Interesting blurb from Albert Breer on NYG coaching search

but let's not sugarcoat this either. Shurmur was the "safe" pick for coach just like Gettleman was the "safe" pick for GM. "Safe" is OK, but will it lead to excellence? Only time well tell.

The other issue with Shurmur is he is pretty milktoast.

...the Giants were targeting Shurmur.

In comment 13791560 Eric from BBI said:

Quote:

but let's not sugarcoat this either. Shurmur was the "safe" pick for coach just like Gettleman was the "safe" pick for GM. "Safe" is OK, but will it lead to excellence? Only time well tell. The other issue with Shurmur is he is pretty milktoast.

That is what will be interesting to watch & it likely will drive fans nuts as it does Jet fans with Bowles. I thought all along the Giants will go ‘safe’, I thought it would be Mike Smith. I think no doubt McAdoo scared Mara.

Pure speculation on my part, but this definitely feels like Mara. (But what do I know?)

I just hope Shurmur has a behind-the-scenes edge to him because he will need it with this group.

In comment 13791560 Eric from BBI said:
[quote] but let's not sugarcoat this either. Shurmur was the "safe" pick for coach just like Gettleman was the "safe" pick for GM. "Safe" is OK, but will it lead to excellence? Only time well tell.

The other issue with Shurmur is he is pretty milktoast. [/quote

To me,Shurmur will look & sound like Vince Lombardi after having had to listen to McAdoo's drool. At least we know Shurmur has the experience & preparation for the role of HC as opposed to McAdoo,who was a rush hire(why couldn't we have let Philly have him?) & won in his 1st year because Reese spent $200 million on the D & Spags D won games for him(which is why,with a healthy D,Shurmur should keep Spags as DC).Shurmur is a solid hire!

Shumur safe means that there are much riskier guys out there.

And I'm not even sure Patricia or McD was going to come here, so any commentary on them really is moot.

I guess Wilks is a wildcard due to his inexperience, but calling Shurmur safe vs. Wilks is really just semantics.

I guess I look at the only safe choice as being Coughlin or a person you know exactly what you're getting. To imply that Shurmur's ceiling is lower because of his demeanor or that an unknown's ceiling is higher is pure speculation.

it cant get worse than the shit show we watched this year. Give me a guy that is not afraid to make a change with personal during the preseason and season. Everyone could see that we needed to make some player changes on the Oline during preseason.

In comment 13791568 Eric from BBI said:

Quote:

Pure speculation on my part, but this definitely feels like Mara. (But what do I know?) I just hope Shurmur has a behind-the-scenes edge to him because he will need it with this group.

"...behind-the scenes edge to him..." Make that a very SHARP edge!!!

In comment 13791574 FatMan in Charlotte said:

Quote:

Shumur safe means that there are much riskier guys out there. And I'm not even sure Patricia or McD was going to come here, so any commentary on them really is moot. I guess Wilks is a wildcard due to his inexperience, but calling Shurmur safe vs. Wilks is really just semantics. I guess I look at the only safe choice as being Coughlin or a person you know exactly what you're getting. To imply that Shurmur's ceiling is lower because of his demeanor or that an unknown's ceiling is higher is pure speculation.

Good point. Coughlin was safe in 2004 with his resume. There was no ‘safe’ pick here. They all carry risks. I think experience did matter here.

But, maybe not?

...interesting post.

But why make this comment?

"Only team in the NFL to have a Super Bowl title in each of the last 4 decades in addition to another appearance in 2000."

Technically, true... but you almost make it sound like we're a more successful franchise than the Pats.

And what good is a long perspective when then last 6 years have essentially sucked?

In comment 13791560 Eric from BBI said:

Quote:

but let's not sugarcoat this either. Shurmur was the "safe" pick for coach just like Gettleman was the "safe" pick for GM. "Safe" is OK, but will it lead to excellence? Only time well tell. The other issue with Shurmur is he is pretty milktoast.

Coughlin was a safe pick, no? They just stepped out of their comfort zone (or at least their template) with McAdoo.

In comment 13791574 FatMan in Charlotte said:

Quote:

Shumur safe means that there are much riskier guys out there. And I'm not even sure Patricia or McD was going to come here, so any commentary on them really is moot. I guess Wilks is a wildcard due to his inexperience, but calling Shurmur safe vs. Wilks is really just semantics. I guess I look at the only safe choice as being Coughlin or a person you know exactly what you're getting. To imply that Shurmur's ceiling is lower because of his demeanor or that an unknown's ceiling is higher is pure speculation.

