The Blame Game.....

GumboBC · 02-01-2005, 11:01 AM

When a team isn't doing well, fans want to place the blame somewhere.

Someone has to be held accountable, right?

Most of the time -- fans like to blame the coach first and the QB second.

Next in line are usually the offensive and defensive coordinators. Not necessarily in that order!!

Take ANY team that is losing and it's usually always the coach, QB, offensive coordintor, or defensive coordinator that is the problem.

But, from what I can tell, just about ANY coach can win if he's got enough talented players to work with.

I believe there are only 2 kind of coaches in the NFL.

1. Those coaches who have been fired.
(Tom Landry, Chuck Noll, Dan Reeves, Jim Fassel)

2. Those coaches who will be fired.
(Mike Holmgren, Mike Shannhan, John Gruden?)

You've got some coaches who go out on top, like: Bill Walsh. But if he had of stuck around long enough he would have probably ended up being fired...

Then you have coaches like Jimmy Johnson who just gave up and quit because he couldn't get it done with the dolphins....

So, I think a good arguement can be made that coaching alone isn't the answer. And if coaching alone isn't the answer, then I don't think coaching alone should get so much blame.

Then there's the QB. Brett Favre went to 2 super bowls early in his career. After that, Favre has really struggled in the playoffs. Despite having a better offense now than in his super bowl years, Favre can't get his team back to the super bowl.

Then there's Kurt Warner who went to 2 super bowls himself. And was even the MVP one year. If you believe Mike Martz, it was the "system" and not the QB. And Martz is kind of proving that with Mark Bulger. Though, I think Marshall Faulk had a lot to do with the success the Rams had. And I believe the Rams decline has to do with the declining play of Marshall Faulk.

Then you have a QB like Delhomme who went to the super bowl one year and finished 7-9 the next year.

Or a Trent Dilfer who won a super bowl one year and wasn't even the starter the next year.

I will say this, I believe the teams who enjoy the most succes have franchise QB's. I think the teams who have a QB who can only manage the game are usually one-year wonders...

IMO, you need a QB who can make those one or two critical plays when the game is on the line. Whether that be in the air or on the ground.

But, those franshise QB's need help. They can't do it alone.

Instead of placing the blame in the usual areas. I think there's plenty of other factors that are more to blame........usually!!

If you want a consistent winner, defense is probably the place to start. And if you want to consistently lose, having a poor defense will accomplish that goal.

In the NFL, the best defense isn't a good offense. It's the other way around.

And if you want a consistent running game. The offensive line is the place to start. Unless you've got Barry Sanders.

If you want linebackers who make a lot of plays, the defensive line is the place to start. Let's fact it, linebackers just don't match-up well with 300lb. offensive linemen. You need those D-linemen who can keep the blockers off the linebackers.

Just a little food for thought.....

BlackandBlue · 02-01-2005, 11:13 AM

I blame Gumbo. All this food for thought is making our players fat and lazy.

ScottyRo · 02-01-2005, 11:20 AM

I\'m confused. Are there 2 types or 4 types?

I believe there are only 2 kind of coaches in the NFL.

1. Those coaches who have been fired.
(Tom Landry, Chuck Noll, Dan Reeves, Jim Fassel)

2. Those coaches who will be fired.
(Mike Holmgren, Mike Shannhan, John Gruden?)

You\'ve got some coaches who go out on top, like: Bill Walsh. But if he had of stuck around long enough he would have probably ended up being fired...

Then you have coaches like Jimmy Johnson who just gave up and quit because he couldn\'t get it done with the dolphins....

GumboBC · 02-01-2005, 11:24 AM

Scotty:

Nope, there\'s only 2 types.

You just have some who quit before they get fired.

ScottyRo · 02-01-2005, 11:31 AM

So, when they quit they\'re not a type of coach anymore? But, we\'re still referring to them as coaches...that would seem to indicate that we consider them a type of coaches.

I think at minimum there are 3 types of coaches. The active, the fired, the quitter (not meant to be derogative).

btw, this is an example of arguing for the sake of arguing.

