Keeping it simple here, these are the 4 that are most important to me.
1. You must have been a Head Coach on some level before (college and above) I would prefer NFL Head Coaching experience. I want the candidate to have already cut their teeth and learned from their mistakes. I don't want somebody to learn on the job here.
2. You must have been a coordinator for at least 3 years. I would want the candidate to have been on the sideline, to coach and communicate with the players throughout the game. I know Spags does this. I saw Dick Lebeau do it this weekend. I want a great leader, communicator and teacher.
3.You were/are not a care taker of an already great unit. I want to see your stamp on the unit. Repair something that was in trouble. If you were the care taker, what did you do to bring it to the next level that is noticeable?
4. You have a sound philosophy that can relate easily to the players and get them to buy in. I don't want a "new sheriff in town" type or a millennial whisper that turns camp into a dance club like Mcadoo. I want this coach to be able to get through to the younger players and not only hold them accountable, but have them hold themselves accountable.
Patricia and Wilks don’t have the HC experience you desire.
What has McDaniels fixed that was broken?
Studesville? Spags? Shurmur?
I don’t know if there’s a guy we have talked to or plan on talking to that check all your boxes. Not many would.
Having a list of prerequisites as a fan is just moronic bullshit.
Having a list of prerequisites as a fan is just moronic bullshit.
Don Shula
Chuck Noll
Joe Gibbs
Bill Parcells
Partial list of guys who you would not have hired
Having a list of prerequisites as a fan is just moronic bullshit.
Agreed on point 1 ... but come on. Point 2 is why many come to this sites and others like it. Maybe change the word "prerequisites" to "hopes" and it's not the worst thing.
I think the whole "picking a new head coach" is somewhat of a crap shoot. What do you want your franchise to operate like? ie, get a young, unproven players' coach ... or an old-school, grizzled guy or even a younger guy who plays that role. There aren't a lot of true old-school-style guys out there, but that's my preference. I saw the struggles of early-Giants Coughlin, but I always appreciated his approach. When he tailored things and found a better way, he won me over for good.
Belichick likely isn't coming to the Giants, but I can't think of anyone else I'd prefer at the moment. Certainly not enamored with the ones that have been interviewed so far.
Rigid pre-requisites for hiring someone are usually bad ideas, and only used by people who don't trust their own judgment. I sure hope (and expect) the Giants don't look at it that way.
I am saying this is my starting point. Every candidate is different. That is why you interview them, but they have to touch upon these 4 points at some level.
Listing hopes or prerequisites as a fan only sets one up artificially for high expectations or disappointment.
If we hire a guy with no HC experience and that was one of your important things, you are biased from the get go. If we hire an established HC, you expect immediate success and anything less is disappointing.
Add in the fact that as fans, we don't even know the qualifications of many people yet judge hires, and calling it moronic bullshit is probably being kind.
1) They need to protect the Duke
And
2) Play heavy handed, complimentary football.
LMAO!!
lol Your points are all fair and well made. But they assume one fallacy. That most fans are rational.
I openly state that I'd prefer an old-school Coughlin clone (in a 45-year-old carcass). But I completely acknowledge that that may NOT be the right thing, given the game today, the majority of players' approaches now, and so many other factors. Add the fact that a hire with less experience (perceived or actual) than we'd like to see, personally, might be exactly what the franchise needs - just not within the first 2-3 years.
And there we go on another tangent - a large portion of fans today are "instant gratification" viewers. I'd easily agree to 3-4 mediocre seasons if I knew it would be followed by as many with a real chance to get to and maybe win the big game.
So, bottom line, you're right. But like so much on BBI, those prerequisites are somewhat meaningless, outside of showing who WE are, as far as our viewing preferences.
Whoever they are, there will be enough factoids to be hopeful for those who chose to be and enough potential questions to be doubtful if one wishes
Having a list of prerequisites as a fan is just moronic bullshit.
YOU are the biggest assume I have ever read matched only by your tired routine of straw man arguments.
The op is a million times smarter then you'll ever be.
