Coughlin was a master of X and O tactics. Parcells was more of a big-picture strategic thinker and motivator. Parcells assembled a great staff and delegated the details. Coughlin, not so much.
His resume can't minimized in that area. Given the environment of a short tournament and a full week to focus on a singular opponent, TC delivers. I look at some his worst playoff losses more on individual meltdowns (Brunell in 99, Eli and special teams in 08) than lack of team preparation, with the exception of the 05 Carolina loss. On the other hand, his postseason successes are numerous, from the 96 Jags to 62-7 to end Marino's career to - of course - the Giants superbowl runs.
I remain a little bit unconvinced of TC as a regular season coach however. Seems like a lot of his teams hit the wall and had inexplicable no-shows in the latter half of the year. For that reason, Parcells is better - because it's ultimately most important that your team make the postseason tournament consistently.
I know a lot of people credit BB and our D with that win, but I don't.
It was a great overall team effort (and it was great how our secondary punished the Bills receivers), but I think the offense controlling the ball for over 41 minutes (still a SB record), was the biggest key.
The D gave up a point per min. If not for the record TOP, the Bills might've scored 30+ (if the TOP was more even) and they were driving down the field at the end of the game but just ran out of time (to get Norwood into better FG range - he had very bad history from 47 yds on grass).
It was a great gameplan overall, but imo we would've lost if the O didn't control the ball for 41 min.
RE: RE: Parcells had the benefit of having Little Bill as a defensive
I know a lot of people credit BB and our D with that win, but I don't.
It was a great overall team effort (and it was great how our secondary punished the Bills receivers), but I think the offense controlling the ball for over 41 minutes (still a SB record), was the biggest key.
The D gave up a point per min. If not for the record TOP, the Bills might've scored 30+ (if the TOP was more even) and they were driving down the field at the end of the game but just ran out of time (to get Norwood into better FG range - he had very bad history from 47 yds on grass).
It was a great gameplan overall, but imo we would've lost if the O didn't control the ball for 41 min.
Point Taken.
RE: RE: RE: Parcells had the benefit of having Little Bill as a defensive
I know a lot of people credit BB and our D with that win, but I don't.
It was a great overall team effort (and it was great how our secondary punished the Bills receivers), but I think the offense controlling the ball for over 41 minutes (still a SB record), was the biggest key.
The D gave up a point per min. If not for the record TOP, the Bills might've scored 30+ (if the TOP was more even) and they were driving down the field at the end of the game but just ran out of time (to get Norwood into better FG range - he had very bad history from 47 yds on grass).
It was a great gameplan overall, but imo we would've lost if the O didn't control the ball for 41 min.
Parcells. And I love TC, but it was Tuna. And not close IMO.
Coughlin was every bit as good a coach as Parcells without the drama. I wouldn't criticize anyone choosing Parcells but to say it wasn't close is a little ridiculous.
Parcells also had the greatest defensive player in NFL history
I think this gets overlooked. While Coughlin's rosters had some great players, no player on Coughlin's teams was as significantly impactful on the game, week in and week out.
Parcells. And I love TC, but it was Tuna. And not close IMO.
It's Bill, but I'm not sure I'd say it's "not close". I know Bill gets the credit for being a program builder, and he definitely was that (AFC title in New England, got to AFC title game with Jets), people seem to forget TC built the Jaguars team that also got to an AFC championship, but as an expansion team. Pretty good.
Also, what highlights Bill's greatness, is also the thing that I personally don't like about his career when I look back at it. He comes across a bit of a flake to me jumping from team to team. Maybe that's just me as a Giants fan wishing he had been here for the 90's. He should have been here!
Parcells. And I love TC, but it was Tuna. And not close IMO.
It's Bill, but I'm not sure I'd say it's "not close". I know Bill gets the credit for being a program builder, and he definitely was that (AFC title in New England, got to AFC title game with Jets), people seem to forget TC built the Jaguars team that also got to an AFC championship, but as an expansion team. Pretty good.
Also, what highlights Bill's greatness, is also the thing that I personally don't like about his career when I look back at it. He comes across a bit of a flake to me jumping from team to team. Maybe that's just me as a Giants fan wishing he had been here for the 90's. He should have been here!