The reality is what relevance do any of these designations have on the Saints except that at some point Haslet is going to move from one type to the other?

[Edited on 1/2/2005 by ScottyRo]

GumboBC · 02-01-2005, 11:41 AM

The reality is what relevance do any of these designations have on the Saints except that at some point Haslet is going to move from one type to the other?

You\'re a very smart guy, Scotty. You\'re really asking the right question here.....

Really, this comes down to a fundemental difference I have with many fans.

I believe, and have always believed, that the \"players\" are a lot more responsible for winning and losing.

And I believe that almost ANY coach can win if they have the right players.

Now, if you have 2 teams almost equal in talent, then coaching is going to make the difference.

But, I believe if the Bucs play one of the top teams, they will lose 8 out of 10 times. The talent just isn\'t there, no matter how good of a coach Jon Gruden is.

I used Gruden as an example. Because he\'s proven he is a good coach.

But just insert Haslett\'s name in there and hopefully you\'ll see my point.

Simply put, I believe we can\'t win with the overall talent we have on this Saints\' team. No matter who the coach is. Not with Gruden, not with Shannhan, not with Holmgren, not with anyone.

If we want to win this year we had better find some players who can get it done because I don\'t believe coaching is going to fix much.

ScottyRo · 02-01-2005, 11:59 AM

I believe that with the overall talent on offense - especially with AB as QB - we should have scored in EVERY 1 st quarter. Nearly the opposite happened. Am I wrong about the overall talent on O? (I know the o-line sucked).

Think about what kind of dubious achievement this is: THE SAINTS ONLY SCORED IN THE FIRST QUARTER ONCE OR TWICE ALL YEAR.

I say they had the talent. So where was the problem otherwise? COACH. I put it on McCarthy (although Haslet is ultimately responsible). So this ANY coach didn\'t get it done with adequate talent. This would contradict your theory.

Coaching is about harnessing the talent. Unfortunately, Haslet has only shown that he is capable of this in brief flashes. I like Haslet and wish he had succeeded. Because I like him, I am fairly happy that he\'ll be back. BUT, I would have fired him after this season. 4 years without a playoff appearance is two too long.

saintswhodi · 02-01-2005, 12:01 PM

I would have fired him after this season. 4 years without a playoff appearance is two too long.

Amen brother.

GumboBC · 02-01-2005, 12:13 PM

THE SAINTS ONLY SCORED IN THE FIRST QUARTER ONCE OR TWICE ALL YEAR.

I say they had the talent. So where was the problem otherwise?

The offense had the talent to do BETTER. But McCarthy also had MANY problems outside of his control.

Let\'s say we had another coordiantor this year. Who was going to get that offensive line to block better for Brooks and Deuce?

You don\'t think that offensive line contributed to us not scoring in the first quarter?

You don\'t think Deuce missing 3 games and playing injured for most of the season contributed to us not scoring in the first quarter.

Give McCarthy Pittsburg\'s offensive line and let a healthy Deuce run behind them and see how often we could score in the first quarter.

Put Brooks behind Pittsburg\'s offensive line and let Brooks sit back there and wait for one of our receivers to get open and see how many times we score in the first quarter.

Scotty:

If you had these 2 choices, which one would you take.