If we cut out speculation, then there is no forum. If speculation makes you uncomfortable, I can see why you would have a problem with a fan forum.

The Giants earned the benefit of the doubt after 2007 and 2011. They lost that benefit of the doubt with the last six years of mismanagement.

Five years from now, we me be praising Shurmur and thanking our lucky stars we hired him. But as of January 16, 2018, I'm going to call it like I see it. This was an uninspiring group of only four candidates and the Giants picked one of those four. Two were previously head coaches who were fired. Both know the drill so Mara and Gettleman know there isn't a big learning curve for Shurmur. He also has the added benefit of knowing how to groom QBs, which will be huge when and if they draft a QB with the first pick.

Quote:

And what good is a long perspective when then last 6 years have essentially sucked?

Aren't you answering your own question? The long view shows we've been consistently successful since the 80's. The only team to win a SB in the past 4 decades.

The short view is saying we've been below average in recent years (yet still won a SB in 2011).

And even in the response that the last 6 years have essentiallyh sucked, you chose a time frame that correlated to after the SB win and conveniently glides over the fact we made the playoffs last year.

I'm not even going to address the comparison to the Pats, as if there's a ton of teams like them and we are the outliers.

That game works both ways. Bill Parcells was a horribly risky selection and almost fired. Dan Reeves was a very safe pick.

There is no hidden formula for success. But of the four candidates, Shurmur was the safest. Methinks had the Giants picked one of the other four, you would be defending that selection instead of Shurmur right now.

We are all concerned with Mara's track record now, all of us should be. But Shurmur is the guy and now we have to hope he does well, there is no way of telling if a guy will be decent or mediocre, like Fassel, bad like McAdoo and Handley, or very good like Coughlin and Parcells.

Thinking back I remember when we hired Dan Reeves, he appeared in 3 SuperBowls but got blown out in all of them, in one season he got the good players left here on his side and turned around the franchise. Things looked real good, even LT was saying how good a coach Reeves was and how happy the defense is again.

Then the power struggle began, him vs. the Giants head of scouting, Tom Boisture, then George Young got involved, and the front office gets fractured, and the team falls apart after one good season. Reeves at worst seemed like a safe pick, it turned out to be a bad.

Fassel was a real chance, no experience, it turned out pretty good, we had some good seasons with him and a SuperBowl appearance, after 7 seasons he lost the team.

Coughlin coming here was a pretty safe hire when we grabbed him, but there was some real pushback from the fans when we hired him, very similar to where we are now, as a safe and familiar pick he turned out to be a great choice.

We are all fans that love the Giants, and get caught up in all this, over the next few seasons we will learn how good or bad this hire is, because it is a huge hire, going down further or staying where we are is a pretty dismal thought. Safe or risky in of themselves are neither good nor bad, it comes down to the people themselves. Gettleman and Shurmur will forever be linked together, are they ready to step up?

as THE choice but far from safe. In fact, he was the complete opposite of Fassel which was why many players had a hard time buying in on the new rules adn strict environment.

To 2003 was way better than 2017 as far as issues goes. We had a decent QB though it was time to start looking for the guy, some weapons at WR, TE and RB and some on defense. BUT, we had some tough personalities that were really just doing whatever the hell they wanted.

This team has more "pieces" on defense than they do on offense but they also have way more controversial issues and personality issues than the 2003 team. Moving on from KC to Eli (with Kurt Warner) is not nearly the problem that Eli presents this off season. The talent at WR is woefully thin and our best one is a headcase no matter how fans want to sugarcoat it. He has to be managed and directed (his energy and persona) for the good of the team. TE is fairly set but needs to be used far better than this past season. RB HUGE question mark but can easily be a committee style approach similar to Minnesota and New England (many backs performing jobs at average to above average results). Our Oline is a disaster... Nothing else to be said there.

Shurmur might be a great choice, at the moment I am more blah about it. I was hoping for McDaniels and a fresh feel to our offense and if that didn't work then I was hoping for Patricia..

Is choosing between 4 candidates imply the search was not conducted well?

Quote:

But as of January 16, 2018, I'm going to call it like I see it. This was an uninspiring group of only four candidates and the Giants picked one of those four. Two were previously head coaches who were fired

I can't really think of many coaching searches that bring in many more candidates and can't think of any NYG search that has.

