1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

An anatomy of failure, and the hunt for a HC

Discussion in 'Miami Dolphins Forum' started by Pauly, Oct 14, 2015.

  1. Pauly

    Pauly Season Ticket Holder

    3,699
    3,750
    113
    Nov 29, 2007
    I just want to take some time to reflect on the failures of Head Coach since Don Shula, and to see what we can learn from them, with a view to selecting our next full time head coach.

    Jimmy Johnson. Retired because he didn’t have the passion for the job.
    Pros: Overall he restocked the roster, especially on Defense and got his players to play hard and developed them into better players.
    Cons: Was too dedicated to his offensive scheme to take advantage of Dan Marino’s special abilities.
    Biggest flaw; Unwillingness to adjust his schemes.

    Dave Wannstadt: A good DC who should never have been made HC, and should never have been let inside a personnel room.
    Pros: His teams played with high effort. Great defensive success
    Cons: Unimaginative offensively. Stubbornly stuck to his schemes even when they failed. Favored veterans over developing rookies.
    Biggest flaw; Failed to develop existing talent.

    Nick Saban: Weaseled his way out of LSU to the Dolphins then everyone was shocked when he weaseled his way out of the Dolphins.
    Pros; Very good schematically.
    Cons; Unable to develop a working relationship with professional players. Treated players like Madden ‘bots who could be cut and pasted anywhere rather than individuals.
    Biggest flaw: Lost the locker room by treating the players badly

    Can Cameron. I think we have never heard the full story of what happened. In my opinion there was a very serious schism in the coaching room which bled out into the players, but there isn’t enough info to definitively state what happened behind closed doors.

    Tony Sparano: Hand chosen to be the sock puppet.
    Pros; Teams played hard.
    Cons; Coached scared. Didn’t take risks in developing young players. Found a useful trick (wildcat) then completely overused it to the point where the rest of the league learned how to easily defend it. Unimaginative schemes.
    Biggest flaw; Always taking the safe option.

    Joe Philbin; The only guy in the room desperate enough for a HC job to work for Ireland.
    Pros: Coached up and developed talent. Took appropriate risks (when the game wasn’t on the line).
    Cons; Very reluctant to allow young players onto the field. Got queasy when the game was on the line. Overly loyal to bad co-ordinators. Overly loyal to bad starters (Wheeler, Ellerbe, Thomas and so on). Allowed talent to walk away rather than try to establish working relationships with difficult personalities
    Biggest flaw: Not taking meaningful risks.

    So learning from our failures, here are some qualities we should look for in a coach:
    1) Adjust the scheme to the players (The lesson of Johnson)
    2) Develop the talent we have (The lesson of Wannstadt)
    3) Treat the players like professionals (The lesson of Saban)
    4) Have your coaching staff on the same page (The lesson of Cameron)
    5) Be aggressive and try new approaches (The lesson of Sparano)
    6) Put your cojones on the line (The lesson of Philbin)

    Bonus lesson: The lesson of Bowles: Sometimes the interim HC is a better guy than the guys you interview to replace him.
     
  2. Tannephins

    Tannephins Banned

    1,818
    572
    0
    Dec 23, 2014
    Jim Bates.
     
  3. Pauly

    Pauly Season Ticket Holder

    3,699
    3,750
    113
    Nov 29, 2007
    He's in a different category to Bowles, because he didn't do much after leaving the phins. But he wouldn't have hurt the franchise as badly as his successor did
     
  4. Tannephins

    Tannephins Banned

    1,818
    572
    0
    Dec 23, 2014
    The one constant throughout that period: inadequate quarterback play.
     
  5. Califin

    Califin Well-Known Member

    2,050
    403
    83
    Nov 26, 2007
    If we had cloned Shula, after the Epic in Miami , he would have been reaching an age of fruition right about now.
     
