As of last January he stated he wanted back in the game. He checks the boxes for defensive mind, run oriented teams, "family" connection that Mara seems to favor. I think he would be head and shoulders above Shurmer, for sure. I'm not personally in favor of it, but I have to admit the nostalgia factor is high on this one.
Link - (
New Window )
The 2 names that feel very “safe” and could slide in and work with Gettleman:
-Mike McCarthy
-Jason Garrett
I feel he was too vanilla on offense to win the big one, but much much better than May coaches out there.
That should be criteria #1 as a no-go.
Being exposed to the "Giants Way" needs to be as dangerous as being exposed to Ebola.
Fine with paying fox a bunch to be DC though.
How good would it be? Not sure, because it does seem that Fox has lost a bit off his fastball, but it couldn't be any worse than what's here right now.
Just adding Fox to the current hierarchy? Would go down about as well as the rest of the moves, from canning TC and elevating McAdoo, to canning McAdoo and Reese, to hiring Gettleman - poorly.
Seriously, we need to get rid of all the boomers.
The 2 names that feel very “safe” and could slide in and work with Gettleman:
-Mike McCarthy
-Jason Garrett
I don't remember the details but I've heard several lousy reports about McCarthy, all saying he was a lazy SOB. But he does have a good record and he's not really old.
Seriously, we need to get rid of all the boomers.
Might want to have a look at this...
https://sports.yahoo.com/ex-bears-coach-john-fox-wanted-different-qb-in-draft-over-mitch-trubisky-210559099.html - ( New Window )
Seriously, we need to get rid of all the boomers.
Boomers? Really? Do you have a mind of your own or do you just follow the tide?
Mcadoo wasn’t a retreat. I don’t even consider shurmur a retread because he wasn’t hired on the back of his HC resume. Coughlin was a retread.
But no thanks to Fox. He’s better than the last 2 crowns, but meh...
That's not setting the bar very high.
He would be an excellent choice for defensive coordinator.
Coughlin repeatedly fired (or had to fire) his coordinators every time the team stunk. It allowed him to save his own neck and stick around long enough to win a couple Super Bowls.
I'm not surprised to see those who opposed the hire in the first place doing victory laps and calling for his head, but If you believed in Shurmur to begin with (as Mara did, as Gettleman did, as I did) then he deserves patience.
Coughlin repeatedly fired (or had to fire) his coordinators every time the team stunk. It allowed him to save his own neck and stick around long enough to win a couple Super Bowls.
I'm not surprised to see those who opposed the hire in the first place doing victory laps and calling for his head, but If you believed in Shurmur to begin with (as Mara did, as Gettleman did, as I did) then he deserves patience.
Bettcher has a lot less to work with - Shurmur doesn't have anywhere near the same excuse.
If you feel he deserves patience, can I ask - why? Believing in him on day 1 shouldn't be an answer - you'd have to see something in him to date that makes you feel he's the answer going forward.
If you feel he deserves patience, can I ask - why? Believing in him on day 1 shouldn't be an answer - you'd have to see something in him to date that makes you feel he's the answer going forward.
This year the issues and results has been different, with a rookie QB, an OL that still isn't right, zero speed at the WR position, and the loss of Barkley. If there's a coaching problem on the offensive side of the ball, it's Hal Hunter, not Shurmur.
So as someone who believed in Shurmur when he was first hired, I say don't throw out the baby with the bath water. Changes are needed not just at the player level, but at the coaching level. Maybe it's the position coaches that are the problem, not the coordinators. Impossible to tell from my couch.
Quote:
If you feel he deserves patience, can I ask - why? Believing in him on day 1 shouldn't be an answer - you'd have to see something in him to date that makes you feel he's the answer going forward.
I don't see anything that makes me feel differently than I did before. I thought he did an excellent job last year keeping the team competitive against some tough defenses despite the horrendous start. The road game vs the playoff bound Colts was a prime example. They lost the game, but playing without OBJ against the Colts all-star defense, with JJ Watt facing Chad Wheeler all day, it was a game that shouldn't've been close. The offense performed at a level such that the whole was much greater than the sum of the parts and that's a sign of good coaching.
This year the issues and results has been different, with a rookie QB, an OL that still isn't right, zero speed at the WR position, and the loss of Barkley. If there's a coaching problem on the offensive side of the ball, it's Hal Hunter, not Shurmur.
So as someone who believed in Shurmur when he was first hired, I say don't throw out the baby with the bath water. Changes are needed not just at the player level, but at the coaching level. Maybe it's the position coaches that are the problem, not the coordinators. Impossible to tell from my couch.
I can respect that Milton, while still seeing it very differently from you. I see a lot of problems that are just scheme and strategy - bad time management, questionable playcalls, the team looking unprepared (especially at the start of games).
