Official Browns QB Prospect Discussion!
-
Yeah, it's one of those points that shuts down the argument: Manziel plays in the SEC, not the MAC, and he's torched an epic Alabama defense not once but twice. And yes, their defense is epic and most of them will play in the NFL. I forget the stats they were throwing out about drafted players during 'Bama-LSU but it was pretty nuts.
So there isn't much question of whether Manziel can succeed against big, fast, NFL types. He's been doing it for two years. It's a non-debate in my opinion.
As for this entire season being a fluke for Gipson: He played well last year, too, when given the chance. The main reason Horton never even questioned him as a starter was that full game tape against the Steelers finale. Was that a fluke as well? Have the last two years been flukes, even though Dick Jauron and Ray Horton (couple guys who might know a little something about DBs) have said he has everything you look for in a starting FS? I'm just not following you on this one. Did you just dig in too deep?
A second TE is just one idea that could help the offense, and I know the Browns like it because they wanted Vance McDonald pretty badly last year. I know Chud loves him some 12, as do most OCs these days. But I'm not married to it. We might see better value in a WR and sign a f/a TE we like better than Barnidge... easier to upgrade than Gipson by miles.
I don't believe Bama's defense is as great as you and others claim.Yeah, it's one of those points that shuts down the argument: Manziel plays in the SEC, not the MAC, and he's torched an epic Alabama defense not once but twice. And yes, their defense is epic and most of them will play in the NFL. I forget the stats they were throwing out about drafted players during 'Bama-LSU but it was pretty nuts.
So there isn't much question of whether Manziel can succeed against big, fast, NFL types. He's been doing it for two years. It's a non-debate in my opinion.
As for this entire season being a fluke for Gipson: He played well last year, too, when given the chance. The main reason Horton never even questioned him as a starter was that full game tape against the Steelers finale. Was that a fluke as well? Have the last two years been flukes, even though Dick Jauron and Ray Horton (couple guys who might know a little something about DBs) have said he has everything you look for in a starting FS? I'm just not following you on this one. Did you just dig in too deep?
A second TE is just one idea that could help the offense, and I know the Browns like it because they wanted Vance McDonald pretty badly last year. I know Chud loves him some 12, as do most OCs these days. But I'm not married to it. We might see better value in a WR and sign a f/a TE we like better than Barnidge... easier to upgrade than Gipson by miles.
The best offense they've faced all season (outside A&M) is 27th overall Ole Miss. The rest of the offense rankings they've faced are as follows: 34th (LSU), 39th (CSU), 92nd (Va.Tech), 99th (Kentucky), 100th (Arkansas), and 101st (Tennessee). That's not even including Georgia State.
The average offense they face, not including Ga. State, ranks 61st.
Coincidentally, the average rank of the teams OSU has faced is also 61, and they're only giving up 6 more points per game than Bama, while scoring 10 points more per game on offense.
Does that mean that OSU has an elite defense as well? Furthermore, seeing that OSU's offense ranks higher in every statistical category, and both teams are undefeated, and both teams have faced and beaten 2 ranked teams thus far, does that make OSU a better team?
Also, since OSU's remaining SOS is twice as strong as Bama's, if both teams win out, shouldn't OSU be more deserving of a National Title chance?
Sorry, I went off on a tangent. I just don't feel like Bama is as strong of a team as they have been in the past, yet they're getting that SEC bias. People are so quick to say that OSU hasn't faced anyone, but, statistically, neither has Bama.
-
I don't believe Bama's defense is as great as you and others claim.Yeah, it's one of those points that shuts down the argument: Manziel plays in the SEC, not the MAC, and he's torched an epic Alabama defense not once but twice. And yes, their defense is epic and most of them will play in the NFL. I forget the stats they were throwing out about drafted players during 'Bama-LSU but it was pretty nuts.
So there isn't much question of whether Manziel can succeed against big, fast, NFL types. He's been doing it for two years. It's a non-debate in my opinion.
