Pederson said what

ShiningStar said:
So than everyone was wrong about Foles. Go figure.
Click to expand...

They were, right? Or it was a case where he's a great fit for their offense due to his connections with Pederson. There's no denying he's played great in the NFCCG. But I pointed out the big plays for you. A terrific throw downfield on a trick play (and a great call) design to suck in the over-the-top coverage, and a huge bomb on a play where the WR was wide open because the coverage fell down. I'm not making it up. He still had to make the throws, and Cowboys fans know better than most that's not always easy to get a QB to do, but that's not the same thing as saying he's successful because of the coaching.
 
Idgit said:
I haven't seen anybody suggest 'it was just talent,' but it's not surprising you have to mischaracterize the argument to try to make your point. The league is about personnel. Yes, coaching is important, but it's secondary to personnel.

Anyone who saw Foles (new player) play in the NFCG knows the deal. He threw a pinpoint pass into coverage deal downfield on the flea flicker to Smith (new player). He had another on-target bomb to Jeffries (new player) on the double move where Newman fell down. He played great.

That game hinged on an early pick-6 when Long (new player) hit Keenum's arm and Robinson (new player) picked it and returned it to the house.

You can't look at this year's Eagles team and last year's team and suggest the difference is the same group of coaches are just coaching better. And then hold up your 'evidence' of this to be the fact that three players got hurt and the replacements played well and so it must have been because of the coaching. Anybody willing to be honest looks at what Roseman did with that roster and can recognize he did a fantastic job putting that team together and they're in the Superbowl as a result.
Click to expand...
the triumvirate of a good nfl team is players, coaching, and a good front office. our shortcomings regarding the latter two prevent us from ever being in the big dance.
 
Clove said:
So the answer is we have a stupid front office and stupid coaches then.
Click to expand...

I wouldn't say the FO is stupid, but thay have missed on some things, all of them do in the league. The coaches and FO sure as hell looked smart and good last seaso.
 
Dre11 said:
How do you know they haven't unless you've been at practices everyday. Once a player hit the field, the coach have absolutely nothing to do with the outcome of a play, or how a player execute. The 49ers loaded up on talent for years. Shanahan was killed after the superbowl in Atlanta. He also was average in San Fran until Garrappolo came along.
Click to expand...
shanahan lacked the one key ingredient to being successful. a franchise qb. the eagles roseman made the moves necessary two years ago to get carson wentz, trading away their future 1st round pick to do so. then he later traded Bradford and got a 1st round pick back. he brought in Pederson, an outstanding hc. jimmy Johnson said it best when he said few understand the value of a good hc.
 
It's a process. We have to get the right kind of guys.
 
This is absolutely true that players have to make plays but it equally true that the right "plays" need to be called and adjustments do have to be made during games as the other team adjust to what you are doing. It is very hard for a player to make plays when the other team knows what you are doing. The benefit from having a good coach on game day is making adjustments and counter adjustments as well as scheming to take advantage of another teams weakness. That does not even get into situational game awareness and clock management which fall on the coach. Our coach is basically incapable of doing all of the things needed on game day. Garrett's Monday - Saturday work may be good enough but it is all for nothing if his inability to adjust and complete lack of situational awareness cost us the game on Sunday which has been a Garrett hallmark from the beginning.
 
Dre11 said:
Well, Wade was hired before by another organization, Garrett turned down a job in B-more and was hot in Atlanta, Gailey was a hot candidate too. Camp that was a fail.

Then you was just beat. That's sports in general, sometimes you the other team execute plays too, it's who executes the best or the most. They get paid too.
Click to expand...

First of all, what does the fact Garrett could have had a job in Baltimore matter at this point? They are not an infallible organization. Although I guess there's a good chance they'd have crap canned Garrett well before we did if he had the same level of success he's had here.

The end result is all that matters and not one coach Jones hired has gone onto be a better HC somewhere else. So it's not like Gailey was jut stunted by Jones and once he got free from Jones' clutches, he proved to be a great HC. Jerry hires crappy head coaches. That's pretty obvious at this point.

That's quite a cop out on the execution commentary. The reality is this......... teams with good head coaches often out "execute" and often out-scheme other coaches. So this constant movement here by some to try to minimize the importance of a good head coach is laughable.
 
CowboysFaninHouston said:
Pederson said. “...........But it takes players. I tell the players all the time: ‘There is no magic play.’ Players make the plays
Click to expand...

