Eliot Wolf - Green Bay's draft record and retention is unmatched in this league.
Trent Kirchner - Say what you want about Seahawks problems on the OL, but until 2017 Kirchner was part of an organization that built one of the most impressive power running games in recent memory, plus a dominant defense. The Seattle Defense is on pace to allow the fewest points in the NFL for the 5th straight season! They allow a league low 17 points per game. Sure scheme has a lot to do with it, but Seattle has drafted well on defense and kept it going. Kirchner has a strong resume if you ask me. Seattle Defense - ( New Window )
While GB's draft record and retention is unmatched, I can't shake the feeling I'm watching a team fundamentally lacking in overall talent functioning by the sheer talent of the QB.
Are a mediocre at best drafting team. A lot of “ok” guys but no difference makers or impact players. I’d compare them to the redskins the last few years re: the draft.
I’d prefer the Giants not be a perpetual 7-9 to 9-7 team.
But no one on this board really has a clue who is good and is not. Guys in organizations can be a great gear in a great machine that they have no hand in and you don't find out until they get the gig themselves. Even a successful "talent evaluator" or guys with good eyes, I mean those are a dime a dozen. It's not seeing talent or evaluating it, that's not difficult. What's difficult is the giant organism that a football team is, that relies on talent, a sound scheme, good teaching, good nutrition, good coaching, good luck, good health and smart personnel management. It's about creating a system, a top to bottom system that works and that system can lose a piece or a part and keep functioning because the whole is greater than the sum of its parts.
Elliot Wolf might be amazing, but maybe the guys his GM takes aren't the ones he'd take or the offense isn't the one he'd look for a coach for. We simply have no idea, so rating Jim A vs Jim B is fun but none of us, not one single person here has any iota what goes on in the day to day of running a successful NFL franchise. We can assume the framework and know what the parts are, but we don't know how they truly interact and what mechanism it is that drives it. Is it money? Is it success? Is it internally driven people? Is it innately talented people? Is it incredibly detailed hard working people? Yes, its all of them, woven together in a way that works and making that work is the trick. This is an organizational philosophy, one we need from Mr. Mara at the top and it has to be unwavering and it has to be implemented well and during his time he hasn't shown that vision.
What Mr. Mara has shown is that he wants to win and he wants to do things the right way, he doesn't always do either but I truly believe he does what he thinks is best. He's a smart man, you can debate it all you want but it's fact. What he is not though, is an organizational leader with a vision. He wants to win, he knows that, he wants integrity, he wants accountability, all good traits but he's not a man of vision. What he needs directly under him is a steward of this franchise, someone with a blue print for how his team should play. Not "heavy handed" or "protect the Duke", that's showy bullshit nonsense, I mean strong LOS, diverse fronts on defense built on a core philosophy (stopping the run for instance), tall DBs, big interior players, smarter skill players, etc.
One of the reasons Little Bill has been so great is because he has a system and it's the same one we won two titles with. Two big blocking pass catching TEs at all times, big pass catching hammer type running FB, at all times, small quick pass catching darting 3rd down rb, at all times, a physical runner at all times, big edge rushers at all times, stout interior DL at all times, smart, quick, hard nosed WRs at all times. Go back and look at the Bavaro, Mowatt, Carthon, Baker, Ingram, Morris, Anderson, Meggett teams on offense. They weren't super star 40 time players but everyone could win a situation and we did it all over the field. The Pats have done the same thing for years and it's not a mystery but no one replicates it. Kevin Faulk, James White, Corey Dillon, LeGarrette Blount, Rex Burkhead, Amendola, Welker, Hogan, Troy Brown, Gronk, Bennett...the list goes on. Yes Gronk is a star yes Randy Moss and Brandin Cooks are burners but the core, the very essence of these teams is the same ingredients year after year. You identify what works, and you go find it and you replace it and they have for 15 straight seasons.
I realize the Tom Brady thing and the NFC East stinks on ice, but the core is the same we used in the 1980s to topple John Elway and the K Gun, with pedestrian offenses and pretty slow big but smart and tough defenses. Bill still uses that, he's never deviated and people go nuts looking to copy him. It's not hard, its just that no one can do it like he does year in and year out. He has built a core philosophy and the pieces look great as a whole. He has a guy to find the scrappy short area middle of the field hands like glue WR and he always has a few. He finds the big hulking, blocking pass catching TEs and he always has two. His guys go get what he wants because he knows what he wants and he drafts and signs accordingly and they meld into his culture. That is what we need, not a single name, not a hot star who "made" a team good again because those guys don't exist. Trade names all day, crow when you're guy gets hired then the others can bitch when we lose a game and their guy didn't get the nod because they know OH SO MUCH about how to run and fill an NFL front office. Whoever it is, wherever he is from he has to have a core philosophy and it has to be implemented from the top down, period. That's our best choice, the person with the clear plan who has the authority to implement it HIS way.