As for this entire season being a fluke for Gipson: He played well last year, too, when given the chance. The main reason Horton never even questioned him as a starter was that full game tape against the Steelers finale. Was that a fluke as well? Have the last two years been flukes, even though Dick Jauron and Ray Horton (couple guys who might know a little something about DBs) have said he has everything you look for in a starting FS? I'm just not following you on this one. Did you just dig in too deep?
A second TE is just one idea that could help the offense, and I know the Browns like it because they wanted Vance McDonald pretty badly last year. I know Chud loves him some 12, as do most OCs these days. But I'm not married to it. We might see better value in a WR and sign a f/a TE we like better than Barnidge... easier to upgrade than Gipson by miles.
The best offense they've faced all season (outside A&M) is 27th overall Ole Miss. The rest of the offense rankings they've faced are as follows: 34th (LSU), 39th (CSU), 92nd (Va.Tech), 99th (Kentucky), 100th (Arkansas), and 101st (Tennessee). That's not even including Georgia State.
The average offense they face, not including Ga. State, ranks 61st.
Coincidentally, the average rank of the teams OSU has faced is also 61, and they're only giving up 6 more points per game than Bama, while scoring 10 points more per game on offense.
Does that mean that OSU has an elite defense as well? Furthermore, seeing that OSU's offense ranks higher in every statistical category, and both teams are undefeated, and both teams have faced and beaten 2 ranked teams thus far, does that make OSU a better team?
Also, since OSU's remaining SOS is twice as strong as Bama's, if both teams win out, shouldn't OSU be more deserving of a National Title chance?
Sorry, I went off on a tangent. I just don't feel like Bama is as strong of a team as they have been in the past, yet they're getting that SEC bias. People are so quick to say that OSU hasn't faced anyone, but, statistically, neither has Bama.
I don't believe Bama's defense is as great as you and others claim.
The best offense they've faced all season (outside A&M) is 27th overall Ole Miss. The rest of the offense rankings they've faced are as follows: 34th (LSU), 39th (CSU), 92nd (Va.Tech), 99th (Kentucky), 100th (Arkansas), and 101st (Tennessee). That's not even including Georgia State.
The average offense they face, not including Ga. State, ranks 61st.
Coincidentally, the average rank of the teams OSU has faced is also 61, and they're only giving up another score
Does that mean that OSU has an elite defense as well? Furthermore, seeing that OSU's offense ranks higher in every statistical category, and both teams are undefeated, and both teams have faced and beaten 2 ranked teams thus far, does that make OSU a better team?
Also, since OSU's remaining SOS is twice as strong as Bama's, if both teams win out, shouldn't OSU be more deserving of a National Title chance?
Sorry, I went off on a tangent. I just don't feel like Bama is as strong of a team as they have been in the past, yet they're getting that SEC bias. People are so quick to say that OSU hasn't faced anyone, but, statistically, neither has Bama.
You are letting facts (your stats about the OSU vs. Ala. offense and defense) get in the way of a good delusion (that Alabama and the SEC are far superior).
-
I don't believe Bama's defense is as great as you and others claim.
The best offense they've faced all season (outside A&M) is 27th overall Ole Miss. The rest of the offense rankings they've faced are as follows: 34th (LSU), 39th (CSU), 92nd (Va.Tech), 99th (Kentucky), 100th (Arkansas), and 101st (Tennessee). That's not even including Georgia State.
The average offense they face, not including Ga. State, ranks 61st.
Coincidentally, the average rank of the teams OSU has faced is also 61, and they're only giving up another score
Does that mean that OSU has an elite defense as well? Furthermore, seeing that OSU's offense ranks higher in every statistical category, and both teams are undefeated, and both teams have faced and beaten 2 ranked teams thus far, does that make OSU a better team?
Also, since OSU's remaining SOS is twice as strong as Bama's, if both teams win out, shouldn't OSU be more deserving of a National Title chance?
Sorry, I went off on a tangent. I just don't feel like Bama is as strong of a team as they have been in the past, yet they're getting that SEC bias. People are so quick to say that OSU hasn't faced anyone, but, statistically, neither has Bama.
