When you think the grass is greener on the other side…

[Bruce]

… you’re not taking care of your own grass – Jerry Gray defensive coordinator in Buffalo.

According to some the only standard of success for coaching seems to be getting to the Super Bowl -- further, that the solution to fixing the problem and getting there is simply firing and replacing the team's coaches.

How does that apply to teams like Detroit Lions, Arizona (formerly the St Louis Cardinals, Seattle Seahawks, and New Orleans Saints??? None of these teams has ever been to a Super Bowl – so has every coach who has ever coached for these guys sucked?

Lions: Don McCaffery, Rick Forzano, Tommy Hudspeth, Monty Clark, Darryl Rogers, Wayne Fonts, Bobby Ross, Gary Moeller, Marty Mornhinweg, Steve Mariucci. (coaches during Super Bowl era)

Cardinals: Charley Winner, Bob Hollway, Don Coryell, Bud Wilkinson, Jim Hanifan, Gene Stallings, Joe Bugel, Buddy Ryan, Vince Tobin, Dave McGinnis, Dennis Green (coaches during Super Bowl era)

BTW for you youngsters Bud Wilkinson played on 1936 national championship team at Minnesota; coached Oklahoma to 3 national titles (1950, 55, 56); won 4 Orange and 2 Sugar Bowls; teams had winning streaks of 47 (1953-57) and 31 (1948-50); retired after 1963 season with 145-29-4 record in 17 years. Yet as the "answer" when he was coach in St. Louis, his of NFL numbers were a 9-20 record from 1978-79 -- after which he was sacked for the next "answer" Jim Hanifan.

Saints: Tom Fears, J.D. Roberts, John North, Ernie Hefferle, Hank Stram, **** Nolan, **** Stanfel, O.A. (Bum) Phillips, Wade Phillips, Jim Mora, Rick Venturi, Mike Ditka, Jim Haslett (coaches during Super Bowl era)

Seahawks: Mike Holmgren has been Seattle’s coach for a season longer than Mike Sherman and has yet to win a playoff game. Chuck Knox never got them a playoff win either. I won’t bother listing their coaches who failed but by now you should begin to get my drift.

You all know the perennial losing franchise teams that I have not mentioned that seem to be on a continuous coaching carousel rebuilding and failing, rebuilding and failing...over-and-over

It has been 37 years since the Jets or the Colts played in a Super Bowl, and 36 since Kansas City appeared in one. Does that mean that every single coach that has been employed by them SUCKS???

How many times do you think staffs turned over and new staffs were going to be the solution to the problems that keep them from getting to the big game?

It has been 29 years since the Vikings made it to the Super Bowl and even the great Bud Grant who got them there 4 times failed to win the big one. Are all of Minnesota’s next great answers to be judged as failures too???

I honestly think too many of you missed the point of nets posting.

Be careful of what you ask -- you just might get it.

 

[musccy]

I didn't see net's post yet, so I'm not sure what inspired this post, but regardless, a good one.

THe novelty of a new coach wears off very quickly, and then ppl start to realize that the same mistakes or achievements you see w/ the new coach are what the old coach offered.

As this applies to MS...if you really think he's lost this team, fine, but also, don't expect that inconsistent performances, questionable/controversial game calls, or losses in the playoffs will mystically vanish w/ a new coach.

 

[yooperfan]

Bruce,
You forgot the great Detroit Lion coaching guru, Harry (the hat) Gilmer.
Back in the mid to late 60's all the Lion fans were really whining about Harry the hat.
It was a great thing to behold.

 

[Chamuko]

Bruce:

I really like the way you have a very nice optimist way to look at things, and I like you personally, believe me I have tried to find a way to keep backing Sherman as I used to do, but after this season I really think that we might take the chance to change AT LEAST THE OC in Green Bay, I know that success is not sure and that we might even end up worst, but if it was my call, which is not, I will take it and take full responsibility for it.