You can call the list uninspiring, but you probably should pick a target on what's inspiring to find a comparison. Patricia and McD have been part of the most successful run in the NFL - post SB era. Shurmur has consistently improved the offenses of the teams he's been with, including the sad sack Rams, where at the time, he had the best year to year improvement in NFL history (not sure if that's since been exceeded).

To me, this coaching search has been a typical one, either for the Giants or any other team. We looked at several successful coordinators and offered one the job.

If none of these guys were inspiring, you can call it as you see it, but I'd opine that you're seeing it wrong.

For your responses on this thread.

It's like you are a castoff if you feel like all signs with Shurmur point to a very "safe" Mara pick. I don't know how anyone can argue this the case.

I remember starting a thread on Dottino's interview with WFAN towards the end of the season. He said the Giants would go with a "50-ish" or so year old coordinator with previous HC experience and wouldnt ya know it? Also important to note this was pre-Gettleman being hired.

Prior head coaching experience is terrific, even more so when you can actually point to it as a worthwhile accomplishment. What is to be learned from Shurmur's couple of years in Cleveland in what we all know is a rudderless environment?

We all want Shurmur to be a 10+ year success. I'll be hoping that every day he is on the job. Now that it has been unofficially agreed upon, I'll be very curious to see what happens with the DC post and QB position. Both areas that need a rebirth as far as I'm concerned.

wrong but it appears Mara came into this search with pre qualifications and if they weren't met, the candidate had more than an uphill climb. Shurmur "checked" all of those boxes that Mara so brilliantly discussed with the media. My guess? He killed the interview, showed that he was more than prepared for the gig and had a steady hand. His work with offense and QBs is well noted, and he learned from his time as HC in Cleveland. He is also a guy that will not be asking for any type of control with personnel, which McDaniels seems to want (if not now, but possibly eventually).

Shurmur is by all accounts a good man and a good coach. He just seems so god damn sleepy, but as discussed, let's hope he has some understated fire in there that can get this team going.

We'll agree to disagree on this. In overly-simplistic terms, what I saw was:

- Two regurgitated head coaches, both which were fired. McDaniels was an utter disaster in Denver. Shurmur at least had decent "excuses" for failing (the Browns being the Browns, ownership change, etc.).

- One first-year defensive coordinator.

- One long-standing defensive coordinator whose defense may have been more due to the head coach running the team.


I didn't have a favorite in this because I know this is a crapshoot. My original guess was that it would be Wilks. But in hindsight, I think Mara - for better of worse - may have gotten scared off by the McAdoo similarities. (But again, pure speculation). Shurmur supposedly wowed the Giants in his interview (as did Patricia).

My biggest problem with Shurmur right now is personality. He seems VERY mild. But I am basing that all on public interviews. We shall see.

I think his coordinator selections will be key. If they keep Spags, I consider that a red flag. I am a little suspicious right now because of the offensive guys are jumping ship but only our DL coach has left.

When we hear Gettleman talk about the successes of the defensive HC and read reports about how he "couldnt wait" to get Wilks in front of NYG ownership, are we supposed to believe that was all fake and he didnt really feel that way?

I was hoping to feel like Gettleman really spearheaded this coaching selection and Shurmur doesnt give off that feeling, at least not to me.

and that led to excellence. It happens.

in more general teams...

I would be surprised if Gettleman and Shurmur don't make us at the very least a competitive team. Both of these guys are competent. Depending on the QB situation, I could see us going 8-8 next year with the right personnel moves.

My question is what is the ceiling moving forward in 2019 and 2020. Gettleman will be approaching 70. Shurmur has to prove he knows how to build a playoff contender.

I understand the point you're making. I'm just saying that you don't often have "inspiring" choices when searches like this come about. I was intrigued by Wilks too, but even being here in Carolina, you don't hear a lot about him. McDermott was often discussed as a possible HC candidate. wilks name really only came up because of a connection to Gettleman, and it looks like his other possible openings closed before he could interview, or he interviewed and wasn't chosen.

Everyone talks about how this offseason is crucial for the team. The GM hire looks like we have a competent guy. The HC hire is always going to be an unknown. We have to trust that he can lead the team and develop players, but at least by bringing in a guy with experience, who had developed QB's and has had successful offenses, you hope it is the best move for the team.