You are letting facts (your stats about the OSU vs. Ala. offense and defense) get in the way of a good delusion (that Alabama and the SEC are far superior).
You are letting facts (your stats about the OSU vs. Ala. offense and defense) get in the way of a good delusion (that Alabama and the SEC are far superior).
From top to bottom, the SEC is hands down the best conference in college football.
But Bama is not as dominant as they have been. Their illusion of supremacy this year is aided by playing highly mediocre offenses.
Outside of A&M, they play the dregs of the SEC this season. Even LSU is a down year. Yes, Auburn has been a surprise, but there's no Georgia or Carolina on their schedule. Mizzou will be a test for them.
-
I think he was talking about my response to... ah, shit, never mind. It was about the prominence of the QB position being an NFL thing, not an NCAA thing. Bridgewater is way better than McCarron but 'Bama is still better than Louisville.
I did not see a point.
What is the value of:
1. A 5'8", big-hitting FS in a league that is legislating big hits in the secondary out of the game?
2. A RB that has been dismissed from not one, but two schools for disciplinary reasons? Would concern me even more if he declares as a Jr. rather than sticking for his Sr. year.
On the plus side Johnson is a good pick, if he comes out. Just be careful filling out that card as he could be one of up to four A.J. Johnsons in the 2014 draft.
I think he was talking about my response to... ah, shit, never mind. It was about the prominence of the QB position being an NFL thing, not an NCAA thing.
Now that is understandable. Only problem is you keep jumping from college QB to QB based apparently on their prominence as represented by the dominance of their stats.
I just don't believe Gipson is a long term quality starter. He's having a phenomenal season and I would love for him to be our starter for the next ten years, but I still believe this season is a bit of a fluke.
I think our bar for phenomenal is a tad low... unless after nine games 2 INTs and 10 passes defended on the 12th ranked pass D is phenomenal.
That said I must note that the pass stat we lead the league in is YPC at a paltry 6.0. So our coverage doesn't suck either.
"When you have a shared vision it is a lot easier to make unpopular decisions." - Paul DePodesta "When you win, say nothing. When you lose, say less." - Paul Brown Complete 2017 Browns Board Mock: http://thebrownsboard.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=46196 -
I think he was talking about my response to... ah, shit, never mind. It was about the prominence of the QB position being an NFL thing, not an NCAA thing.
Now that is understandable. Only problem is you keep jumping from college QB to QB based apparently on their prominence as represented by the dominance of their stats.
I just don't believe Gipson is a long term quality starter. He's having a phenomenal season and I would love for him to be our starter for the next ten years, but I still believe this season is a bit of a fluke.
I think our bar for phenomenal is a tad low... unless after nine games 2 INTs and 10 passes defended on the 12th ranked pass D is phenomenal.
That said I must note that the pass stat we lead the league in is YPC at a paltry 6.0. So our coverage doesn't suck either.
Now that is understandable. Only problem is you keep jumping from college QB to QB based apparently on their prominence as represented by the dominance of their stats.
I think our bar for phenomenal is a tad low... unless after nine games 2 INTs and 10 passes defended on the 12th ranked pass D is phenomenal.
That said I must note that the pass stat we lead the league in is YPC at a paltry 6.0. So our coverage doesn't suck either.
Phenomenal compared to what I expected of him.
For a UDFA from a non Top 25 program to not only be a starter for us, but not be a liability as well...that's phenomenal in my eyes.
I think he's reached his ceiling, honestly. He'll never be a Pro Bowl level player, at best he'll be a middle of the road starter who can excel when surrounded by talent.
I fully expected him to be benched by this point and Bademosi or someone to fill in until we draft a safety next year.
Joyner seems like the perfect fit for Horton's philosophy. A small, ridiculously fast player who hits hard and covers even harder. Guys like that normally play with a chip on their shoulder, and that seems to be the persona of this defense, from Kruger being considered the weakest of the Ravens LB's, to Des Bryant being considered a troubled talent, to Buster Skrine being thought of us as too small to play on Sundays.
I'm at least glad we're developing an identity.