Sometimes a change of the HC or OC might acctually do good for a team.

We can spend eternity arguing who is wrong and who is right on the coching issue and might never agree on it, it is clear Sherman and friends hasnt been the best nor the worst in NFL history but right now I see the writing on the wall for changes....

Too bad no one of us has the magic stick and can guarantee the success for this team as I feel that we will all be very happy if GB turns around next season and gets to be a very good team under Sherman or under anyother coach.

 

[musccy]

I agree Chamuko that the writing is on the wall w/ MS, and even though I would support his return, I expect him and Rossley to be gone very soon, especially if Favre retires.

As you said, he's not the best, but certainly not the worst coach in the NFL, but 3-12 will always put you on the hot seat.

 

[musccy]

I agree Chamuko that the writing is on the wall w/ MS, and even though I would support his return, I expect him and Rossley to be gone very soon, especially if Favre retires.

As you said, he's not the best, but certainly not the worst coach in the NFL, but 3-12 will always put you on the hot seat.

 

[Philtration]

Great post.
Not to turn it into a Bears story but when Ditka was fired after 10 very good years the Bears brought in the hottest coaching candidate in the league in Dave Wannstedt . All he did was turn the team into a bunch of crybabies and get rid of some very good players (Trace Armstrong, Rich Zorich) He was obsesed with a players percentage of body fat and not whether they could actually play football and he set the Bears back years with his weirdo ideas. Unless you get Bill Belichick (not going to happen) who else is out there? Don't say Parcells either because he is starting to lose credibilty by jumping from team to team every few years.

 

[Bruce]

Good point Phil. I think as a fan from another great franchise we would agree that Kansas City is a very solid franchise in its own right.

During Kansas City's 36 year drought the coaching change overs that promised to take them to the promised land included the following.

I am sure when KC replace Hank Stram with Paul Wiggins(11 -24) they thought they had the answer, just like they did when they replaced him with Tom Bettis(1 - 6) who was replaced by Marv Levy(31 -42), who was fired and replaced by John Mackovic(30 - 42), replaced by Frank Gansz(8 -22-1). Marty Schottenheimer was next and turned the team from a 17 year drought to (100 - 59 - 1) and a (3 - 7) playoff record, but was fired and replaced with Gunther Cunningham (16 - 16) who was fired and replaced by **** Vermeil (40 - 31) who has gotten to one playoff game, where of course they lost.

But rest assured, finding coaches that will turn your franchise around is a piece of cake. :roll:

Great post.
Not to turn it into a Bears story but when Ditka was fired after 10 very good years the Bears brought in the hottest coaching candidate in the league in Dave Wannstedt . All he did was turn the team into a bunch of crybabies and get rid of some very good players (Trace Armstrong, Rich Zorich) He was obsesed with a players percentage of body fat and not whether they could actually play football and he set the Bears back years with his weirdo ideas. Unless you get Bill Belichick (not going to happen) who else is out there? Don't say Parcells either because he is starting to lose credibilty by jumping from team to team every few years.

 

[net]

Bruce,

On the money, as usual. I've been trying to say this(without the evidence you provide).

Another team to consider is the Dallas Cowboys. Jimmy Johnson produced some good teams(Barry Switzer proved he could coach Johnson's team) but the Plowboys have been very pedestrian since the Landry/Johnson era.
Even Bill Parcells has produced 'mediocre'(their words) results.

One of the saddest times was the abuse Tom Landry took near the end of his coaching time in Dallas. This would be equivalent to Packer fans booing Vince Lombardi. A couple of inches, twice, cost Landry titles that went to Lombardi.

Change does not produce automatic results. The Packers got lucky with Mike Holmgren, but I fear without Ron Wolf, it would have been Mediocre Mike Holmgren, as it was when he was running personnel in Seattle.

You also could include the Jets, who haven't been sniffing the Big Show in sometime.

