First of all, we will get some of them back, second and more important thats why we have coaches for, our guys need to show progress. We are 1-4, at this point I was hoping for 3-2
I think some of the young people have showed some decent progress, but I'm just not sure how many wins that will translate into. The OL looked pretty bad week-1. Some people were talking like Whitehair was a bust... but I think that was on the other messageboard. Now they look better (except for Massie). Even the run-blocking looks better than I've seen in a few years. And some of the youngsters on D in the secondary have looked surprisingly decent, but have made some mistakes too. Howard, for a non-first round pick rookie is showing promise. The LB corps is coming along nicely too. And Goldman was looking like a beast before his injury. I may be wrong, but I think there are some promising youngsters coming along for next year. Add another draft and free agency to that talent, and I think this could be a very good team. But just not this year. I just don't see that being possible. But I could also be dead wrong.
I do too. And with a couple of inspired veterans like Freeman and Royal why arent there any more wins? Thats the question coaches need to ask themselves. And answer them.
I think some of the young people have showed some decent progress, but I'm just not sure how many wins that will translate into. The OL looked pretty bad week-1. Some people were talking like Whitehair was a bust... but I think that was on the other messageboard. Now they look better (except for Massie). Even the run-blocking looks better than I've seen in a few years. And some of the youngsters on D in the secondary have looked surprisingly decent, but have made some mistakes too. Howard, for a non-first round pick rookie is showing promise. The LB corps is coming along nicely too. And Goldman was looking like a beast before his injury. I may be wrong, but I think there are some promising youngsters coming along for next year. Add another draft and free agency to that talent, and I think this could be a very good team. But just not this year. I just don't see that being possible. But I could also be dead wrong.
I do too. And with a couple of inspired veterans like Freeman and Royal why arent there any more wins? Thats the question coaches need to ask themselves. And answer them.
I think some key mistakes hurt us. Hoyer not seeing AJ hurt us in the last game. Stupid penalties at the worst time have hurt us too. And the injuries don't help either. I think Goldman's injury was a big loss to the defense. If he were healthy we'd see more consistent pressure on the opposing QBs. I'll probably get flamed for this, but I think Loggains play calling has gotten better as the season has progressed. And I think Vic Fangio is coaching his ass off right now with this cobbled together makeshift D roster.
I do know that if we have to dump this coaching staff it's not automatically a good thing. At some point we have to get some continuity with the team or we will never be anything more than a crap franchise. Obviously we can't keep bad coaches. But hopefully things will level out next year and we will not have to start over again. 6 GM/HC's in 5 years is bad. 8 would be even worse. You just can't overcome that kind of turnover and have anything better than the Cleveland Browns have had - doing this turnover thing with the staff. I hope Pace/Fox can end up being good. If not, then it's not a given we get better any time soon.
I do too. And with a couple of inspired veterans like Freeman and Royal why arent there any more wins? Thats the question coaches need to ask themselves. And answer them.
I think some key mistakes hurt us. Hoyer not seeing AJ hurt us in the last game. Stupid penalties at the worst time have hurt us too. And the injuries don't help either. I think Goldman's injury was a big loss to the defense. If he were healthy we'd see more consistent pressure on the opposing QBs. I'll probably get flamed for this, but I think Loggains play calling has gotten better as the season has progressed. And I think Vic Fangio is coaching his ass off right now with this cobbled together makeshift D roster.
I do know that if we have to dump this coaching staff it's not automatically a good thing. At some point we have to get some continuity with the team or we will never be anything more than a crap franchise. Obviously we can't keep bad coaches. But hopefully things will level out next year and we will not have to start over again. 6 GM/HC's in 5 years is bad. 8 would be even worse. You just can't overcome that kind of turnover and have anything better than the Cleveland Browns have had - doing this turnover thing with the staff. I hope Pace/Fox can end up being good. If not, then it's not a given we get better any time soon.
Arent you the least worried about the fact that Loggains played calling went up after Jay went down... I am. Regarding HC, Barth hurt us, that was Fox's call. I loved the Fox sign, I admit it. Almost as much as I hate it at this point. Colour me dissapointed.
Worse start since 2004 only means we will be in the SB in 2 years!!...right?
As to your question JABF, i think a 5 year term for new GM/HC would be reasonable, with the first couple of years to get the talent he/they want, then see progression in years 3,4,5...So by next year i would expect them to be sniffing the playoff hunt.
I do agree 100% that this team needs more longevity from the GM and HC positions. Hell even "The Dick N' Dave Show"(great talk show name btw! lol) got 11 years combined as HC's.