I'm awesome, and I fuck dolphins. Ghoolie 12/2/2012: I have absolutely no skills, training or pride -
We think Gipson has peaked at 23? He's as wily as he's ever gonna be? He's a fantastic athlete so I don't think that's gonna hold him back. He's got a lot of PDs, 2 picks, and scads of tackles. By any measure, he's playing great football. There's almost nothing a replacement could do to win us more games.
Like Tour kinda-sorta said, the bottom line is bad things happen when the other team drops back to pass: They either get sacked (2nd in the NFL) or they don't accomplish much (lowest YPA in the entire league). So we draft a DB high up? Uhhhhhh... okay?
I'd say offensive playmakers.
-
Now that is understandable. Only problem is you keep jumping from college QB to QB based apparently on their prominence as represented by the dominance of their stats.
I think our bar for phenomenal is a tad low... unless after nine games 2 INTs and 10 passes defended on the 12th ranked pass D is phenomenal.
That said I must note that the pass stat we lead the league in is YPC at a paltry 6.0. So our coverage doesn't suck either.
Phenomenal compared to what I expected of him.
For a UDFA from a non Top 25 program to not only be a starter for us, but not be a liability as well...that's phenomenal in my eyes.
I think he's reached his ceiling, honestly. He'll never be a Pro Bowl level player, at best he'll be a middle of the road starter who can excel when surrounded by talent.
I fully expected him to be benched by this point and Bademosi or someone to fill in until we draft a safety next year.
Joyner seems like the perfect fit for Horton's philosophy. A small, ridiculously fast player who hits hard and covers even harder. Guys like that normally play with a chip on their shoulder, and that seems to be the persona of this defense, from Kruger being considered the weakest of the Ravens LB's, to Des Bryant being considered a troubled talent, to Buster Skrine being thought of us as too small to play on Sundays.
I'm at least glad we're developing an identity.
Sacks we're T-5 now... with 31, but three of the top six including Seattle, with whom we are tied, have played 10 games to our 9.
I'm a troubled by our lack of INTs. With as much pressure as we put on QBs (in addiditon to the sacks we are T-2 in the league in "QB Hits") to stand tied for 26th place with only 6 team INTs makes me scratch my head. Four teams are tied at the top with 13.
Of course this is not necessarily a secondary issue. Our LBs have kicked in a grand total of zero. So give me at least one LB....
Joyner seems like the perfect fit for Horton's philosophy. A small, ridiculously fast player who hits hard and covers even harder. Guys like that normally play with a chip on their shoulder, and that seems to be the persona of this defense, from Kruger being considered the weakest of the Ravens LB's, to Des Bryant being considered a troubled talent, to Buster Skrine being thought of us as too small to play on Sundays.
At 5'8 Joyner'd better play with that chip strapped to his feet...
I know I posted the same yesterday, but I still can't see a short FS no matter how hard hitting he is... especially since you aren't allowed to hit "defenseless" receivers hard.
It's going to be more and more important that your FS is tall and can jump to bat balls away from the Mega-WRs in the league.
And at 5'11 that ain't Gipson either...
-
We think Gipson has peaked at 23? He's as wily as he's ever gonna be? He's a fantastic athlete so I don't think that's gonna hold him back. He's got a lot of PDs, 2 picks, and scads of tackles. By any measure, he's playing great football. There's almost nothing a replacement could do to win us more games.
Like Tour kinda-sorta said, the bottom line is bad things happen when the other team drops back to pass: They either get sacked (2nd in the NFL) or they don't accomplish much (lowest YPA in the entire league). So we draft a DB high up? Uhhhhhh... okay?
I'd say offensive playmakers.
We think Gipson has peaked at 23? He's as wily as he's ever gonna be? He's a fantastic athlete so I don't think that's gonna hold him back. He's got a lot of PDs, 2 picks, and scads of tackles. By any measure, he's playing great football. There's almost nothing a replacement could do to win us more games.