Chris, I agree. He fucking coached Dallas! Bill was always looking for the next job.
Of course no one likes that he coached the Cowboys
But he gave me the greatest Giants teams I've ever seen. By far. Sorry, but none of Coughlin's teams come close to Parcells' teams. That's just reality.
I give a slight edge to Parcells but it is really close.
I think most of TC's struggles the last few years with the Giants had to do with a very poor front office (see drafts 2011-15). I think he lost a lot of say as time went on.
the Tuna had more dominating reg seasons (though 2008 was in the process of being dominant before Plax's assident and Coughlin did have some dominant reg seasons in Jax).
It was also easier to keep a great team together prior to FA and the cap, so Tuna had that advantage.
For me, it's hard to not factor in the schtooking Tuna gave us on the way out. I don't think Coughlin would've done that. He might still be coaching the Giants if it was up to him.
But he gave me the greatest Giants teams I've ever seen. By far. Sorry, but none of Coughlin's teams come close to Parcells' teams. That's just reality.
It's okay to like both Greg. The greatest Giants team was 1986 no doubt, but the 8 year run of Coughlin/Manning was pretty damn enjoyable too.
But he gave me the greatest Giants teams I've ever seen. By far. Sorry, but none of Coughlin's teams come close to Parcells' teams. That's just reality.
It's okay to like both Greg. The greatest Giants team was 1986 no doubt, but the 8 year run of Coughlin/Manning was pretty damn enjoyable too.
I think the 2007 Giants may have been the best team. Defeated the 18-0 Patriots who had crushed everyone they played....
Hard to argue with 14-2 in 1986 and a dominant playoffs.
although I think the fact both guys did well coaching in multiple locations shows that both were legitimately great HCs.
To play devil's advocate on Parcells though, the following is a list of things BBI believes to be true.
- LT is the GOAT, certainly the defensive GOAT
- Belichick is the GOAT DC who went on to be the GOAT HC
- Carson was an underrated player who should've been 1st ballot HOF
- Banks was an underrated HOF player at his best who was matching LT in the late 80s for a stretch
- strong DBs and really strong DL and LB play
- HOF-level QB in Simms
- Morris was a very underrated RB at his peak
- Bavaro peaked as possibly the best two-way TE ever
The Parcells Giants were certainly more consistently great than the Coughlin Giants for sure, but they were also a hell of a lot more loaded with talent/coaching support.
I mean, those defenses are what carried those teams. How much of that defensive "success pie" should be split between Parcells/Belichick/LT/Other defenders? GOAT DC + GOAT DEFENDER + Loaded defensive supporting cast. It's hard to break down.
Again, just trying to present another view. As great as Parcells was and as great a job as he did cultivating a winning attitude among the team, he had a ton of help compared to Coughlin. Even relative to the Salary Cap era, the Coughlin Giants weren't as loaded.
around the league and fans of other teams, Parcells was almost certainly viewed on the same level as the best coaches of his era while TC was viewed as part of the tier below. Maybe even below that.
Bill had the two better Superbowl teams, but Tom's two Superbowl victories were coaching clinics against arguably the greatest quarterback and coach combo in NFL history.
Loved both, but I prefer less drama. One game, I want Tom.I
I dunno where some of you are getting "not remotely close"
talk from, but I think it has to do with nostalgia.
Parcells had to win a much tougher environment rather than the watered down NFL of the 2000s. The '80s Niners, for instance, were a much better team than the 2007 Patriots.
Parcells launched the careers of other great coaches. Coughlin's staffs were often lousy.
Coughlin teams routinely lost in humiliating fashion, something that didn't happen nearly as much to Parcells.
But I think it’s definitely Parcells. What I wonder about is what would have happened if Plax doesn’t get stupid with the gun. I thought the 2008 team was clearly the best team in the league and on its way to the SB. No one knows if they would have done it given the injury possibilities but if TC won that 2nd SB that year plus who knows how the next few years would have went. Plax really did a number of TCs career even acknowledging TC did win the 2nd one a few years later.
Similar to the 2008-2010 teams. The strike was a factor of course, but the ‘87 team was already headed for disaster.
That parallel is one reason I have difficulty drawing much of a distinction between Parcells’s NYG tenure and Coughlin’s. They each had upper-tier talent for about six years. They each won two Super Bowls, preceded by a rough first year and two years of gradual growth, and separated by three very disappointing seasons.
talk from, but I think it has to do with nostalgia.