There's not some magical guy out there with an impeccable draft record. If there was, he would have a job as a GM already and wouldn't be leaving. Everyone is blowing Dorsey as some "great evaluator of talent" and maybe he is, but look at his draft record with the Chiefs. It is not unlike a ton of GMs out there. Some really good picks, some awful ones. The kicker? He had Andy Reid as a coach. Dorsey's first ever pick for the Chiefs was #1 overall, and the guy ended up a complete bust (Eric Fisher). His next few drafts weren't exactly home runs. All these guys have an "eye" for talent, sometimes the talent just doesn't pan out. Draft is a crapshoot. You just have to be more consistent than the other guy.
My point is, Reese's draft record is just as good as John Dorsey's, if not better. Let that sink in.
There's a few things I want as the next GM of this team:
1. Be lock step with the HC and owner as what the new identity of this team is going to be. When you pick players, they know they are going to be GIANTS. Reese went off the deep end in taking guys with a ton of upside who weren't all that interested in being physical football players. That needs to stop.
2. Manage resources and the roster effectively. Essentially, know what the hell you're doing when you look at a roster. If the QB is making 20M a year, you better make damn sure you put the pieces around him to succeed.
3. Communicate to the media and the fans what the vision of the team is in a way that doesn't make you sound like you are smarter than everyone else. This isn't a knock at Reese. He was basically in a lose lose situation at the end, whatever he said was scrutinized to no end.
4. Lastly, be a football guy. Be a scout that has worked for a winning organization in the past. I don't have any interest in the next cap wizard who has been learning the ropes (Abrams). I'm sure he's a nice guy and great at what he does, but he's not a scout and he's never been one.
common sense obvious good management in ANY business, yet most organizations are incapable of doing it.
Have a core philosphy, find personnel that can implement it. No matter who the assistants are, they never change the playbook or terminology. There was a great piece in SI about this that I posted here a while back. I think it was in October, I'll try to find it.
Excellent post, Joey. The first sentence speaks volumes. Â
The more I think about it, the more I want him as the next Giants head coach. He has had that extra seasoning under Lil' Bill, and you know he's going to run the football program like he does. I see greatness in him. I think he's the guy. He failed in Denver. And Belichick failed his first go in Cleveland. I always give a coach a pass when they don't have a competent QB. And even though that was largely McDaniels' fault in choosing Tebow, coaches don't play the game, the players do, and you can't win in the NFL without competency at the QB position.
Belichick is notoriously extremely demanding of his assistant coaches, and not only did McDaniels get hired by Bill as a know-nothing 25 year-old with only 1 year of experience as a graduate assistant for Michigan State, he stayed with him for 8 seasons, promoting him alone the way, and after a 3-year interlude with Denver and the Rams, Bill hired him back as the OC for the last 6 years. That's 14 total seasons with the greatest head coach in history.
Further, he'll install a lot of the offensive creativity and innovation that has helped the Patriots to be a consistently top offense in the NFL for a very long time.
Yes, he has benefitted from having Brady and Belichick. But it's not just Brady being great, it's McDaniels also, designing and implementing a system that gets the most out of Brady and the rest of his players.
should be on the list. He missed on the QB but he infused that team with a lot of talent. 20 of his 24 picks have the chance to be multi year contributors
Dumbest assessment ever.. They have shit for talent and had a TON of picks.. Those picks made the team but look at the team... They played Moneyball in the NFL and failed horribly doing it.
They actually don't have shit for talent, that might be the dumbest assessment ever. To name a few
Myles Garrett
Emmanuel Ogbah
Larry Ogunjobi
Derrick Kindred
David Njoku
Carl Nassib
Corey Coleman when healthy.
He could have traded Josh Gordon but didn't. His strategy wasn't wrong, the Browns were just impatient. Filling the other positions with talent and then getting your QB is a good strategy.