    Pandarilla likes this.
  6. vt_dolfan

    vt_dolfan Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    A lot of the defensive players LOVED Saban.
     
    dolphin25 likes this.
  7. Pandarilla

    Pandarilla Purist Emeritus

    14,282
    5,005
    113
    Sep 10, 2009
    Boone, NC
    You forgot one...

    Watching football(the lesson of the Dolphins)

    Satan really is a Jets fan.
     
  8. Tannephins

    Tannephins Banned

    1,818
    572
    0
    Dec 23, 2014
    That era was probably a Drew Brees away from becoming something very solid and long-term. Saban had his issues with player relations, but a lot of that could've been overcome with winning, which Brees would've facilitated.
     
    dolphin25 likes this.
  9. brandon27

    brandon27 Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    45,652
    19,304
    113
    Dec 3, 2007
    Windsor, ON. CANADA
    You know, not the popular opinion around here, but I really think Nick Saban's recent comments are accurate. If he had gotten Drew Brees over Culpepper, there's a really good chance he would likely still be here, and there's a really likely chance we'd probably have a banner hanging up in the stadium somewhere with a Lombardi on it. I think you're right, winning would have shut up the disgruntled players, and Drew Brees would have made that relatively easy. All speculation, and we'll never know. Oh well.
     
  10. Tannephins

    Tannephins Banned

    1,818
    572
    0
    Dec 23, 2014
    So much of this involves getting lucky enough to have a good quarterback and a good head coach at the same time. Look at what Bill Belichick did in Cleveland and New England, before the arrival of Tom Brady. He had the same brains and know-how, but he didn't have the quarterback.
     
    Rick 1966, dolphin25 and Limbo like this.
  11. jcliving

    jcliving Active Member

    361
    185
    43
    Aug 19, 2014
    Belichick made a lot of mistakes in Cleveland. It was more than just the QB. Give him credit for improving his performance. Having both is the simplest path, but it is not the only path (Ravens).
     
  12. dirtylandry

    dirtylandry Well-Known Member

    4,214
    1,750
    113
    Aug 2, 2015
    That right there solves all issues


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
     
  13. cdnfinfan

    cdnfinfan New Member

    348
    175
    0
    Oct 6, 2010
    I think the Jury is still out on Bowles, lets not jump to conclusions. he MAY become a great HC but he still has much to prove.
     
    ATLFINFAN and Tannephins like this.
  14. Tannephins

    Tannephins Banned

    1,818
    572
    0
    Dec 23, 2014
    Right, what I mean is the establishment of a perennial winner, which is dependent on a QB and head coach mix that sustains that sort of success. The Ravens for example have bounced all over the map over the same years, mainly because they're more dependent on quality play from the other facets of their team. They don't have the Belichick/Brady formula that all but ensures a relatively high level of success regardless of the play of the other areas of the team.
     
  15. Tannephins

    Tannephins Banned

    1,818
    572
    0
    Dec 23, 2014
    No kidding. The guy's coached four games for Christ's sake.
     
    dolphin25 and cdnfinfan like this.
  16. Fin D

    Fin D Sigh

    72,252
    43,684
    113
    Nov 27, 2007
    Excellent post and thought process.

    The problem is, to combine the lessons you've pointed out would create the perfect coach. That guy is pretty rare and there's only two guys out there that will be available at the end of the season that have a shot at matching up with those.....Gus Malzhan & Hue Jackson.
     
  17. DolphinGreg

    DolphinGreg Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    5,227
    6,527
    113
    Dec 7, 2014
    As a general principle, the NFL will grind you down. It’s a business in which it’s incredibly rare to hold a high-level job for more than 5-7 years because you’re evaluated based solely on wins and losses. In order to keep your job the team must win, which is very tough to make happen over a long period of time, and even if the team wins you may still come under fire for a host of other reasons. Finding any sustained success in that type of environment definitely requires an advantage—something that can provide stability and success even during down years when the roster is weak.