Parcells had to win a much tougher environment rather than the watered down NFL of the 2000s. The '80s Niners, for instance, were a much better team than the 2007 Patriots.
Parcells launched the careers of other great coaches. Coughlin's staffs were often lousy.
Coughlin teams routinely lost in humiliating fashion, something that didn't happen nearly as much to Parcells.
Think you are totally wrong on your tougher to build premise. No salary cap and far easier to keep your players.
Which 49ers were better than the Patriots? How many SBs do the 49ers have and how many do the Patriots have?
Yeah, I will never forgive Bill for leaving in the manner in which he did. Virtually "dead to me" and a lot of Giants fans and that counts.
impossible to compare objectively. Both won 2 Super Bowls as HC of the Giants. Very different styles and people. IMO there's no right or wrong answer. I think for most people it would depend on your age and when you started following the Giants.
I was young in mid 60s and 1970s. A Giants fan, surrounded by front running Cowboys, Steelers and Raiders fans mixed in with some Dolphins and Vikings fans too while the Giants were a laughing stock. There was never any thought of the Giants winning the Super Bowl pre Bill Parcells. He'll always be my favorite Giants coach for that reason.
Tom Coughlin inherited a team that had won 2 Super Bowls and had been to a 3rd Super Bowl 3 season before he was hired. Very different circumstances. Tom Coughlin had to deal with free agency and the rules on the field had changed the way the game was played and coached. It made coaching an NFL team a different challenge than Parcells era.
Pick your favorite, no one can make a legitimate case that you're wrong.
Well, go position by position with the 1990 Niners
QB - I'm sure you'll say Brady, but I'd say that one at worst is a push. Me, I'd take Montana.
RB - Craig > Faulk
WR - Rice > Moss
WR - Welker was the better possession receiver, Taylor the better big play threat. Could go either way on this one
TE - Brent Jones > Kyle Brady/Ben Watson
LT - Matt Light > Bubba Paris
LG - Guy McIntyre > Logan Mankins
C - Push between Koppen/Sapolu
RG - Harris Barton > Steve Neal
RT - Steve Wallace > Nick Kaczur
DE - Pierce Holt > Ty Warren
NT - Wilfork > Carter, though Carter was really good too
DE - Kevin Fagan > Jarvis Green
OLB - Haley > Vrabel
ILB - Bruschi > Keith DeLong
ILB - Adalius Thomas > Millen
OLB - Romanowski > Rosevelt Colvin
CB - Samuel > Darryl Pollard
CB - Don Griffin > Hobbs
SS - Harrison > Chet Brooks/Dave Waymer
FS - Lott > James Sanders
talk from, but I think it has to do with nostalgia.
Parcells had to win a much tougher environment rather than the watered down NFL of the 2000s. The '80s Niners, for instance, were a much better team than the 2007 Patriots.
Parcells launched the careers of other great coaches. Coughlin's staffs were often lousy.
Coughlin teams routinely lost in humiliating fashion, something that didn't happen nearly as much to Parcells.
Yes, but he also didn't have to deal with free agency.
With the modern era of Free Agency introduced in 1993, I don't think you realize how big of an issue that is. It's something Tom Coughlin had to deal with his entire tenure as a head coach. Bill Parcells did not.
works in Coughlin's favor. When Parcells became the coach of the Giants teams were good and bad for decades because there was no player movement. It was much harder to turn around a struggling team and the Giants did more than struggle for 15 years. In that era the best teams had 2nd string players that would have been above average or even stars on other teams.
Kind of like in the 1990s when Ron Stone was a bench player for the Cowboys and instantly became the Giants best OL when he left as a free agent. That's a huge advantage for a team that needs to get better.
The flip side is that a lot of players have to be coached up faster and plugged right in out of college to replace departing free agents. That was not a Tom Coughlin strength.
Big fan of Coughlin since his SU wingback days . The thing you have to remember about Parcells is the premature exits . He despised Young . It was mutual . And Young blocked his return to the Giants in 96. But Bill never failed in anything . Patriots. Jets and Cowboys : he just left early .
