before it even starts!     Just screaming 'he sucks' gets you no where.     Making a reasonable argument makes progress.   Gets posters to agree with you.     Here's your chance to shape the argument.

 

Start making that argument and not only will you get more support from more posters,   but you'll get less push back, less disagreement from the Chuck-supporters.   And, hopefully a better website for all of us to enjoy!      Win-Win!!

 

I hope everyone will take this post to heart.     It's going to be an interesting off-season.    It might be more enjoyable for all of us if we can find more common ground.    

I hope this post will be viewed as a road map to more common ground.

 

 

Go Colts!                      

[zibby43]

Agreed.  

 

I mean, I get that this is a message board and everyone is entitled to his or her opinion.  That said, the constant droning of "Chuck sucks" or "Grigson is terrible" with no other semblance of substance gets awfully boring fast.  

 

For the record, I'm in the fire Pagano camp because I find him average (as OP pointed out).  And Luck does deserve better.  Pagano exhibits questionable judgment with respect to game management.  I also think he could run a tighter ship, accountability-wise.  

 

Grigson looks to be learning from his draft mistakes and FA disasters.

[MPStack]

I was a huge advocate of not resigning Pagano last season and still feel that way. I`m not a hater, but he reminds me a lot of Caldwell. IMO he just is consistently outcoached by the opposition. He has no signature wins, where the game plan was just flawless. I`d like to see some emotion from the guy, rather than that aways look of despair on the sidelines. I got it the team overall, lacks talent, but a great deal of the problems are coaching. Fixing the coaching would be a good first step to improving this team. Just my 2 cents!

[NannyMcafee]

I don't compare pagano to other coaches. Im More upset with how we are losing and winning games, because there are few games that show our team is prepared. Even in the wins.

[UKColt13]

There is no accountability on the team for screw ups. He's a media nightmare. On the sideline he just looks sad most of the time. There doesn't seem to be any passion or motivation from him.

 

I want a coach that holds players accountable, treats them like men and doesn't coddle them. When they make a mistake I want a coach who'll yell at a player that needs to be yelled at instead of giving them a pat on the head and saying "don't worry, you'll get 'em next time".

 

Pagano still being on the staff tells me that Irsay is content with mediocrity. I'm not convinced that Pagano will be on the staff for training camp. I'm still thinking Irsay is waiting for Saban, Bill O'Brien or Mike McCarthy or talking to Gruden.

 

A good team can carry a bad coach or a good coach can carry a bad team. We have neither right now.

[coltsfeva]

What I find frustrating is the perception that Chuck and/or Grigson don't have the capacity to learn from their mistakes. That and the assumption that someone will come in here and never make a mistake, either in coaching or drafting. Look at Belicheck's tenure with the Browns or Pete Caroll's call to pass the ball in the SB. I'm not saying everything is great. Things need to change, that we all agree on. A good draft, getting guys like Langford, Mewhort and Geathers back and going into 2017 with improved depth (because some of the guys who started this year will be backups next year) should give us hope that this team can be much better than the team we agonized over this year. 

[DougDew]

2 hours ago, MPStack said:

I was a huge advocate of not resigning Pagano last season and still feel that way. I`m not a hater, but he reminds me a lot of Caldwell. IMO he just is consistently outcoached by the opposition. He has no signature wins, where the game plan was just flawless. I`d like to see some emotion from the guy, rather than that aways look of despair on the sidelines. I got it the team overall, lacks talent, but a great deal of the problems are coaching. Fixing the coaching would be a good first step to improving this team. Just my 2 cents!

I'm not disagreeing with your assessment of being outcoached, but as far as signature wins, the game plan against Denver at Denver that led to the AFCCG was pretty good.

[will426]

26 minutes ago, DougDew said:

I'm not disagreeing with your assessment of being outcoached, but as far as signature wins, the game plan against Denver at Denver that led to the AFCCG was pretty good.