    This is why in virtually every place you look in the modern era, long-tenured HCs have had great play at the QB position which can carry the team to a competitive 7-, 8- or 9-win season when things aren’t going well. This is also one of the reasons new HCs don’t mind gambling on a new QB to begin their tenure. They know that it’s sort of like an insurance policy. They know they can point to a young QB’s development as an excuse for early losses and if that QBs turn out to be a gem, it’ll be the goose that laid the golden egg—the gift that keeps on giving. This move can be offset with increased demands on the back end in years 3 and 4 when expectations are high.

    QBs are so highly valued in the NFL not because winning a Super Bowl requires you have a great one but because a great one can so easily put you in contention for the Super Bowl. QBs are the equalizer in the modern NFL. Great play at the QB position tends to set the bar in the NFL at about 7-8 wins at worst and it opens the door to going after those magical seasons in which the team wins nearly every game. With a good QB, you’re basically guaranteed to be on the cusp of the Play-offs every year and with just a little luck and skill you’ll get in more often than not (i.e. Marino).

    So, if a team hasn’t hit the lottery on a QB or done so with multiple elite defenders (Harris/Urlacher/Briggs/Tillman, Ngata/Suggs/Lewis/Reed, Wagner/Chancellor/Sherman/Thomas, etc.), it’s nearly impossible for a HC to avoid the kind of bad years that put him on the hot seat. Most coaches simply aren’t allowed to rebuild multiple times and if the team does poorly one year, it had better not repeat that or else the coach is almost always doomed. So we should expect a lot of hiring/firing as it’s just part of the business—at least unless someone comes up with a fool-proof way of determining who the great QBs are in the draft.

    On that note, I think people take NFL firings to be harsher than they really are. With coaching changes coming every year we still act surprised when turnover happens. These are not the kind of firings that you and I see in our workplace. Being a production-based business, firings are not a condemnation of lack of effort as much as they are a company saying, ‘move over, we want to try another guy in your spot.’ The NFL is like any large company with an array of VPs, executives and managers. It will actively re-arrange itself internally after every year or two based on the output it’s seeing.

    These guys make a lot of money and are guaranteed another assistant job should they fail as HCs. To get a chance to be a HC is in itself like winning the lottery for these guys. The worst that happens is they fall back to where they were but for a brief period they control everything. Heck, we see a lot of coaches get second chances if they go after them.

    Thus teams constantly gamble on new HCs because that’s how the system has evolved to be. It’s not evil or harsh. It’s just that there’s enough payoff in getting the synergy right that you’re benefitted by continually trying a different approach if the production isn’t coming in hopes that good fortune, a little luck and a good strategy will eventually coincide. NFL GMs and VPs play the roles of corporate strategists that claim to have solutions. Some do. Some don’t. Either way, we shouldn’t expect teams to commit to anything when the production isn’t there. Loyalty in the NFL should always be a surprise because (as most of us can attest via Ross with Philbin and Philbin with his coordinators) loyalty usually doesn’t equate to being a valuable thing in a production business. For every great guy you go out on a limb for, there are 10 whose production won’t change.


    The last lesson is that this is the real-world and it’s a closed system. Getting something will require you give something. Asking for something will require you make concessions. While it’s easy to say what you’d like to have (i.e. a franchise QB, a 1[SUP]st[/SUP] round play-maker, a motivational HC, a brilliant coordinator, etc.) you have to account for where those guys are going to come from and accept that there won’t be a perfect candidate out there. That strong-armed QB might turn out to be Dan Marino, Joe Flacco or Ryan Mallett. It’s a risk. That’s brilliant coordinator might be Bill Walsh about to revolutionize the game or it might be Cam Cameron or Chip Kelly about to come in and make some really questionable roster decisions.

    Another consequence of the closed system reality is that you have a lot of overlap. It’s incredibly rare that we actually see teams do so poorly for so long that they wipe the slate clean and hire a new GM/VP, HC, OC, and DC all in the same year along with setting out to rebuild the entire roster. In most scenarios, an incoming HC is forced to work with an existing GM and is virtually always expected to work his scheme around a few franchise players. Sometimes this forced collaboration is a good thing but it’s often a headache that compounds and compromises the already-complex decisions that go into building a team. What’s hard becomes harder by the realities of the closed system.