It does take players but a team playing against you knowing all of our plays out of specific formations , downs, and distances closes the skill gap.
 
cern said:
the triumvirate of a good nfl team is players, coaching, and a good front office. our shortcomings regarding the latter two prevent us from ever being in the big dance.
Click to expand...

I agree with your triumvirate, even if I don't agree that our coaching is what's keeping us out of the big dance. It's pretty easy to look at how our defense has ranked in seasons where we've fallen short and make a case that the issue was with defensive personnel more than anything else. And I'd agree that the front office (and to a lesser extent, Garrett) have to take the heat for the poor defensive personnel decisions during those seasons.
 
CATCH17 said:
It does take players but a team playing against you knowing all of our plays out of specific formations , downs, and distances closes the skill gap.
Click to expand...
it's even worse when the opposing teams openly laugh about it.
 
Bleu Star said:
Lol right..... This is typical coach speak. Nothing more.

Move along folks. Nothing to see here.
Click to expand...

For the record, you're right that this is just coach-speak and a cliche. It's accurate, but it's nothing to stir up discussion.
 
cern said:
shanahan lacked the one key ingredient to being successful. a franchise qb. the eagles roseman made the moves necessary two years ago to get carson wentz, trading away their future 1st round pick to do so. then he later traded Bradford and got a 1st round pick back. he brought in Pederson, an outstanding hc. jimmy Johnson said it best when he said few understand the value of a good hc.
Click to expand...

So it took a good qb (a player) to execute his plays, right? It took the Eagles to spend in Free agency on "players" . The year before that, they were calling Pederson the worst hire and ready to run him out of philly. Of course you value a good coach, but ultimately it's on the players.
 
Idgit said:
I haven't seen anybody suggest 'it was just talent,' but it's not surprising you have to mischaracterize the argument to try to make your point. The league is about personnel. Yes, coaching is important, but it's secondary to personnel.

Anyone who saw Foles (new player) play in the NFCG knows the deal. He threw a pinpoint pass into coverage deal downfield on the flea flicker to Smith (new player). He had another on-target bomb to Jeffries (new player) on the double move where Newman fell down. He played great.

That game hinged on an early pick-6 when Long (new player) hit Keenum's arm and Robinson (new player) picked it and returned it to the house.

You can't look at this year's Eagles team and last year's team and suggest the difference is the same group of coaches are just coaching better. And then hold up your 'evidence' of this to be the fact that three players got hurt and the replacements played well and so it must have been because of the coaching. Anybody willing to be honest looks at what Roseman did with that roster and can recognize he did a fantastic job putting that team together and they're in the Superbowl as a result.
Click to expand...

It's hyperbole to prove a point. You clearly are trying to mitigate the importance of high quality coaching. I mean your examination of the Eagles game is laughable. When Robinson returned that pick, it only made the game 7-7. From then on, the Eagles offense steamrolled the Vikes defense, with a BACK UP QB. Doesn't matter if Foles was new or not, their coaching staff drew up a game plan that exploited a Vikes D and did it with a backup QB........ oh and a backup LT that somehow didn't implode against a ferocious pass rush because Philly slid protections, etc.

Its embarrassing at this point that some of you are now going into the coaching is that important tank to defend Garrett.
 
cern said:
it's even worse when the opposing teams openly laugh about it.
Click to expand...

So why weren't they laughing last season? When Zeke wasn't there, it was easy to laugh then, they knew they had a wounded duck.
 
cern said:
lest we forget, it wasn't that long ago when the leader of the front office said romo's scrambling ability precluded the need for a great o-line.
Click to expand...
Right! And then ironically, they started building the O line because Romo was getting his *** kicked.
 
Dre11 said:
How do you know they haven't unless you've been at practices everyday. Once a player hit the field, the coach have absolutely nothing to do with the outcome of a play, or how a player execute. The 49ers loaded up on talent for years. Shanahan was killed after the superbowl in Atlanta. He also was average in San Fran until Garrappolo came along.
Click to expand...

That's BS.

Coaches can absolutely affect the outcome of a play soley based on the play they call to begin with.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Staff online

Members online

... and 94 more.
Total: 25,405 (members: 194, guests: 25,211)
Robots: 1,000

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
474,112
Messages
14,513,697
Members
24,208
Latest member
CowboysQC
Back
Top