Post by butkus3595 on Dec 21, 2016 7:47:02 GMT -6
Whether for/against firing Fox, the article makes some good points.
"Teams do not improve with constant turnover at the top. " To me this is the classic, 'what came first the chicken or the egg?' Constant turnover at the top is the cause for teams to no improve or is it that teams do not improve that causes constant turnover at the top.
To give credence to this he uses the Browns with 5 HCs in 8 years & no doubt are the worst team in the NFL. Romeo Crennel was the last HC to last 4 seasons yet he went 24-40.
On the other hand over past 8 seasons the Raiders have also gone through 5 HCs, yet they have already clinched the playoffs.
Maybe it's not the turnover at HC rather it's who they are changing to. If a team is going to make a change at HC they better have their guy. Don't fire the HC to pander to fans then scramble to find another stand-in for a year or 2.
I don't like Fox's style but if Pace got his guy 2 years ago he should keep him (& prepare to fall on his own sword if there isn't solid improvement in '17). However, if Pace realizes his philosophy doesn't mesh with Fox or if there really is a Fox vs Fangio dust-up I want to see Fox hit the road.
I prefer Fangio's no-nonsense and straight shooter style. I like how Vic took the blame for the Rodgers to Nelson play. I liked his candor when he said the previous defense he inherited was built for nothing (neither 3-4 or 4-3).