    This has become so much of an issue in the free agent era that we now actually consider coaches and coordinators not based on their overall ability to develop talent but by what scheme they employ to do so. More and more, we let a few player contracts dictate which coaches and coordinators we want. This kind of player-centric tunnel vision, which never extends beyond the remaining 3-4 years on a contract, helps lead to short-sighted decision making and increased turnover amongst coaches as well.


    At the end of the day though, turnover is a healthy thing because it opens up a possibility for improvement. So don’t feel guilty about how optimistic you feel guys. When someone asks, ‘how can this turnover make you happy,’ just tell them that in times like these you get to see (and ponder) the bigger picture.
     
    texanphinatic likes this.
  18. Clark Kent

    Clark Kent Fighter of the Nightman

    8,560
    4,133
    113
    May 9, 2008
    You really think that highly of Hue Jackson? I don't mean that as a dig, I'm genuinely curious. I don't know a lot about the guy... He's seemed to have some success w/QB's (Flacco's rookie and sophomore seasons, Dalton in 2015). In 2010 as Oakland's HC, he went 8-8 w/Jason Campbell and Bruce Gradkowski. Darren McFadden was relevant for the first and only time in his career w/Jackson too. I also remember he got fired because... well, it's the Raiders and that's what they do. I know Marvin Lewis thinks highly of him... which may or may not be a good thing, depending on what you think of Marvin Lewis. What is it about him that makes you think he's on Malzahn's level?

    I remember back in 2013, Cinci was on Hard Knocks. And I remember being turned off by Jackson. He was a position coach at the time, but there was something about him I didn't care for. I can't even remember what exactly... I think it was a personality thing, but I can't say for sure.
     
  19. Fin D

    Fin D Sigh

    72,252
    43,684
    113
    Nov 27, 2007
    He's succeeding at every place he's been and they've all been very different circumstances. I was like that about him too, but then I learned some stuff.
     
    Clark Kent likes this.
  20. Clark Kent

    Clark Kent Fighter of the Nightman

    8,560
    4,133
    113
    May 9, 2008
    I don't think Jimmy retired from lack of passion for the job. I think Jimmy Johnson had poor stamina. He was constantly getting burned out, IMO. He's much like Parcells in that way.

    And I don't think it's fair to say that he was too dedicated to his offensive scheme to take advantage of Marino... At least, not entirely. There is some truth to that statement but, it's too black and white in the way it was written. The game in 1996 revolved around running the ball and playing defense. Had Jimmy secured a legit running back ala Denver w/Davis, Miami probably would of been more successful offensively. And Marino's special abilities faded w/his legs. See Peyton Manning in 2015 as an example. Marino's legs were even worse than Manning (and he didn't have D.Thomas or E.Sanders) and had trouble dropping back from under center. He was in slow motion from 96 onward. Which lead to a lot more pressure and big hits due to Marino's failures to drop back quickly enough, giving himself less time to read the field and fire a lazor. Unlike Manning, Marino always had an arm though. From shotgun, Danny's specialness would still be evident. See the Phins v. Colts in the 1998 playoffs as an example, when Marino, starting deep in his territory (I think inside Miami's 10) converted multiple 3rd and longs, to win the game. Can we really blame Johnson for not operating from shotgun 90% of the time? No one did that back then.

    Having said that, I do agree, Jimmy's offenses were unimaginative (often compared to a High school offense) and lacked talent. As coach and GM, that was on Jimmy. And he took Marino's ability to audible away, which was a mistake. Then again, as the old saying goes, Marino never audibles to a running play lol. I think it's probably more fair to say, Jimmy and Dan were a bad fit at that point in their careers.