Go eat your crow as you literally were as wrong as someone could be about a season. More dignified men would learn to shut up. You aren't a man though. Just a fat little boy.
Those are my top two choices for the same reasons you listed.
A guy who signed up in January 2018 knows my posting history from this Summer??
Hello, Simo. Another dupe by this guy.
Quote:
Funny...I remember reading your comments this summer. Berating people who called for Pugh to play OR. Mocking those concerned about the ol. Mocking those who pointed out Max was a moron.
A guy who signed up in January 2018 knows my posting history from this Summer??
Hello, Simo. Another dupe by this guy.
Again, no response on point. You made a fool out of yourself this August. To see you calling another poster a moron is the height of irony.
You are forever discredited. Now shut up and let other people post their still untarnished opinions.
"Only a moron would even consider playing Pugh at OT."
fat man in August.
fat man in August.
I never made that comment nor addressed those talking about moving Pugh.
You bring up straw men and then post a complete falsehood.
Stick to robbing the elderly.
Quote:
"Only a moron would even consider playing Pugh at OT."
fat man in August.
I never made that comment nor addressed those talking about moving Pugh.
You bring up straw men and then post a complete falsehood.
Stick to robbing the elderly.
You. Are. A. Liar. And you know it.
You also mocked those concerned about the OL during training camp, with repeated use of the word moron.
Not sure what the ad hominem attack of robbing the elderly relates to, I actually volunteer at a senior citizen home twice a month.
Whatever you say forever discredited moron.
Quote:
of prerequisites is a bad idea for anyone hiring, as they often exclude some excellent candidates.
Having a list of prerequisites as a fan is just moronic bullshit.
Funny...I remember reading your comments this summer. Berating people who called for Pugh to play OR. Mocking those concerned about the ol. Mocking those who pointed out Max was a moron.
YOU are the biggest assume I have ever read matched only by your tired routine of straw man arguments.
The op is a million times smarter then you'll ever be.
Go eat your crow as you literally were as wrong as someone could be about a season. More dignified men would learn to shut up. You aren't a man though. Just a fat little boy.
Yup, John from Atlanta for sure.
Quote:
point.
Quote:
Funny...I remember reading your comments this summer. Berating people who called for Pugh to play OR. Mocking those concerned about the ol. Mocking those who pointed out Max was a moron.
A guy who signed up in January 2018 knows my posting history from this Summer??
Hello, Simo. Another dupe by this guy.
Hmm or just chose to read the comments without posting?
Again, no response on point. You made a fool out of yourself this August. To see you calling another poster a moron is the height of irony.
You are forever discredited. Now shut up and let other people post their still untarnished opinions.
"Only a moron would even consider playing Pugh at OT."
fat man in August.
Chose to read comments without posting, then signed up and immediately starting posting on every single thread? Color me skeptical.
But FMiC is forever discredited?
Pore through them and find where I ever commented on Pugh moving to Tackle. Actually, try finding a time I berated somebody fro saying the OL was bad.
You've already derailed the thread. Great Work, Pal.
Quote:
You. Are. A. Liar. And you know it.
Pore through them and find where I ever commented on Pugh moving to Tackle. Actually, try finding a time I berated somebody fro saying the OL was bad.
You've already derailed the thread. Great Work, Pal.
I dont need to pour through a damn thing. We both know what you said chump. You couldn't have been more wrong.
What's next, going back to the strawman point?
FatMan in Charlotte : 8/3/2017 2:54 pm : link
All he's done is shrunk Flowers to a skinny guy with bad technique.
We should move a short armed T-Rex to Tackle, cut Flowers and since Guard is so easy to play - Solari can be a player-coach.
Pugh..
FatMan in Charlotte : 8/3/2017 3:08 pm : link
played I think 2 games at Tackle and people bitched about it. The idea he is an awesome tackle is borne more out of people thinking Flowers is shitty than Pugh actually playing like an All-Pro there.
If Flowers..