1. Keep McCarthy and we get Pittsburg\'s offensive line and a healthy Deuce.

2. Fire McCarthy and keep the same O-line and an injured Deuce.

02-01-2005, 11:01 AM	#1
GumboBC Banned Join Date: May 2004 Posts: 2,616	The Blame Game..... When a team isn't doing well, fans want to place the blame somewhere. Someone has to be held accountable, right? Most of the time -- fans like to blame the coach first and the QB second. Next in line are usually the offensive and defensive coordinators. Not necessarily in that order!! Take ANY team that is losing and it's usually always the coach, QB, offensive coordintor, or defensive coordinator that is the problem. But, from what I can tell, just about ANY coach can win if he's got enough talented players to work with. I believe there are only 2 kind of coaches in the NFL. 1. Those coaches who have been fired. (Tom Landry, Chuck Noll, Dan Reeves, Jim Fassel) 2. Those coaches who will be fired. (Mike Holmgren, Mike Shannhan, John Gruden?) You've got some coaches who go out on top, like: Bill Walsh. But if he had of stuck around long enough he would have probably ended up being fired... Then you have coaches like Jimmy Johnson who just gave up and quit because he couldn't get it done with the dolphins.... So, I think a good arguement can be made that coaching alone isn't the answer. And if coaching alone isn't the answer, then I don't think coaching alone should get so much blame. Then there's the QB. Brett Favre went to 2 super bowls early in his career. After that, Favre has really struggled in the playoffs. Despite having a better offense now than in his super bowl years, Favre can't get his team back to the super bowl. Then there's Kurt Warner who went to 2 super bowls himself. And was even the MVP one year. If you believe Mike Martz, it was the "system" and not the QB. And Martz is kind of proving that with Mark Bulger. Though, I think Marshall Faulk had a lot to do with the success the Rams had. And I believe the Rams decline has to do with the declining play of Marshall Faulk. Then you have a QB like Delhomme who went to the super bowl one year and finished 7-9 the next year. Or a Trent Dilfer who won a super bowl one year and wasn't even the starter the next year. I will say this, I believe the teams who enjoy the most succes have franchise QB's. I think the teams who have a QB who can only manage the game are usually one-year wonders... IMO, you need a QB who can make those one or two critical plays when the game is on the line. Whether that be in the air or on the ground. But, those franshise QB's need help. They can't do it alone. Instead of placing the blame in the usual areas. I think there's plenty of other factors that are more to blame........usually!! If you want a consistent winner, defense is probably the place to start. And if you want to consistently lose, having a poor defense will accomplish that goal. In the NFL, the best defense isn't a good offense. It's the other way around. And if you want a consistent running game. The offensive line is the place to start. Unless you've got Barry Sanders. If you want linebackers who make a lot of plays, the defensive line is the place to start. Let's fact it, linebackers just don't match-up well with 300lb. offensive linemen. You need those D-linemen who can keep the blockers off the linebackers. Just a little food for thought.....
GumboBC Banned Join Date: May 2004 Posts: 2,616

02-01-2005, 11:13 AM	#2
BlackandBlue Kinder, gentler Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: dirty south Posts: 3,889	The Blame Game..... I blame Gumbo. All this food for thought is making our players fat and lazy.

02-01-2005, 11:20 AM	#3
ScottyRo 1000 Posts + Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: Williamsburg, VA (ugh, the food here) Posts: 1,704	The Blame Game..... I\'m confused. Are there 2 types or 4 types? I believe there are only 2 kind of coaches in the NFL. 1. Those coaches who have been fired. (Tom Landry, Chuck Noll, Dan Reeves, Jim Fassel) 2. Those coaches who will be fired. (Mike Holmgren, Mike Shannhan, John Gruden?) You\'ve got some coaches who go out on top, like: Bill Walsh. But if he had of stuck around long enough he would have probably ended up being fired... Then you have coaches like Jimmy Johnson who just gave up and quit because he couldn\'t get it done with the dolphins....

02-01-2005, 11:24 AM	#4
GumboBC Banned Join Date: May 2004 Posts: 2,616	The Blame Game..... Scotty: Nope, there\'s only 2 types. You just have some who quit before they get fired.
GumboBC Banned Join Date: May 2004 Posts: 2,616

02-01-2005, 11:31 AM	#5
ScottyRo 1000 Posts + Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: Williamsburg, VA (ugh, the food here) Posts: 1,704	The Blame Game..... So, when they quit they\'re not a type of coach anymore? But, we\'re still referring to them as coaches...that would seem to indicate that we consider them a type of coaches. I think at minimum there are 3 types of coaches. The active, the fired, the quitter (not meant to be derogative). btw, this is an example of arguing for the sake of arguing. The reality is what relevance do any of these designations have on the Saints except that at some point Haslet is going to move from one type to the other? [Edited on 1/2/2005 by ScottyRo]