    I think Dave Wannstedt was overrated as a defensive mind. Too often he would get caught w/his pants down and our defense would implode. His defenses had more booms than busts, but still too many busts. Miami had two potential future HOF's in Zach Thomas and Jason Taylor. Two shutdown corners in Madison and Surtain, who in their prime, were as good as anyone, ever... Solid safeties behind them. And an overall good defensive line. Someone like a Belichick or Carroll would have had a field day coaching up those guys. Wannstedt was adequate, IMO.

    And I don't think it's fair to say the offenses were "unimaginative" under Wannstedt. They were... but purposefully so, due to Dave's real failure, securing a starting QB w/his decisions to pass on Trent Green in favor of Fiedler, and failing to draft Drew Brees in favor of Fiedler. Chan Gailey and Norv Turner were the OC under Wannstedt. I consider both guys to be very good offensive minds. Maybe outdated in 2015, but from 2000-2003, they were excellent additions to Miami. Can't blame them from having to scheme around Fiedler, Griese, Lucas, etc...


    Did he lose the locker room? As someone previously stated, their were players, including leader Jason Taylor who liked Saban. Nick Saban's biggest flaw is that he isn't an NFL coach. He's a recruiter, not a drafter. And his drafts were horrible.


    Most coaches are risk adverse. Maybe Sparano more than others (I don't know if that's true, but lets assume it is)... Sparano did note in 2011 that he wanted more mobility from his QB. Citing Rodgers and Big Ben as QB's who create bigger plays than anyone else. And he did help bring out the WC, which Miami ran more effectively than anyone else. Sure it died, but was it because of overuse? No... It died because it was limited. And to his credit, Sparano and co. did try to evolve the wildcat w/Pat White. Obviously the trigger man (white) sucked and never developed but, the wildcat paved the way for the read option. It paved the way for mobile QB's in this generation like Cam Newton, Russell Wilson, etc... Sparano wasn't unimaginative. He knew what he wanted, but didn't have the personnel for it.



    1. I disagree a bit, but fair enough.
    2. Not accurate at all. Wannstedt's failures were due 1) Failure to secure a starting QB. 2) Bad drafting. 3) Vanilla defenses.
    3. OK.
    4. I don't know what went on w/Cameron, suffice it to say, he was in way over his head.
    5. Absolutely wrong. Sparano had more imagination than any coach we've had in the last 20 years. That wasn't his undoing. Sparano and co. set the stage for a new kind of offensive scheme in the NFL. Had Sparano had Newton or a Russell Wilson, he would of likely been considered the biggest innovator at the NFL level prior to Chip Kelly's arrival.
    6. OK.

    As someone else stated, the problem has been QB. It's much easier to be imaginative w/a great QB than it is w/the Fiedler's and Henne's of the world.
     
  21. Tannephins

    Tannephins Banned

    1,818
    572
    0
    Dec 23, 2014
    ...and even the late-career Marinos....
     
  22. Clark Kent

    Clark Kent Fighter of the Nightman

    8,560
    4,133
    113
    May 9, 2008
    Agreed. And I love Marino,
     
  23. Fin D

    Fin D Sigh

    72,252
    43,684
    113
    Nov 27, 2007
    I view the game as three parts:

    - The coaching staff
    - The QB
    - The rest of the players

    Its also not as simple as saying if 2 of 3 are playing well, then you have success though.

    Anyone of those three can sabotage the season and/or one of the other parts. You need competence at all 3 to get to the playoffs (in the case of #3 I'm talking about the net overall level). You need to excel at 2 while having competence at the remaining one to go further.
     
  24. RoninFin4

    RoninFin4 Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    23,797
    45,399
    113
    Dec 11, 2007
    Cincinnati, Ohio
    One thing in the "plus" column for me about Jackson is that he's gotten experience in a multitude of different roles. He's been a head coach, offensive coordinator, quarterback coach, running back coach, wide receivers coach, secondary coach, and special teams coordinator. ALL of those roles are roles he's held at the NFL level.