The more I think about it, the more I want him as the next Giants head coach. He has had that extra seasoning under Lil' Bill, and you know he's going to run the football program like he does. I see greatness in him. I think he's the guy. He failed in Denver. And Belichick failed his first go in Cleveland. I always give a coach a pass when they don't have a competent QB. And even though that was largely McDaniels' fault in choosing Tebow, coaches don't play the game, the players do, and you can't win in the NFL without competency at the QB position.
Belichick is notoriously extremely demanding of his assistant coaches, and not only did McDaniels get hired by Bill as a know-nothing 25 year-old with only 1 year of experience as a graduate assistant for Michigan State, he stayed with him for 8 seasons, promoting him alone the way, and after a 3-year interlude with Denver and the Rams, Bill hired him back as the OC for the last 6 years. That's 14 total seasons with the greatest head coach in history.
Further, he'll install a lot of the offensive creativity and innovation that has helped the Patriots to be a consistently top offense in the NFL for a very long time.
Yes, he has benefitted from having Brady and Belichick. But it's not just Brady being great, it's McDaniels also, designing and implementing a system that gets the most out of Brady and the rest of his players.
I really hope he's the guy.
I am not a huge fan of McDaniels but I would much rather give him a chance over some names being thrown around like John Fox, Marvin Lewis, etc.
His age is a slight concern and it might be a situation like DeCosta in Baltimore where it will be difficult to lure him away due to assurances that he will succeed Thompson. Wolf and Abrams returning to he previous post would be a nice start IMO. Wolf has the chance to lock down the GM position for the next 10+ years.
I said it before and I'll say it again. I don't care if Â
The names being thrown around here don't mean anything... every single person will have good picks and bad picks to their resume... and you don't really know whether those picks/FA moves were theirs or someone elses.
Reese was no exception. His fatal flaw, IMO, was not having a cohesive plan in place that meshed with the HC. BM talked about being heavy handed, yet we focused on the passing game and did nothing positive to help the OLine and RB position.
His recent mid-season PC answers were evidence, again IMO, that he had no real plan that he could communicate and that was evident by the players he was signing/drafting.
so I totally agree with those saying the #1 thing our new GM needs to have is a philosophy that is easily articulated and a plan to enact it. And that philosophy needs to be shared by the HC and his coordinators.
and compare his time there to McDaniels in Denver?? Those two situations have absolutely nothing in common other than that they ended in a firing.
So true. Art Modell ruined BB in Cleveland. BB had beatne the Tuna led Pats in the 1994 playoffs and were considered a SB contender in 1995 when the news of the move to Baltimore broke and chaos ensued.
The names being thrown around here don't mean anything... every single person will have good picks and bad picks to their resume... and you don't really know whether those picks/FA moves were theirs or someone elses.
Reese was no exception. His fatal flaw, IMO, was not having a cohesive plan in place that meshed with the HC. BM talked about being heavy handed, yet we focused on the passing game and did nothing positive to help the OLine and RB position.
His recent mid-season PC answers were evidence, again IMO, that he had no real plan that he could communicate and that was evident by the players he was signing/drafting.
so I totally agree with those saying the #1 thing our new GM needs to have is a philosophy that is easily articulated and a plan to enact it. And that philosophy needs to be shared by the HC and his coordinators.
Of course every GM will have good and bad picks to their name. Reese has entire drafts that were terrible, though. For example, not a single player selected in 2012 is in the NFL right now. He has repeatedly whiffed on the OL, both in the draft and FA, including his own FA.
if you read my post as a defense of Reese, then you mis-read it. Or I wasn't clear enough.
My only point was, IMO, it wasn't Reese's talent eval skills that truly did him in... although more recently he has whiffed much more than not... it was the overall lack of cohesive philosophy and implementation of said philosophy that was his downfall.
RE: That one comment about Ross makes everything else in this suspect. Â
Anyone else surprised there is no one from the Steelers organization on the list. I honestly thought we would use the Mara Rooney connection to maybe snag their second in line over there. They are one of the most consistent teams year in and year out in the NFL..
They probably have a gentleman's agreement not to raid each others personnel.
RE: RE: the BB failed in Cleveland thing is so wrong Â
His record in Cleveland was 36-44. Aside from the playoff appearance that you cherry picked he had a losing record every season in Cleveland.
Fact checking is your friend.
He took over a 3-13 team of graybeards, went 6-10, 7-9, 7-9, then 11-5 and a playoff win. Sudden turnarounds were a lot harder to come by back then before true free agency. They were 4-4, I believe, when Modell announced the move, which pretty much destroyed the season. They went 1-7 after that.
