I want our coach to be an offense guy. The league has changed and continues to change. The rule changes still haven't reached their full fruition. People are still learning how to exploit them. And there will be more changes coming down the road as Gooddell continues his quest to turn the NFL into the NBA. It is going to get harder and harder to succeed based off of a good defense as having a "good" defense is going to become harder and harder to achieve, and will have less and less impact as time goes on.
Dungy won with offense in IND. Bellichek with offense in NE. Being a "defense" guy doesn't mean you are a 3 yards and a cloud of dust guy. Maybe Lovie will stifle the defense, maybe he has learned but defense vs offense (see also Billick) doesn't matter in an HC.
when picking potential HCs, Bucs fans think its still 2002? . . . since when are the Bucs so good that Lovie is a definite no go? How about we get to "respectable" before we worry about nuclear Super Bowls? Like it or not the Bucs are starting over
when picking potential HCs, Bucs fans think its still 2002? . . . since when are the Bucs so good that Lovie is a definite no go? How about we get to "respectable" before we worry about nuclear Super Bowls? Like it or not the Bucs are starting over
Every other team not hiring Lovie Smith will be saying "We think this guy can take a team to the SB" (not a lot of SB coaches lying around this year), whoever hires Lovie will say "We KNOW he can take a team to the SB.". That is no small feat to be able to say because SB coaches aren't just running around out there in the wild for us to pick from. Hell, if not Lovie, get me Wisenhunt.
when picking potential HCs, Bucs fans think its still 2002? . . . since when are the Bucs so good that Lovie is a definite no go? How about we get to "respectable" before we worry about nuclear Super Bowls? Like it or not the Bucs are starting over
So we should hire hoping for mediocrity instead of doing what the 31 other teams do and try to find a guy that will take us to the promised land sooner rather than later.
when picking potential HCs, Bucs fans think its still 2002? . . . since when are the Bucs so good that Lovie is a definite no go? How about we get to "respectable" before we worry about nuclear Super Bowls? Like it or not the Bucs are starting over
So we should hire hoping for mediocrity instead of doing what the 31 other teams do and try to find a guy that will take us to the promised land sooner rather than later.
all I read is a bunch of "no Lovie" and not any "no Lovie because Coach "X" is available," . . . but to your point . . . since when in Buc land is going to the SB and playoffs "hoping for mediocrity"? Have you been watching the team the last few years? I am not even a big Lovie fan, I dont know enough about him to be a big fan, but come on . . 4 or 5 division titles in 9 years, 84-66 record, NFC Champs . . . . does that sound like "mediocrity" to a Buc fan?
I have no problem with a solid defensive coach. Looking at the NFC playoffs this year Seattle, 9ers and Panthers all rode their defenses to pretty successful years.
when picking potential HCs, Bucs fans think its still 2002? . . . since when are the Bucs so good that Lovie is a definite no go? How about we get to "respectable" before we worry about nuclear Super Bowls? Like it or not the Bucs are starting over
So we should hire hoping for mediocrity instead of doing what the 31 other teams do and try to find a guy that will take us to the promised land sooner rather than later.
all I read is a bunch of "no Lovie" and not any "no Lovie because Coach "X" is available," . . . but to your point . . . since when in Buc land is going to the SB and playoffs "hoping for mediocrity"? Have you been watching the team the last few years? I am not even a big Lovie fan, I dont know enough about him to be a big fan, but come on . . 4 or 5 division titles in 9 years, 84-66 record, NFC Champs . . . . does that sound like "mediocrity" to a Buc fan?
4 or 5 division titles huh?That's impressive, considering he only had 3 in the 9 years in Chicago where did the extras come from?1 playoff berth in his last 6 seasons as HC while in a division with the Vikes & Lions, having one of the worst offense in all of football during his tenure, way to go, that's elite right there. No need to strive for more, we have our guy. ::)
I have no problem with a solid defensive coach. Looking at the NFC playoffs this year Seattle, 9ers and Panthers all rode their defenses to pretty successful years.
