White Tiger, you seem to discount Rodgers an awful lot. Is your position really that Rogers wouldn't have had success but for the fact that he sat behind Brett Favre? A guy - I might add - who by all accounts I've ever read has never had a minute of time for a backup. I find that hard to believe. I think Rodgers would too. He and Dilfer think he'll be a success.
1) He's the OC, not QBs coach.2) It's impressive that he had 5 first round draft picks in the FIRST PLACE. 3) You're making a bad argument by equating Tedford's ability to turn his college QBs into successful NFL QBs with his ability to be an NFL coordinator. Aside from the fact that his job was to develop his QBs for success at the college level (and win games), we have no idea what his QBs would have been like in other systems - maybe those 5 busts would never have been drafted under a different coordinator. Because Tedford had no control over what happened to these QBs when they left his school, you can't make these assumptions you illogically insist on making.And Tedford might be terrible, I have no idea. But it won't be for the reasons you suggest.
1) He's the OC, not QBs coach.2) It's impressive that he had 5 first round draft picks in the FIRST PLACE. 3) You're making a bad argument by equating Tedford's ability to turn his college QBs into successful NFL QBs with his ability to be an NFL coordinator. Aside from the fact that his job was to develop his QBs for success at the college level (and win games), we have no idea what his QBs would have been like in other systems - maybe those 5 busts would never have been drafted under a different coordinator. Because Tedford had no control over what happened to these QBs when they left his school, you can't make these assumptions you illogically insist on making.And Tedford might be terrible, I have no idea. But it won't be for the reasons you suggest.
good post all the way around but exactly to the part in bold
SOME of his pupils?Prior to Aaron Rodgers - who may/may not have received a check for endorsing Jeff Tedford - ALL FIVE 1st Round QB's - were BUSTS!The only thing that separated Rodgers from the others was the amount of time he spent on the bench, behind Brett Favre, and while working with Tom Clements - the Packers current offensive coordinator...These points I'm making are to support why I am not happy with the selection of Jeff Tedford as our OC - you can refuse to look at the information if you want. Like I said, I'm not trying to talk you into my position - I'm stating why I can't believe the Bucs, or any other NFL franchise would even interview him to run their offense.The point is - his system hid how bad they were in college - and he allowed NFL exec's and coaches to think that the awful QB they were considering (that he trained), were really good, so they put their reputations on the line because Tedford let them. Why would he do that? Because getting his players onto NFL rosters allowed him to recruit more and better players.He fooled them FIVE times - NONE of them were any good - and consequently, his reputation paid the price.He never developed a SINGLE quarterback.It's just that simple.It's like Steve Spurier QB's and WR's, or ANY quarterback that Bobby Petrino "tutored" they look good - until you draft them.Why is that pertinent? As it was learned by NFL execs, he simply had a gimmick that hid their flaws - while simplifying the game for them. It worked - in college. It never has in the pros.Ever.
The point is - his system hid how bad they were in college -
your faulting our future Offensive Coordinator for having an offensive system in college that succeeded despite its QBs?Priceless
I don't know if this has been said elsewhere in the thread as I just haven't had the time to read through it all, but I kind of actually find his QBs ending up as busts in the pros as a positive more than I see it as a negative.I mean, thinking about it, what that really says is that Tedford took a guy who shouldn't have been a 1st round pick and made him look like one. FIVE different times. Doesn't that say his system elevates the level of play of his QBs more often than not? Maximizes their talent to the point that they look much better than they really are. Isn't that what we say was the problem with the last regime, they didn't get everything they could out of their players? But here some folks are complaining that his QBs ended up as busts without recognizing the fact that he's the one that probably made them look better. Isn't that EXACTLY what we want?
I don't know if this has been said elsewhere in the thread as I just haven't had the time to read through it all, but I kind of actually find his QBs ending up as busts in the pros as a positive more than I see it as a negative.I mean, thinking about it, what that really says is that Tedford took a guy who shouldn't have been a 1st round pick and made him look like one. FIVE different times. Doesn't that say his system elevates the level of play of his QBs more often than not? Maximizes their talent to the point that they look much better than they really are. Isn't that what we say was the problem with the last regime, they didn't get everything they could out of their players? But here some folks are complaining that his QBs ended up as busts without recognizing the fact that he's the one that probably made them look better. Isn't that EXACTLY what we want?
