Enter your username and password below to sign in to your PewterReport account.
x close
Gruden has never <insert 3 games to glory comments here> gotten the guys to make those plays since he's been here. I mean his offense has been awful for 5 years. That's a lot of time to be blaming the players who have changed and the one constant is the OC.
Quote from: keeponbucn on November 28, 2006, 10:13:43 AMHe makes some valid points that fans don't think about. I'm not calling for Kiffin's head because of the injuries and the same goes for Gruden, IMO. These coaches don't suck out loud in one off-season. The guy's right and it's what I've said all along, Gruden's job is to put players in position to make plays and it's just not happening right now. Gruden has never <insert 3 games to glory comments here> gotten the guys to make those plays since he's been here. I mean his offense has been awful for 5 years. That's a lot of time to be blaming the players who have changed and the one constant is the OC.
He makes some valid points that fans don't think about. I'm not calling for Kiffin's head because of the injuries and the same goes for Gruden, IMO. These coaches don't suck out loud in one off-season. The guy's right and it's what I've said all along, Gruden's job is to put players in position to make plays and it's just not happening right now.
The coaching decision that got us to that point was the jettisoning of Brad who didn't crater until this year in MIN so we were clearly early and pre-emptive on that because Brad wasn't "his kind of guy". From then on the succession of failures at that spot, and the instability, is largely on Gruden's head. He never got SoB to be more than SoB - I mean all the same flaws SoB had in DEN just kept right on happening. He never got Simms to develop. Disconcertingly, all three QB's regressed after playing for Gruden so there's a huge ton of fault in that mix.Great QB play is what elevates you into another level with the offense but NYG is 12th with shakey QB play, CHI is 13th, MIN is 14th. Miami is 16th with the Culpepper/Harrington mix of trash. DET is 18th with Kitna and 19 is SEA who has rolled a lot of Seneca Wallace. Gruden has only been better than any of those units one time. One more time, my gripe isn't that we're not #1 or #5 but that we're not better than bad.
Quote from: dalbuc on November 28, 2006, 10:42:03 AMThe coaching decision that got us to that point was the jettisoning of Brad who didn't crater until this year in MIN so we were clearly early and pre-emptive on that because Brad wasn't "his kind of guy". From then on the succession of failures at that spot, and the instability, is largely on Gruden's head. He never got SoB to be more than SoB - I mean all the same flaws SoB had in DEN just kept right on happening. He never got Simms to develop. Disconcertingly, all three QB's regressed after playing for Gruden so there's a huge ton of fault in that mix.Great QB play is what elevates you into another level with the offense but NYG is 12th with shakey QB play, CHI is 13th, MIN is 14th. Miami is 16th with the Culpepper/Harrington mix of trash. DET is 18th with Kitna and 19 is SEA who has rolled a lot of Seneca Wallace. Gruden has only been better than any of those units one time. One more time, my gripe isn't that we're not #1 or #5 but that we're not better than bad.I know I wanted Brad gone at that point, a change needed to be made. With the atrocious o-line we needed a QB with more mobility and stronger arm than BJ. It has nothing to do with "Gruden's guy." You are what you are and to think SoB would magically develop into not making bonehead decisions is crazy. You can only polish a turd so much, in the end it's still a turd. The injuries to Simms and SoB don't fall on Gruden. Simms play was marginal last year, I agree he hasn't developed but Gruden has a good track record of developing QB's. It's the talent level of those QB's, IMO. I agree the offense should be better than this but those teams you mention don't have a rookie QB. "Shaky QB play" is much different than rookie QB play and you of all people know this. Gruden is at fault for this, he's the HC but there are clear reasons as to why. Not sure about the whole QB regresssion. This hasn't really came out until Gruden got to Tampa. There are numbers to support it but the talent level at this position has been awful. Gruden's fault? Possibly, but he didn't draft Simms, SoB was forced into the starting role and Grads was drafted by Gruden.