Like Tour kinda-sorta said, the bottom line is bad things happen when the other team drops back to pass: They either get sacked (2nd in the NFL) or they don't accomplish much (lowest YPA in the entire league). So we draft a DB high up? Uhhhhhh... okay?
I'd say offensive playmakers.
It doesn't have to make sense, I'm going to be stubborn on this. I have to, after all of the garbage I talked about him in the offseason.
Even if Horton just called him his defensive MVP this season...which he did.
We need safety help.
-
Couch, that is so cool and self-aware, gotta give you massive props. Honestly, if we could all be that self-effacing, life would be 20 times more fun.
Here's an article that praises Skrine and Gipson... but inadvertently points out that Gipson isn't covering great. He's getting a rep as a big hitter but he's ranked 33rd among safeties in completion percentage. Jauron loved his coverage abilities, said he could play corner, so that's a bit troublesome and might be part of our problem on third downs.
He needs to improve in that area (like Skrine)... or we need a safety who covers better. The hits? We got those. In today's NFL, you need safeties who can step up and cover a slot or hybrid TE.
http://www.cleveland.com/browns/index.ssf/2013/11/cleveland_browns_secondary_sho.html
-
Couch, that is so cool and self-aware, gotta give you massive props. Honestly, if we could all be that self-effacing, life would be 20 times more fun.
Here's an article that praises Skrine and Gipson... but inadvertently points out that Gipson isn't covering great. He's getting a rep as a big hitter but he's ranked 33rd among safeties in completion percentage. Jauron loved his coverage abilities, said he could play corner, so that's a bit troublesome and might be part of our problem on third downs.
He needs to improve in that area (like Skrine)... or we need a safety who covers better. The hits? We got those. In today's NFL, you need safeties who can step up and cover a slot or hybrid TE.
http://www.cleveland.com/browns/index.ssf/2013/11/cleveland_browns_secondary_sho.html
Couch, that is so cool and self-aware, gotta give you massive props. Honestly, if we could all be that self-effacing, life would be 20 times more fun.
Here's an article that praises Skrine and Gipson... but inadvertently points out that Gipson isn't covering great. He's getting a rep as a big hitter but he's ranked 33rd among safeties in completion percentage. Jauron loved his coverage abilities, said he could play corner, so that's a bit troublesome and might be part of our problem on third downs.
He needs to improve in that area (like Skrine)... or we need a safety who covers better. The hits? We got those. In today's NFL, you need safeties who can step up and cover a slot or hybrid TE.
http://www.cleveland.com/browns/index.ssf/2013/11/cleveland_browns_secondary_sho.html
I've always been infatuated with ball hawk, defensive captain safeties. Ed Reed has been one of my favorite players for the past decade.
I understand there are many molds of a quality safety, and that Gipson's mold is just as effective, but it's just not what I have in mind.
In my eyes, a successful defense needs three things: a badass ballhawk safety, an intelligent and hard hitting MLB and an effective pass rushing OLB. Those are primary needs. With those pieces in place, you can begin to focus on building a strong secondary and strong defensive line.
We have two of the three, and a solid safety who is neither a liability nor a playmaker. We have a solid line, a great CB, a solid #2 CB, a run supporting SS, and a plethora of rushers. We're one playmaker away from having the absolute best defense in the NFL.
We're at a point now where we can afford to take BPA almost all draft. We don't have a need so glaring that we will have to reach (QB excluded). If the BPA in the second is a safety, id like to see us go safety. If it's a TE, I would like to go TE.
I would rather see us amass quality talent than be right or wrong. Kansas City as the exception, the team with the most talent normally wins in the NFL. I'm tired of being the team with moxie and gumption, I want to be the team with top tier talent at all 53 spots.
-
Couch, that is so cool and self-aware, gotta give you massive props. Honestly, if we could all be that self-effacing, life would be 20 times more fun.
Here's an article that praises Skrine and Gipson... but inadvertently points out that Gipson isn't covering great. He's getting a rep as a big hitter but he's ranked 33rd among safeties in completion percentage. Jauron loved his coverage abilities, said he could play corner, so that's a bit troublesome and might be part of our problem on third downs.