White Tiger agrees . . he just doesn't know he agrees:
The point is - his system hid how bad they were in college -
???
This year will be an " I'm from Missouri year". My faith in the direction they are going now is back to the zero Morris level and then when I found out Lovie will have final say on personnel, it went minus. Why another defensive person who historically does squat with offense and OC's? Successful DC are a almost a dime a dozen.
I think we've all gotten to the "show me" point, US, but I think you don't need to be as worried about the "final say" issue. I'm typically a traditionalist on the GM-HC split, but I get the impression that what he's talking about is a lot less than the Bill Parcells/Belichick/Shanahan/Holmgren model, and more like the Andy Reid model, where the coach is a partner with the GM. To me, the relationship with the GM is going to be much more important than who gets final say - "final say" issues should only come up rarely. If it's more than that, than it's a problem that wouldn't change regardless of who has that power.
Yes, he was a pariah. You see, what is valuable to all of the team execs that drafted one of his FIVE busts - were their reputations. The coaches and the GM's did not survive the drafting of Akili Smith, Joey Harrington, Kyle Boller, Trent Dilfer, or David Carr - in the first round. He either never told them the truth - or he did not know the truth.That ruined Jeff Tedford's name in NFL circles. As I said - I do not believe Tedfords system will work in the NFL, because the system was so handily defeated in college - each time he played significant competition - neither his system, nor his QB could overcome the level of competition.That was on a level playng field - he only ever managed to make it to the Holliday Bowl, the Las Vegas Bowl and the Armed Forces Bowl.He never fooled enough teams to make a serious run of any kind. He has always been a bucketful of "meh"...
something oddly appropriate about this video . . cant quite put my finger on it though http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=86oajgI1L8o ;)
I don't know if this has been said elsewhere in the thread as I just haven't had the time to read through it all, but I kind of actually find his QBs ending up as busts in the pros as a positive more than I see it as a negative.I mean, thinking about it, what that really says is that Tedford took a guy who shouldn't have been a 1st round pick and made him look like one. FIVE different times. Doesn't that say his system elevates the level of play of his QBs more often than not? Maximizes their talent to the point that they look much better than they really are. Isn't that what we say was the problem with the last regime, they didn't get everything they could out of their players? But here some folks are complaining that his QBs ended up as busts without recognizing the fact that he's the one that probably made them look better. Isn't that EXACTLY what we want?
White Tiger agrees . . he just doesn't know he agrees:
No. he does not. He greatly disagrees. Immediately after they were drafted - immediately - it became clear that these QB's were not what the execs who drafted them were had led to belive.Perhaps I should explain to you the complex nature of playing QB in the NFL? Perhaps I overestimated you? Maybe you don't know that NFL defenses are quite a bit different than college defenses (even if you do play USC, Oregon, and Stanford...)?See, Tedfords QB's were immediately exposed by NFL defenses - he did not make them better, or they would have been good. If they had been good, they could have gotten better.NONE of the Tedford 5 - ever got better...ever.Not sure what you don't get about that?It's like you are trying hard not understand - while the deliberately overlooking the answer. Like you've already begun defending someone you don't know anything about.and I beg to differ - if Tedford fails - it will absolutely be because of something mentioned here - see, that's why I have reservations about Lovie for even considering him.
The point is - his system hid how bad they were in college -
???
Kind of like how Kyle Boller could throw a football through the goal posts - from his knees - at 70 yards out - but couldn't read the blitz...ever.