Quote from: keeponbucn on November 28, 2006, 12:07:38 PM You can only polish a turd so much, in the end it's still a turd. The injuries to Simms and SoB don't fall on Gruden. Simms play was marginal last year, I agree he hasn't developed but Gruden has a good track record of developing QB's. Name 'em. He never "fixed" Jeff George or SoB, or Simms. His two big "success" stories are Brad and Gannon. Brad was a pro bowler before Gruden got here. Gannon was a guy who came out of nowhere but Gannon was never a bad QB, he was a just a Marty Schottenheimer QB so his TD #'s stunk and in Gruden's offense he tossed a lot more TD's so his rating soared. You can't claim he develops QB's and then dismiss George, Simms, SoB, Rob John, Ryan Leaf or King. OK, fine, none of them are good but a "good" coach should be able to raise their level of play. King is a walking disater but Steckel got something out of him - not a ton but something.
You can only polish a turd so much, in the end it's still a turd. The injuries to Simms and SoB don't fall on Gruden. Simms play was marginal last year, I agree he hasn't developed but Gruden has a good track record of developing QB's.
Quote from: keeponbucn on November 28, 2006, 02:35:53 PMGannon NEVER played like he did under Gruden weather he was in, Minn, KC. You can't pass it off just because it was Marty's old running style of play to help your argument. 1991 MIN 60% passer 2:1 TD:INT ratio, in KC he was a 63%, 60%, 56% and 58% passer. In Oakland he was a 59, 60, 65 % passer under Gruden and his best year was the year Gruden left. In other words, Gannon was a pretty effective QB before Gruden got a hold of him and conitnued to play well after he left. It wasn't a total miracle.Like you said, he's done nothing with the rest of those guys and, again, the standard, isn't to get them to play like Manning but getting them to not 100% suck whihc he's not done. There no evidence of developing QB's for him.
Gannon NEVER played like he did under Gruden weather he was in, Minn, KC. You can't pass it off just because it was Marty's old running style of play to help your argument.
Semi credible until he has this line "It’s well known that Kiffin has total autonomy over the defense, and the defense looks considerably worse than the offense these days. "Our offense is ranked 30th, the defense is 22nd. The offense in two "good games" has averaged 15 points whihc is still 2 below the scoring Mendoza Line.I love the "fire Gruden and you have to fire Kiffin" boogeyman. Is Kiffin so sacrosanct that people think tying Gruden to Kiffin saves him?
Quote from: BucINT20 on November 28, 2006, 03:05:49 PMit's not that Kiffin is the dealbreaker or the protector of gruden's job, just that it'd be hypocritical not to fire both. Kiffin is the Head Coach of the Defense, and if you're firing Gruden on the grounds that he has to be accountable, then you have to point to the futility of this D too...a lack of continuity and poor play in the trenches have caused failure on both sides, and if you hold it against one coach you should probably hold it against both.The difference being Kiffin has had 1 bad year in what, a decade now? Gruden has had 4 awful years in 5 and one very mediocre year in terms of his offense. That said, I think you do hold Kiffin responsible for a unit that can't tackle well and seems unable to consistently execute assignments in the secondary. Doesn't matter if it is bad coaching or bad players, he picked the coaches and he picked the players and one of those groups ain't doing thier jobs. I mean as banaged up as the DL is it looks a lot better than the secondary whihc looks awful depsite only the one injury.
it's not that Kiffin is the dealbreaker or the protector of gruden's job, just that it'd be hypocritical not to fire both. Kiffin is the Head Coach of the Defense, and if you're firing Gruden on the grounds that he has to be accountable, then you have to point to the futility of this D too...a lack of continuity and poor play in the trenches have caused failure on both sides, and if you hold it against one coach you should probably hold it against both.
Quote from: Cheveliar on November 28, 2006, 03:11:45 PMNo it sells papers and gets their fishwrap mentality out there. Wait, this is the pro-Gruden article and I thought the wraps were on the anti-Gruden mentality because it sold papers. I'm always confused by these conspiracies. Why did Ira Kaufman shoot JFK again?
No it sells papers and gets their fishwrap mentality out there.
I love the "fire Gruden and you have to fire Kiffin" boogeyman. Is Kiffin so sacrosanct that people think tying Gruden to Kiffin saves him?
That wasn't the point at all. I was only pointing out that if both coaches have units that are performing badly, then you have to hold both coaches responsible for their respective units.