Anyone else surprised there is no one from the Steelers organization on the list. I honestly thought we would use the Mara Rooney connection to maybe snag their second in line over there. They are one of the most consistent teams year in and year out in the NFL, and I would love to be more like them in the grand scheme.
I am surprised -- the Steelers draft very well. Seems like every draft they take at least a few players that I wish the Giants had taken.
you can paint the narrative any way you like. Maybe the 11-5 season was the pivot where it was all going to turn around until the move wrecked everything or maybe it was a fluke. I've always believed it was the latter and pretty sure that's how most Browns fans view it. The 1996 Ravens went 4-12 for what it's worth.
RE: RE: RE: the BB failed in Cleveland thing is so wrong Â
His record in Cleveland was 36-44. Aside from the playoff appearance that you cherry picked he had a losing record every season in Cleveland.
Fact checking is your friend.
He took over a 3-13 team of graybeards, went 6-10, 7-9, 7-9, then 11-5 and a playoff win. Sudden turnarounds were a lot harder to come by back then before true free agency. They were 4-4, I believe, when Modell announced the move, which pretty much destroyed the season. They went 1-7 after that.
Everyone also seems to forget that BB helped teach Ozzie Newsome, who went on to build the team that won the SB for the Ravens. and that build started in earnest in the 1996 draft with Jonathan Odgen and Ray Lewis.
You can't judge him solely on his overall record. As Greg said, he took over a 3-13 team! And if you look at the roster he inherited, you'll know why they were 3-13.
He had a mess at QB in his 3rd season and I believe Bernie Kosar, who was nearing his end, was traded during the season.
BB then took what many would consider an underachieving (at the time) Vinny Testeverde and the Browns to the playoffs in his 4th season and led them to their only playoff victory in the last 28 years. 28 f-ing years! And they still didn't have a great roster.
I think you have to throw his fifth season out of the equation to be fair. He lost his starting QB (Vinny) before the '95 season even started and then there was the Modell clusterf*ck of moving the franchise.
I think a reasonable person could see that BB could've been in the process of turning the franchise around if given a little patience, especially considering the roster he inherited, QB injury, franchise move, etc.
My guess is knowledgeable Browns fans wish BB was given more patience (and of course that the Browns never left after '95).
the street is that Accorsi has his eye on a relatively under the radar candidate. Someone who goes by the pseudonym Anak? Apparently, he spotted Ernie talking on his phone a few years ago, followed him throughout midtown Manhattan for a number of blocks and showed the courage to introduce himself. That interaction has stuck with Accorsi and now the Yeshiva U law grad and Courtney Cox doppelganger is right in the mix for his dream job.
whatever you think of his time in CLE, he clearly is one of the all time greats now.
No, just think it's shallow thinking to say that he was a failure in CLE.
It's not like I'm the Pres. of his fan club, I just think there were a lot of factors out of his control, e.g., the crappy roster he inherited, the franchise move, etc.
And as others have said, not only was it more difficult to turn around a team quickly in those days, they didn't have years of high draft picks on the roster, like they do now. They aged and bottomed out quickly, making it even more difficult to rebuild.
how will people on this board feel if Spags gets the HC job.
while perhaps he has learned from his mistakes in st Louis and I like him as a coordinator, there is a risk that appointing spags would fall into an incumbency bias. the giants need to open the piggy bank and cast the new broad and wide and find the best candidate available. McAdoo was a mistake that was made thinking that continuity would be helpful. I think the Giants are going to go for a big name.
I was in a bookstore many years ago and I saw a book about Jimmy Johnson. As I unzipped and prepared to urinate on it I noticed that the introduction was written by none other than Bill Parcells. So I tucked back in and gave it a quick read, wondering what Tuna would have to say about JJ.
He basically said, "I knew JJ would be a successful coach in the NFL. He had a system (philosophy, whatever the exact word was) that was proven to work, and knew how to execute that system by getting the right people in place, and teaching them to play in that system."
This is what we need. We need someone who has a coherent understanding and system, an understanding of what is needed at each position, and can communicate with a GM on how to get the right people to man it, and can teach players to run it.
I am a believer in equifinality. That is, there are many paths to the same outcome. You can win with power football. You can win with speed. You can win with the WCO and you can win with the spread attack. But, to win with any of them,you have to be great at putting it all in place so it is coherent. And know the system's weaknesses that will be attacked and how to counter move.
I remember in the Tuna/Simms heyday, people would know exactly what we were going to do on O, they just couldn't stop it because we were very good at doing it.