I think some key mistakes hurt us. Hoyer not seeing AJ hurt us in the last game. Stupid penalties at the worst time have hurt us too. And the injuries don't help either. I think Goldman's injury was a big loss to the defense. If he were healthy we'd see more consistent pressure on the opposing QBs. I'll probably get flamed for this, but I think Loggains play calling has gotten better as the season has progressed. And I think Vic Fangio is coaching his ass off right now with this cobbled together makeshift D roster.
I do know that if we have to dump this coaching staff it's not automatically a good thing. At some point we have to get some continuity with the team or we will never be anything more than a crap franchise. Obviously we can't keep bad coaches. But hopefully things will level out next year and we will not have to start over again. 6 GM/HC's in 5 years is bad. 8 would be even worse. You just can't overcome that kind of turnover and have anything better than the Cleveland Browns have had - doing this turnover thing with the staff. I hope Pace/Fox can end up being good. If not, then it's not a given we get better any time soon.
Arent you the least worried about the fact that Loggains played calling went up after Jay went down... I am. Regarding HC, Barth hurt us, that was Fox's call. I loved the Fox sign, I admit it. Almost as much as I hate it at this point. Colour me dissapointed.
I just figured Loggains got better with time on the job. Barth was a whiff, no question the guy is a dud. They will fix that. I just think Robbie Gould scared them into making a rash move there. When Robbie couldn't even make extra points, that was a problem.
I am disappointed too. I predicted a 9 win season before the season began. This is tough to take. I just don't want us to do something that could prolong the agony for more years than needed. To me it is too early to pull the plug and start all over again. I just want to be sure before we do this again.
Of course the media knows nothing has no information and are in general morons so most of this cannot be taken serious. Just messin w/ya Soul.
Biggest reason for not bringing Fox back is the clown show that are his press conferences WHEN you are not winning. Bill Bel gets to act like that, he's won multiple SB's and is going into the HoF w/out question. Fox has acted like a ginormous douche since he got here, and it's only getting worse. Worse is his lack of ability to out perform other coaches as stated. I don't think Hou/Philly would have been winnable games, but they would have been closer.
but alas this is just media folk and they are no nothing morons and cannot be listened to.
Houston was definitely a winnable game--we were up 14-10 at half receiving the ball to start the 3rd. That's a situation where you have a clear edge to get the win. I wouldn't say it's was just "winnable", I'd say it was a game that should have been won. It was lost by a WR fuckup (just the way Tate lost the game for Detroit in week 4) and a coaching staff that was completely schooled all 2nd half.
Maybe you're right. But do you think this team can get significantly better this year? Is that even possible with the existing healthy players?
First of all, we will get some of them back, second and more important thats why we have coaches for, our guys need to show progress. We are 1-4, at this point I was hoping for 3-2
3-2 was a completely reasonable hope for this team at this point.
I think the X factor after this season will be the MCcaskeys. If they fall to say 3-13 or 4-12 I would think at least 1 or 2 heads might roll. We'll see though.
Putting a lousy product on the field , IS a reason to consider whether or not someone is a good enough fb coach ... how he handles the media is NOT . It's totally fkng irrelevant , and it astonishes me that some actually think this is somehow 'important' .
Of course the media knows nothing has no information and are in general morons so most of this cannot be taken serious. Just messin w/ya Soul.
Biggest reason for not bringing Fox back is the clown show that are his press conferences WHEN you are not winning. Bill Bel gets to act like that, he's won multiple SB's and is going into the HoF w/out question. Fox has acted like a ginormous douche since he got here, and it's only getting worse. Worse is his lack of ability to out perform other coaches as stated. I don't think Hou/Philly would have been winnable games, but they would have been closer.
but alas this is just media folk and they are no nothing morons and cannot be listened to.
Houston was definitely a winnable game--we were up 14-10 at half receiving the ball to start the 3rd. That's a situation where you have a clear edge to get the win. I wouldn't say it's was just "winnable", I'd say it was a game that should have been won. It was lost by a WR ****up (just the way Tate lost the game for Detroit in week 4) and a coaching staff that was completely schooled all 2nd half.
It was a 4 point game on the road against a really good def at 1/2 time. I understand what you are saying, but 4 points on the road doesn't really mean anything.
priceonomics.com/modeling-the-probability-of-winning-an-nfl-game/ Here is a link(not sure how old it is) about win loss based on score and how much time is left. 3+ points at 1/2 time is somewhere about 67%, but down by 3+ is still over 40%. What this doesn't show is home vs road; I would bet home teams have a better shot at coming back by 3+ then road teams are. So maybe it was winnable, but it was probably at best a coinflip at 1/2 time; it was definitely still a game.
