Welcome, Guest
Pewter Report  >>  Boards  >>  The Red Board (Moderators: 3rd String Kicker, PRPatrol)  >>  Topic: Gruden's future, the continuing saga « previous next »
Page: 1

DanTurksGhost

******
Hall of Famer

Posts : 19749
Offline
: November 28, 2006, 09:16:37 AM

http://www.tboblogs.com/index.php/sports/comments/grudens-future/

keeponbucn

******
Hall of Famer

Posts : 11481
Offline
#1 : November 28, 2006, 10:13:43 AM

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.


DanTurksGhost

******
Hall of Famer

Posts : 19749
Offline
#2 : November 28, 2006, 10:20:14 AM

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.

Similar to Dungy in Indy, I guess. Defensive guru, yet his defense has basically been poor since he's been there aside from one decent season, the same as Gruden and his offense.

keeponbucn

******
Hall of Famer

Posts : 11481
Offline
#3 : November 28, 2006, 10:27:29 AM

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.



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.


It's hard to argue with that but....I will.

Again, it all goes back to continutiy at the QB position Dal, there really is no arguing that. The teams with consistent success have staples at that position and the Bucs have clearly lacked this. Once BJ started sucking out loud early 2004, he had a decent 2003, it was time for a change. Simms comes in a get's injured the first game SoB goes in and plays efficient. Following year SoB gets injured and the team plays above their heads for most of the year (is that coaching Dal?).

You'll come back with "every team has injuries" but it's really what position gets injured that determines how it affects the team. CB and QB are crucial positions that can't be hidden. It's like you're naked in the middle of time square once your #1 QB goes down.

keeponbucn

******
Hall of Famer

Posts : 11481
Offline
#4 : November 28, 2006, 12:07:38 PM

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.


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.

Runole

*
Hall of Famer
******
Posts : 8997
Online
#5 : November 28, 2006, 01:28:36 PM

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.


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.


Very impressive posts obviously you failed to graduate with that degree in "Negativology" that so many have attained.

I believe it is most telling when dealing with a "Negativologist" that when "logical reasons" are given for a lack of success on any given year the quick incessent reply is always   "I don't want to hear about EXCUSES"  Clearly the statement of someone that has severe "entitlement issues" , "questionable self- worth tied to a football teams wins and losses", or is a "self- professed expert" ie "MONDAY MORNING QB" on any decision that doesn't work.


But what do I know??  I am just a fan that sat through a 26 game losing streak never missing a game and continued to follow the Bucs all the way through the 80's and early 90's to the current date.  JMHO but I like the organization of Gruden and Allen and company.


I would shudder at the thoughts of losing them for some of the "nincompoops" being currently proferred by current media types still angry at being shut out of the Bucs organization by Gruden and Company.  It appears that their "golden child" Richie MK is not doing so well after all!!

keeponbucn

******
Hall of Famer

Posts : 11481
Offline
#6 : November 28, 2006, 02:35:53 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.

Who could fix SoB or Jeff George? There's not a coach in the history of the NFL that could.

Rob Johnson? He was here one year and played as efficient as Rob Johson could.

The ONLY QB I can see fitting your side is Simms because Gruden's had time with him. The others weren't with him long enough to judge.

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.

keeponbucn

******
Hall of Famer

Posts : 11481
Offline
#7 : November 28, 2006, 03:00:13 PM

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.

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.


It's funny you leave out the fact the he tossed 12 TD's in 91 with 6 ints.

Gannon never came close to throwing 20+ TD's in a season until when? 1999 when he threw 24 with 14 ints. THe next two years he threw for 28 and 27 before Gruden left not to mention averaging 3,700 yrds those 3 years under Gruden. Gannon never sniffed 3,000 yrds comign close in 1998 - 2,300.

You can twist stats all day long to support your side Dal, I'm not saying what Gruden is an offensive genius or the greatest coach ever, I'm saying he's PROVEN.

Pick6

*
Hall of Famer
******
Posts : 5150
Offline
#8 : November 28, 2006, 03:05:49 PM

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?

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.

i don't think ownership cares about the relative rank of either unit, they both stink and they both lose games...besides, if you want to talk rankings, you have to look at progress from last year....the defense, with the same players that made the unit #1 last year are now fundamentally poor and lacking in confidence....say what you want about player decline, but on a veteran unit, you'd expect sounder play and better adjustments from game to game...i'm not making a case to fire kiffin, just making a case that the mitigating circumstances are similar on both sides of the ball.

W's are the stat ownership is interested in, and neither coach has put a unit on the field that can consistently win games, but neither coach is far away. again, i think the owners aren't surprised by the step back this year (except the magnitude of it), so i don't think it's going to be held against either coach in terms of a decision to fire this winter.

cheveliar

******
Hall of Famer

Posts : 19366
Offline
#9 : November 28, 2006, 03:11:45 PM

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?

No it sells papers and gets their fishwrap mentality out there.

Without Carl Nix it feels like our running game just took a death blow to the face!


cheveliar

******
Hall of Famer

Posts : 19366
Offline
#10 : November 28, 2006, 03:16:23 PM


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.


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.

I agree the secondary does stink, but it's a direct corelation to how bad the DL sucks...that looks so much better...can't take one without the other...

Without Carl Nix it feels like our running game just took a death blow to the face!


cheveliar

******
Hall of Famer

Posts : 19366
Offline
#11 : November 28, 2006, 03:17:23 PM

No 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?

LOL, I can't stand those guys...so I probably shouldn't have posted since I didn't even read it...

Without Carl Nix it feels like our running game just took a death blow to the face!


Pick6

*
Hall of Famer
******
Posts : 5150
Offline
#12 : November 28, 2006, 03:24:06 PM

ultimately, dal, i don't see kiffin going thru a 3rd head coach in tampa, nor do i think another HC out there would be willing to inherit a D-coordinator (even an amazing one) the way gruden was, especially with this defense on the brink of a rebuild. 

it's not a boogeyman to help save gruden, i just don't think it's likely (whether it's his choice or the new guy's) that kiffin sticks around to work with a new HC, a new set of assistant coaches (barry will be gone, as will at least one of the new guys IMO), and a new set of players...the only guy he'll recognize in meeting rooms is ronde barber.

goto11

*
Starter
****
Posts : 621
Offline
#13 : November 28, 2006, 03:34:03 PM

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.


DanTurksGhost

******
Hall of Famer

Posts : 19749
Offline
#14 : November 28, 2006, 03:47:28 PM

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.

By the way, in case you guys didn't know, the article posted above was written by Scott Kramer, aka "goto11" here on the forum. So therefore you get the answer directly from the horse's mouth, and you can quiz him all you like about what he wrote.

You can check out his site, too:
http://www.bucstats.com/
Page: 1
Pewter Report  >>  Boards  >>  The Red Board (Moderators: 3rd String Kicker, PRPatrol)  >>  Topic: Gruden's future, the continuing saga « previous next »
:

Hide Tools Show Tools