Shanahan wants to consult? Bring him here, Sir Jones!

[KJJ]

I can think of a city on Ohio where he would fit in.

If you're talking about Cleveland no one seems to fit in there from QBs, head coaches to GMs.

 

[skinsscalper]

Maybe he didn't and just wanted to vouch for him as a person.

This is what I've heard. Griffin, himself, thanked Shanahan publicly for giving him a positive review to the Rams.

 

[erod]

One of the most overrated coaches in NFL history.

 

[bodi]

never liked him - still don't

 

[fortdick]

I didn't say they had a team. Ever. Why are you so confused about this?

How would Shanahan fit in in Cleveland if these is not a football team? Whom would he consult?

 

[Reverend Conehead]

One of the most overrated coaches in NFL history.

Shanahan was an excellent coach. I was living in Denver when he took the reigns. The team had for years been hampered by a too conservative Dan Reeves and then by Wade Phillips who simply wasn't very good. The Broncos two Super Bowls under Shanahan were no accident. I never bought the argument that he was somehow a lousy coach because both his Super Bowls were with John Elway at quarterback. You could make the same argument about Tom Landry. Landry won the same number of Super Bowls as Shanahan and he was only able to do it with Roger Staubach under center.

Edit: That said, I think it would be a bad idea to bring in Shanahan as a consultant. It smacks of cutting your head coach off at the knees. Let Garrett do it his way or, if he's not right for the job, fire him.

 

[erod]

Shanahan was an excellent coach. I was living in Denver when he took the reigns. The team had for years been hampered by a too conservative Dan Reeves and then by Wade Phillips who simply wasn't very good. The Broncos two Super Bowls under Shanahan were no accident. I never bought the argument that he was somehow a lousy coach because both his Super Bowls were with John Elway at quarterback. You could make the same argument about Tom Landry. Landry won the same number of Super Bowls as Shanahan and he was only able to do it with Roger Staubach under center.

Edit: That said, I think it would be a bad idea to bring in Shanahan as a consultant. It smacks of cutting your head coach off at the knees. Let Garrett do it his way or, if he's not right for the job, fire him.

Shanahan failed in Oakland. Failed in Washington. Failed when Elway retired.

Landry was a terrific NFL player, one of the best coordinators of all time in New York, built the Cowboys from nothing then had 20 consecutive winning seasons, won with Don Meredith, won with Roger Staubach, won with Danny White, invented the shotgun and pre-snap motion, invented the flex defense, and is in the Hall of Fame.

No offense, but you're not very good at this.

 

[DeaconMoss]

He'd be better off in Green bay, more cheese up there for rat face to eat

 

[Reverend Conehead]

Shanahan failed in Oakland. Failed in Washington. Failed when Elway retired.

Landry was a terrific NFL player, one of the best coordinators of all time in New York, built the Cowboys from nothing then had 20 consecutive winning seasons, won with Don Meredith, won with Roger Staubach, won with Danny White, invented the shotgun and pre-snap motion, invented the flex defense, and is in the Hall of Fame.

No offense, but you're not very good at this.

No, offense, but you don't know your NFL history or much about the game. Landry did not invent the shotgun. It had existed for years before Landry brought it into an NFL that wasn't using it. To say Shanahan was given a fair shot and then failed with the LOS ANGELES Raiders is absurd. What really happened was Al Davis hired him and didn't allow him to do things his way. Davis meddled and meddled and gave Shanahan exactly zero chance to install his system or to bring in the players that could implement it. Then Davis fired him after only 1 and a half seasons. Given zero chance to succeed. Then Shanahan moved on to Denver and installed that system and won two Super Bowls where two previous coaches had failed to with Elway. Shanahan wasn't as successful in Washington, but he did do well enough to win the NFC East in 2012. And, no, Landry didn't win the Super Bowl with Don Meredith or with Danny White. He only won it with Staubach. If you're saying that having a winning season without a Super Bowl is a type of success, fair enough. Shanahan had a lot of those too.

No coach in history has ever won the Super Bowl without quality personnel. Landry had great personnel. Shanahan had great personnel. To say "Shanahan had quality personnel; therefore his Super Bowls don't count" is one of the dumbest claims anyone could possibly make. The man built a great team in Denver. The man was successful. End of story.

Shanahan didn't innovate or change the game as much as Landry. On that basis we can call Landry the better coach. However, to claim that Shanahan's success doesn't count because anyone would have automatically won with Elway is just plain silly. Neither Dan Reeves nor Wade Phillips did that with Elway. So let's end this absurdity here and now.

 

[DenCWBY]

Mike; See the Dan Reeves interview then slowly back away.

 

[DeaconMoss]

The rat is looking for some cheese.

LOL. Great minds think alike

 

[erod]

No, offense, but you don't know your NFL history or much about the game. Landry did not invent the shotgun. It had existed for years before Landry brought it into an NFL that wasn't using it. To say Shanahan was given a fair shot and then failed with the LOS ANGELES Raiders is absurd. What really happened was Al Davis hired him and didn't allow him to do things his way. Davis meddled and meddled and gave Shanahan exactly zero chance to install his system or to bring in the players that could implement it. Then Davis fired him after only 1 and a half seasons. Given zero chance to succeed. Then Shanahan moved on to Denver and installed that system and won two Super Bowls where two previous coaches had failed to with Elway. Shanahan wasn't as successful in Washington, but he did do well enough to win the NFC East in 2012. And, no, Landry didn't win the Super Bowl with Don Meredith or with Danny White. He only won it with Staubach. If you're saying that having a winning season without a Super Bowl is a type of success, fair enough. Shanahan had a lot of those too.

