Fire Zimmer Now!!!

Scotman

Well-Known Member
Messages
4,524
Reaction score
6,161
I'll wade in. What the heck.

:)

I'll start off by saying I haven't been a fan of Zimmer's. I don't hate him, but I don't fawn after him either. Also, I have an extensive background in leadership, management and adminsitration. I'll finish my doctorate in the field soon (dissertation :mad:).

Mike, I get your point, flawed as it is. I don't think anyone believes that the defensive architect behind our new-look defense is Zimmer. Parcells is. But to equate Zimmer with a mid-level manager based on your experience isn't going to work. Not all management systems work in the manner you espouse.

For example, I had the opportunity this year to hire a guy to be my right hand. He had little experience in the areas that I needed him for. But, I knew he was smart and a hard worker. I knew the other hundred or so people under him would follow him. I told him my vision and goals. It was his job to get the job done. Not mine. If I was going to do it myself, I wouldn't have needed him.

At that point, he went to work learning and preparing. He has surpassed my expectations to this point. And that is credit to him, not me. If I were to take any credit, it would be for seeing the potential that lied in this one employee. But when that person realizes his/her potential, they should get the credit. Pretty simple in my book.

It is not nearly as easy to find someone capable of doing what Zimmer is doing as you say. Read Elbert Hubbard's A Message to Garcia. You can find it easily on the internet. Just a few pages long.

Mike, I don't post a lot but I believe from reading your posts you're an intelligent and thoughtful poster. But we've got two distinct things going on here. On one hand, you're arguing that Zimmer isn't the designer of the defense. You have done so strongly enough that it doesn't appear you're giving Zimmer his due. Second, there are those that are arguing that you don't create anything worth while in the NFL without teamwork. Not just on the field, but off. And they are arguing that you have to give credit all around.

For me, I give credit to the whole shooting match. From JJ on down to Rowdy. And here's to hoping that the defense keeps improving!
 

Mike 1967

New Member
Messages
2,767
Reaction score
2
AdamJT13 said:
Your argument is simply ridiculous. It's as if you think all a defensive coordinator does is decide whether to play a 3-4 or a 4-3 -- and that actually coordinating the defense during a game is irrelevant. Parcells doesn't call the defensive plays, Zimmer does. If Parcells had ANY doubts about Zimmer's ability to coordinate the defense, he absolutely would have brought in a coordinator familiar with the 3-4, who knew how to call a game with a 3-4 defense. But Parcells KNEW that Zimmer is a very good defensive coordinator, so he had no reason to fire him. He knew why a defense that was so good in 2003 dropped off so much in 2004, and it had nothing to do with Zimmer.

If anything, this season proves that Zimmer is a good coordinator no matter what the scheme. Give him a defense that's not ravaged by injuries at key positions, and he'll turn it into one of the league's best.

Wow...strong language from Adam. A very rare thing.....so my argument must be a good one ! :)

It is rediculous to think that Zimmer is the catalyst behind the defensive change and not Parcells.

Zimmer very well may be a great coach. But he was not the catalyst behind the move to the 3-4, nor was he the catalyst behind the recent drafts. The Catalyst was Parcells.

To say that that is rediculous...is rediculous.
 

Trip

New Member
Messages
674
Reaction score
0
Mike 1967 said:
Yes...that is what I believe.

But.....that evaluation included key players like Ellis and Glover who were already on board the team before PArcells arrived on the scene.

PArcells kept some of the players and removed others.

Parcells also selected the defensive players over the last two years. And I believe that he also made selections last year with an eventualy move to the 3-4 in mind.

It's not Zimmer's job to draft players or sign free agents. He plays the hand he's dealt, and he plays it well.

Parcells is looking good right now. But lets keep a few points in mind, please.

1. We had a pretty darn good defense in 2003 and Parcells had little input in building it or directing it.

2. We had a miserable defense in 2004. Why? Because of Parcells talent evaluation, partly. Remember, it was he who decided to ride it out with Peter Hunter, and little depth behind him, against the wishes of HIS boss.

We run the 3-4 now. It's what Parcells knows and likes. In your management analogies, this would make him a micro-manager.
 

AdamJT13

Salary Cap Analyst
Messages
16,583
Reaction score
4,529
Mike 1967 said:
Wow...strong language from Adam. A very rare thing.....so my argument must be a good one ! :)

Or the opposite.

It is rediculous to think that Zimmer is the catalyst behind the defensive change and not Parcells.

Zimmer very well may be a great coach. But he was not the catalyst behind the move to the 3-4, nor was he the catalyst behind the recent drafts. The Catalyst was Parcells.

To say that that is rediculous...is rediculous.

Nobody ever said Zimmer was the "mastermind" or "catalyst." He's the defensive coordinator, not the "defensive mastermind."