SOME of his pupils?Prior to Aaron Rodgers - who may/may not have received a check for endorsing Jeff Tedford - ALL FIVE 1st Round QB's - were BUSTS!The only thing that separated Rodgers from the others was the amount of time he spent on the bench, behind Brett Favre, and while working with Tom Clements - the Packers current offensive coordinator...These points I'm making are to support why I am not happy with the selection of Jeff Tedford as our OC - you can refuse to look at the information if you want. Like I said, I'm not trying to talk you into my position - I'm stating why I can't believe the Bucs, or any other NFL franchise would even interview him to run their offense.The point is - his system hid how bad they were in college - and he allowed NFL exec's and coaches to think that the awful QB they were considering (that he trained), were really good, so they put their reputations on the line because Tedford let them. Why would he do that? Because getting his players onto NFL rosters allowed him to recruit more and better players.He fooled them FIVE times - NONE of them were any good - and consequently, his reputation paid the price.He never developed a SINGLE quarterback.It's just that simple.It's like Steve Spurier QB's and WR's, or ANY quarterback that Bobby Petrino "tutored" they look good - until you draft them.Why is that pertinent? As it was learned by NFL execs, he simply had a gimmick that hid their flaws - while simplifying the game for them. It worked - in college. It never has in the pros.Ever.
You keeping saying the other 5, and ignore that Carr spent three years at Fresno AFTER Tedford left.
Billick on drafting QBs - he talks about Boller here. http://www.nfl.com/draft/story/09000d5d8286f0f3/article/how-to-draft-a-qb-part-4-the-kyle-boller-experience. That doesn't sound like a Tedford problem - it sounds like a Boller problem. I'd point out that elsewhere he says about Tedford (I can't find the article any more) that he's an excellent QB coach. And let's keep in mind that before Tedford got his hands on Boller (just a single year), Boller never in a million years gets drafted. He was never over 50% in terms of completion % before Tedford, and his int/td were underwater. So he fixes his mechanics, Boller improves a great deal, and that makes Tedford unsuitable? Ok.You used the word "pariah" I'd use the word scapegoat.
Wait, so White Tiger - are you saying he's going to be a bad OC because he lied about his players' ability? Because I'm struggling to understand what you are getting at.NFL GMs and Scouts have a job to do. They are professionals. They aren't going to draft a QB in the first round because a coach tells them to. They are going to draft a QB in the first round because their evaluation has told them that. There is not a college coach in this land who will throw his very own player under the bus when a scout comes calling. He isn't going to tell the team NOT to draft the guy number one if the team is making it known that they might. He's got loyalty to his players wanting to get that pay day and his team including the potential recruits who might go there because he had a 1st round pick.At this point however, I'm not even sure if you are calling him out for being a liar or really believe that Tedford should've made these guys into all-pros. Ultimately, I think it says more about him that these guys were exposed in the NFL so quickly, because again, he designed a system that not only hid flaws but made them look like number one picks. That is a GOOD thing for us, not bad, as he'll make our players better.Would it be better if Tedford had 6 hall of fame QBs he coached? Do you really think that would mean he had a better system or just better talent and he was carried along by these great QBs? Is that really what you are advocating for?
The point is - his system hid how bad they were in college -
your faulting our future Offensive Coordinator for having an offensive system in college that succeeded despite its QBs?Priceless
Haha +1.
You keeping saying the other 5, and ignore that Carr spent three years at Fresno AFTER Tedford left.
And he keeps saying that "he never developed a SINGLE quarterback" yet he developed Aaron Rodgers. The correct statement would be "only 1 of 5 QBs he coached who became 1st round picks became an elite NFL QB" (including Rodgers and leaving out Carr).
Wait, so White Tiger - are you saying he's going to be a bad OC because he lied about his players' ability? Because I'm struggling to understand what you are getting at.NFL GMs and Scouts have a job to do. They are professionals. They aren't going to draft a QB in the first round because a coach tells them to. They are going to draft a QB in the first round because their evaluation has told them that. There is not a college coach in this land who will throw his very own player under the bus when a scout comes calling. He isn't going to tell the team NOT to draft the guy number one if the team is making it known that they might. He's got loyalty to his players wanting to get that pay day and his team including the potential recruits who might go there because he had a 1st round pick.
Aside from the fact that I don't think Tedford needed to lie about a single thing (as JayAuggs points out these GMs don't take a coaches word) you better HOPE your coach will go to bat for you as a player. As a college head coach, I would lose a lot of respect for Tedford if his allegiance wasn't to his team and to his players. Doing his best to help them once they've left the program, even if you decide he lied (which you can't know), is not anything close to a black mark.