FatMan in Charlotte : 8/3/2017 2:32 pm : link
is as terrible as people are insinuating, then you can always pick a tackle off the scrap heap if needed instead of weakening two positions.
I have a feeling by the end of the year people are going to be eating their words about Flowers anyway. He's come to camp in shape and reportedly eagerly working on technique changes.
LOL...
FatMan in Charlotte : 8/3/2017 9:34 am : link
Quote:
Unless the rules changed since February, they will not be able to put 12 guys on the field to pull this off
The hyperbole here is staggering. You realize that people are acting as if Flowers is useless and the biggest liability in the league right now?
This is the same bullshit that happens each August. Basically, people are expecting us to play handicapped on offense because of camp reports about flowers having no clue on what his struggles are regarding.
Maybe he's learning a new technique and isn't picking it up immediately. Maybe he isn't going to be good - but I always love the panic here.
Just two days ago, people were making assumptions about Rosas because he "only" went 5 of 8 from 50 yards using a kicking tee. They didn't even realize that when kickers use a tee, they are often working on technique or experimenting with trajectory to understand what they need to do to drive the ball. Instead of thinking more deeply there - they assume Rosas is approaching the drill as if he needs to make a game-winning FG or be cut.
It is madness.
Suggesting..
FatMan in Charlotte : 8/3/2017 10:03 am : link
moving Pugh to RT when his strength is at Guard isn't some sort of panacea you think it is.
You supposedly shore up one position to make another weaker.
And that's assuming you even have a clue about what you're talking about.
Taking snippets of camp observations and assuming you know more than the coaching staff is the true folly in these discussions.
I know it goes against fandom to recognize this, but it sure would make discussions a lot more logical
I'm not evading this statement..
FatMan in Charlotte : 8/3/2017 11:07 am : link
Quote:
All I am saying, and you continue to evade it, is that this is a Superbowl roster and I would not risk said season on whether Flowers suddenly improves
It's pretty damn hard to respond to. Your suggestion is to put Pugh at Tackle. That alleviates the situation? Did it add to the Superbowl roster or simply shift a resource and apparently remove another resource?
It is overly dramatic say that Flowers is going to risk the season or that Pugh replacing him is going to eliminate that risk. Do I need to remind you that people really didn't like Pugh at Tackle, either?
Didn't the often-maligned Newhouse play on a SB team and get a ring? A team that got there on the strength of their offense?
Basically, given the roster we have, you either have Flowers at Tackle or an equally flawed player there and if you move Pugh, you just move that concern to a Guard position as well.
What..
FatMan in Charlotte : 8/3/2017 11:51 am : link
the fuck do you think every team's plan B is if they have a weakness, especially at a premium position that doesn't exactly have hundreds of people capable of manning?
Are you that oblivious to the way rosters are constructed and the depth of certain positions?
That isn't blindly trusting the FO. It is a combination of understanding roster construction and factoring in a fan trying to be an armchair GM and coach who is using putting faith in the FO as an insult.
I guess the flip side is not having faith in the FO and expecting that to somehow lead to a better result?
LOL.
Quote:
There is no magic formula. Some very successful head coaches had little experience and coordinators and had never been a head coach.
Sure, but what challenges did they have to face? Our guy will need to deal with Odell's personality.
Can we stop with this? It's obnoxious. The only thing he does is take his touchdown celebrations a little too far and get really pissed at losing games. Stop acting like the next coach needs a a Ph D in criminal psychology.
There's a difference between debating a topic and saying I called people morons.
You do realize we moved Pugh out of necessity and it weakened the guard position, right?
And furthermore, he didn't replace Flowers, which was the topic.
I know that's a bit much to ask to understand nuance, but I'm dealing with a fucking putz.
There's a difference between debating a topic and saying I called people morons.
You do realize we moved Pugh out of necessity and it weakened the guard position, right?
And furthermore, he didn't replace Flowers, which was the topic.
I know that's a bit much to ask to understand nuance, but I'm dealing with a fucking putz.
And the whole discussion revolved around getting Hart out of the lineup and playing their best LT at LT.