    He's also a former client of Mike Tannenbaum, whose track record in terms of being an agent for coaches is sparkling right now. Steve Kerr, David Blatt and now Dan Quinn have all achieved/are achieving high levels of success. Al Saunders, a confidant of Jackson, was also brought in. Miami offered Jim Schwartz to come in as a defensive consultant. Jackson interviewed for Buffalo's head coaching gig this past offseason and said he'd have kept Schwartz in place. Read into that what you will, but I think that was at least a somewhat concerted effort to set the table for a possible Hue Jackson hiring.
     
  25. Onehondo

    Onehondo Senior Member Club Member

    2,671
    879
    113
    Dec 20, 2007
    Chesapeake, Virginia
    We have had a lot of coaches who played harder to not lose than they did to win, if that makes sense. I also have a question, if someone would answer it. Why was Philbin hired, was it because he was seen as a good offensive coordinator, or special talents with player development, or special abilities building offensive lines? Or maybe he had some other special skills? Its a serious question, so that I can better understand why the owner and his management team makes some of the decisions they make
     
  26. Tannephins

    Tannephins Banned

    1,818
    572
    0
    Dec 23, 2014
    The Packers were coming off a Super Bowl win, their offense was largely responsible for their success, and Ross and company thought that bringing someone in thought to be partly responsible for it would translate here.
     
  27. Colmax

    Colmax Well-Known Member

    5,126
    3,241
    113
    Dec 12, 2007
    Good on you for recognizing this. I admit, Sparano has been my favorite HC since Shula (and I didn't know ANYTHING about football outside of Marino was a bad-***.....years ago, and I was a kid).

    My feelings on Sparano is that he didn't get a fair shake. Maybe he did, but I thought he was actually building something. Bad on the team for the injuries, esp. to Ronnie Brown, and some of the late-game defensive collapses, and maybe Chad Henne. I think under his tenure, Miami was tops (or near there) in first-possession second half scoring. It seems as though, what is the norm today in deferring possession at the beginning of the game, he started. I think he had good vision as to where the game was going, as you pointed out. I just wonder if he could have kept up that forward-thinking (albeit, in an old-school kind of way)? I think he could have. I thought he was building something in Miami that could have been sustainable. Wish he could have had a few more years.
     
  28. The_Dark_Knight

    The_Dark_Knight Defender of the Truth

    11,939
    10,456
    113
    Nov 24, 2007
    Rockledge, FL
    I've always been of he opinion that great coaches make great players, not the other way around. Had we gotten Brees instead of Culpepper, I don't believe our record would have been THAT much better. There's always so much talk of the importance of the quarterback and not nearly enough talk about the importance of the head coach. Two prime examples that are irrefutable.

    Joe Gibbs as the HC of the Washington Redskins won 3 Super Bowls in 4 years with 3 different quarterbacks...Theismann, Williams and Rypien. Gibbs has a EFFECTIVE system in place and elevated the playing level of his team without having an all star quarterback.

    Now some will say, "aw, that's ancient history". Ok, more recently...2008, Tom Brady goes down for the season in week 1 with a torn ACL and Matt Cassel comes in and leads the Patriots to the playoffs. Since Cassel's departure from the Patriots, I don't think anyone would say Cassel's had an all star career. Belichik, his system and his coaching ability elevates the level of play from his team.

    Bottom line, the most important player on a team is indeed the head coach
     
  29. Tannephins

    Tannephins Banned

    1,818
    572
    0
    Dec 23, 2014
    I'm not sure you should attribute that to the head coach exclusively. If there is a winning culture in place, as there has been for over a decade on the Patriots, there is a natural human tendency for other players to give extra effort when a quarterback is injured, in the effort to continue what the team has established. Now, of course you can attribute that winning culture at least in part to the head coach, and I think you'd be right, but I believe that winning culture is largely a product of what the players themselves foster via their own leadership and attitudes.

    The key in my opinion is a combination of three things: 1) enough physical talent among the players to inspire a belief among them that they can be highly competitive in the league, where the play at the quarterback position is crucial, 2) a belief among the players that their coaches have the ability to put them in position to be highly competitive, where the actual ability of the coaches is critical, and 3) leadership among the players that can create a consistent winning culture.