You still haven't explained your theory about Parcells not needing a "real" defensive coordinator -- especially considering that Parcells doesn't call the defensive schemes.

So, Mike, who tells the defense what to do on each play?
 

Yeagermeister

Well-Known Member
Messages
47,629
Reaction score
117
Hostile said:
This is not meant to offend and I hope it doesn't.

I would hate to work for you.

Let me see if I have this straight. You're Parcells. You have a vision, directive, goal, demand, or whatever you want to call it, to get this team ready to play the 3-4.

You give this task to me. I work my butt off. Project is paying off.

You and only you deserve the pedastal?

Frick that. Give me a team working together any day. Seems pretty clear to me that is exactly what he is doing.

I'm sorry, I just don't buy this at all.

You just decribed my boss :(
 

scottsp

Well-Known Member
Messages
2,936
Reaction score
941
Mike 1967 said:
Here is what I believe

- We needed to make a major overhaul of our scheme and/or we needed to do a better job on draft day.

- If we were going to overhaul the Defensive Scheme, then we would need to bring in a new defensive mastermind to implement that scheme. Not count on an existing coordinator to "learn" the new scheme.

- In this instance we did overhaul the sheme and we overhauled the evaluation of players. Specifically we put a new scout management in place and implemented a 3-4 scheme for the first time in Dallas.

- But...Zimmer did not need to be replaced because Parcells was the mastermind behind the 3-4. Even if Parcells had hired a new DC, it would have been one of his old cronies. He would not hired a DC under the pretext that that DC would be the author and mastermind behind the implentation of the new scheme.


If this is what you truly believe, you severely undervalue the role of an NFL coordinator.

This is not a special situation unlike any other in the league. Mike Zimmer is not some high-priced yes man who performs minimal tasks as the DC. He is charged with developing a specific game plan each and every week, just as any coordinator is expected to.

Such positions in the league aren't given to coaches an organization deems merely as a caretaker. They're entrusted to people whom the club and the head coach feel can effectively coordinate a unit for battle.

You can minimize the effect Zimmer has on the defense if you want. But the fact remains, he is heading up this unit and is doing so rather well. That much is certain. Are they this far along under another DC? We have no way of knowing that at all.
 

Mike 1967

New Member
Messages
2,767
Reaction score
2
Scotman said:
I'll wade in. What the heck.

:)

I'll start off by saying I haven't been a fan of Zimmer's. I don't hate him, but I don't fawn after him either. Also, I have an extensive background in leadership, management and adminsitration. I'll finish my doctorate in the field soon (dissertation :mad:). Mike, I get your point, flawed as it is.

I suppose that a doctorate is supposed to establish a precedent of authority that cannot be argued against.

Suffice to say that my experience is that those who teach in higher levels of college do so because they cannot survive in the real world. :)

Scotman said:
I don't think anyone believes that the defensive architect behind our new-look defense is Zimmer. Parcells is.!

Good ! Because that is exactly my argument.

Scotman said:
But to equate Zimmer with a mid-level manager based on your experience isn't going to work. Not all management systems work in the manner you espouse.

For example, I had the opportunity this year to hire a guy to be my right hand. He had little experience in the areas that I needed him for. But, I knew he was smart and a hard worker. I knew the other hundred or so people under him would follow him. I told him my vision and goals. It was his job to get the job done. Not mine. If I was going to do it myself, I wouldn't have needed him.

At that point, he went to work learning and preparing. He has surpassed my expectations to this point. And that is credit to him, not me. If I were to take any credit, it would be for seeing the potential that lied in this one employee. But when that person realizes his/her potential, they should get the credit. Pretty simple in my book.

It is not nearly as easy to find someone capable of doing what Zimmer is doing as you say. Read Elbert Hubbard's A Message to Garcia. You can find it easily on the internet. Just a few pages long. .!

I have no issue with what you have stated above. But you have not provided me with enough information to relate it to the topic/debate at hand.

I also will be a bit more specific in respect to my analogy.

In my analogy I have a department that is running incorrectly. In this analogy an ISO auditor comes in and fails the department for various flawed processes. In this instance the company has to bring someone in to rewrite the procedures that the company operates by.

In this example, it would not be logical to expect that a hardworking individual with no experience would be able to write procedures for that department. This is exactly the same dynamic that drives the experience requirement on most every job. Because job experience directly dictates job knowledge which directly dictates sound process.

I also never said that all management systems work in the manner that I espouse. I was simply developing an analogy in an effort to better communicate my point. Wether or not my management experience relates directly with your management experience in no way undermines the analogy.



