3-13, and no, being 'in some games' doesn't count (too bad the NFL doesn't pass out participation trophies). Poor game planning, poor in game adjustments, poor use of personnel (Howard being example 1, reliance on Paulsen being example 2), poor clock management....should I go on?
3-13, and no, being 'in some games' doesn't count (too bad the NFL doesn't pass out participation trophies). Poor game planning, poor in game adjustments, poor use of personnel (Howard being example 1, reliance on Paulsen being example 2), poor clock management....should I go on?
Yeah, but you need to factor in that the team is "in a good place" now. Fox has assured us of that.
3-13, and no, being 'in some games' doesn't count (too bad the NFL doesn't pass out participation trophies). Poor game planning, poor in game adjustments, poor use of personnel (Howard being example 1, reliance on Paulsen being example 2), poor clock management....should I go on?
Yeah, but you need to factor in that the team is "in a good place" now. Fox has assured us of that.
My favorite quote: "I think we’re, in my opinion, in way better position to be in striking distance moving forward.” So, they weren't in striking postion before, but now they are almost ready to be in position to be within striking position?
How does that line up?
Not close to being in striking position...1-15 Closer to being in striking position...2-14 in position to be in striking position...3-13 Almost in striking position...8-8 in striking position...10-6
I agree with 1701, with 19 men on the IR and the on and off injuries we had through the season, I just can't throw all of that on the head coach, and you can't tell me that the excessive injuries weren't a factor. Now, having said that, I can't see giving the HC anything better than a D for all the other variables so aptly pointed out above. It may not all be on him, but considering what we see on the field, the buck has to stop with the HC.