That logic thing just don't work around these parts. According to half the posters here if you can't score 50 points a game you shouldn't even bother to show up on Sunday.
when picking potential HCs, Bucs fans think its still 2002? . . . since when are the Bucs so good that Lovie is a definite no go? How about we get to "respectable" before we worry about nuclear Super Bowls? Like it or not the Bucs are starting over
So we should hire hoping for mediocrity instead of doing what the 31 other teams do and try to find a guy that will take us to the promised land sooner rather than later.
all I read is a bunch of "no Lovie" and not any "no Lovie because Coach "X" is available," . . . but to your point . . . since when in Buc land is going to the SB and playoffs "hoping for mediocrity"? Have you been watching the team the last few years? I am not even a big Lovie fan, I dont know enough about him to be a big fan, but come on . . 4 or 5 division titles in 9 years, 84-66 record, NFC Champs . . . . does that sound like "mediocrity" to a Buc fan?
4 or 5 division titles huh?That's impressive, considering he only had 3 in the 9 years in Chicago where did the extras come from?1 playoff berth in his last 6 seasons as HC while in a division with the Vikes & Lions, having one of the worst offense in all of football during his tenure, way to go, that's elite right there. No need to strive for more, we have our guy. ::)
who said "elite" you said "hoping for mediocrity" lol. Lovie has THREE division titles in 9 years . . we have ZERO in how many years? He took the team to the SB, right? Do you disagree with 84-66? lolBtw, who is the "Coach X" you are offering as an available better alternative for our "not even sniffing mediocrity" team?
Well I'm pretty sure the Seahawks, 49ers, and Panthers don't have the 32nd offense in the league. Nothing wrong with defensive oriented teams but still got to be at least a middle of the pack offense. The league favors offense so those Tony Dungy days are a thing of the past.
I could swear I just heard a whole lot of talk about how the head coach is ultimately responsible. And then, just like that, he can only play the hand he's dealt. A lot of talk, too, about how it takes offense to win in today's NFL. And then, just like that, respectability became the key issue.Staggering levels of delusion manifesting itself as hypocrisy around here.
I want our coach to be an offense guy. The league has changed and continues to change. The rule changes still haven't reached their full fruition. People are still learning how to exploit them. And there will be more changes coming down the road as Gooddell continues his quest to turn the NFL into the NBA. It is going to get harder and harder to succeed based off of a good defense as having a "good" defense is going to become harder and harder to achieve, and will have less and less impact as time goes on.
Dungy won with offense in IND. Bellichek with offense in NE. Being a "defense" guy doesn't mean you are a 3 yards and a cloud of dust guy. Maybe Lovie will stifle the defense, maybe he has learned but defense vs offense (see also Billick) doesn't matter in an HC.
The problem with those examples is that Lovie has had a LOT of time as a HC, and has never shown he can "win with offense". You would think that if he was going to learn how it wouldn't take a decade to do it.Lovie's a good guy and a good coach. He's got a lot of good reasons for hiring him and I wouldn't be surprised or upset if we did hire him. I just prefer a different direction that I think will have better results. He's a "safe" pick to me.
We'll I can only speak for myself but Lovie isn't my first choice. Mainly for the concerns you raise. But he's still an upgrade IMO,
Well I'm pretty sure the Seahawks, 49ers, and Panthers don't have the 32nd offense in the league. Nothing wrong with defensive oriented teams but still got to be at least a middle of the pack offense. The league favors offense so those Tony Dungy days are a thing of the past.
Yes, they all have a gamechanger at QB. That's really what matters most.
The problem with those examples is that Lovie has had a LOT of time as a HC, and has never shown he can "win with offense". You would think that if he was going to learn how it wouldn't take a decade to do it.Lovie's a good guy and a good coach. He's got a lot of good reasons for hiring him and I wouldn't be surprised or upset if we did hire him. I just prefer a different direction that I think will have better results. He's a "safe" pick to me.
I appreciate and do understand your concerns. They are my worries as well and trust me no one places a higher preium on having a strong passing game than I have over the years. I am not saying he can win with offense or is willing to just that being a "defense guy", and Dungy was for years and years here, doesn't condemn you to being a bad offensive coach. I have the same worry that he's not gonna be able to let go of it the way Dungy and bellichek did. I think the Tedford thing shows a willingness to reach beyond his "comfort" zone and gives me hope.
