Sporting News ranks NFL head coaches - JG 23rd

[visionary]

Where do you think Garrett would have been ranked the year he took over?

My guess would be 12-15 range

3 years later he is 23, going on 32

That is what I call, improving with experience

 

[big dog cowboy]

Where do you think Garrett would have been ranked the year he took over?

My guess would be 12-15 range

None of the new HC's are ranked ahead of JG at 23 so why would JG step into the league that high?

 

[visionary]

None of the new HC's are ranked ahead of JG at 23 so why would JG step into the league that high?

Because he became the HC much more highly touted than any of these guys and as an interim HC had 'coached' the team to a 5-3 record

His star was on the ascent

Then, he actually started coaching and reality trumped hype

 

[Idgit]

None of the new HC's are ranked ahead of JG at 23 so why would JG step into the league that high?

I had him at 1 overall. Now he's at 23, falling to 32 if we pretend that typo was for real. On a relatively arbitrary list created by a guy at SportingNews. My head is spinning at that sort of descent.

 

[Passepartout]

Tom Coughlin at the top 5 really he has, not won a playoff game since the Super Bowl 2012! That is confusing!

 

[TheDude]

I had him at 1 overall. Now he's at 23, falling to 32 if we pretend that typo was for real. On a relatively arbitrary list created by a guy at SportingNews. My head is spinning at that sort of descent.

You had garrett at 1 overall in 2012? Let me find a good .gif

 

[Idgit]

You had garrett at 1 overall in 2012? Let me find a good .gif

Not really. I was just putting him high so we could play the 'look how far he imaginarily dropped' game some more.

 

[RS12]

No biggie. Any of of 500 coaches.

 

[big dog cowboy]

I had him at 1 overall. Now he's at 23, falling to 32

You sure he will stop there?

 

[Beast_from_East]

In addition to the late game blunders that snatch defeat from the jaws of victory, Garrett's other problem is his inability to beat anybody with a winning record.

Garrett's career coaching record against teams above 500 is embarrassingly bad. You are not going to be considered a good coach when the only teams you can beat are the Raiders and Browns of the NFL.

Just saying.

 

[Idgit]

In addition to the late game blunders that snatch defeat from the jaws of victory, Garrett's other problem is his inability to beat anybody with a winning record.

Garrett's career coaching record against teams above 500 is embarrassingly bad. You are not going to be considered a good coach when the only teams you can beat are the Raiders and Browns of the NFL.

Just saying.

This is *so* not a problem. Beating the teams you should beat, and losing to teams that are better than you is a good sign, and not a bad one. I'd be more on the fence about the team's performance if we were all over the place in terms of how we played.

Another thing I like about Jason's teams is that we're so obviously losing games because of the pass defense. It's pretty consistent, and yes, for the hundredth time it's his responsibility to fix it. But I like that our weaknesses are obvious and well defined and that it's not little things all over the place that keep cropping up to bite us. At least we can throw resources at defense until Tony Romo's too old to help us win anything.

 

[SilverStarCowboy]

Beating the teams you should beat, and losing to teams that are better than you is a good sign, and not a bad one.

Another thing I like about Jason's teams is that we're so obviously losing games because of the pass defense.At least we can throw resources at defense until Tony Romo's too old to help us win anything.

 

[Idgit]

I take it from this you'd rather get to 8-8 by beating some good teams and losing to some bad ones?

Or that you'd rather have us losing games for a hodgepodge of reasons and not just because our defense stinks?

 

[SilverStarCowboy]

I take it from this you'd rather get to 8-8 by beating some good teams and losing to some bad ones?

Or that you'd rather have us losing games for a hodgepodge of reasons and not just because our defense stinks?

Okay Spidey.

 

[big dog cowboy]

You are not going to be considered a good coach when the only teams you can beat are the Raiders and Browns of the NFL.

Yet somehow he won 7 other games besides the Oakland game last year with an ungodly amount of injuries on defense.


J/K

 

[Idgit]

Okay Spidey.

I suppose I should take this for the dodging of the direct question that it is. I get it.

 

[SilverStarCowboy]

I suppose I should take this for the dodging of the direct question that it is. I get it.

 

[Toruk_Makto]

I wonder where Pete was last year.

 

[visionary]

This is *so* not a problem. Beating the teams you should beat, and losing to teams that are better than you is a good sign, and not a bad one. I'd be more on the fence about the team's performance if we were all over the place in terms of how we played..

Yep, being consistently mediocre and beaten like a drum by good team is "so not the problem" and in fact is a good thing

Lol

 

[TheMarathonContinues]

Where do you think Garrett would have been ranked the year he took over?

My guess would be 12-15 range

3 years later he is 23, going on 32

That is what I call, improving with experience

I've got to be honest. If people would've ranked him 12-15 range his 1st year.....I don't know what would make them rank him LOWER or HIGHER for that matter. He's been 8-8 and IMO his coaching has been the same as the record. Mediocre/average and not much improvement. I don't see how you'd rank him any higher or lower at this point. The only thing I can see is that this team does respond well to him. With these back to back 8-8 seasons he should've lost this team at least a season gap..

That says something I guess.....