|
|
Â
|
| Quote: |
| Nick Caserio, director of player personnel with the New England Patriots since 2008, “would be willing to listen, especially to a place like the Giants,” according to Albert Breer of SI.com. Caserio has been reluctant to leave the Patriots, and reportedly rebuffed overtures from the San Francisco 49ers a year ago. Rich Hill of SB Nation’s Patriots, web site, Pats Pulpit, told us recently that it “would be a major shock” if Cesario were to decide to leave New England. Breer noted that Bill Belichick has a long history with Ernie Accorsi, who is leading the Giants’ GM search. It is also true that previous searches that Accorsi ran in Detroit and Atlanta ended with executives with New England connections, Bob Quinn and Thomas Dimitroff, getting those jobs. If Caserio leaves the Patriots, there is an expectation he would want to bring Josh McDaniels with him as head coach. |
Giants can not talk to him without per.ission from pats and can't talk to him until bye week of playoffs or pats eliminated..
Even if they could you have no idea if they did or not
+1
They can't contact him until the Pats' season is over.
McDaniels especially is a huge red flag. Failed everywhere else he's been and NE didn't skip a beat without him so there is absolutely no indication that 1) he has anything at all to do with the NE success on offense or 2) that he has changed at all from his failed days elsewhere.
McDaniels especially is a huge red flag. Failed everywhere else he's been and NE didn't skip a beat without him so there is absolutely no indication that 1) he has anything at all to do with the NE success on offense or 2) that he has changed at all from his failed days elsewhere.
This argument you guys keep trying to push doesn t make any sense when you break it down.
You say he has been a failure everywhere else. Well, he has only coached three places, NE, Denver, and St.Louis.
He spent 1 season with the Rams, and 2 with Denver. So we're supposed to ignore 10 years of success, and focus on 3 seasons? Because that's all Bill, right?
Basing your opinion on 3 bad seasons and ignoring the success is asinine.
He might make a good head coach yet, and his resume is as good as any other realistic candidate. Not a sure thing, but certainly a resume that begs for a second look.
So it wouldn't be a surprise if this was the year it actually happened, and if it did, Saban would likely want control over personnel decisions. If that were the case, a GM like Abrams makes sense. Caserio would be less likely because it would mean being in the same role he already has with Belichick (so why trade down?). I'm not sure how Gettleman would feel about a role like that. A return to his roots, but also a step down.
Quote:
McDaniels seems to be a lightning rod here. I tend to think his second go around would be much better than his stint in Denver. If NE has been good at one thing it is scheming with the players they have, not forcing a square peg into a round hole. We need to be much better on offense and this could help.
Agree
Just curious what the basis is for those who think McDaniels will be better in his next attempt at HC. There seems to be no indication of this as far as evidence of his effectiveness or likelihood that his history away from NE won't continue. Is it just a gut feeling? Is it a hopeful thought based on general optimism?
I'm kind of amazed that people feel this way other than the fact that as a general concept - people significantly over value everything that has anything to do with New England. Which has cost a lot of franchises dearly after they reached out to the BB coaching/GM tree and it didn't work out. I see no reason McDaniels would be any different, but see plenty of evidence he would fail.
Quote:
In comment 13735502 Rjanyg said:
Quote:
McDaniels seems to be a lightning rod here. I tend to think his second go around would be much better than his stint in Denver. If NE has been good at one thing it is scheming with the players they have, not forcing a square peg into a round hole. We need to be much better on offense and this could help.
Agree
Just curious what the basis is for those who think McDaniels will be better in his next attempt at HC. There seems to be no indication of this as far as evidence of his effectiveness or likelihood that his history away from NE won't continue. Is it just a gut feeling? Is it a hopeful thought based on general optimism?
I'm kind of amazed that people feel this way other than the fact that as a general concept - people significantly over value everything that has anything to do with New England. Which has cost a lot of franchises dearly after they reached out to the BB coaching/GM tree and it didn't work out. I see no reason McDaniels would be any different, but see plenty of evidence he would fail.
Tebow....Drafting Tebow would have sunk anyone. Impossible to evaluate because of that one mistake. BB took him back in a heartbeat.
Quote:
Pats are a reverse black hole when it comes to players, coaches, and GMs. People go there to be "successful", but they leave their to fail or hang around in mediocrity.
McDaniels especially is a huge red flag. Failed everywhere else he's been and NE didn't skip a beat without him so there is absolutely no indication that 1) he has anything at all to do with the NE success on offense or 2) that he has changed at all from his failed days elsewhere.