RE: RE: Is someone suggesting BB is not a good coach? Â
whatever you think of his time in CLE, he clearly is one of the all time greats now.
No, just think it's shallow thinking to say that he was a failure in CLE.
It's not like I'm the Pres. of his fan club, I just think there were a lot of factors out of his control, e.g., the crappy roster he inherited, the franchise move, etc.
And as others have said, not only was it more difficult to turn around a team quickly in those days, they didn't have years of high draft picks on the roster, like they do now. They aged and bottomed out quickly, making it even more difficult to rebuild.
Ah, the big blue goggles strike again.
I never said he was a failure, but he was hardly a success. He had a losing record, that's not success. Yes, some things worked against him. They always do. Shit happens. I get it.
The point is that just because McDaniels didn't set the world in fire in Denver doesn't mean he won't have success in NY. Belichick, widely considered the best of all time, didn't set the world on fire in Cleveland. He had a losing record.
Everything is black and white around here. Belichick is a great coach, that doesn t mean everything he has ever done is perfect.
LakeGeorge Re. Everything is black and white around here. Â
and compare his time there to McDaniels in Denver?? Those two situations have absolutely nothing in common other than that they ended in a firing.
Yeah, you're right, McDaniels was better earlier than Lil' Bill. Perhaps if the Broncos gave McDaniels 4 seasons to win he would've been a success. Bill got 5 seasons in Cleveland, and the first 3 seasons were all losing seasons. McDaniels went 8-8 his first year, then they pulled the plug on him after a 3-9 start year 2.
Not sure if your narrative is that Bill Belicheck didn't fail because he had one really good year out of 5 and then got fired because of Modell and the move, but if that is the narrative, it's a wrong one. Belicheck went 11-5 his 4th season and then went 5-11 his last season...he likely would not have survived that with a lot of teams, one winning season out of 5?
McDaniels could've done that if the Broncos didn't let him go after only 12 games in his 2nd year. Yes, there was turmoil with players, but that was a quick trigger and it doesn't mean he isn't a great candidate today, which he sure is. For Belicheck to entrust his offense to him for so long, it means something. For him to have earned a head coaching job as young as he was, that means something, too...that he was doing it the right way.
Trent Kirchner - Say what you want about Seahawks problems on the OL, but until 2017 Kirchner was part of an organization that built one of the most impressive power running games in recent memory, plus a dominant defense. The Seattle Defense is on pace to allow the fewest points in the NFL for the 5th straight season! They allow a league low 17 points per game. Sure scheme has a lot to do with it, but Seattle has drafted well on defense and kept it going. Kirchner has a strong resume if you ask me. Seattle Defense - ( New Window )
While GB's draft record and retention is unmatched, I can't shake the feeling I'm watching a team fundamentally lacking in overall talent functioning by the sheer talent of the QB.
I’d prefer the Giants not be a perpetual 7-9 to 9-7 team.
Elliot Wolf might be amazing, but maybe the guys his GM takes aren't the ones he'd take or the offense isn't the one he'd look for a coach for. We simply have no idea, so rating Jim A vs Jim B is fun but none of us, not one single person here has any iota what goes on in the day to day of running a successful NFL franchise. We can assume the framework and know what the parts are, but we don't know how they truly interact and what mechanism it is that drives it. Is it money? Is it success? Is it internally driven people? Is it innately talented people? Is it incredibly detailed hard working people? Yes, its all of them, woven together in a way that works and making that work is the trick. This is an organizational philosophy, one we need from Mr. Mara at the top and it has to be unwavering and it has to be implemented well and during his time he hasn't shown that vision.
What Mr. Mara has shown is that he wants to win and he wants to do things the right way, he doesn't always do either but I truly believe he does what he thinks is best. He's a smart man, you can debate it all you want but it's fact. What he is not though, is an organizational leader with a vision. He wants to win, he knows that, he wants integrity, he wants accountability, all good traits but he's not a man of vision. What he needs directly under him is a steward of this franchise, someone with a blue print for how his team should play. Not "heavy handed" or "protect the Duke", that's showy bullshit nonsense, I mean strong LOS, diverse fronts on defense built on a core philosophy (stopping the run for instance), tall DBs, big interior players, smarter skill players, etc.