No coach in history has ever won the Super Bowl without quality personnel. Landry had great personnel. Shanahan had great personnel. To say "Shanahan had quality personnel; therefore his Super Bowls don't count" is one of the dumbest claims anyone could possibly make. The man built a great team in Denver. The man was successful. End of story.

Shanahan didn't innovate or change the game as much as Landry. On that basis we can call Landry the better coach. However, to claim that Shanahan's success doesn't count because anyone would have automatically won with Elway is just plain silly. Neither Dan Reeves nor Wade Phillips did that with Elway. So let's end this absurdity here and now.

Which is why literally no one is interested in hiring Shanahan. Jon Gruden seemed to do OK with Al Davis and the Raiders. And while Landry didn't invent the concept of the shotgun, he's the first to make it a staple of an NFL offense.

He's just another NFL coach. Nothing more and nothing less.

To compare him with Tom Landry is the purest definition of absurdity every posted on this board.

 

[Reverend Conehead]

Which is why literally no one is interested in hiring Shanahan.

He's just another NFL coach. Nothing more and nothing less.

To compare him with Tom Landry is the purest definition of absurdity every posted on this board.

I said Landry was the better coach. But that's true if you compare him to almost any coach in the NFL today. My premise was that Shanahan was a successful head coach. The evidence backs that up. You don't win two Super Bowls in a row as a fluke. Jimmy Johnson won two Super Bowls in a row. He only won with Troy Aikman. His coaching style wasn't as innovative as Landry's. Does that somehow invalidate his success?

The premise "Shanahan's success doesn't count because he had Elway" is the height of absurdity.

 

[DeaconMoss]

Shannys cut blocks are now a penalty, let that man relax in the sun and keep him away

 

[erod]

I said Landry was the better coach. But that's true if you compare him to almost any coach in the NFL today. My premise was that Shanahan was a successful head coach. The evidence backs that up. You don't win two Super Bowls in a row as a fluke. Jimmy Johnson won two Super Bowls in a row. He only won with Troy Aikman. His coaching style wasn't as innovative as Landry's. Does that somehow invalidate his success?

The premise "Shanahan's success doesn't count because he had Elway" is the height of absurdity.

Didn't say it didn't count. I just said it doesn't make him great by any measure. Same goes for Holmgren, Dungy, Billick, McCarthy, Payton, Tomlin, or Kubiak.

Landry very nearly won four Super Bowls, and perhaps 5 or 6 if not for the Green Bay Packers, Jackie Smith, and some horrible officiating and luck against the Colts. (Go read about that one.) And go read up on the days of when Landry and Lombardi were the coordinators for the New York Giants.

 

[KJJ]

To compare him with Tom Landry is the purest definition of absurdity every posted on this board.

Garrett vs Landry is the purest definition of absurdity ever posted on this board.

http://cowboyszone.com/threads/jason-garrett-vs-tom-landry.229565/

 

[erod]

Garrett vs Landry is the purest definition of absurdity ever posted on this board.

http://cowboyszone.com/threads/jason-garrett-vs-tom-landry.229565/

Resume-wise, of course not.

I do compare them in personality and approach. Garrett appreciates and understands the iconic love of Landry within this fanbase. He carries himself in a way I think Landry would very much appreciate. He gets it, and I love the Landry hitch homage that Garrett employed to honor him.

Garrett, at least, has a voice, which Jerry never gave anyone after Jimmy except when a stadium needed building.

 

[KJJ]

Resume-wise, of course not.

I do compare them in personality and approach. Garrett appreciates and understands the iconic love of Landry within this fanbase. He carries himself in a way I think Landry would very much appreciate. He gets it, and I love the Landry hitch homage that Garrett employed to honor him.

Garrett, at least, has a voice, which Jerry never gave anyone after Jimmy except when a stadium needed building.

Any coach who's only had one winning/playoff season in 5 years after inheriting the talent that Garrett did including a franchise QB should never be compared to Landry in any way, shape or form. Landry was able to win 4 games during his second season after taking over an expansion team.

 

[erod]

Any coach who's only had one winning/playoff season in 5 years after inheriting the talent that Garrett did including a franchise QB should never be compared to Landry in any way, shape or form. Landry was able to win 4 games during his second season after taking over an expansion team.

Look at the craptastic roster he inherited. If nothing else, he purged that mess of old, ill-fitting pieces that Jerry had collected, and he encouraged building an offensive line and a young roster. Jerry listened to Garrett on that front, which was a big change from before.

 

[Stash]

Look at the craptastic roster he inherited. If nothing else, he purged that mess of old, ill-fitting pieces that Jerry had collected, and he encouraged building an offensive line and a young roster. Jerry listened to Garrett on that front, which was a big change from before.

Give it a rest with this revisionist history garbage already.

The "craptastic roster" that overmatched Garrett inherited had 10 Pro Bowl players on it. This utter nonsense about him inheriting a poor roster and then having to build is a load of crap. As well as this misguided notion that Garrett was somehow this 'driving force' behind this team's drafting of offensive linemen. Nothing more than a bunch of lies told in a vain effort to prop up an underperforming coach.