Frankly, if we are looking at a #2 pick that may be a QB, and we are looking for a quick turnaround and revamp of the offense, then an offensive guy seems like a good choice.

I do think the extreme failure of Mac plays a part here. And it probably sealed Wilks fate.

can't you say that about every candidate?

owners. Bland type..but has worked for them for most part

so i can't say who's the best. Of the group, Shurmur has the best resume. Also, he has done a great job with the Vikings offense. I agree that the choice of defensive coordinator will be a key move for him and the team. Of he aces that, I'll be feeling very optimistic.

Agree completely that this may have been the best choice given the fact where we are at in the QB process. He will be a tremendous asset for Webb, probably the first pick, and even Eli (if Eli is still here).

Look, I am not condemning the pick. But if you read the reactions to this, even from Giants "inside sources" in today's papers... they all say Shurmur is "solid." Solid is good, but it isn't "inspiring." But maybe that is what the team needs.

In comment 13791662 Chris in Philly said:

Quote:

and that led to excellence. It happens.

Coughlin also wasnt a dynamo, personality-wise, when he first came here in 2004. He was known as a disciplinarian that wasn't exactly outgoing and cheery. It took him until 2007 to change his ways and personality to the outside world.

In comment 13791660 Chris684 said:

Quote:

When we hear Gettleman talk about the successes of the defensive HC and read reports about how he "couldnt wait" to get Wilks in front of NYG ownership, are we supposed to believe that was all fake and he didnt really feel that way? I was hoping to feel like Gettleman really spearheaded this coaching selection and Shurmur doesnt give off that feeling, at least not to me.

No necessarily, it just likely means as the process played out there was a candidate who rose above DG in their collective eyes.

BBI needs to learn how to view things more fluidly, things may and do change on a dime.

a guy with little experience because of what happened with McAdoo is complete bullshit. I sincerely hope that wasn't the factor in not hiring Wilks.

In comment 13791670 UConn4523 said:

Quote:

can't you say that about every candidate?

No. For better or worse, "jazzier" candidates would normally include a big name (i.e., at least talk to Saban or some high profile college coach) or an up-and-coming coordinator who has held the position for a number of years and who is credited with the success of that unit.

It may or may not have been smart to talk to Gruden or Cowher, but was it considered? Was Belichick considered? (Those who automatically laugh at the idea forget there was a time when Parcells wanted to come back and the Giants said no - we only learned that years later).

keeps Spags because he gave him a job as OC in St. Louis, I agree with Eric - that's a major red flag. Also - this lovefest that ownership has with Spags is pretty fucking weird at this point. The guy has been in charge of 2 of the worst defenses in Giants history, one of which was the worst in NFL history. We get that he won us a super bowl. That was fun. It was also 11 years ago. Time to move on. If Mara can't see that, I don't trust him to make other decisions...like the head coach.

In comment 13791660 Chris684 said:

Quote:

When we hear Gettleman talk about the successes of the defensive HC and read reports about how he "couldnt wait" to get Wilks in front of NYG ownership, are we supposed to believe that was all fake and he didnt really feel that way? I was hoping to feel like Gettleman really spearheaded this coaching selection and Shurmur doesnt give off that feeling, at least not to me.

I'm not sure why this is the way you're approaching this. No, you're not supposed to believe it was all fake. Gettleman could have really wanted to give him a shot, Wilks could have just been okay in his interview, and the people in charge could have simply agreed he wasn't the best choice.

Grooming Abrams for the job and using Gettleman as a stop gap

Giants have always and under this ownership will always conduct business

Their way.

You'll see me go (blanking) ballistic if we keep Quinn.

in the absence of information that's really damning, I'd support almost any hire. It's what you have to hope for as fans - that the right decisions are made. We know they aren't always or else we wouldn't have had the disasterous 2017.

The only hire I'd be very critical of is McDaniels and that's only because I have inside info on how much of a dick he is and how he isn't respected by players or team support staff.

Being a dick isn't a game-breaker. Not having respect is - you can't lead without respect. Indy probably fits him well so he can outdick Irsay.

Who exactly are the “inspiring” candidates that you think they should have interviewed? And why does being mild mannered equal “safe”? How is Shurmur a safer pick than anyone else? Does having more experience equal safe? And why is safe a bad thing? Why would you assume Shurmers ceiling is lower than any random coach with no HC experience?

McDaniels does seem like a dick. So does Schwartz.


It will be VERY interesting to see how Shurmur deals with Odell Beckham.