One of the reasons Little Bill has been so great is because he has a system and it's the same one we won two titles with. Two big blocking pass catching TEs at all times, big pass catching hammer type running FB, at all times, small quick pass catching darting 3rd down rb, at all times, a physical runner at all times, big edge rushers at all times, stout interior DL at all times, smart, quick, hard nosed WRs at all times. Go back and look at the Bavaro, Mowatt, Carthon, Baker, Ingram, Morris, Anderson, Meggett teams on offense. They weren't super star 40 time players but everyone could win a situation and we did it all over the field. The Pats have done the same thing for years and it's not a mystery but no one replicates it. Kevin Faulk, James White, Corey Dillon, LeGarrette Blount, Rex Burkhead, Amendola, Welker, Hogan, Troy Brown, Gronk, Bennett...the list goes on. Yes Gronk is a star yes Randy Moss and Brandin Cooks are burners but the core, the very essence of these teams is the same ingredients year after year. You identify what works, and you go find it and you replace it and they have for 15 straight seasons.
I realize the Tom Brady thing and the NFC East stinks on ice, but the core is the same we used in the 1980s to topple John Elway and the K Gun, with pedestrian offenses and pretty slow big but smart and tough defenses. Bill still uses that, he's never deviated and people go nuts looking to copy him. It's not hard, its just that no one can do it like he does year in and year out. He has built a core philosophy and the pieces look great as a whole. He has a guy to find the scrappy short area middle of the field hands like glue WR and he always has a few. He finds the big hulking, blocking pass catching TEs and he always has two. His guys go get what he wants because he knows what he wants and he drafts and signs accordingly and they meld into his culture. That is what we need, not a single name, not a hot star who "made" a team good again because those guys don't exist. Trade names all day, crow when you're guy gets hired then the others can bitch when we lose a game and their guy didn't get the nod because they know OH SO MUCH about how to run and fill an NFL front office. Whoever it is, wherever he is from he has to have a core philosophy and it has to be implemented from the top down, period. That's our best choice, the person with the clear plan who has the authority to implement it HIS way.
Why Russ? Former NFL offensive lineman . let me double check that. Maybe hire both of them somehow.
Chris Morgan is falcs OL coach former Seattle OL coach.
Steve, Russ and Chris as OC.
My point is, Reese's draft record is just as good as John Dorsey's, if not better. Let that sink in.
There's a few things I want as the next GM of this team:
1. Be lock step with the HC and owner as what the new identity of this team is going to be. When you pick players, they know they are going to be GIANTS. Reese went off the deep end in taking guys with a ton of upside who weren't all that interested in being physical football players. That needs to stop.
2. Manage resources and the roster effectively. Essentially, know what the hell you're doing when you look at a roster. If the QB is making 20M a year, you better make damn sure you put the pieces around him to succeed.
3. Communicate to the media and the fans what the vision of the team is in a way that doesn't make you sound like you are smarter than everyone else. This isn't a knock at Reese. He was basically in a lose lose situation at the end, whatever he said was scrutinized to no end.
4. Lastly, be a football guy. Be a scout that has worked for a winning organization in the past. I don't have any interest in the next cap wizard who has been learning the ropes (Abrams). I'm sure he's a nice guy and great at what he does, but he's not a scout and he's never been one.
What do you want? Two tight ends and 3 yards and a cloud of dust?
Have a core philosphy, find personnel that can implement it. No matter who the assistants are, they never change the playbook or terminology. There was a great piece in SI about this that I posted here a while back. I think it was in October, I'll try to find it.
Belichick is notoriously extremely demanding of his assistant coaches, and not only did McDaniels get hired by Bill as a know-nothing 25 year-old with only 1 year of experience as a graduate assistant for Michigan State, he stayed with him for 8 seasons, promoting him alone the way, and after a 3-year interlude with Denver and the Rams, Bill hired him back as the OC for the last 6 years. That's 14 total seasons with the greatest head coach in history.
Further, he'll install a lot of the offensive creativity and innovation that has helped the Patriots to be a consistently top offense in the NFL for a very long time.
Yes, he has benefitted from having Brady and Belichick. But it's not just Brady being great, it's McDaniels also, designing and implementing a system that gets the most out of Brady and the rest of his players.
I really hope he's the guy.
Quote:
should be on the list. He missed on the QB but he infused that team with a lot of talent. 20 of his 24 picks have the chance to be multi year contributors
Dumbest assessment ever.. They have shit for talent and had a TON of picks.. Those picks made the team but look at the team... They played Moneyball in the NFL and failed horribly doing it.
