Welcome, Guest
Pewter Report  >>  Boards  >>  The Red Board (Moderators: 3rd String Kicker, PRPatrol)  >>  Topic: Tampa Tribune editorial calls for Gruden's ouster « previous next »
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 ... 8

mjs020294

******
Hall of Famer

Posts : 2245
Offline
#30 : December 16, 2006, 03:06:15 PM

I would guess that over 80% of Buccs fans want Gruden out now.

I think that depends on your definition of a Buc fan.    I think if you include all the recent bandwagon fans, you would be accurate.  But if you only counted the votes of the people who migrated over from the old sombrero as season ticket holders (the long time fans), no way is it anywhere close to 80%.

80% was a low estimate, there isn't a lot of support for Gruden around town these days Java.

I stick to my original statement.   I think if you took a poll of the long time fans, it would be less than 50%.

The longterm fans are the ones who tend to cling to the Dungy-McKay era.  ;)  It matters not how long you have supported the team, all fans have a right to express their opinion.


Itchalot

*
Hall of Famer
******
Posts : 5747
Offline
#31 : December 16, 2006, 03:12:06 PM

We call that living in the past.


JavaBuc

******
Hall of Famer

Posts : 28661
Offline
#32 : December 16, 2006, 03:13:30 PM

The longterm fans are the ones who tend to cling to the Dungy-McKay era.

I don't agree with that.  I think the ones who cling to the Dungy-McKay era are the fans who came on board in 1997 with the uniform change and start of the successful years.   The long term fans I'm talking about are the ones who had season tickets back in the John McKay through Sam Wyche days as well.   Those fans are the ones who don't overreact.

I agree with itchalot's analysis.

mjs020294

******
Hall of Famer

Posts : 2245
Offline
#33 : December 16, 2006, 03:20:13 PM

The longterm fans are the ones who tend to cling to the Dungy-McKay era.

I don't agree with that.  I think the ones who cling to the Dungy-McKay era are the fans who came on board in 1997 with the uniform change and start of the successful years.   The long term fans I'm talking about are the ones who had season tickets back in the John McKay through Sam Wyche days as well.   Those fans are the ones who don't overreact.

I agree with itchalot's analysis.

Stop living in the past, Tampa has changed a lot since then.  The population of the area has doubled in the last twenty years and at least 50% of the fan base weren't here 15-20 years ago.   

If you were here 24/7 and experienced the local media and water-cooler talk, you would know there isn't much support for Gruden anymore.  Even the people that want him to stick around wouldn't really shed a tear if he left in a couple of months.


JavaBuc

******
Hall of Famer

Posts : 28661
Offline
#34 : December 16, 2006, 03:32:20 PM

If you were here 24/7 and experienced the local media and water-cooler talk, you would know there isn't much support for Gruden anymore. Even the people that want him to stick around wouldn't really shed a tear if he left in a couple of months.

That's a definite advantage I have over the people living in Tampa.   I'm not affected by the negative media there (it's always negative).   Although I was never affected by it in the past even when I was there.   I'm not one who listens to the media much, I go with what I think is the sensible thing to do.    I think the sensible thing to do is to keep Gruden.   

Believe me, I know the "water cooler" talk in Tampa.   The average Tampa fan knows very little about football.   All they know is the team is losing so a change must be necessary.   But really they know squat.

watson

*
Hall of Famer
******
Posts : 5169
Offline
#35 : December 16, 2006, 04:14:18 PM

Wow.  Another insightful article in the Tampa Tribune.  Didn't they recently publish an article that said Gruden was trying to go to Dallas as a replacement for Parcells.  Then when the writer was challenged, didn't he say that Dallas was just an example and not a fact.  I take everything they publish with a grain of salt.

Truths:
1.  Never have an argument with an idiot.  They will drag you down to their level and then beat you with their experience.
2.  For some it would be better if they remained silent and be thought a fool than to speak and erase all doubt.

blitz

*
Pro Bowler
*****
Posts : 1810
Offline
#36 : December 16, 2006, 04:23:36 PM

Sure Bucs could be winless, but they also could have a much better record if a few things fall their way. I agree, controversial editorials are designed to get people talking and sell papers. Plus, from what all the locals here have said, the Tribune never liked Gruden anyway. Maybe they're hoping a new coach will spoon feed reporters stories so they don't have to work like McKay did.

Exactly.  The sports writers still miss the regular handouts from Rich.  It doesn't work for him in Atlanta with Blank like it did with the Glazers.  Also, fans who understand the game generally are not of the oust Gruden bandwagon.   They understand that with most of the league getteing higher draft picks than the Bucs over the last five years, this was bound to happen.   They also understand the rash of injuries including the QB who was a wonderboy in the eyes of many, have left the team very shorthanded.

naplesbuc

*****
Pro Bowler

Posts : 1235
Offline
#37 : December 16, 2006, 04:28:12 PM

The team was 0-3 with Simms so the QB decisions made in the offseason, while significant, had no impact on the general direction of this season.  Let's fact it, this season was over in terms of playoffs at that point, with two out of those three losses at home and with the brutal schedule the rest of the way.

BUCFAN4LIFE

*****
Pro Bowler

Posts : 1832
Offline
#38 : December 16, 2006, 04:29:02 PM

I find it stunning and breathtaking that the Tampa Tribune and The St. Petersburg Times ALWAYS fail to mention Tampa Bay's salary cap woes over the past couple of years. The major, overriding factor in failing to keep the likes of John Lynch, Joe Jurevicius, Warren Sapp, Thomas Jones and others is that the Bucs couldn't afford to keep them and attempt to upgrade the team in other areas that needed upgrading.