Tom Coughlin should be in the HOF already . For chrissakes Marv Levy is . TC probably pissed off some voters . But he is not on caliber with the great Parcells . Very few in league history are .
At the end of the day, I think Coughlin consistently got more with less than Parcells did… BP had more and deeper talent, and as mentioned, a GOAT on the field and on the sidelines. I’m admittedly biased on the way he left the team, which was unforgivable.
RE: This is a very good, thought provoking thread.
At the end of the day, I think Coughlin consistently got more with less than Parcells did… BP had more and deeper talent, and as mentioned, a GOAT on the field and on the sidelines. I’m admittedly biased on the way he left the team, which was unforgivable.
not sure the word "consistent" is in any way applicable to TC's tenure.
Tuna leaving when he did still pisses me off. & I'm aware GY would never have hired BB so I'm not going down that road, but still...we ended up with He Who Shall Not be Named as our HC. Ugh.
But if they are both young enough to have years ahead them and I’m building an organization then Coughlin. Parcells was great but one serious flaw with him was that the grass was always greener somewhere else. Coughlin was loyal through and through.
In comment 16538259 Grey Pilgrim said:
Quote:coordinator.
Primary reason we won SB 25.
I know a lot of people credit BB and our D with that win, but I don't.
It was a great overall team effort (and it was great how our secondary punished the Bills receivers), but I think the offense controlling the ball for over 41 minutes (still a SB record), was the biggest key.
The D gave up a point per min. If not for the record TOP, the Bills might've scored 30+ (if the TOP was more even) and they were driving down the field at the end of the game but just ran out of time (to get Norwood into better FG range - he had very bad history from 47 yds on grass).
It was a great gameplan overall, but imo we would've lost if the O didn't control the ball for 41 min.
"If" doesn't count.
RE: RE: RE: Parcells had the benefit of having Little Bill as a defensive
In comment 16538259 Grey Pilgrim said:
Quote:coordinator.
Primary reason we won SB 25.
I know a lot of people credit BB and our D with that win, but I don't.
It was a great overall team effort (and it was great how our secondary punished the Bills receivers), but I think the offense controlling the ball for over 41 minutes (still a SB record), was the biggest key.
The D gave up a point per min. If not for the record TOP, the Bills might've scored 30+ (if the TOP was more even) and they were driving down the field at the end of the game but just ran out of time (to get Norwood into better FG range - he had very bad history from 47 yds on grass).
It was a great gameplan overall, but imo we would've lost if the O didn't control the ball for 41 min.
"If" doesn't count.
Forget the "if" part then, if it makes you feel better.
The point is our offense controlled the ball for a record 41 minutes. The Bills prolific offense couldn't score a single point while they were sitting on their collective ass. When they were on the field, they scored a pt per min of possession. See, no ifs.
It's not like this is some kind of crazy idea of mine, it was part of the (brilliant) game plan to keep the ball out of the Bills hands.
I just think the offense, including the OL, OJ, Hoss, Ingram, OC Ron Erhardt, et al. deserves more credit than they get.
If (there I go again) you don't understand my point, that's your right.
bill found his groove after year one.
tom kind of had yet to evolve until a near-mutiny but he did and credit to him, and then caught lightning in a bottle.
in the pre internet 80s you could follow the weekday storylines in the papers and get a real feel for how bill navigated those seasons and built his team.
his new jersey nuggets of wisdom are also iconic.
theres no loser here.
who say Coughlin because Parcells coached the Jets and Cowboys remind me of teenage girls who hate another girl that dated their ex-boyfriend.
it's a f-ing business.
I'd respect an answer that simply had x and o's or if you said with shorter training camps, longer seasons, more injuries, and the salary cap it's harder to win consistently - but because of who he coached when he left NY?
very very weak and is an emotional argument, which of course is fine to feed an answer to an opinion question, but it doesn't make it less weak.
I like both so it's not like there is a loser in this question, but I do give Parcells the edge for most of the reasons already cited
I am hard pressed to take Parcells over TC because of the walk out in 91 - which was total bullshit.
Believe them to be equal.
Primary reason we won SB 25.
TBH, the game may have passed them both by.
I remain a little bit unconvinced of TC as a regular season coach however. Seems like a lot of his teams hit the wall and had inexplicable no-shows in the latter half of the year. For that reason, Parcells is better - because it's ultimately most important that your team make the postseason tournament consistently.