Scotman said:
Mike, I don't post a lot but I believe from reading your posts you're an intelligent and thoughtful poster. But we've got two distinct things going on here. On one hand, you're arguing that Zimmer isn't the designer of the defense. You have done so strongly enough that it doesn't appear you're giving Zimmer his due. Second, there are those that are arguing that you don't create anything worth while in the NFL without teamwork. Not just on the field, but off. And they are arguing that you have to give credit all around.

For me, I give credit to the whole shooting match. From JJ on down to Rowdy. And here's to hoping that the defense keeps improving!

I would direct you to the origination of this thread. The context begins there.

The original issue is not teamwork. The original issue was questioning those that called for Zimmer to be fired last year.

I was, and am, answering that statement with sound debate to support my position last year that a change was needed.

Last year I viewed Zimmer as the architect and mastermind of the 4-3 system being employed. This year I view Parcells as the architect and mastermind of the 3-4 scheme being employed.

It would appear that we are arguing over semantics while agreeing on the primary issue's of this debate.
 

scottsp

Well-Known Member
Messages
2,936
Reaction score
941
Being a catalyst has nothing to do with it. The man has taken a scheme he has never coached before and rolled with it. He's learning, just as the players are. And also like the players, Zimmer seems to be getting a better handle on this 3-4.

I have done my fair share of ragging on the man, but I gotta give Zim credit for what he's done to this point. He deserves a ton. What he is doing is not easy at all. And I am happy as hell for him right about now.
 

Mike 1967

New Member
Messages
2,767
Reaction score
2
scottsp said:
Being a catalyst has nothing to do with it. The man has taken a scheme he has never coached before and rolled with it. He's learning, just as the players are. And also like the players, Zimmer seems to be getting a better handle on this 3-4.

I have done my fair share of ragging on the man, but I gotta give Zim credit for what he's done to this point. He deserves a ton. What he is doing is not easy at all. And I am happy as hell for him right about now.

Being a catalyst has nothing to do with what ?
 

Mike 1967

New Member
Messages
2,767
Reaction score
2
scottsp said:
If this is what you truly believe, you severely undervalue the role of an NFL coordinator.

This is not a special situation unlike any other in the league. Mike Zimmer is not some high-priced yes man who performs minimal tasks as the DC. He is charged with developing a specific game plan each and every week, just as any coordinator is expected to.

Such positions in the league aren't given to coaches an organization deems merely as a caretaker. They're entrusted to people whom the club and the head coach feel can effectively coordinate a unit for battle.

You can minimize the effect Zimmer has on the defense if you want. But the fact remains, he is heading up this unit and is doing so rather well. That much is certain. Are they this far along under another DC? We have no way of knowing that at all.

I view it differently

I am not minimizing the effect that Zimmer has on the defense......others are minimizing the effect that Parcells has on this defense.

Bottom line is that the move to the 3-4 would not be having the success that it has without PArcells in the equation.

Replace Zimmer with another DC and you would basically get the same results if Parcells were still in the equation...and if PArcells was the one selecting the DC.
 

Mike 1967

New Member
Messages
2,767
Reaction score
2
scottsp said:
It would not make much sense to keep a defensive coordinator who was not someone the coach wanted to be part of the staff, particularly one who was not as familiar with a scheme the head coach wished to implement.

Bill Parcells could have gone and got any number of lackeys who had worked with this specific scheme before - coaches who were more familiar with the 3-4. Instead, he opted to go with someone who had not coached this specific defense before at the NFL level.

I don't care how familiar the coach is with the scheme. It makes absolutely no sense to keep a DC around in this situation if he's not valued by the head man. Because if he was not, it would be easy as hell to go get someone who knew the 3-4 better and had worked with it in the league before.

I never said that Zimmer was not valued by the head man.
 

Doomsday101

Well-Known Member
Messages
107,762
Reaction score
39,034
Mike BP brought in the 3-4 no one argues that but it is Zimmer job to make it work and he has done that and this unit is playing very well under Zimmer.
 

Mike 1967

New Member
Messages
2,767
Reaction score
2
scottsp said:
Are they this far along under another DC? We have no way of knowing that at all.

That is not my question.

The core issue that I am debating is that we would not be this far along if Parcells were not in the mix. It is parcells that is the primary catalyst on the defensive improvement...not the DC.

So the question I am asking is...how far along would we be if PArcells were not here. And my answer is not nearly as far as we are with him here.
 

Mike 1967

New Member
Messages
2,767
Reaction score
2
Doomsday101 said:
Mike BP brought in the 3-4 no one argues that but it is Zimmer job to make it work and he has done that and this unit is playing very well under Zimmer.

It is working mainly because of Parcells...not because of Zimmer.
 