I will play devils advocate a little here though SR;  They didn't have the money to match the $10 million deal Thomas Jones received from Chicago, but they had $20 million for Charlie Garner.   ???



Widely misconstrued- Garner was here on a 2 year deal that was heavily backloaded for 2 more. Jones Signed a more spread out deal worth 11mil. In the first two years both earned with their SB spread over the life roughly 2-2.5mil per- They basically made the same until year 3 where likely Garner would have been done or restructured.

As for the 2, TJ was coming off 3 good games and before that was an unknown 1st round bust for the AZ Cards. Garner had been a hell of  back, was older and coming off injury, but had proven over and over he was dual threat and a stud in Gruden's WCO. So based on that it's a toss up on which back you take. Jones seems risky becasue he hasn't fully proven anything, Garner was older and was fully recovered from a knee injury but age and previous injury make him a risk as well. They both play Garner is injured but who would have thought he would have blown out his good knee. Bad luck hits us and Jones turns out to be a good pickup. But unless Gruden and Allen were freeaking Nostradamus who could have known.

The whole team was excitied about what Garner brought and I can still remember Kiffen saying  he was gonna have Garner play both ways and make him a LB.

Hindsight is 20/20


keeponbucn

******
Hall of Famer

Posts : 11481
Offline
#39 : December 16, 2006, 05:09:48 PM

what a waste of time that was. It's not even worth the effort to post what's entirely wrong about the article.....it's pretty sad that they would post this dribble but not suprising.

Ladyfan

*
Hall of Famer
******
Posts : 6756
Offline
#40 : December 16, 2006, 05:44:45 PM

I was shocked out of my socks when I saw the editorial.  I called them right away and gave them my 2 cents....as if they care!!!!!

Ignorant sobs.....Good points PR!!!!!




Guest
#41 : December 16, 2006, 05:46:46 PM

I respect a few people at the Trib, but basically it's Carter Gaddis and Mark Topkin (to a lesser extent)

mjs020294

******
Hall of Famer

Posts : 2245
Offline
#42 : December 16, 2006, 05:50:14 PM

I will play devils advocate a little here though SR;  They didn't have the money to match the $10 million deal Thomas Jones received from Chicago, but they had $20 million for Charlie Garner.   ???

Widely misconstrued- Garner was here on a 2 year deal that was heavily backloaded for 2 more. Jones Signed a more spread out deal worth 11mil. In the first two years both earned with their SB spread over the life roughly 2-2.5mil per- They basically made the same until year 3 where likely Garner would have been done or restructured.


Garner signed a $24 million deal, with a $4 million signing bonus.  I can't find the salary breakdown but I think he made $2 million in 2004.  Jones's contract was a VERY affordable deal even for a good back-up RB:

Jones   
2004   800,000
2005   1,800,000
2006   2,250,000
2007   2,225,000
   
Signing Bonus: 3,500,000
Total   10,575,000

And it isn't a case of hindsight, practically everyone I know hated the deal back in 2004.  The sight of Warren Sapp chasing Garner down AND WINNING was one of the most sickening things I have seen in the last few years.


BucsGuru

*
Hall of Famer
******
Posts : 6397
Offline
#43 : December 16, 2006, 05:53:09 PM

I will play devils advocate a little here though SR; They didn't have the money to match the $10 million deal Thomas Jones received from Chicago, but they had $20 million for Charlie Garner. ???

I've often wondered about that myself.

It is simply because Garner understood Gruden and his system, Gruden understood what a dual-RB threat Garner could be, and Garner was a better RB in the WCO than TJ was esteemed to be.  Garner, when he was healthy, was a nice little back.  He ran hard, could juke with the best of them, and could catch as well as any RB with good hands could.  I always called Garner the Dervish, for all the spin moves he used, and thought he was a very good shifty back.  TJ wasn't a bad back, busted his hiney, but it all came down to who Gruden preferred.  IS that such a sin?

I mean in hindsight, it looks, and is bad.  But back then, I was stoked about Garner, despite his age and gas tank.  I wish we all could have seen him run more than he did...we might not be starting up all these TJ threads. 



Could not resist this Boid.  It is so obvious you have Blinders on when it come to Gruden.  Can't you just agree that this was a bad move?  Whether or not Jones "fit the system" is pointless; he went on to be productive with another team.
The game of football is about wins and losses, not excuses.  PR has gone to great lengths to bring out the issues that would argue the reasoning behind our teams failures, but at some point you have to just realize that Gruden is not getting it done for the Bucs.
This is not a fire Gruden thread, just a reality check.

mjs020294

******
Hall of Famer

Posts : 2245
Offline
#44 : December 16, 2006, 05:56:59 PM

It is so obvious you have Blinders on when it come to Gruden.  Can't you just agree that this was a bad move?  Whether or not Jones "fit the system" is pointless; he went on to be productive with another team.
The game of football is about wins and losses, not excuses.  PR has gone to great lengths to bring out the issues that would argue the reasoning behind our teams failures, but at some point you have to just realize that Gruden is not getting it done for the Bucs.

This is not a fire Gruden thread, just a reality check.

I have to agree with this ^^   OMG I need a lie down.

Page: 1 2 3 4 5 ... 8
Pewter Report  >>  Boards  >>  The Red Board (Moderators: 3rd String Kicker, PRPatrol)  >>  Topic: Tampa Tribune editorial calls for Gruden's ouster « previous next »
:

Hide Tools Show Tools