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.