They actually don't have shit for talent, that might be the dumbest assessment ever. To name a few
Myles Garrett
Emmanuel Ogbah
Larry Ogunjobi
Derrick Kindred
David Njoku
Carl Nassib
Corey Coleman when healthy.
He could have traded Josh Gordon but didn't. His strategy wasn't wrong, the Browns were just impatient. Filling the other positions with talent and then getting your QB is a good strategy.
We have some TEs.
We have an OK D roster... although no lbs.
We lack a decent offensive system and a line worthy of this team.
Mr. Mara. Please find us an OL centric GM and HC combination that either share a system or are savvy enough to jive together.
Belichick is notoriously extremely demanding of his assistant coaches, and not only did McDaniels get hired by Bill as a know-nothing 25 year-old with only 1 year of experience as a graduate assistant for Michigan State, he stayed with him for 8 seasons, promoting him alone the way, and after a 3-year interlude with Denver and the Rams, Bill hired him back as the OC for the last 6 years. That's 14 total seasons with the greatest head coach in history.
Further, he'll install a lot of the offensive creativity and innovation that has helped the Patriots to be a consistently top offense in the NFL for a very long time.
Yes, he has benefitted from having Brady and Belichick. But it's not just Brady being great, it's McDaniels also, designing and implementing a system that gets the most out of Brady and the rest of his players.
I really hope he's the guy.
I am not a huge fan of McDaniels but I would much rather give him a chance over some names being thrown around like John Fox, Marvin Lewis, etc.
Reese was no exception. His fatal flaw, IMO, was not having a cohesive plan in place that meshed with the HC. BM talked about being heavy handed, yet we focused on the passing game and did nothing positive to help the OLine and RB position.
His recent mid-season PC answers were evidence, again IMO, that he had no real plan that he could communicate and that was evident by the players he was signing/drafting.
so I totally agree with those saying the #1 thing our new GM needs to have is a philosophy that is easily articulated and a plan to enact it. And that philosophy needs to be shared by the HC and his coordinators.
Drafts dropped off the cliff when Ross came aboard
So true. Art Modell ruined BB in Cleveland. BB had beatne the Tuna led Pats in the 1994 playoffs and were considered a SB contender in 1995 when the news of the move to Baltimore broke and chaos ensued.
Reese was no exception. His fatal flaw, IMO, was not having a cohesive plan in place that meshed with the HC. BM talked about being heavy handed, yet we focused on the passing game and did nothing positive to help the OLine and RB position.
His recent mid-season PC answers were evidence, again IMO, that he had no real plan that he could communicate and that was evident by the players he was signing/drafting.
so I totally agree with those saying the #1 thing our new GM needs to have is a philosophy that is easily articulated and a plan to enact it. And that philosophy needs to be shared by the HC and his coordinators.
Completely agree on the vision. Would argue Bill Parcells was very similar in that regard.
My only point was, IMO, it wasn't Reese's talent eval skills that truly did him in... although more recently he has whiffed much more than not... it was the overall lack of cohesive philosophy and implementation of said philosophy that was his downfall.
My thoughts as well.
His record in Cleveland was 36-44. Aside from the playoff appearance that you cherry picked he had a losing record every season in Cleveland.
Fact checking is your friend.
Quote:
Anyone else surprised there is no one from the Steelers organization on the list. I honestly thought we would use the Mara Rooney connection to maybe snag their second in line over there. They are one of the most consistent teams year in and year out in the NFL..
They probably have a gentleman's agreement not to raid each others personnel.
Fact checking is your friend.
He took over a 3-13 team of graybeards, went 6-10, 7-9, 7-9, then 11-5 and a playoff win. Sudden turnarounds were a lot harder to come by back then before true free agency. They were 4-4, I believe, when Modell announced the move, which pretty much destroyed the season. They went 1-7 after that.
Quick turnarounds that are common now were rare in that timeframe - and having around a .500 record for the Browns, then and now is pretty damn good.
Anyone else surprised there is no one from the Steelers organization on the list. I honestly thought we would use the Mara Rooney connection to maybe snag their second in line over there. They are one of the most consistent teams year in and year out in the NFL, and I would love to be more like them in the grand scheme.
I am surprised -- the Steelers draft very well. Seems like every draft they take at least a few players that I wish the Giants had taken.
You want failing? Its McAdoo, here.
Quote:
His record in Cleveland was 36-44. Aside from the playoff appearance that you cherry picked he had a losing record every season in Cleveland.
Fact checking is your friend.