Mac, may have moved him out of necessity. You are right. The new GM cut Hart in a minute.
You were dead wrong and there is more coming chump.
Read the responses there, Ace. Almost every one discusses Flowers. No mention of Hart.
Tell me where I've ever said Hart is a good player and should have stayed at Tackle?
You mention strawmen and then just keep foisting them out there.
Sy'56 : 8/2/2017 10:14 pm : link
In comment 13548016 Marty866b said:
Quote:
Great stuff! BBI is a great website and you just make it better.
Besides Flowers,my biggest concern about this year's team is the ability or inability to run the ball. We have a questionable offensive line with I guess what would be called unproven runners. What do you forsee out of the running game?
The running game, even moreso than the passing game, lives and dies on the OL. I would day NYG is 50/50 on strong/weak in that department. Good enough to be effective but a very limited ceiling.
I do think Perkins is the most talented RB NYG has had in a very long time. Very good running style, low to the ground, let quickness, balance, vision. It's all there. I think it will be "good enough" but not gamebreakinig at all
Quote:
And the whole discussion revolved around getting Hart out of the lineup and playing their best LT at LT.
Read the responses there, Ace. Almost every one discusses Flowers. No mention of Hart.
Tell me where I've ever said Hart is a good player and should have stayed at Tackle?
You mention strawmen and then just keep foisting them out there.
If you cant admit you were wrong here, then you never will.
BTW, calling the suggestion madness is hysterical, as you did.
Strawman can wait. You were dead wrong in every aspect.
Where does discussion of Hart come into play? Love the strawman there, Governor.
And by the way - what part of the above statement is wrong?
I wouldn't be at all surprised to see Perkins and a few other players come back this season with something to prove. They aren't being handed jobs anymore without competition.
Quote:
Basically, given the roster we have, you either have Flowers at Tackle or an equally flawed player there and if you move Pugh, you just move that concern to a Guard position as well.
Where does discussion of Hart come into play? Love the strawman there, Governor.
And by the way - what part of the above statement is wrong?
Um, if FLowers move to RT who would that eliminate?
As for where you were wrong, every statement. Literally every statement.
The starting RT has now been cut. Pugh was moved to OT, eventually full time before his injury. Hart was the worst OT in the league. Flowers was rated 57th best LT!!!
The Giants best offensive performances in the pre wr injury period were with Hart out of the lineup and Pugh at OT.
You insinuated it was playing armchair gm, a panic, madness, etc.
You are unable to understand OT is more impotrnat than guard. That the OT position couldn't ruin the season.
Where were you right?
I wouldn't be at all surprised to see Perkins and a few other players come back this season with something to prove. They aren't being handed jobs anymore without competition.
If any roster.
Quote:
He had a promising rookie season. There's no way anyone could have known he was going to mail it in last year.
I wouldn't be at all surprised to see Perkins and a few other players come back this season with something to prove. They aren't being handed jobs anymore without competition.
It was obivous in preseason Gallman was more talented. Perkins is not an NFL rb and wont be on the roster next year.
If any roster.
Preseason? That comment was made on August 2. The Giants first preseason game wasn't until August 11th. So that comment was most likely made based off of the prior season and what they had seen in shorts and shells.
And Sy has been praising Gallman all season long.
Quote:
In comment 13777979 Brown Recluse said:
Quote:
He had a promising rookie season. There's no way anyone could have known he was going to mail it in last year.
I wouldn't be at all surprised to see Perkins and a few other players come back this season with something to prove. They aren't being handed jobs anymore without competition.
It was obivous in preseason Gallman was more talented. Perkins is not an NFL rb and wont be on the roster next year.
If any roster.
Preseason? That comment was made on August 2. The Giants first preseason game wasn't until August 11th. So that comment was most likely made based off of the prior season and what they had seen in shorts and shells.
And Sy has been praising Gallman all season long.
But what that would have to do with an argument made on content I am not sure.
Are arguments right or wrong to you based on the person delivering them? If so, to borrow a fatman phrase, you are a moron.