Primary reason we won SB 25.
I know a lot of people credit BB and our D with that win, but I don't.
It was a great overall team effort (and it was great how our secondary punished the Bills receivers), but I think the offense controlling the ball for over 41 minutes (still a SB record), was the biggest key.
The D gave up a point per min. If not for the record TOP, the Bills might've scored 30+ (if the TOP was more even) and they were driving down the field at the end of the game but just ran out of time (to get Norwood into better FG range - he had very bad history from 47 yds on grass).
It was a great gameplan overall, but imo we would've lost if the O didn't control the ball for 41 min.
Quote:
coordinator.
Primary reason we won SB 25.
I know a lot of people credit BB and our D with that win, but I don't.
It was a great overall team effort (and it was great how our secondary punished the Bills receivers), but I think the offense controlling the ball for over 41 minutes (still a SB record), was the biggest key.
The D gave up a point per min. If not for the record TOP, the Bills might've scored 30+ (if the TOP was more even) and they were driving down the field at the end of the game but just ran out of time (to get Norwood into better FG range - he had very bad history from 47 yds on grass).
It was a great gameplan overall, but imo we would've lost if the O didn't control the ball for 41 min.
Point Taken.
Quote:
In comment 16538259 Grey Pilgrim said:
Quote:
coordinator.
Primary reason we won SB 25.
I know a lot of people credit BB and our D with that win, but I don't.
It was a great overall team effort (and it was great how our secondary punished the Bills receivers), but I think the offense controlling the ball for over 41 minutes (still a SB record), was the biggest key.
The D gave up a point per min. If not for the record TOP, the Bills might've scored 30+ (if the TOP was more even) and they were driving down the field at the end of the game but just ran out of time (to get Norwood into better FG range - he had very bad history from 47 yds on grass).
It was a great gameplan overall, but imo we would've lost if the O didn't control the ball for 41 min.
Point Taken.
Grey, I'm not used to that. Lol.
It is a question. After he left the Giants he had decent teams, but nothing spectacular.
It's Bill, but I'm not sure I'd say it's "not close". I know Bill gets the credit for being a program builder, and he definitely was that (AFC title in New England, got to AFC title game with Jets), people seem to forget TC built the Jaguars team that also got to an AFC championship, but as an expansion team. Pretty good.
Also, what highlights Bill's greatness, is also the thing that I personally don't like about his career when I look back at it. He comes across a bit of a flake to me jumping from team to team. Maybe that's just me as a Giants fan wishing he had been here for the 90's. He should have been here!
Quote:
Parcells. And I love TC, but it was Tuna. And not close IMO.
It's Bill, but I'm not sure I'd say it's "not close". I know Bill gets the credit for being a program builder, and he definitely was that (AFC title in New England, got to AFC title game with Jets), people seem to forget TC built the Jaguars team that also got to an AFC championship, but as an expansion team. Pretty good.
Also, what highlights Bill's greatness, is also the thing that I personally don't like about his career when I look back at it. He comes across a bit of a flake to me jumping from team to team. Maybe that's just me as a Giants fan wishing he had been here for the 90's. He should have been here!
Chris, I agree. He fucking coached Dallas! Bill was always looking for the next job.
I think most of TC's struggles the last few years with the Giants had to do with a very poor front office (see drafts 2011-15). I think he lost a lot of say as time went on.
It was also easier to keep a great team together prior to FA and the cap, so Tuna had that advantage.
For me, it's hard to not factor in the schtooking Tuna gave us on the way out. I don't think Coughlin would've done that. He might still be coaching the Giants if it was up to him.
I'm not going to choose; glad we had both.
Oh now that is just precious. The story never changes: all of the credit when they win, none of the blame when they lose.
It's okay to like both Greg. The greatest Giants team was 1986 no doubt, but the 8 year run of Coughlin/Manning was pretty damn enjoyable too.
Quote:
But he gave me the greatest Giants teams I've ever seen. By far. Sorry, but none of Coughlin's teams come close to Parcells' teams. That's just reality.
It's okay to like both Greg. The greatest Giants team was 1986 no doubt, but the 8 year run of Coughlin/Manning was pretty damn enjoyable too.