 

[Bruce]

Yeah, during the Jet's 37 year drought the following coaches all must of sucked too:

2001-present Herman Edwards 40-45-0
2000 Al Groh 9-7-0
1997-1999 Bill Parcells 30-20-0
1995-1996 Rich Kotite 4-28-0
1994 Pete Carroll 6-10-0
1990-1993 Bruce Coslet 26-39-0
1983-1989 Joe Walton 54-59-1
1977-1982 Walt Michaels 41-49-1
1976 Mike Holovak 0-1-0
1976 Lou Holtz 3-10-0
1974-1975 Charlie Winner 9-14-0

Wait a minute... aren't a couple of these guys on some of the posters wish lists???

Bruce,

On the money, as usual. I've been trying to say this(without the evidence you provide).

Another team to consider is the Dallas Cowboys. Jimmy Johnson produced some good teams(Barry Switzer proved he could coach Johnson's team) but the Plowboys have been very pedestrian since the Landry/Johnson era.
Even Bill Parcells has produced 'mediocre'(their words) results.

One of the saddest times was the abuse Tom Landry took near the end of his coaching time in Dallas. This would be equivalent to Packer fans booing Vince Lombardi. A couple of inches, twice, cost Landry titles that went to Lombardi.

Change does not produce automatic results. The Packers got lucky with Mike Holmgren, but I fear without Ron Wolf, it would have been Mediocre Mike Holmgren, as it was when he was running personnel in Seattle.

You also could include the Jets, who haven't been sniffing the Big Show in sometime.

 

[DePack]

And in the same vein, Bill Cowher went through what Sherman is going through. Pittsburgh's ownership stuck with him. It seems to have paid off.

Phil...did Ditka really get fired? I'm sure he did or you wouldn't have mentioned it. Where the hell is all the loyalty?

 

[PWT36]

A topic concerning Mike Sherman head coaching career with common sense and accurate. it is refreshing to see this type of a topic. Mike Sherman coaching record in his six year coaching career in Green Bay places him as the fourth best Packer coach in Packers history only EL "Curly" Lambeau Founder, GM & HC from 1921 -1949., Vincent Lombardi GM and HC of glory years Packers from 1959-1967 . Mike Holmgren head coach from 1992 -1998 are ahead of Mike Sherman. All other Packer coaches were below .500 winning percentage except Rhodes one year coaching record of 8-8. Some Packer coaches were in .300 range. Mike Sherman had the one of the best if not best first five year coaching winning record in the NFL put him up there with Chuck Knox, Joe Gibbs, Chuck Siefert first five year coaching winning records in NFL since 1970. . None of these had Competitive balance (Free Agency & Salary cap) to contend with because that was established in 1993.) It is not a fact that Mike Sherman will not be back in Green Bay as HC because of his first losing year. Many franchises, as example the Steelers have not fired their coach after one losing season. Since 1998 , Bill Cowher's Steelers have had 3 losing seasons and Steelers extended his contract after a bad '03 season. The Steelers have had a 15-1 season in '04 and good winning season in '05, as a reward for not "pulling the plug" on Bill Cowher. The Cowboys have "not pull plug" on Parcells for some losing seasons and were 5-11 in '04 but having a good winning season this year. There is no reason with all the many injured players coming back next year, many rookies, first year and second year Packer players getting very valuable NFL playing experience this year, and new crop of low round draft choices in '06 draft plus free agents coming in, that Mike Sherman can not turn Packers around next year. The Packers also have $10-15M cap space next year, they had very little cap space this year. All these things point to turning this poor record around in '06 especially having the stability if Head coach Mike Sherman returns; who had proven winning career record of coaching Green Bay. Of coarse this up to GM Ted Thompson to decide, he is responsible for complete Packer football operations. I would think he has already evaluated Mike Sherman job performance as head coach, and January 2 or there abouts, we should know whether Mike Sherman will be back in Green Bay as head coach for his 7th year. Or the Packer will search for another head coach in '06 , I will go along with Ted Thompson decison, he has more expertise in this situation than I do. With all the Teams that are rumored to be looking for a new HC in '06, and if Sherman's is out as HC in GB, I think, he will not be unemployed as HC in NFL very long.

