WhoDat

Halo might kill me for this if it gets out of hand, but...


Can a losing coach still be a great coach?


What do you guys think? Sound off. Obviously there are a couple of possible definitions for key terms like losing (this year, overall, during some period) and great, but tell me what you guys think.

ScottyRo

I voted yes. I think, however, that everything would have to conspire against a great coach in order for him to be considered a losing coach when given years of opportunity.

Great coaches can have many diffent things which make them great such as the ability to make the team better than they are (by motivation or otherwise) and having the right gameplan and model for success. There are others, I'm sure.

As far as Haz goes, I think it's clear that he doesn't make it on the second one cuz he has changed philosophies seemingly year-to-year. Thus, he doesn't have that great and solid plan to win and is trying to adapt to what is working elsewhere in the league.

Haz's ability to motivate it a tough one to figure. At times, it seems like the players are really behind him and primed to play. At others, it seems like as a group they could care less about the game.

WhoDat

Thanks Scotty. My intent is not necessarily to make this about Haslett. I'm talking about any coach. It's an interesting question, I think. I mean, most people believe a great player can play on a losing team for his whole career and still be great, right? Archie Manning is a perfect example of that. You take away last season from the Chargers, and LT has spent his entire career on a piss poor team, and he's the best back in the league, IMO.

But that brings up an interesting question. A player with crappy talent around him can be considered great, even if the team loses. But what about a coach? Ditka is a God in Chicago and a bum in New Orleans. So, the question remains....

\"Excuses, excuses, excuses. That’s all anyone ever makes for the New Orleans Saints’ organization.\" - Eric Narcisse


\"Being a Saints fan is almost like being addicted to crack,\" he said.[i]\"You know you should stop, but you just can\'t.\"

ScottyRo

There are two Ditka's. One, Chicago Ditka, who was a great coach with an attitude the fans loved and the smarts to bring in the right coaches to help his team succeed. Then you have the N.O. Ditka. He's the one that thought it'd be fun to coach again forgetting that it's a lot of work. On top of that he brought in the wrong people. I thought Zavin was a good DC, but Danny was not OC material and that choice cost us. Still, though, he took a couple of really bad teams and a bad offense in particular and got 6 wins two years straight. All 3 years really should have been 3 win seasons.

On top of it all, I give Ditka credit for sticking it out that last year and wanting to right the ship. I lost a ton of respect for Jim Mora when he quit in the middle of the season. My philosophy on that is for a coach to build a team that sucks, he needs to stick around and suffer like the rest of us while we go 3-13.