Just Curious Your Take On Our Coach?

[cowboys19]

These are not in order of how good they are, more how they popped in my head. I like BP and he might be better than anyone of these guys but it isn't that hard to come up with the 5 now and 5 of all time. I didn't even go back to the time of Lombardi!

Current head coaches:
1. Bill Cowher
2. Bill Belicheck
3. Andy Reid
4. Holmgren
5. Dungy


All Time
1. Jimmy Johnson
2. Chuck Knoll
3. Don Shula
4. Tom Landry
5. Bill Walsh

has reid holmgrem or dungy won a super bowl the last 3 years?

 

[Arch Stanton]

These are not in order of how good they are, more how they popped in my head. I like BP and he might be better than anyone of these guys but it isn't that hard to come up with the 5 now and 5 of all time. I didn't even go back to the time of Lombardi!

Current head coaches:
1. Bill Cowher
2. Bill Belicheck
3. Andy Reid
4. Holmgren
5. Dungy


All Time
1. Jimmy Johnson
2. Chuck Knoll
3. Don Shula
4. Tom Landry
5. Bill Walsh

No Joe Gibbs?

 

[SultanOfSix]

I'm waiting for Juke's opinion.

I'm not exactly sure what it is.

Edit: Too slow. Didn't see it.

 

[BulletBob]

Hey.....let's try to keep the debate civil. OK?

You mean the CURRENT debate?

 

[tommyboy10]

has reid holmgrem or dungy won a super bowl the last 3 years?

Been alot closer than Tuna, and that was the argument you originally started on. Read back, then try again.

Thanks

 

[tommyboy10]

You mean the CURRENT debate?

Funny

 

[Juke99]

I'm waiting for Juke's opinion.

I'm not exactly sure what it is.

Edit: Too slow. Didn't see it.

Get with the program, will ya?

 

[cowboys19]

Been alot closer than Tuna, and that was the argument you originally started on. Read back, then try again.

Thanks

not really. my take on being sucessful is winning the super bowl. its those guys then everyone else.

So by that logic im right

 

[Juke99]

You mean the CURRENT debate?

Sure. Whatever. I'm easy.

I just don't wanna have to hit the ban button.

 

[Stautner]

Playcalling is important as well as execution, but most people are sure to go to their teams strengths, and stay away from their weaknesses, right?

And you are better equipped to know how and when to do that than Bill Parcells and his staff .......?

 

[BulletBob]

has reid holmgrem or dungy won a super bowl the last 3 years?

Nope. But their records are better than Parcells over the past 3 years.

Now that you've clarified that the word "currently" means "over the past 3 years," wanna shift the argument to what the word "better" means?

 

[tommyboy10]

not really. my take on being sucessful is winning the super bowl. its those guys then everyone else.

So by that logic im right

That's ridiculous....Just do this, go back, read the original post. Then, tell me, even looking at your view of the super bowl being the definition of success, how Tuna has been better than the others mentioned by the other posters. Compare them in their journey to what you call "success." Then get back to us.

Can't happen

 

[Juke99]

not really. my take on being sucessful is winning the super bowl. its those guys then everyone else.

So by that logic im right

My only problem with your position is, What does it matter what has happened in the past.

I get kinda confused when Parcells supporter don't use his own measuring stick to evaluate him.

"No matter what you have done in the past, at some point you have to prove you can still get the job done"

So far, he's .500.

And another Parcells comment "You are what your record says you are"

So I am confused as to why people who support him don't use his own methods of evaluation to evaluate his performance.

 

[TtownCowboy]

has reid holmgrem or dungy won a super bowl the last 3 years?

So are you going to actually respond to what the thread question was or go on about how important the SB is.

The SB is always the best end result, yes we can all agree on that. Now wouldn't you at least like a shot at the SB every year or close to every year. If so, you will have to win enough games to get to the play-offs, and then win in the play-offs, right?

Now back to the original thread question. I know you can do this.

 

[dboyz]

As for yesterday's game, I don't think we got outcoached. For my taste I would have liked to have seen more screens, swings, slants, but I don't think we got out game planned. I think the game plans this year have been ok.

The difference in the game was the QB. They have Donovan McNabb and we have Drew Bledsoe.