    Those are the ingredients of dynasties. Everything else is hit or miss and results in relatively wide variation from year to year. The worst teams in the league have none of the three, which I think you could argue has been exemplified by the 2015 Dolphins thus far.
     
    DolphinGreg likes this.
  30. DolphinGreg

    DolphinGreg Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    5,227
    6,527
    113
    Dec 7, 2014
    I have to 2nd what Tannephins said and add a bit myself...


    Rex Grossman got to a Super Bowl and Trent Dilfer did too. Think about that.

    Look, I appreciate when people bring up relatively bad QBs who achieved success within the confines of great teams it’s nearly always false in the same way pointing to a guy that made a million dollars selling some stupid piece of garbage product and calling him a great businessman is false. It’s misleading. It’s a badly drawn conclusion.

    You didn’t see a bunch of teams clamoring for those Chicago QBs after they got to the Super Bowl did you? Nobody wanted Brian Griese, Rex Grossman or Kyle Orton after that because folks knew the primary component in the Bears Super Bowl run was defense. The second was a good running game. The third was an historically great special teams unit led by Devin Hester, probably the greatest return man ever. The passing game was an afterthought.

    I point this out because we might look at Lovie Smith and say, ‘wow, he must really know QBs to get those guys to a Super Bowl!’ We’d be wrong (obviously) because the QB play was definitely not superior on those teams and they had success despite it.

    So don’t point to Matt Cassell who inherited the Godliest throne in QB’ing history in 2008. The real story goes like this…Tom Brady goes down and Cassell steps in behind the best pass-blocking O-line NE ever had and gets to throw the ball to a bunch of solid guys along with Wes Welker and Randy Moss maybe the most complimentary duo of WRs ever put on a field. Welker at the time was considered one of the most uncover-able WRs in the NFL and a guy who’d catch anything—probably a good option for a new QB. Not only was Moss a physical freak considered one of the most capable WRs to ever suit up in the NFL but he was coming off his most productive year in which he set the single season TD record along with Brady. Moss was exactly the type of WR an inexperienced QB would love. Just throw it up to the big man or launch it out in front of him and let him go get it!

    That 2008 NE team, regardless of who stepped in at QB, was going to win games. They were 16-0 the year before in the regular season. Heck, the addition of Cassell cost them 5 games! The fact Cassell hadn’t played since high school is evidence of that. Bill Belichick hardly proved anything other than he had the best team in football for a couple years and it wasn’t even close. And I haven’t said a word about the defense which as we all know was pretty good at the time.

    If you take a normal team that is let’s say a Wildcard contender at 10-6 and put in a QB that will cost them 5 games they’ll be 5-11 and people will say, ‘oh, well, they lost their QB, it’s no wonder they didn’t do as well.’ When you do it with a 16-0 team and they wind up 11-5 mostly because of a good run at the end, you get people talking about the HC as though he did something.

    When it comes to Washington I can’t comment because it’s not my era, but that’s another problem, you can’t compare the roles and responsibilities of QBs in the 80s to what they are now in a league that features the QB like never before. Maybe Gibbs is some sort of exception to the rule but that’s a different era of football and you’re talking about Redskins teams that ran the ball really well.

    And lest we not forget that Joe Theisman is in the Hall of Fame. He’s hardly someone we can write off as garbage that Joe Gibbs lifted up despite his lack of talent. I’m not the biggest Theisman fan but, c’mon, the Redskins were very talented teams and that gave Gibbs a big edge in out-scheming the other coaches.
     
  31. ILDolPhan

    ILDolPhan New Member

    136
    30
    0
    Apr 9, 2013
    I think going 8-8 in Oakland with Jason Campbell & Gradkowski as your QB's is pretty impressive. He is technically a "retread", but his firing was attributed to the new GM wanting his guy. Looking back, I would assume McKenzie would keep Jackson over Dennis Allen, but I digress.