It's nice and all to beat Peyton we should be able to though we know all about him..have yet to beat Big Ben nor Brady which are people You Need To Beat In the Afc 

[Gyworks]

My problem is that Pagano is superficial in terms of football knowledge. A lot of talk, a lot of Paganoism but no profound concepts. Some say he's a good motivator but I'm not so sure, I never get goosebumps by watching his victory speeches. However for a HC it's not enough to summon even the most brilliant coordinators and assistant coaches because by definition they are mostly interested in their craft and they don't necessarily see or care for the overall picture. The HC must have a crystal clear vision for his team to coordinate the coaches and align all activities accordingly. He must have attention to the smallest details while not getting lost in details to forget about the big picture. Can you imagine Pagano having such management skills? He doesn’t really seem to have long term enhancement concepts for the teams but he rather seems just reacting to the mistakes of the previous game week after week. I'm pretty convinced he's just running for his life since the lost AFCCG and he's just trying to save his job. That’s the most secure way to mediocrity, which would be to lose a game due to insufficient preparation, to correct your mistakes, to win a hardly fought next game, to become very happy about your win so that you relax and then to get outcoached and loose again.

[OffensivelyPC]

5 hours ago, NewColtsFan said:

 

I'm offering up this post in the hope that it will bring more peace and harmony here to the website.     That it will move the two sides -- the Chuck Haters and the Chuck Defenders --- closer together and there will be less vitriol on the website.

This looks like a reasonable and sensible post.  That must mean you love Pagano, you are okay with mediocrity, and don't care if we waste Lucks prime.  

 

Am I doing it right?

[OffensivelyPC]

2 hours ago, UKColt13 said:

There is no accountability on the team for screw ups. He's a media nightmare. On the sideline he just looks sad most of the time. There doesn't seem to be any passion or motivation from him.

Why does everyone hate his media personality?  Bill Belichick has done this for years.  Granted, a bit different personality, but he gets praised for saying nothing with a lot of words (even less words than Pagano for that matter), and when Pagano does it, he's a media nightmare.  I actually like the fact that he protects information and givs nothing to the media, for two reasons - I hate the media and it's no one's business.  Despite what you the fan or the media think, you are not entitled to any sort of information that doesn't have to be disclosed due to federal/state statutory mandate.  People can whine and cry about the "right" to know - there's no such right and the sooner people can figure this out, the better off we will all be when things come up like "When will Irsay tell us the second time he's not making any coaching changes because it's been 2 weeks since the last time...?"

[coltsva]

Well stated NCF. I am for an upgrade at coach as I think Pagano is average as the day is long. When I look around the league I come up with only 8 coaches that I would trade straight up for Pagano:

Group A

Belichick, Carroll, Tomlin, Harbaugh, Arians, McCarthy, Reid, Quinn.

 

Then there are the more experienced guys who have had success but are inconsistent:

Group B

Payton, Del Rio, O'Brien, Fox, Caldwell, Lewis, Rivera, Garrett

 

I'm not ready to crown some of these "one hit wonders" just yet, because they are no different than Pagano was after his first few years. They would be:

Group C

Gase, McAdoo, Zimmer, Gruden(Jay), Koetter. 

 

Then there are those who have not had any success yet:

Group D

Pederson, Jackson, Mularky, Bowles, 

 

I want Pagano replaced. I would certainly want someone from Group A, but that's not happening. I would not want anyone from Group B as I think it would be simply a lateral move. Nobody from group D, although the jury is still out on 3 of the 4.  

 

What it comes down to is would I want to replace Pagano with a "hot" coordinator like those in Group C? Yes, I think it is worth the risk since I already have concluded that Pagano is just another average coach. 

 

*From the unemployed ranks, I would absolutely be on board with Jon Gruden. He had success in two places. In Oakland with a journeyman QB, and in Tampa with terrible QB's.

 

 

 

 

[UKColt13]

9 minutes ago, OffensivelyPC said:

Why does everyone hate his media personality?  Bill Belichick has done this for years.  Granted, a bit different personality, but he gets praised for saying nothing with a lot of words (even less words than Pagano for that matter), and when Pagano does it, he's a media nightmare.  I actually like the fact that he protects information and givs nothing to the media, for two reasons - I hate the media and it's no one's business.  Despite what you the fan or the media think, you are not entitled to any sort of information that doesn't have to be disclosed due to federal/state statutory mandate.  People can whine and cry about the "right" to know - there's no such right and the sooner people can figure this out, the better off we will all be when things come up like "When will Irsay tell us the second time he's not making any coaching changes because it's been 2 weeks since the last time...?"

 

I appreciate that, but Belichick does his talking through his players on the field. He doesn't have to defend poor play, bad game plans, incompetent assistants on a weekly basis. Belichick gets praised by saying very little when he is winning, Pagano is getting hate for saying very little when he is losing, badly. 