He needs to improve in that area (like Skrine)... or we need a safety who covers better. The hits? We got those. In today's NFL, you need safeties who can step up and cover a slot or hybrid TE.
http://www.cleveland.com/browns/index.ssf/2013/11/cleveland_browns_secondary_sho.html
I've always been infatuated with ball hawk, defensive captain safeties. Ed Reed has been one of my favorite players for the past decade.
I understand there are many molds of a quality safety, and that Gipson's mold is just as effective, but it's just not what I have in mind.
In my eyes, a successful defense needs three things: a badass ballhawk safety, an intelligent and hard hitting MLB and an effective pass rushing OLB. Those are primary needs. With those pieces in place, you can begin to focus on building a strong secondary and strong defensive line.
We have two of the three, and a solid safety who is neither a liability nor a playmaker. We have a solid line, a great CB, a solid #2 CB, a run supporting SS, and a plethora of rushers. We're one playmaker away from having the absolute best defense in the NFL.
We're at a point now where we can afford to take BPA almost all draft. We don't have a need so glaring that we will have to reach (QB excluded). If the BPA in the second is a safety, id like to see us go safety. If it's a TE, I would like to go TE.
I would rather see us amass quality talent than be right or wrong. Kansas City as the exception, the team with the most talent normally wins in the NFL. I'm tired of being the team with moxie and gumption, I want to be the team with top tier talent at all 53 spots.
I've always been infatuated with ball hawk, defensive captain safeties. Ed Reed has been one of my favorite players for the past decade.
I understand there are many molds of a quality safety, and that Gipson's mold is just as effective, but it's just not what I have in mind.
In my eyes, a successful defense needs three things: a badass ballhawk safety, an intelligent and hard hitting MLB and an effective pass rushing OLB. Those are primary needs. With those pieces in place, you can begin to focus on building a strong secondary and strong defensive line.
We have two of the three, and a solid safety who is neither a liability nor a playmaker. We have a solid line, a great CB, a solid #2 CB, a run supporting SS, and a plethora of rushers. We're one playmaker away from having the absolute best defense in the NFL.
We're at a point now where we can afford to take BPA almost all draft. We don't have a need so glaring that we will have to reach (QB excluded). If the BPA in the second is a safety, id like to see us go safety. If it's a TE, I would like to go TE.
I would rather see us amass quality talent than be right or wrong. Kansas City as the exception, the team with the most talent normally wins in the NFL. I'm tired of being the team with moxie and gumption, I want to be the team with top tier talent at all 53 spots.
Well, 50% of the equation is having the team with the top tier talent.....but the other 50% is superior coaching.
-
I've always been infatuated with ball hawk, defensive captain safeties. Ed Reed has been one of my favorite players for the past decade.
I understand there are many molds of a quality safety, and that Gipson's mold is just as effective, but it's just not what I have in mind.
In my eyes, a successful defense needs three things: a badass ballhawk safety, an intelligent and hard hitting MLB and an effective pass rushing OLB. Those are primary needs. With those pieces in place, you can begin to focus on building a strong secondary and strong defensive line.
We have two of the three, and a solid safety who is neither a liability nor a playmaker. We have a solid line, a great CB, a solid #2 CB, a run supporting SS, and a plethora of rushers. We're one playmaker away from having the absolute best defense in the NFL.
We're at a point now where we can afford to take BPA almost all draft. We don't have a need so glaring that we will have to reach (QB excluded). If the BPA in the second is a safety, id like to see us go safety. If it's a TE, I would like to go TE.
I would rather see us amass quality talent than be right or wrong. Kansas City as the exception, the team with the most talent normally wins in the NFL. I'm tired of being the team with moxie and gumption, I want to be the team with top tier talent at all 53 spots.
Well, 50% of the equation is having the team with the top tier talent.....but the other 50% is superior coaching.
Well, 50% of the equation is having the team with the top tier talent.....but the other 50% is superior coaching.
I'd like to counter that point by presenting to you the Denver Broncos, who won with Jack Del Rio at the helm. The same Del Rio who posted only 3 winning seasons in 9 years in Jacksonville and has a career winning percentage of .489.