Latest Blogs
2023 New Orleans Saints: Training Camp Last Blog: 08-01-2023 By: MarchingOn Puck the Fro Browl! Last Blog: 02-05-2023 By: neugey CFP: "Just Keep Doing What You're Doing" Last Blog: 12-08-2022 By: neugey

02-01-2005, 11:41 AM	#6
GumboBC Banned Join Date: May 2004 Posts: 2,616	The Blame Game..... The reality is what relevance do any of these designations have on the Saints except that at some point Haslet is going to move from one type to the other? You\'re a very smart guy, Scotty. You\'re really asking the right question here..... Really, this comes down to a fundemental difference I have with many fans. I believe, and have always believed, that the \"players\" are a lot more responsible for winning and losing. And I believe that almost ANY coach can win if they have the right players. Now, if you have 2 teams almost equal in talent, then coaching is going to make the difference. But, I believe if the Bucs play one of the top teams, they will lose 8 out of 10 times. The talent just isn\'t there, no matter how good of a coach Jon Gruden is. I used Gruden as an example. Because he\'s proven he is a good coach. But just insert Haslett\'s name in there and hopefully you\'ll see my point. Simply put, I believe we can\'t win with the overall talent we have on this Saints\' team. No matter who the coach is. Not with Gruden, not with Shannhan, not with Holmgren, not with anyone. If we want to win this year we had better find some players who can get it done because I don\'t believe coaching is going to fix much.
GumboBC Banned Join Date: May 2004 Posts: 2,616

02-01-2005, 11:59 AM	#7
ScottyRo 1000 Posts + Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: Williamsburg, VA (ugh, the food here) Posts: 1,704	The Blame Game..... I believe that with the overall talent on offense - especially with AB as QB - we should have scored in EVERY 1 st quarter. Nearly the opposite happened. Am I wrong about the overall talent on O? (I know the o-line sucked). Think about what kind of dubious achievement this is: THE SAINTS ONLY SCORED IN THE FIRST QUARTER ONCE OR TWICE ALL YEAR. I say they had the talent. So where was the problem otherwise? COACH. I put it on McCarthy (although Haslet is ultimately responsible). So this ANY coach didn\'t get it done with adequate talent. This would contradict your theory. Coaching is about harnessing the talent. Unfortunately, Haslet has only shown that he is capable of this in brief flashes. I like Haslet and wish he had succeeded. Because I like him, I am fairly happy that he\'ll be back. BUT, I would have fired him after this season. 4 years without a playoff appearance is two too long.

02-01-2005, 12:01 PM	#8
saintswhodi 5000 POSTS! + Join Date: Oct 2004 Location: San Antonio, TX Posts: 6,941	The Blame Game..... I would have fired him after this season. 4 years without a playoff appearance is two too long. Amen brother.

02-01-2005, 12:13 PM	#9
GumboBC Banned Join Date: May 2004 Posts: 2,616	The Blame Game..... THE SAINTS ONLY SCORED IN THE FIRST QUARTER ONCE OR TWICE ALL YEAR. I say they had the talent. So where was the problem otherwise? The offense had the talent to do BETTER. But McCarthy also had MANY problems outside of his control. Let\'s say we had another coordiantor this year. Who was going to get that offensive line to block better for Brooks and Deuce? You don\'t think that offensive line contributed to us not scoring in the first quarter? You don\'t think Deuce missing 3 games and playing injured for most of the season contributed to us not scoring in the first quarter. Give McCarthy Pittsburg\'s offensive line and let a healthy Deuce run behind them and see how often we could score in the first quarter. Put Brooks behind Pittsburg\'s offensive line and let Brooks sit back there and wait for one of our receivers to get open and see how many times we score in the first quarter. Scotty: If you had these 2 choices, which one would you take. 1. Keep McCarthy and we get Pittsburg\'s offensive line and a healthy Deuce. 2. Fire McCarthy and keep the same O-line and an injured Deuce.
GumboBC Banned Join Date: May 2004 Posts: 2,616