 

I'm not asking to be able to rifle through the papers on his desk, but he coddles the team. Even in his end of year conference. He said we played great in the last game against a good team. We had to comeback to win, against a 3 win team, at home. He should be saying that that is not good enough. Playing that way does not get you into the playoffs. Playing that way does not win rings. If I'm not confident the team can win a championship with a coach then I don't want him here. I have no confidence in Pagano.

[aaron11]

24 minutes ago, OffensivelyPC said:

Why does everyone hate his media personality?  Bill Belichick has done this for years. 

most people here hate Belichick too

 

i wouldn't be mad if they got rid of mandatory press conferences, considering our coach along with several others never say anything

 

the only loser would be the media

[SilentHill]

If you think this is bad you should have been here during the 2011 offseason.

[VocableLoki]

35 minutes ago, OffensivelyPC said:

This looks like a reasonable and sensible post.  That must mean you love Pagano, you are okay with mediocrity, and don't care if we waste Lucks prime.  

 

Am I doing it right?

You forgot obligatory "choppin wood" reference or pointing out he rode Arian's/Luck's coattails. 

[OffensivelyPC]

7 minutes ago, UKColt13 said:

 

I appreciate that, but Belichick does his talking through his players on the field. He doesn't have to defend poor play, bad game plans, incompetent assistants on a weekly basis. Belichick gets praised by saying very little when he is winning, Pagano is getting hate for saying very little when he is losing, badly. 

 

I'm not asking to be able to rifle through the papers on his desk, but he coddles the team. Even in his end of year conference. He said we played great in the last game against a good team. We had to comeback to win, against a 3 win team, at home. He should be saying that that is not good enough. Playing that way does not get you into the playoffs. Playing that way does not win rings. If I'm not confident the team can win a championship with a coach then I don't want him here. I have no confidence in Pagano.

Yeah, but most of what you're talking about has nothing to do with the media.  Play on the field and saying nothing in interviews are two distinct and mutually exclusive issues.  One has nothing to do with the other unless you're asking him to simply say the right thing in the correct manner.  That job is reserved for a wife and no one else (kidding ladies).

 

The point is, we don't know what goes on behind closed doors, in the film room etc.  If he were to come into the film room and tell everyone that they are doing great when they are not, then of course that is a problem.  But to me, jsut because he says something in an post-game presser doesn['t mean that's how he caoches his team - at least it wouldn't me.  And I don't think we should be quick to assume that presser-Pagano is the same as coach-Pagano.

[OffensivelyPC]

19 minutes ago, aaron11 said:

most people here hate Belichick too

 

i wouldn't be mad if they got rid of mandatory press conferences, considering our coach along with several others never say anything

 

the only loser would be the media

And I would be totally okay with that. Most hate Belicheck, but it's fans like us and the media who cant ever get the soundbytes they want - they actually have to work at their job to get a Belichick story.

[OffensivelyPC]

15 minutes ago, VocableLoki said:

You forgot obligatory "choppin wood" reference or pointing out he rode Arian's/Luck's coattails. 

This game is always teaching me something new.  I feel like the more I learn, the less I know...

[VocableLoki]

I have two reservations for letting Chuck go:

 

1) I have a lot of emotional support for the guy. 2012 was awesome and the "Dancing with my Daughters" speech still gives me chills. The Packers game, etc. 

 

The team also, I think, takes on this attitude in how well they can stage a comeback. Beyond everything else the players seem to support him, which I think is important.

 

2) Teams that let go of successful coaches for "not being successful enough" have a very iffy track record for that strategy. The Eagles have been burned twice on this, firing Andy Reid and Chip Kelly and then having to hit the reset button. I know Kelly had a bad year in San Francisco but it's hard not to wonder what he might have done with Weintz this year.

 

I have been a University of Tennessee fan all my life and we spent years trying to replace Phillip Fulmer and are just now only reaching the success he had towards the end of his career. I think you need to be careful about firing people who seem to have success.

 

That being said I know Chuck has plenty of flaws. I don't think he game plans well, I think games can get away from him (they are rarely wire-to-wire close games, we get blown out or stage a comeback) and he has weirdly aggressive calls that sometimes work (surprise onside kicks) and sometimes don't (insert weird special teams fake play).

 

All in all I think the New England game in 2015 epitomizes Chuck. We had a close game (by our closest with New England) at home against a very good team with what turned out to not be one of our best teams, yet it is all overshadowed by one (admittedly game-sealing) call that he made. I think it's impressive we played with NE up to that point but it's hard to argue that his play call and lack of control over the players running it lead to a loss.