I would also like to present to you Nick Saban, who may be one of the greatest coaches of all time, and failed miserably in Miami due to having an absolutely garbage team.
Great coaching doesn't matter if you have a bad team. I'd be willing to bet that Mangini, Davis, and Crennel could all put together 8 win seasons in Denver.
The two go hand in hand, obviously. But having no on field talent is much harder to overcome.
You'd have to be a genius to win with a shitty team, and you'd have to be an idiot to lose with a great one.
I'm awesome, and I fuck dolphins. Ghoolie 12/2/2012: I have absolutely no skills, training or pride -
Well, 50% of the equation is having the team with the top tier talent.....but the other 50% is superior coaching.
I'd like to counter that point by presenting to you the Denver Broncos, who won with Jack Del Rio at the helm. The same Del Rio who posted only 3 winning seasons in 9 years in Jacksonville and has a career winning percentage of .489.
I would also like to present to you Nick Saban, who may be one of the greatest coaches of all time, and failed miserably in Miami due to having an absolutely garbage team.
Great coaching doesn't matter if you have a bad team. I'd be willing to bet that Mangini, Davis, and Crennel could all put together 8 win seasons in Denver.
The two go hand in hand, obviously. But having no on field talent is much harder to overcome.
You'd have to be a genius to win with a shitty team, and you'd have to be an idiot to lose with a great one.
I'd like to counter that point by presenting to you the Denver Broncos, who won with Jack Del Rio at the helm. The same Del Rio who posted only 3 winning seasons in 9 years in Jacksonville and has a career winning percentage of .489.
I would also like to present to you Nick Saban, who may be one of the greatest coaches of all time, and failed miserably in Miami due to having an absolutely garbage team.
Great coaching doesn't matter if you have a bad team. I'd be willing to bet that Mangini, Davis, and Crennel could all put together 8 win seasons in Denver.
The two go hand in hand, obviously. But having no on field talent is much harder to overcome.
You'd have to be a genius to win with a shitty team, and you'd have to be an idiot to lose with a great one.
Yes, I agree with all of that.....but, you can have a team with somewhat lesser talent beat up on a team with more talent if the coaching is quality.
I mean, was there any doubt in your mind that a Lombardi, Landry, Shula and others could do this? Yes a great coach cannot make really crappy talent win.....but a crappy coach can make good talent lose.
I mean....just take Kansas City. Last year with Romeo they were 2-14. Now, with Andy Reid, they are 9-0....and there has not been all that much changeover in personell. The coach and the QB. (yes, a QB can make a big difference obviously, but often a QB is an extension of a coach)
-
-
And after all that... you know it's coming... "the best teams are the teams with the best quarterbacks."
-
Well, 50% of the equation is having the team with the top tier talent.....but the other 50% is superior coaching.
I'd like to counter that point by presenting to you the Denver Broncos, who won with Jack Del Rio at the helm. The same Del Rio who posted only 3 winning seasons in 9 years in Jacksonville and has a career winning percentage of .489.
I would also like to present to you Nick Saban, who may be one of the greatest coaches of all time, and failed miserably in Miami due to having an absolutely garbage team.
Great coaching doesn't matter if you have a bad team. I'd be willing to bet that Mangini, Davis, and Crennel could all put together 8 win seasons in Denver.
The two go hand in hand, obviously. But having no on field talent is much harder to overcome.
You'd have to be a genius to win with a shitty team, and you'd have to be an idiot to lose with a great one.
Jack Del Rio may have gotten credit for a win as head coach but Peyton Manning runs half the team.I'd like to counter that point by presenting to you the Denver Broncos, who won with Jack Del Rio at the helm. The same Del Rio who posted only 3 winning seasons in 9 years in Jacksonville and has a career winning percentage of .489.
I would also like to present to you Nick Saban, who may be one of the greatest coaches of all time, and failed miserably in Miami due to having an absolutely garbage team.