He took over a 3-13 team of graybeards, went 6-10, 7-9, 7-9, then 11-5 and a playoff win. Sudden turnarounds were a lot harder to come by back then before true free agency. They were 4-4, I believe, when Modell announced the move, which pretty much destroyed the season. They went 1-7 after that.
Everyone also seems to forget that BB helped teach Ozzie Newsome, who went on to build the team that won the SB for the Ravens. and that build started in earnest in the 1996 draft with Jonathan Odgen and Ray Lewis.
He had a mess at QB in his 3rd season and I believe Bernie Kosar, who was nearing his end, was traded during the season.
BB then took what many would consider an underachieving (at the time) Vinny Testeverde and the Browns to the playoffs in his 4th season and led them to their only playoff victory in the last 28 years. 28 f-ing years! And they still didn't have a great roster.
I think you have to throw his fifth season out of the equation to be fair. He lost his starting QB (Vinny) before the '95 season even started and then there was the Modell clusterf*ck of moving the franchise.
I think a reasonable person could see that BB could've been in the process of turning the franchise around if given a little patience, especially considering the roster he inherited, QB injury, franchise move, etc.
My guess is knowledgeable Browns fans wish BB was given more patience (and of course that the Browns never left after '95).
No, just think it's shallow thinking to say that he was a failure in CLE.
It's not like I'm the Pres. of his fan club, I just think there were a lot of factors out of his control, e.g., the crappy roster he inherited, the franchise move, etc.
And as others have said, not only was it more difficult to turn around a team quickly in those days, they didn't have years of high draft picks on the roster, like they do now. They aged and bottomed out quickly, making it even more difficult to rebuild.
He basically said, "I knew JJ would be a successful coach in the NFL. He had a system (philosophy, whatever the exact word was) that was proven to work, and knew how to execute that system by getting the right people in place, and teaching them to play in that system."
This is what we need. We need someone who has a coherent understanding and system, an understanding of what is needed at each position, and can communicate with a GM on how to get the right people to man it, and can teach players to run it.
I am a believer in equifinality. That is, there are many paths to the same outcome. You can win with power football. You can win with speed. You can win with the WCO and you can win with the spread attack. But, to win with any of them,you have to be great at putting it all in place so it is coherent. And know the system's weaknesses that will be attacked and how to counter move.
I remember in the Tuna/Simms heyday, people would know exactly what we were going to do on O, they just couldn't stop it because we were very good at doing it.
Quote:
whatever you think of his time in CLE, he clearly is one of the all time greats now.
No, just think it's shallow thinking to say that he was a failure in CLE.
It's not like I'm the Pres. of his fan club, I just think there were a lot of factors out of his control, e.g., the crappy roster he inherited, the franchise move, etc.
And as others have said, not only was it more difficult to turn around a team quickly in those days, they didn't have years of high draft picks on the roster, like they do now. They aged and bottomed out quickly, making it even more difficult to rebuild.
Ah, the big blue goggles strike again.
I never said he was a failure, but he was hardly a success. He had a losing record, that's not success. Yes, some things worked against him. They always do. Shit happens. I get it.
The point is that just because McDaniels didn't set the world in fire in Denver doesn't mean he won't have success in NY. Belichick, widely considered the best of all time, didn't set the world on fire in Cleveland. He had a losing record.
Everything is black and white around here. Belichick is a great coach, that doesn t mean everything he has ever done is perfect.
Recognizing the many other factors involved is the opposite of "black and white".
At this point, best to agree to disagree.
Yeah, you're right, McDaniels was better earlier than Lil' Bill. Perhaps if the Broncos gave McDaniels 4 seasons to win he would've been a success. Bill got 5 seasons in Cleveland, and the first 3 seasons were all losing seasons. McDaniels went 8-8 his first year, then they pulled the plug on him after a 3-9 start year 2.
Not sure if your narrative is that Bill Belicheck didn't fail because he had one really good year out of 5 and then got fired because of Modell and the move, but if that is the narrative, it's a wrong one. Belicheck went 11-5 his 4th season and then went 5-11 his last season...he likely would not have survived that with a lot of teams, one winning season out of 5?
McDaniels could've done that if the Broncos didn't let him go after only 12 games in his 2nd year. Yes, there was turmoil with players, but that was a quick trigger and it doesn't mean he isn't a great candidate today, which he sure is. For Belicheck to entrust his offense to him for so long, it means something. For him to have earned a head coaching job as young as he was, that means something, too...that he was doing it the right way.