 

This season is certainly the defining one for Chuck. If he has a good year then we will certainly retain him. Another average/below average year and I think he will be gone. Regardless, I think he deserves a good amount of respect for what he has done here.

 

P.S. 

Like the thread idea a lot, since I have been involved in many Chuck debates over the past few weeks.

[SteelCityColt]

Far too many sensible posts in this topic, I might have to lock it out of shock.

 

 

[VocableLoki]

32 minutes ago, OffensivelyPC said:

This game is always teaching me something new.  I feel like the more I learn, the less I know...

Sounds like a The Wire quote.

[OffensivelyPC]

3 minutes ago, VocableLoki said:

Sounds like a The Wire quote.

I've never seen that show.  I still need to watch Breaking Bad and the Sopranos...

[lollygagger8]

 

Maybe a bit simplistic in the approach, but why not make a Pros/Cons list for the guy? Feel free to add on/delete/change: 

 

Pros:

Winning record (49-31)

Players seem to like him 

Good human being 

 

 

Cons: 

Poor defensive showing  

Time mgmt skills 

Doesn't seem to hold players accountable 

 

 

*History of playing inferior players over better ones (not sure if that is Grigs or Pags)*

 

 

[#12.]

8 hours ago, NewColtsFan said:

 

 

Start making that argument and not only will you get more support from more posters,   but you'll get less push back, less disagreement from the Chuck-supporters.   

 

Why do we care?  We're in the majority.  By far,  among Colts fans are the Chuck critics in the majority.  A Chuck apologist would have to be living in fantasyland to believe otherwise.

[DougDew]

4 hours ago, will426 said:

It's nice and all to beat Peyton we should be able to though we know all about him..have yet to beat Big Ben nor Brady which are people You Need To Beat In the Afc 

Our defense is what it is, and certainly benefited from an aging Peyton, but the Denver defense was very good that year and our offense outplayed them the entire game.

[Defjamz26]

Bottom 10 isn't exactly harsh depending on who else you're putting there. If we look at 2016 coaches before they were fired, this is who I'd put in the bottom 10 in no particular order:

 

Rex Ryan

Gus Bradley

Mike McCoy

Chip Kelly

Jeff Fisher

John Fox

Todd Bowles

Marvin Lewis

Hue Jackson

 

That's 9 and I reluctantly put Lewis in there because he's went to 7 playoff games but never won any. And this was his first losing season in awhile. But the next step is who gets the 10th spot? Do you put some good coach like Zimmer or Arians there who had their first losing season in awhile? What about Rivera who was just in the Super Bowl? Or Kubiak who won it but then didn't make the playoffs? Why wouldn't Pagano be listed among those other 9 though? Maybe he's the best of the bunch but he's still in that same tier. On his best day maybe he's the 11th or 12th worst coach in the league but that's not saying much. I don't think it's worth trying to actually define how bad or "not so bad" Pagano is because we know he isn't good or great. It's a moot point IMO. Although anyone who says he's the worst in the NFL is crazy. Jeff Fisher did nothing with a Rams team loaded with talented players from the RG3 trade.

[Fisticuffs111]

2 hours ago, VocableLoki said:

You forgot obligatory "choppin wood" reference or pointing out he rode Arian's/Luck's coattails. 

But really, I've seen way too many people saying "Chuck has three 11-5 seasons" lately. I wouldn't ever say anything about riding anybody's coattails, but it's just a fact that Bruce coached 12 games that year.

[VocableLoki]

2 minutes ago, Fisticuffs111 said:

But seriously, I've seen way too many people saying "Chuck has three 11-5 seasons" lately.

Not sure what you mean. He does have three 11-5 seasons? 

[Clem-Dog]

I was on the fence last season in regards to Chuck's ability to effectively coach this team.  But after hearing him spew his mentality to Lamey earlier this season he revealed the problem.  He said something to the effect that he tells his players every game is going to be close and that it  will come down to the last two minutes before the outcome is decided.  Although this statement is true in some cases it also creates a passive environment while lowering expectations.  

 

Imagine if General Patton had told his soldiers before going into battle that the outcome wasn't certain.  It wouldn't have exactly inspired any confidence.

 

 

[Fisticuffs111]

3 minutes ago, VocableLoki said:

Not sure what you mean. He does have three 11-5 seasons? 