I think the 2007 Giants may have been the best team. Defeated the 18-0 Patriots who had crushed everyone they played....
Hard to argue with 14-2 in 1986 and a dominant playoffs.
To play devil's advocate on Parcells though, the following is a list of things BBI believes to be true.
- LT is the GOAT, certainly the defensive GOAT
- Belichick is the GOAT DC who went on to be the GOAT HC
- Carson was an underrated player who should've been 1st ballot HOF
- Banks was an underrated HOF player at his best who was matching LT in the late 80s for a stretch
- strong DBs and really strong DL and LB play
- HOF-level QB in Simms
- Morris was a very underrated RB at his peak
- Bavaro peaked as possibly the best two-way TE ever
The Parcells Giants were certainly more consistently great than the Coughlin Giants for sure, but they were also a hell of a lot more loaded with talent/coaching support.
I mean, those defenses are what carried those teams. How much of that defensive "success pie" should be split between Parcells/Belichick/LT/Other defenders? GOAT DC + GOAT DEFENDER + Loaded defensive supporting cast. It's hard to break down.
Again, just trying to present another view. As great as Parcells was and as great a job as he did cultivating a winning attitude among the team, he had a ton of help compared to Coughlin. Even relative to the Salary Cap era, the Coughlin Giants weren't as loaded.
Loved both, but I prefer less drama. One game, I want Tom.I
Parcells had to win a much tougher environment rather than the watered down NFL of the 2000s. The '80s Niners, for instance, were a much better team than the 2007 Patriots.
Parcells launched the careers of other great coaches. Coughlin's staffs were often lousy.
Coughlin teams routinely lost in humiliating fashion, something that didn't happen nearly as much to Parcells.
That parallel is one reason I have difficulty drawing much of a distinction between Parcells’s NYG tenure and Coughlin’s. They each had upper-tier talent for about six years. They each won two Super Bowls, preceded by a rough first year and two years of gradual growth, and separated by three very disappointing seasons.
Quote:
talk from, but I think it has to do with nostalgia.
Parcells had to win a much tougher environment rather than the watered down NFL of the 2000s. The '80s Niners, for instance, were a much better team than the 2007 Patriots.
Parcells launched the careers of other great coaches. Coughlin's staffs were often lousy.
Coughlin teams routinely lost in humiliating fashion, something that didn't happen nearly as much to Parcells.
Think you are totally wrong on your tougher to build premise. No salary cap and far easier to keep your players.
Which 49ers were better than the Patriots? How many SBs do the 49ers have and how many do the Patriots have?
Yeah, I will never forgive Bill for leaving in the manner in which he did. Virtually "dead to me" and a lot of Giants fans and that counts.
Bill may be better, but not by much.
I was young in mid 60s and 1970s. A Giants fan, surrounded by front running Cowboys, Steelers and Raiders fans mixed in with some Dolphins and Vikings fans too while the Giants were a laughing stock. There was never any thought of the Giants winning the Super Bowl pre Bill Parcells. He'll always be my favorite Giants coach for that reason.
Tom Coughlin inherited a team that had won 2 Super Bowls and had been to a 3rd Super Bowl 3 season before he was hired. Very different circumstances. Tom Coughlin had to deal with free agency and the rules on the field had changed the way the game was played and coached. It made coaching an NFL team a different challenge than Parcells era.
Pick your favorite, no one can make a legitimate case that you're wrong.
RB - Craig > Faulk
WR - Rice > Moss
WR - Welker was the better possession receiver, Taylor the better big play threat. Could go either way on this one
TE - Brent Jones > Kyle Brady/Ben Watson
LT - Matt Light > Bubba Paris
LG - Guy McIntyre > Logan Mankins
C - Push between Koppen/Sapolu
RG - Harris Barton > Steve Neal
RT - Steve Wallace > Nick Kaczur
DE - Pierce Holt > Ty Warren
NT - Wilfork > Carter, though Carter was really good too
DE - Kevin Fagan > Jarvis Green
OLB - Haley > Vrabel
ILB - Bruschi > Keith DeLong
ILB - Adalius Thomas > Millen
OLB - Romanowski > Rosevelt Colvin
CB - Samuel > Darryl Pollard
CB - Don Griffin > Hobbs
SS - Harrison > Chet Brooks/Dave Waymer
FS - Lott > James Sanders
So, yeah, that 49er team was better.
