BakoSaint

I don't think DA was worse than Haslett. I don't like either one a bit but I think DA was a slightly better coach with a worse roster. If you look at the Haslett years, Haslett was a defensive coach, Mike McCarthy was his offensive coordinator from 2000-2004, and the offense carried the team until McCarthy left in 2005. The only above average defensive year was 2000, and I think that was more about the players being highly motivated about NOT playing for Ditka anymore, and the sense of a fresh start, than anything about Haslett. Haslett, to me, was a random mediocre DC guy with bad habits just like DA whose greatest attributes were having a top offensive coordinator and not being Mike Ditka. I would credit Mike McCarthy much more than Jim Haslett with our first playoff win.

https://www.pro-football-reference.c.../nor/index.htm

If anything DA annoyed me less than Haslett because as least DA was honest when we lost that they were not going to change anything and they were going to keep doing what they were doing. Haslett was always full of meaningless drivel about how they were going to change things they couldnt change (if the ball bounced different we would have won so we will work hope it bounces different and think about not fumbling) or that did not matter much and were distractions (this year we want to have a power running game so we had Deuce gain 15 pounds, no wait that was last year, now we had him lose 15 pounds and we are going to regain speed and win). Haslett was just always full of creative excuses and distractions that I felt destroyed accountability.

Also, I feel Haslett had a better chance to succeed with Aaron Brooks than DA did with Carr, but blew it worse. I feel it was more of Haslett and Loomis who decided to make Brooks into a pocket passer after giving him a big contract and that Brooks could been great if he was used more like Josh Allen. Brooks was developed to waste half his skill set and learn to make excuses, and thats what destroyed Brooks career.