Bruce Arians got us 9 wins that year and was COTY. I'm not at all poking fun at Pagano's ordeal, it was awful, but it's just a fact that he only coached a few games that year.

[2006Coltsbestever]

12 minutes ago, Defjamz26 said:

Bottom 10 isn't exactly harsh depending on who else you're putting there. If we look at 2016 coaches before they were fired, this is who I'd put in the bottom 10 in no particular order:

 

Rex Ryan

Gus Bradley

Mike McCoy

Chip Kelly

Jeff Fisher

John Fox

Todd Bowles

Marvin Lewis

Hue Jackson

 

That's 9 and I reluctantly put Lewis in there because he's went to 7 playoff games but never won any. And this was his first losing season in awhile. But the next step is who gets the 10th spot? Do you put some good coach like Zimmer or Arians there who had their first losing season in awhile? What about Rivera who was just in the Super Bowl? Or Kubiak who won it but then didn't make the playoffs? Why wouldn't Pagano be listed among those other 9 though? Maybe he's the best of the bunch but he's still in that same tier. On his best day maybe he's the 11th or 12th worst coach in the league but that's not saying much. I don't think it's worth trying to actually define how bad or "not so bad" Pagano is because we know he isn't good or great. It's a moot point IMO. Although anyone who says he's the worst in the NFL is crazy. Jeff Fisher did nothing with a Rams team loaded with talented players from the RG3 trade.

I think Chuck is better than all the Coaches you named regarding your 9 + he is better than Mularkey as well who is in our Division. Titans did go 9-7 but Mularkey hasn't accomplished near what Chuck has and we swept the Titans. I have Chuck out of the bottom 10, having said that he is Average and I am for change if we can get someone better.

[VocableLoki]

1 minute ago, Fisticuffs111 said:

Did Bruce Arians not coach 12 games in 2012? Or do we consider those Chuck's wins even though he wasn't there?

Just depends on what you want to do. Chuck gets the wins on his record but Arians certainly should get credit as well. I think the team was pretty inspired by Chuck throughout so I would give both credit. It was Chuck's team; Arians piloted it to success, no reason they both can't get credit.

[VocableLoki]

3 minutes ago, Clem-Dog said:

I was on the fence last season in regards to Chuck's ability to effectively coach this team.  But after hearing him spew his mentality to Lamey earlier this season he revealed the problem.  He said something to the effect that he tells his players every game is going to be close and that it  will come down to the last two minutes before the outcome is decided.  Although this statement is true in some cases it also creates a passive environment while lowering expectations.  

 

Imagine if General Patton had told his soldiers before going into battle that the outcome wasn't certain.  It wouldn't have exactly inspired any confidence.

 

 

I understand your point but I would still argue that those aren't the same thing, nor is that what he is trying to accomplish. I would think Pagano is trying to get his players to understand that winning any game in the NFL is difficult and that they should expect a close game every time out.

[Fisticuffs111]

8 hours ago, NewColtsFan said:

Pagano is average and the Colts need a better than average HC to get the most out of the Andrew Luck years. 

I've seen plenty of people say this, namely Superman in a nice post a while back. I  wholeheartedly agree with it.

I think Pagano's a capable enough coach, with help from Luck, to get to 10 wins most every year. But I think he'll be a detriment against good teams with the better coaches in the league. Basically I think he'll be our weakness going into every playoff run from here on out.

[2006Coltsbestever]

21 minutes ago, Defjamz26 said:

Bottom 10 isn't exactly harsh depending on who else you're putting there. If we look at 2016 coaches before they were fired, this is who I'd put in the bottom 10 in no particular order:

 

Rex Ryan

Gus Bradley

Mike McCoy

Chip Kelly

Jeff Fisher

John Fox

Todd Bowles

Marvin Lewis

Hue Jackson

 

That's 9 and I reluctantly put Lewis in there because he's went to 7 playoff games but never won any. And this was his first losing season in awhile. But the next step is who gets the 10th spot? Do you put some good coach like Zimmer or Arians there who had their first losing season in awhile? What about Rivera who was just in the Super Bowl? Or Kubiak who won it but then didn't make the playoffs? Why wouldn't Pagano be listed among those other 9 though? Maybe he's the best of the bunch but he's still in that same tier. On his best day maybe he's the 11th or 12th worst coach in the league but that's not saying much. I don't think it's worth trying to actually define how bad or "not so bad" Pagano is because we know he isn't good or great. It's a moot point IMO. Although anyone who says he's the worst in the NFL is crazy. Jeff Fisher did nothing with a Rams team loaded with talented players from the RG3 trade.