    It seems like everyone is on board with Malzahn as the next great HC, but I'd be more confident today that Jackson would provide better results as HC than Malzahn. Not that Malzahn won't be a good find if he makes the move, but he's an unknown in the NFL. Based off Jackson's track record (his offenses are always at the top), I think you should ask "what makes you think Malzahn is on Jackson's level?". I also wonder what type of coaching staff Malzahn could assemble, and I don't have any worries about that w/Jackson.

    My only concern with Jackson would be some of the issues that came up at Oakland during a press conference or two. He seemed to have a short fuse, but at least he had fire/passion, which is unlike the most recent HC in Miami. Seeing him elevate Dalton this year, I would love to see what he could do with Tannehill.
     
  32. Piston Honda

    Piston Honda Well-Known Member

    7,853
    8,088
    113
    Sep 23, 2014
    Couple points on the 2008 Patriots. Cassell didn't lead them to the playoffs, they were 11-5, still didn't make the post season. The other point is that 11-5 sounds good but they were 18-1 the years before, 16-0 regular season. A 5 game drop off, from all time great to slightly above average.
     
  33. The_Dark_Knight

    The_Dark_Knight Defender of the Truth

    11,939
    10,456
    113
    Nov 24, 2007
    Rockledge, FL
    You made my argument for me.
     
  34. The_Dark_Knight

    The_Dark_Knight Defender of the Truth

    11,939
    10,456
    113
    Nov 24, 2007
    Rockledge, FL
    You're right, my mistake. That was the last season WE made the playoffs
     
  35. jdang307

    jdang307 Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    39,159
    21,798
    113
    Nov 29, 2007
    San Diego
    I point this out when people say Brady isn't much, and look they went 11-5 without him.

    Yeah, 5 game drop off! LIke going from 11-5 to 6-11.
     
  36. DolphinGreg

    DolphinGreg Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    5,227
    6,527
    113
    Dec 7, 2014
    No I did not. You claimed that the HC was the most important. Clearly many recent instances prove that is not always the case and it may not even be normal except in the case of a few great coaches like Shula, Belichick, Gibbs, etc.

    That's hardly a model we can use...where's the next once-in-a-generation HC? Can you please point him out because apparently the Dolphins need one of those!


    The truth is, even when you look at the great dynasties there were clearly highlight players, most of which made (or will make) the HoF.
     
  37. PhinFan1968

    PhinFan1968 To 2020, and BEYOND! Club Member

    That argument would hold water if 16-0 was a realistically sustainable standard...which, of course, it isn't.

    12-4/13-3 maybe...particularly considering they never got close to 16-0 since, or before.
     
  38. The_Dark_Knight

    The_Dark_Knight Defender of the Truth

    11,939
    10,456
    113
    Nov 24, 2007
    Rockledge, FL
    You're right....we should have kept Philbin and Coyle. They OBVIOUSLY weren't the problem
     
  39. Pauly

    Pauly Season Ticket Holder

    3,699
    3,750
    113
    Nov 29, 2007
    On the whole who is more important, the QB or the Coach argument. I have to firmly come down on the die of the Voach being more important.
    I follow a few different types of football. In soccer success follows the good managers. in Rugby success follows the great coaches.

    But HoF coaches are loke HOF QBs. They are hard to find, but if you're not lookiing you won't find them. Also you need to have a clear idea of what you think makes a HoF Coach when you're looking, There's no way anyone can honestly say that Philbin or Sparano had HoF candidate stamped on their resume when they were hired. The only one since Johnson who had that stamp on their resume was Saban, and we forgot to read the fine print that it applied to Div 1 College, not the NFL.
     
  40. Dolphinzdawgg

    Dolphinzdawgg Banned

    227
    38
    28
    Feb 22, 2015
    Coral Gables, FL
    Great write-up except for this - it seems to be a dichotomy. I'd really like to see the list of players "coached up" by Philbin.
     

Share This Page