Mike 1967

New Member
Messages
2,767
Reaction score
2
scottsp said:
Being a catalyst has nothing to do with it. The man has taken a scheme he has never coached before and rolled with it. He's learning, just as the players are. And also like the players, Zimmer seems to be getting a better handle on this 3-4.

For the record....I do agree with your assesment above. He has done a hell of a job adapting to a new system.

My issue last year was primarily with the system being employed...not necessarily with the person coaching it.
 

Scotman

Well-Known Member
Messages
4,524
Reaction score
6,161
No Mike, mentioning the doctorate certainly doesn't mean it can't be argued with. I know people with a doctorate that can't find their butt with both hands. I was only clearing enough ground to establish that I do have some back ground knowledge in management. And shame on you if you think that all of those people teaching at higher institutions are there because they can't do it themselves. It's exactly the opposite, for the most part. Many of those in higher education have, as their first priority, new research and work in the field. Teaching is secondary. Produce, publish or perish, as they say. There's nothing there about teaching. Trust me.

As far as not providing enough detail in my analogy, I'm not sure what else I could have said. Don't forget, I don't disagree with you about whether or not Zimmer is the designer, only that you have to give him some credit for pulling everything together.

I'll give you the one about the original intent of the thread. It sure appeared to be calling out those that wanted him gone. I would have been satisfied had Bill brought in someone else. So count me in that group. But at this point, I also readily admit I'm glad he's here. Glad I didn't get my way. Obviously, Bill thought he needed him.

Doesn't look like I'm head coach material after all. :(
 

Doomsday101

Well-Known Member
Messages
107,762
Reaction score
39,034
Mike 1967 said:
It is working mainly because of Parcells...not because of Zimmer.

Zimmer is getting the job done, he calls the plays and he gets these guys prepaired that is what a coordinator does. If you choose to discredit the job that Zimmer has done then so be it.
 

Mike 1967

New Member
Messages
2,767
Reaction score
2
Scotman said:
No Mike, mentioning the doctorate certainly doesn't mean it can't be argued with. I know people with a doctorate that can't find their butt with both hands. I was only clearing enough ground to establish that I do have some back ground knowledge in management. And shame on you if you think that all of those people teaching at higher institutions are there because they can't do it themselves. It's exactly the opposite, for the most part. Many of those in higher education have, as their first priority, new research and work in the field. Teaching is secondary. Produce, publish or perish, as they say. There's nothing there about teaching. Trust me.

As far as not providing enough detail in my analogy, I'm not sure what else I could have said. Don't forget, I don't disagree with you about whether or not Zimmer is the designer, only that you have to give him some credit for pulling everything together.

I'll give you the one about the original intent of the thread. It sure appeared to be calling out those that wanted him gone. I would have been satisfied had Bill brought in someone else. So count me in that group. But at this point, I also readily admit I'm glad he's here. Glad I didn't get my way. Obviously, Bill thought he needed him.

Doesn't look like I'm head coach material after all. :(

I have no issue with Zimmer either.

Personally I wanted the scheme to be overhauled.

If I had the following two choices then I would have chosen # 2

(1) If we keep Zimmer then we keep the existing scheme
(2) The only way to implement a new scheme would be to get rid of Zimmer.

I personally had no issue keeping Zimmer if we could change the scheme and keep him too. But in my opinion this would not have been a workeable scenario if the head coach was not already an expert in the 3-4 scheme.
 

Mike 1967

New Member
Messages
2,767
Reaction score
2
Doomsday101 said:
Zimmer is getting the job done, he calls the plays and he gets these guys prepaired that is what a coordinator does. If you choose to discredit the job that Zimmer has done then so be it.

Yes...Zimmer is doing the job that he is being asked to do. I am not discrediting that he is doing his job.

But his job is not the primary reason behind the success that we have seen

In the over all scheme of things....this change to the 3-4 would not have been succesful if Big Bill were not in the picture.
 

Scotman

Well-Known Member
Messages
4,524
Reaction score
6,161
Mike 1967 said:
I have no issue with Zimmer either.

Personally I wanted the scheme to be overhauled.

If I had the following two choices then I would have chosen # 2

(1) If we keep Zimmer then we keep the existing scheme
(2) The only way to implement a new scheme would be to get rid of Zimmer.

I personally had no issue keeping Zimmer if we could change the scheme and keep him too. But in my opinion this would not have been a workeable scenario if the head coach was not already an expert in the 3-4 scheme.

Fair enough. If you look back at my threads about the 4/3 3/4 when the shift began, it'll be obvious I don't have enough knowledge to say whether or not your statement is correct. You probably know a lot more about that than I do.

I just don't think BP gets all the credit, either. It's got to be spread around. Some for BP. Some for Zimmer. Some for Jerry. Some for the twins in the beer commercial, too.
 
Top