This is a pretty well thought out Post. Great stuff.

[#12.]

9 minutes ago, Defjamz26 said:

Bottom 10 isn't exactly harsh depending on who else you're putting there. If we look at 2016 coaches before they were fired, this is who I'd put in the bottom 10 in no particular order:

 

Rex Ryan

Gus Bradley

Mike McCoy

Chip Kelly

Jeff Fisher

John Fox

Todd Bowles

Marvin Lewis

Hue Jackson

 

That's 9 and I reluctantly put Lewis in there because he's went to 7 playoff games but never won any. And this was his first losing season in awhile. But the next step is who gets the 10th spot? Do you put some good coach like Zimmer or Arians there who had their first losing season in awhile? What about Rivera who was just in the Super Bowl? Or Kubiak who won it but then didn't make the playoffs? Why wouldn't Pagano be listed among those other 9 though? Maybe he's the best of the bunch but he's still in that same tier. On his best day maybe he's the 11th or 12th worst coach in the league but that's not saying much. I don't think it's worth trying to actually define how bad or "not so bad" Pagano is because we know he isn't good or great. It's a moot point IMO. Although anyone who says he's the worst in the NFL is crazy. Jeff Fisher did nothing with a Rams team loaded with talented players from the RG3 trade.

 

 McCoy is the only coach in your bottom 10 who has a QB, a QB comparable to Luck.  The fact that Chuck is being mentioned among this group, with Luck, tells you everything you need to know.  Also, ranking Chuck above a few of these coaches seems questionable.  Fox - 3 conference championship games, 2 Super Bowls.  Rex - 2 conference championship games.  Fisher - a Super Bowl.  Sure, Fisher was mostly mediocre and it ended poorly, but if Chuck's head coaching days end in 2017, at least Fisher went to a Super Bowl.

[Defjamz26]

8 minutes ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

I think Chuck is better than all the Coaches you named + he is better than Mularkey as well who is in our Division. Titans did go 9-7 but Mularkey hasn't accomplished near what Chuck has and we swept the Titans. I have Chuck out of the bottom 10, having said he is Average and I am for change if we can get someone better.

I thought about Mularkey too but the Titans showed marked improvement under him and may have made the playoffs if not for the Mariota injury. And the arrow is pointing up with another draft coming up. Plus Chuck's accomplishments are really overstated. His first season, Arians won most of those games so you can't really credit him there. But even after he went 11-5 in a weak division and then proved that he couldn't do it once the division got better. They went 8-8 with Luck for all but 1 game. The argument against Chuck is that he can't get to 11-5 again. The Colts can't CONSISTENTLY beat elite teams. With the division being better, the Colts under Chuck are a perennial 8-8 or 9-7 team at best. Sure Grigson hasn't helped matters but even if he nailed this offseason I still think Chuck would get outcoached and lose some winnable games.

[2006Coltsbestever]

3 minutes ago, #12. said:

 

 McCoy is the only coach in your bottom 10 who has a QB, a QB comparable to Luck.  The fact that Chuck is being mentioned among this group, with Luck, tells you everything you need to know.  Also, ranking Chuck above a few of these coaches seems questionable.  Fox - 3 conference championship games, 2 Super Bowls.  Rex - 2 conference championship games.  Fisher - a Super Bowl.  Sure, Fisher was mostly mediocre and it ended poorly, but if Chuck's head coaching days end in 2017, at least Fisher went to a Super Bowl.

Yes we have Luck but one of the worst Defenses in the league, so that offsets Luck a bit. Cant win consistently without at least an Average Defense no matter the QB. Our Defense isn't close to Average, It's Bad.

[Fisticuffs111]

20 minutes ago, VocableLoki said:

Just depends on what you want to do. Chuck gets the wins on his record but Arians certainly should get credit as well. I think the team was pretty inspired by Chuck throughout so I would give both credit. It was Chuck's team; Arians piloted it to success, no reason they both can't get credit.

Yeah, you're right, just opinion I guess. I don't withhold all credit from Pagano, I just give most of it to Arians. Pagano emotionally jacked the guys up, that's what he does anyways, but I just don't think it should hold much weight when looking at Pagano's future here.