This argument you guys keep trying to push doesn t make any sense when you break it down.
You say he has been a failure everywhere else. Well, he has only coached three places, NE, Denver, and St.Louis.
He spent 1 season with the Rams, and 2 with Denver. So we're supposed to ignore 10 years of success, and focus on 3 seasons? Because that's all Bill, right?
Basing your opinion on 3 bad seasons and ignoring the success is asinine.
He might make a good head coach yet, and his resume is as good as any other realistic candidate. Not a sure thing, but certainly a resume that begs for a second look.
I think it's a perspective thing because I think the ease at which people dismiss his abject failures elsewhere is asinine.
You are wrong to say that (in my case anyway) I only focus on his failed years. I also look at NE's success during his time away and the many coaches and HCs who have come from NE and bombed (or the few who were ok at best, but not good and certainly not great).
If he was the driving force behind NE's offensive success then where is that evidence. They were good/great before him, good/great when he left, and good/great with him back - certainly nothing that says McDaniels is the cause. The only thing that would prove he contributed to that good/great offensive play would be if he brought that same offensive success with him at his other stops...which he did not.
I have no idea if he'll be good or bad if some franchise is naive enough to give him a "second chance", but what I see is quite a bit of evidence that he won't be and only the "hope" or idea that he will (with no real evidence).
Quote:
In comment 13735751 Thegratefulhead said:
Quote:
In comment 13735502 Rjanyg said:
Quote:
McDaniels seems to be a lightning rod here. I tend to think his second go around would be much better than his stint in Denver. If NE has been good at one thing it is scheming with the players they have, not forcing a square peg into a round hole. We need to be much better on offense and this could help.
Agree
Just curious what the basis is for those who think McDaniels will be better in his next attempt at HC. There seems to be no indication of this as far as evidence of his effectiveness or likelihood that his history away from NE won't continue. Is it just a gut feeling? Is it a hopeful thought based on general optimism?
I'm kind of amazed that people feel this way other than the fact that as a general concept - people significantly over value everything that has anything to do with New England. Which has cost a lot of franchises dearly after they reached out to the BB coaching/GM tree and it didn't work out. I see no reason McDaniels would be any different, but see plenty of evidence he would fail.
Tebow....Drafting Tebow would have sunk anyone. Impossible to evaluate because of that one mistake. BB took him back in a heartbeat.
And that was his call 100% so that says what about his judgement? And, still doesn't say anything about real evidence that he would be good anywhere else. BB taking him back doesn't show any sign that he would be successful in another organization - just that BB can control him and work with him.
McDaniel failed in Denver because he was making ALL of the decisions, player personnel, draft, everything. Too much for a young guy with limited experience.
I assume the Rams at the time he was OC just sucked.
Regardless, not a huge fan of anyone that leaves the Belichick nest. In addition, McDaniel doesn't seem to be very patient.
Anyone know what specifically makes Caserio an interesting candidate?
Anyone know what specifically makes Caserio an interesting candidate?
Nothing...you hit the nail on the head. It is only that false New England shine that has people talking about him. You wouldn't even know his name if he was with another team.
There is a lot of fools gold in Foxboro and whole lotta fools around the NFL willing to collect it thinking it is real gold.
So it wouldn't be a surprise if this was the year it actually happened, and if it did, Saban would likely want control over personnel decisions. If that were the case, a GM like Abrams makes sense. Caserio would be less likely because it would mean being in the same role he already has with Belichick (so why trade down?). I'm not sure how Gettleman would feel about a role like that. A return to his roots, but also a step down.
20 years? Yeah that makes sense. lol
You are going to fail in life, and hopefully learn from it. BB learned a lot obviously becaus of the 6 Super Bowls he has been to as a HC.
I'm not saying McDaniels is BB but having the attitude that he can't be a good head coach based on his experience in Denver is narrow minded.
Look at how resourceful they are with game plans and using players. Their o line in not much better than ours and yet they win.
He did the same thing with Deion Branch, LaGarrette Blount and Martellus Bennett. That's just something Belichick does. Familiarity does not necessarily equal excellence.
I really don't see how anyone can honestly endorse McDaniels and not admit that it's at least a little bit rooted in wishful thinking. And it's not just that these guys can't succeed without Belichick - I think many people fail to realize how valuable Ernie Adams is to the Patriots and how much he helps the coaching staff prepare each week.
When you hire one of the New England assistants, you're not only asking them to only asking them to take on a larger role to become your head coach, but to do so without one of the enormous advantages (Adams) that made them successful previously.