In comment 13791702 BigBlueShock said:

Quote:

Who exactly are the “inspiring” candidates that you think they should have interviewed? And why does being mild mannered equal “safe”? How is Shurmur a safer pick than anyone else? Does having more experience equal safe? And why is safe a bad thing? Why would you assume Shurmers ceiling is lower than any random coach with no HC experience?

I think I answered all of your questions above.

Norv Turner is 'experienced'. After much trial and error we know he isn't a head coach at this level. Experience isn't a measure of can-do. It's just a way for fans to justify a hiring and feel good about it. There are plenty of success stories of head coaches with comparatively little experience.

how can you say you'd support any hire based on the way the last hire went down? It's pretty apparent that Mara completely made the wrong choice in McAdoo and made the wrong choice in letting Reese stay on 2 years ago. He also royally fucked up the Eli thing (which I'm over at this point).

Mara has been faced with multiple big time decisions and the results have not been good with any of them. How can you blindly trust this hire?

the point of hiring a coach is not to hire the guy with the highest floor. It is to hire the guy with the highest ceiling that will lead you to a championship. You're right, Shurmur will most likely not be a disaster. That shouldn't be the reason you hire someone.

In comment 13791657 Eric from BBI said:

Quote:

We'll agree to disagree on this. In overly-simplistic terms, what I saw was: - Two regurgitated head coaches, both which were fired. McDaniels was an utter disaster in Denver. Shurmur at least had decent "excuses" for failing (the Browns being the Browns, ownership change, etc.). - One first-year defensive coordinator. - One long-standing defensive coordinator whose defense may have been more due to the head coach running the team. I didn't have a favorite in this because I know this is a crapshoot. My original guess was that it would be Wilks. But in hindsight, I think Mara - for better of worse - may have gotten scared off by the McAdoo similarities. (But again, pure speculation). Shurmur supposedly wowed the Giants in his interview (as did Patricia). My biggest problem with Shurmur right now is personality. He seems VERY mild. But I am basing that all on public interviews. We shall see. I think his coordinator selections will be key. If they keep Spags, I consider that a red flag. I am a little suspicious right now because of the offensive guys are jumping ship but only our DL coach has left.

On Defense, outside of Graham, we don't have a position coach that really has much of a connection to any other organization or a track record of strong units. Spags isn't going to jump ship to be a position coach next season. Considering his ties to Shurmur/Gettleman/Ownership I could see him being offered some front office position if the Giants want to make a clean break from McAdoo tenure and to prevent issues on the coaching staff (previous interim head coach coaching under new head coach)

In comment 13791568 Eric from BBI said:

Quote:

Pure speculation on my part, but this definitely feels like Mara. (But what do I know?) I just hope Shurmur has a behind-the-scenes edge to him because he will need it with this group.

Apparently he’s a huge hard ass who Andy Reid told to lighten up a bit.
Lighten up Francis - ( New Window )

In comment 13791560 Eric from BBI said:

Quote:

but let's not sugarcoat this either. Shurmur was the "safe" pick for coach just like Gettleman was the "safe" pick for GM. "Safe" is OK, but will it lead to excellence? Only time well tell. The other issue with Shurmur is he is pretty milktoast.

if he has a heart beat he'll be a major upgrade over the bore fest for a coach we just had...........

If this truly is a "safe" pick and that's the direction they went, it's a smart play from a risk management perspective. You can't be rolling the dice at every turn, you e gotta make some hedges, round out that portfolio a little bit. That selection will define the franchise more than anything and this coach gives that pick the greatest chance of success.

In comment 13791714 ryanmkeane said:

Quote:

the point of hiring a coach is not to hire the guy with the highest floor. It is to hire the guy with the highest ceiling that will lead you to a championship. You're right, Shurmur will most likely not be a disaster. That shouldn't be the reason you hire someone.

How do you know what Shurmurs ceiling is? He doesn’t yell and scream so it must be low, right?

In comment 13791731 AcesUp said:

Quote:

If this truly is a "safe" pick and that's the direction they went, it's a smart play from a risk management perspective. You can't be rolling the dice at every turn, you e gotta make some hedges, round out that portfolio a little bit. That selection will define the franchise more than anything and this coach gives that pick the greatest chance of success.

^^^ THIS ^^^^

This is the best argument for Shurmur.

I've preached for weeks... they got to get the GM, HC, and QB right.