Great coaching doesn't matter if you have a bad team. I'd be willing to bet that Mangini, Davis, and Crennel could all put together 8 win seasons in Denver.
The two go hand in hand, obviously. But having no on field talent is much harder to overcome.
You'd have to be a genius to win with a shitty team, and you'd have to be an idiot to lose with a great one.
-
Jack Del Rio may have gotten credit for a win as head coach but Peyton Manning runs half the team.I'd like to counter that point by presenting to you the Denver Broncos, who won with Jack Del Rio at the helm. The same Del Rio who posted only 3 winning seasons in 9 years in Jacksonville and has a career winning percentage of .489.
I would also like to present to you Nick Saban, who may be one of the greatest coaches of all time, and failed miserably in Miami due to having an absolutely garbage team.
Great coaching doesn't matter if you have a bad team. I'd be willing to bet that Mangini, Davis, and Crennel could all put together 8 win seasons in Denver.
The two go hand in hand, obviously. But having no on field talent is much harder to overcome.
You'd have to be a genius to win with a shitty team, and you'd have to be an idiot to lose with a great one.
XxDaBuckeyexX said:
Jack Del Rio may have gotten credit for a win as head coach but Peyton Manning runs half the team.
That's the point.
Bad coaches can win with great talent.
I'm awesome, and I fuck dolphins. Ghoolie 12/2/2012: I have absolutely no skills, training or pride -
XxDaBuckeyexX said:
Jack Del Rio may have gotten credit for a win as head coach but Peyton Manning runs half the team.
That's the point.
Bad coaches can win with great talent.
@westside-steve said:
That's the point.
Who?
WSS
Bad coaches can win with great talent.
www.westsidesteve.com www.myspace.com/westsidestevemusic www.cdbaby.com/artist/westsidestevesimmons -
Couch, that is so cool and self-aware, gotta give you massive props. Honestly, if we could all be that self-effacing, life would be 20 times more fun.
Here's an article that praises Skrine and Gipson... but inadvertently points out that Gipson isn't covering great. He's getting a rep as a big hitter but he's ranked 33rd among safeties in completion percentage. Jauron loved his coverage abilities, said he could play corner, so that's a bit troublesome and might be part of our problem on third downs.
He needs to improve in that area (like Skrine)... or we need a safety who covers better. The hits? We got those. In today's NFL, you need safeties who can step up and cover a slot or hybrid TE.
http://www.cleveland.com/browns/index.ssf/2013/11/cleveland_browns_secondary_sho.html
Couch, that is so cool and self-aware, gotta give you massive props. Honestly, if we could all be that self-effacing, life would be 20 times more fun.
Here's an article that praises Skrine and Gipson... but inadvertently points out that Gipson isn't covering great. He's getting a rep as a big hitter but he's ranked 33rd among safeties in completion percentage. Jauron loved his coverage abilities, said he could play corner, so that's a bit troublesome and might be part of our problem on third downs.
He needs to improve in that area (like Skrine)... or we need a safety who covers better. The hits? We got those. In today's NFL, you need safeties who can step up and cover a slot or hybrid TE.
http://www.cleveland.com/browns/index.ssf/2013/11/cleveland_browns_secondary_sho.html
Goes back to YOUR question... what could another play at that position do to add to the W column?... cover better. He has been the suspect on a couple 3rd downs I've seen at least...
-
@westside-steve said:
That's the point.
Who?
WSS
Bad coaches can win with great talent.
Jack Del Rio was the aforementioned example.@westside-steve said:
That's the point.
Who?
WSS
Bad coaches can win with great talent.
Career win percentage of 48%, won last week by basically letting the Broncos just do what they do.
It's easier for a shitty coach with great talent to win than it is for a great coach with shitty talent.
Hello! It looks like you're interested in this conversation, but you don't have an account yet.
Getting fed up of having to scroll through the same posts each visit? When you register for an account, you'll always come back to exactly where you were before, and choose to be notified of new replies (either via email, or push notification). You'll also be able to save bookmarks and upvote posts to show your appreciation to other community members.
With your input, this post could be even better 💗
Register Login