 

[FLCowboyFan]

No Joe Gibbs?

I hate Gibbs!!

:skins: :shoot2:

 

[tommyboy10]

And you are better equipped to know how and when to do that than Bill Parcells and his staff .......?

I'm not saying that, but I do think other teams are better more of the time at using their strengths. Like our teams in the 90's. People knew what we were going to do, and couldn't stop it, right?

Don't get me wrong, they have their jobs for a reason. But when people can do better than others, people get replaced, as they should. But no, I never said,and never will say, that I could do better. But it'd be fun to try!

 

[BulletBob]

My only problem with your position is, What does it matter what has happened in the past.

I get kinda confused when Parcells supporter don't use his own measuring stick to evaluate him.

"No matter what you have done in the past, at some point you have to prove you can still get the job done"

So far, he's .500.

And another Parcells comment "You are what your record says you are"

So I am confused as to why people who support him don't use his own methods of evaluation to evaluate his performance.

You obviously don't understand the meaning of "currently."

(It's an inside-the-thread joke, Juke. Read the original question posed, the reponses, and then you'll get how silly this all is).

 

[TtownCowboy]

I have been critical of Parcells for three years...actually, longer. I started to become less than happy when he went into a shell the second half of his first season.

He was very creative in the first half of his first year. I was at the Monday night game vs the Giants that season. You could actually feel Parcells' stamp on that game. It was tangible. And I was damn excited he was the coach. We ran out of 3-Wide sets. We did a little r***le d***le. We passed on running downs; we ran on passing downs. And he was excited on the sidelines.

When it became apparent that his comment, "I am too old to lose" was serious, that really turned me off. Losing, unfortunately, is part of rebuilding. AND in the current NFL, it's not like you have to lose for 6 years before you can turn it around. Teams turn things around in two seasons now.

When he overloaded the roster with has-beens in the second season, that was very discouraging.

He has said, on more than one occasion "Regardless of what you have done in the past, sooner or later you have to prove to me that you can still get the job done."

The same measure should be used for him.

The team is at .500 under his leadership.

Where he used to be assertive, he is now arrogant. Where he used to be firm in his convictions, he is now stubborn.

It's my opinion that he thinks the team should play the perfect, mistake free game. That's the goal. Well, I saw a Philly team that didn't play a mistake free game. And they won.

And the irony is, Parcells speaks of mistake-free football and then brings in two of the most mistake prone QB's in the history of the game; Testaverde and Bledsoe. Go figure. And his teams have played some DUMB football in the past few years.

AND if you KNOW your QB has zero mobility, then you HAVE to concentrate that much MORE on building a great offensive line. Yet, last year we went into the season with a 7th rounder starting at RT. Go figure. At best, the best offensive line we have had since Parcells' arrival has been mediocre.

Ah whatever....no sense in belaboring the point.

In a nutshell, I simply don't think his philosophy/approach works in the current NFL.

Thanks for responding to the actual question. Couldn't agree w/you more. This was my point.

 

[FLCowboyFan]

has reid holmgrem or dungy won a super bowl the last 3 years?

So that means that only the past 3 winning coaches are worth anything? That includes BP by the way

Here are the top 10 coaches of all time by wins:

All-Time Top NFL Football Coaches
(50 wins or more; including Playoffs & SuperBowl)
These records are complete as of the 2006 Super Bowl
Coaching Win Super AAFC
Years: Coach name: Wins Loss Ties Pct. Bowl AFL/NFL
1. 1963-1995 Don Shula 347 173 6 .665 2-4 0-2
2. 1920-1967 George Halas 324 152 32 .669 6-3
3. 1960-1988 Tom Landry 270 178 6 .601 2-3 0-2
4. 1921-1953 Curly Lambeau 230 135 22 .623 6-1
5. 1969-1991 Chuck Noll 209 156 1 .572 4-0
6. 1981-2003 Dan Reeves 201 174 2 .536 0-4
7. 1973-1994 Chuck Knox 193 158 1 .550
8. 1984- Marty Schottenheimer 191 136 1 .584
9. 1983- Bill Parcells 174 130 1 .572 2-1
10. 1950-1975 Paul Brown 170 108 6 .609 7-3