 

[P@ck66]

Bruce...

As usual..your specious logic fails to prove a point...

(I can give you a laundry list of coaches and players too..but again..so what?)

Some coaches are good and some are bad...and what we are really talking about here is "quality"...or the talent and ability to be a "good..or excellent" head coach coach in the NFL...not a list of who coached whom going back to 1932..but "quality"...

My yardstick is not the SB..as some of you have suggested...

If I have faith in a coach that he at least he has the ablility to one day get my team to the SB (and a few NFC championship games along the way..),then I would be satisfied....

But, I am sorry to say that I DO NOT have that faith in your bumbling, coach Sherman...who has made so many rookie mistakes and bone-headed moves to be considered an absurd clown..in other words..a fool..or a buffoon. And to top it off..as other posters have suggested, he is quite ball-less too..playing it too close to the vest...(conservatively)...or in other words..."not to lose"...(much as your beloved Dan Reeves tends to play it..)

When I think of REAL NFL head-coaches like Holmgren, Cowher, Parcells, Bellichik, Gruden, Reid, Weiss, Mooch, Coughlin, Gibbs..and the new guys...Lovie, Marvin Lewis, etc..(as well as some of the coaches of the past that you mentioned)...I think of WINNERS...(this is what I want to see in Green Bay!) Sherman, imo...is a buffoon and a charlatan when compared to these men....

These men have the ability and talent to be Head Coaches in the NFL...AND TO GET THE JOB DONE! They inspire confidence in their fans and in their players...

But not ol' Casper Milquetoast Sherman and his pet hump (Igor) Rossley....

(These two are a joke..and the PAck deserves better....)

Why do you continually go to bat for the "champion of mediocrity"?

The point is that if it were not for Brett Favre...Sherman would be coaching some high school program by now..and would definitely be out of the NFL.."Quality"...he doesn't have it...

Trot out all the statistics you like...but the fact is that Sherman has had this team on a downward spiral for years now...2-4 in the playoffs...Home field advantage is a joke...and now this season!

Favre could only cover up SherRossley's inadequacies for so long...but now with the poor signings when Sherman was a GM, and the NFL europe quality players out there now..it can no longer be done...

(and DePack..you can't possibly be comparing Sherman to Mike Holmgren can you? Because there is NO comparison...Holmgren is HEAD AND SHOULDERS above SherRossley in terms of ability...It's not even close...)

 

[TOPackerFan]

When I think of REAL NFL head-coaches like Holmgren, Cowher, Parcells, Bellichik, Gruden, Reid, Weiss, Mooch, Coughlin, Gibbs..and the new guys...Lovie, Marvin Lewis, etc..(as well as some of the coaches of the past that you mentioned)...I think of WINNERS...(this is what I want to see in Green Bay!)

These men have the ability and talent to be Head Coaches in the NFL...AND TO GET THE JOB DONE! They inspire confidence in their fans and in their players...

Speaking of specious, Coughlin got sh!thammered in his SB appearance with the Giants and your hero Mike Holmgren hasn't won a playoff game since the 1998 NFC championship game and could only manage to win 1 Super Bowl with Brett in the midst of a 3-in-a-row MVP run and the #1 defense in the NFL, featuring none other than Reggie White at end. Furthermore, WTF has Mooch ever done? Really solid performance in Detroit eh?

 

[digsthepack]

The think that makes me lose faith in MS most is his seeming inability to learn from the many mistakes he has made..whether game management, scheme, etc., he seems to make the same mistakes over again.

 

[P@ck66]

TO..

take your medicine boy..and learn your facts...

Coughlin hasn't taken the Giants to the SB...YET!