Quote:
talk from, but I think it has to do with nostalgia.
Parcells had to win a much tougher environment rather than the watered down NFL of the 2000s. The '80s Niners, for instance, were a much better team than the 2007 Patriots.
Parcells launched the careers of other great coaches. Coughlin's staffs were often lousy.
Coughlin teams routinely lost in humiliating fashion, something that didn't happen nearly as much to Parcells.
Yes, but he also didn't have to deal with free agency.
Don't believe me? This wasn't a called penalty. No one complained. It was the way the game was played then.
Clean hit in 1990 - ( New Window )
With the modern era of Free Agency introduced in 1993, I don't think you realize how big of an issue that is. It's something Tom Coughlin had to deal with his entire tenure as a head coach. Bill Parcells did not.
Kind of like in the 1990s when Ron Stone was a bench player for the Cowboys and instantly became the Giants best OL when he left as a free agent. That's a huge advantage for a team that needs to get better.
The flip side is that a lot of players have to be coached up faster and plugged right in out of college to replace departing free agents. That was not a Tom Coughlin strength.
Tom Coughlin should be in the HOF already . For chrissakes Marv Levy is . TC probably pissed off some voters . But he is not on caliber with the great Parcells . Very few in league history are .
Don't believe me? This wasn't a called penalty. No one complained. It was the way the game was played then. Clean hit in 1990 - ( New Window )
This. Brady never had to deal with the higher level of brutality for QBs in the 1980s and 90s.
not sure the word "consistent" is in any way applicable to TC's tenure.
Quote:coordinator.
Primary reason we won SB 25.
I know a lot of people credit BB and our D with that win, but I don't.
It was a great overall team effort (and it was great how our secondary punished the Bills receivers), but I think the offense controlling the ball for over 41 minutes (still a SB record), was the biggest key.
The D gave up a point per min. If not for the record TOP, the Bills might've scored 30+ (if the TOP was more even) and they were driving down the field at the end of the game but just ran out of time (to get Norwood into better FG range - he had very bad history from 47 yds on grass).
It was a great gameplan overall, but imo we would've lost if the O didn't control the ball for 41 min.
Quote:
In comment 16538259 Grey Pilgrim said:
Quote:coordinator.
Primary reason we won SB 25.
I know a lot of people credit BB and our D with that win, but I don't.
It was a great overall team effort (and it was great how our secondary punished the Bills receivers), but I think the offense controlling the ball for over 41 minutes (still a SB record), was the biggest key.
The D gave up a point per min. If not for the record TOP, the Bills might've scored 30+ (if the TOP was more even) and they were driving down the field at the end of the game but just ran out of time (to get Norwood into better FG range - he had very bad history from 47 yds on grass).
It was a great gameplan overall, but imo we would've lost if the O didn't control the ball for 41 min.
"If" doesn't count.
Forget the "if" part then, if it makes you feel better.
The point is our offense controlled the ball for a record 41 minutes. The Bills prolific offense couldn't score a single point while they were sitting on their collective ass. When they were on the field, they scored a pt per min of possession. See, no ifs.
It's not like this is some kind of crazy idea of mine, it was part of the (brilliant) game plan to keep the ball out of the Bills hands.
I just think the offense, including the OL, OJ, Hoss, Ingram, OC Ron Erhardt, et al. deserves more credit than they get.
If (there I go again) you don't understand my point, that's your right.
tom kind of had yet to evolve until a near-mutiny but he did and credit to him, and then caught lightning in a bottle.
in the pre internet 80s you could follow the weekday storylines in the papers and get a real feel for how bill navigated those seasons and built his team.
his new jersey nuggets of wisdom are also iconic.
theres no loser here.
it's a f-ing business.
I'd respect an answer that simply had x and o's or if you said with shorter training camps, longer seasons, more injuries, and the salary cap it's harder to win consistently - but because of who he coached when he left NY?
very very weak and is an emotional argument, which of course is fine to feed an answer to an opinion question, but it doesn't make it less weak.
I like both so it's not like there is a loser in this question, but I do give Parcells the edge for most of the reasons already cited