Where we really diverge is the position coach/coordinator vs. talent angle - what you think might just be Hal Hunter or Bettcher not getting the job done, I think is more a function of talent. I also think that it seems at times Shurmur can't be Shurmur because what he has on the field simply can't execute what he wants them to do.
There's just no other good explanation why he makes some eyebrow raising decisions, like eliminating rollout calls that he made with a far less mobile Eli when he switched over to Jones. If anything, you'd think the frequency of those calls would have gone up, not down.
I also think we've seen the best of Shurmur - both the effort level and the results are trending downward. I'm not a fan of the 'they fight hard for him' metric, because these guys are professionals and they're all fighting for their jobs. Hell, Miami is making a concerted effort to lose and it seems their roster refuses to play along. The Giants just keep getting worse, even as the level of opponent has declined.
The roster has certainly done him no favors, though - which is why if they were to jettison Shurmur I'd send Gettleman packing right next to him.
In his last stop he was a hearty 14-34 in Chicago.
I don't remember the details but I've heard several lousy reports about McCarthy, all saying he was a lazy SOB. But he does have a good record and he's not really old.
He also had the benefit of 2 first ballot HOF QB's. His offensive schemes were too simplistic, and her benefited from the brilliance of Favre and Rodgers to bail him out. He is a rich man's Ben McAdoo.
Fine with paying fox a bunch to be DC though.
Good idea...let’s put the game on the shoulders of a young Qb who fumbles when a fan in the upper deck farts.
In his last stop he was a hearty 14-34 in Chicago.
you are not going to find a coach with a 600 winning percentage who is looking for a job
You know who's pushing 70? Bill Belichick.
In his last stop he was a hearty 14-34 in Chicago.
LOL. I'm no Fox fan, but Peyton Manning was FAR from his prime during his time with the Broncos.
He's not exactly a spry 64, he's had a number of health issues, cardiac ones to boot.
I don't get to interview these guys or see them interacting with players on the practice field or in the locker room, but that's what it would take for me to determine whether age has become an issue for them. Depending on health and activity, age is mostly a state of mind (at least until 80 or so). Even on the physical side we see QBs like Brady and Brees playing at a high level into their 40's and non-QBs like Strahan, London Fletcher, Larry Fitzgerald, and Frank Gore playing well into their 30's.
30 and 40 ain't what it used to be when it comes to strength, speed, and quickness. And 60 and 70 ain't what it used to be when it comes to mental acuity.
Quote:
133-123 as head coach with the benefit of having Peyton Manning in his prime for back to back to back 12 win seasons.
In his last stop he was a hearty 14-34 in Chicago.
LOL. I'm no Fox fan, but Peyton Manning was FAR from his prime during his time with the Broncos.
Peyton Manning wasn't a corpse until 2014.
He threw for 55 touchdowns and 10 INTS in 2013.
I don't get to interview these guys or see them interacting with players on the practice field or in the locker room, but that's what it would take for me to determine whether age has become an issue for them. Depending on health and activity, age is mostly a state of mind (at least until 80 or so). Even on the physical side we see QBs like Brady and Brees playing at a high level into their 40's and non-QBs like Strahan, London Fletcher, Larry Fitzgerald, and Frank Gore playing well into their 30's.
30 and 40 ain't what it used to be when it comes to strength, speed, and quickness. And 60 and 70 ain't what it used to be when it comes to mental acuity.
It's not his mental acuity, it's his overall physical health. He's had some serious heart issues and he's at an age where a job with the physical demands of the NFL could take a serious toll.
Combine that with his record at his last stop, and does he really warrant the risk?
Combine that with his record at his last stop, and does he really warrant the risk?
I would be all for a Saleh, a Richard or a Roman - but my concern is that these guys end up similar to Shurmur - good at X's/O's, not good at running an organization.
Quote:
It's not his mental acuity, it's his overall physical health. He's had some serious heart issues and he's at an age where a job with the physical demands of the NFL could take a serious toll.
Combine that with his record at his last stop, and does he really warrant the risk?
As a replacement for Bettcher, yes. As a replacement for Shurmur, no.
As DC? No argument here - the only question is whether he'd take the job.
Quote:
If we fully commit to his offense across the organization it will open up a lot of opportunities for asset acquisition. But we have to commit across the organization. That's going to require a lot of change from ownership.
I would be all for a Saleh, a Richard or a Roman - but my concern is that these guys end up similar to Shurmur - good at X's/O's, not good at running an organization.
Saleh is buyer beware. A big rah-rah guy with a style more suited for college. There is a load of talent on the 9ers D, and they are deep.
A lot of NFL DCs could look good directing that team. Bettcher included.
Roman is THE most interesting prospect. Of course, maybe he just does his best work with the Harbaughs - Jim in San Fran with Kaep and John in Bmore with LJax... ;)