 

[TOPackerFan]

TO..

take your medicine boy..and learn your facts...

Coughlin hasn't taken the Giants to the SB...YET!

Okay, I'll concede that I made that mistake but if I were you, I wouldn't be spouting off about how Coughlin hasn't been to a Super Bowl with the Giants. It does little to support your earlier argument. I also notice you have nothing to say about the other coaches I mentioned.

 

[DePack]

PAck66...relax there Bubba. You're the one that brought up Mike Holmgren's EXACT situation and said you can't do that. It's funny when someone brings up facts and statistics you go back to your "******", "hump" mundane descriptions that are entirely subjective. Face it you hate Sherman. Not sure why....maybe he stole your girl in High School....but you are continually out debated in this issue so you get completely unreasonable. It's really quite entertaining! I can see the vein bulging in your forehead.

 

[digsthepack]

DePack...first "the foil"....and now the "vein bulging" reference. You have to start writing your own material, buddy!! LOL

 

[Greg C.]

TOPackerFan: Tom Coughlin was NOT coaching the Giants when they lost the Super Bowl. Jim Fassel was.

Bruce, you are setting the standard too high by focusing on Super Bowl championships. You are also neglecting to mention that most of these franchises had poor talent. Mike Sherman has had pretty good talent, and in six years he has not only failed to win a Super Bowl, he has failed to make it to a Super Bowl, and he has failed to even make it to a conference championship game.

Furthermore, most of the coaches you mention actually DID suck.

The two coaches with the longest tenures in the NFL right now are Jeff Fisher and Bill Cowher. What do they have in common? They got their teams to the Super Bowl and made a respectable showing in the game. Their teams did not crumble in the early rounds of the playoffs, as Sherman's teams have.

I'm not in favor of coaching carousels, which is why I supported Sherman for five years. But enough is enough. He should've been gone last year.

 

[TOPackerFan]

Thanks Greg, but I conceded that earlier. In addition, I'd agree that Sherman had good talent on offense, but the talent was mediocre at best on defense. Sherman blew his only real chance to go to the NFC Championship at least in January of 2004 but hasn't had a realistic shot at it other than that season.

 

[warhawk]

IMO what we're having to live with this year is directly related more to Sherman the GM than Sherman the coach. He put us in a box financially unable to make any moves to address our needs and poor planning cost us both guards as well. As far as play calling goes I don't see much imaginatation or uniqueness to anything he does. I would like to see more passing on early downs especially to the tight ends rather than going to them mostly on 3rd downs looking for the yardage they need for a first. Maybe some runs out of passing formations once in while.
An example of all of the above came in the Bears game on the short interception for a touchdown. A very ordinary play call against a team that new Favre wouldn't get much time and the corner sat on it. Now Sherman had to know that the corners could afford to cheat with the lack of time the line was giving Favre. The same line he helped create with some of the moves he made as GM that left them no money to compete for either guard. The positives are he's no longer GM and we've got some money this year to improve the team so let's take it and roll.

 

[P@ck66]

First of all DePack...

I have not been "out debated" on this subject....

According to who? YOu ? Bruce? Now who is being "subjective"....???

And one can "objectively" judge a HC's "quality" by the body of work that he has produced, decisions he has made, etc..etc...

Trotting out alot of meaningless statistics is not being "objective", DePack...And believe it or not..there are ALOT of posters here..and true Packer fans who agree with this argument!

I like how you guys always say we are being "subjective" when pointing out the "facts" of Sherman's ineptitude and blunders over the years..and his trend towards passivity and playing it safe....when calling games and making decisions...

You can no longer hide Sherman behind the shallow lie of "statistics"....because these statistics have not translated into the most important thing...and that's playoff wins....

 

[DePack]

Whatever dude...as long as you relax.

digs....did I get that from you? I knew I heard it somewhere. I credited the foil remark. I will include the bulging vein remark in my bibliography.

This debate seems neverending.