How was that O in '15? If they had Sam slinging the ball and throwing INTS all over the field forcing the ball with that O as a rookie QB people would be apoplectic on here. The O is in Bates' hands. They get Sam the support and tools that will turn into another Bowles myth fast.
You can't have it both ways - giving Bowles credit for '15, but then then absolving him of responsibility now saying Bates controls the offense. In any case, the HC is where the buck stops and if a unit isn't performing, it falls on the HC to get it to, including firing the OC or DC if needed, or taking over control directly of that unit. But in '15 - Bowles very first year as a HC - they specifically got Chan Gailey as the OC and Bowles did defer the offense almost entirely to him. Then Gailey apparently removed himself as Bowle's "crutch" by retiring after that season, and it's probably not a coincidence that the offense has struggled for the most part since. Bowles doesn't know "O", and they need a HC who does.
We ran the ball down the Colts throats because Winston Hill, who was drafted by the Colts FYI, dominated the LOS and obliterated both the DL and Line backer on his side. He was the best player on the field that day and it was by miles.
Makes sense to run the ball when your playing with the lead. Makes sense to throw the ball when you’re trying to catch up. Is it really any wonder that the teams at the top throw less? Curious as to where those teams rank in rush yards per attempt.
True, but that doesn't change the fact that the Colts were playing to stop Namath's arm which opened up the running game. It was a classic execution of the "do what they least expect" strategy.
Not so. You're making declarations and basically using cliche's without context to make assumptions. You don't know any of that. The point is having talent dictates what's really happening. Even McCown put up career numbers with TB. That was with Morton. So I'm not using Bates as my only example either. I find it pretty humorous when fans use an example such as the Bears game to reinforce these cliche's and to prove they know more than a career NFL lifer. The same shit is prolly being done all over the NFL by fans over one game or even one decision by Football men that laugh at notions of these fans. It's the same as "Bowles doesn't play young players" or "the players don't play hard for him". This fucking guy has been studying defenses in the NFL for how long? Over Thirty Years? And you know Offense and he doesn't? Please omfg. It's about talent, situations, and circumstances that dictate things. With every coach out there. That's why McCown played over Petty and Hack when fans on here knew better then too.
You're right. But doesn't the HC have involvement in these areas? In the case of talent, he doesn't get to "buy the groceries", but he sure does have input, and he also has a role in deciding who gets playing time, and also in terms of coaching them to be better and to develop schemes that will maximize their talent and minimize their deficiencies. As for situations and circumstances, this is the area of concern that I and others have with Bowles since he became HC - he doesn't seem to be able to deal with changes to his game plan, or to be situationally aware. And it sure wasn't just the Chicago game! I realize that somebody who's a football lifer has massive amounts of experience and knowledge that I don't possess, but there's the "can't see the forest for the trees" syndrome that can come into play, and beyond that, just because someone has this experience and knowledge, doesn't mean they can effectively translate to their players. Ted Williams was arguably the greatest hitter in baseball (actually I think Ruth was, but still...), but he sucked as a coach and manager. I'm just passing along my opinions based on my observations, which of course are limited, but then again, so are all other fans POV.
Seem to doesn't mean he can't or doesn't. His persona doesn't help with peoples understanding whether he does or not. But one thing is for sure he couldn't care less about outsidrs opinion of him and that's okay, with me anyway. Ted Williams didn't suck at anything. It's funny the shit that has been said about the likes of Ted Williams and Bill Russell and even Belicek and Bill Walsh before they won by fans and shit people in the media. There's plenty to complain about or be concerned with. But anyone who thinks that this roster is enough to prove the second guesses has prolly got some time to think it over because my money is on him coming back. I think that is their plan. I believe they think they are close to turning it around to winning some of these games they lost and that they're a few players away. Whether he's good enough to get them to the top nobody knows. But if they get the right players this off season they prolly will be a much better team. If not people will get their wish. But then everything they did the last two years will be for naught and the cycle starts again. Hopefully there's a better foundation of players for the next guy to work with than with what Woody was doing when Bowles got here.
Well its clear that you believe in him and I don't. I'm not knowledgeable enough to prove my belief, and frankly hope I'm wrong. I don't really want to have to start over, or even tread water while the next guy comes up to speed, but I'm also too old, and have been patient too long to be satisfied with incremental progress. In the end, we're both going to view things how we want to view them, and how we satisfy our urges as fans. I respect your POV, I just don't share it.
No, it's not clear. I didn't say that. I'm stating my opinion of what the reality of the situation is. Just want to make that crystal clear to you. I tend not to second guess everything tho to prove I know something and I actually root for the men on the team. I also reserve judgement and don't react to shit off the cuff and definitely pay little attention to the attention getters in the media who get people to bite on bullshit.
[/QUOTE]It's about talent, situations, and circumstances that dictate things. With every coach out there. That's why McCown played over Petty and Hack when fans on here knew better then too.[/QUOTE] So under your logic Richie Kotite shouldve never been fired. His “situation” just sucked even though Parcells went 9-7 w virtually the same roster if not worse as Marvin Washington & Bobby Houston moved on..1-15 to 9-7..a few bounces one way or another “situationally” and who knows? Nobody thought Petty or Hack would do better.They just wanted an eye toward the future in another lost season & if things went well one of the young QBs start making strudes developmentally in order to give the organization some direction.There was absolutely no upside from a long term perspective to playing Mccown other than the proclamation of him being te best QB on the roster.Which meant nothing & still means nothing
I guess you're trying to quote me so I'll bite. Different situation But if you think somebody else wins the Bears game fine. I'm not relating this to Kottite even tho some of you guys want to.
Yea sorry about that..connection was giving me a hard time. Please explain how it was a different situation so i can better understand
Okay, but obviously they weren't. Maybe TB knew that? How about that? Btw, he stated several times that Petty was a better player on here. And others were mocking TB for not playing Petty. It didn't matter cause he can't play and the poor guy wanted to win a fucking game. And the post was about whether TB knew anything about O anyway.
[/QUOTE]Okay, but obviously they weren't. Maybe he knew that? How about that? Btw, he stated several times that Petty was a better player on here. And others were mocking TB for not playing Petty. It didn't matter cause he can't play and the poor guy wanted to win a fucking game. And the post was about whether TB knew anything about O anyway.[/QUOTE] Im not sure it can even be debated that TB knows very little about offense. When offensive players routinely say that Bowles is a “defensive coach”,when hes on record saying he doesnt talk to offensive players or attend all of the meetings,when hes on record as saying that hes scouting OL for the first time ever 4 years into his HC regime(after being a former scout mind you)...i mean maybe hes trying to get better acclimated which is fine but hes a defensive coach through & through who delegates anything & everything offensively. Whether he needs to know anything about O to be a HC is another discussion but everything weve come to know including from Bowles himself is that offense is not his thing
Not really a coincidence that the NFL changed its rules to favor offenses while the popularity of the league is in decline. KInd of reminds you of the steroid era after the MLB strike of '94, where 95 pound weaklings were hitting 30 HRs a season and scoring went through the roof. What many people do not know, is that the steroid era actually helped baseball's popularity (which was at an all-time low after the strike and why the league was reluctant to do anything about the steroid problem), since most casual fans prefer high scoring games. It's all about making the product as attractive and exciting as possible in order to maximize revenue. Unfortunately, today's games no longer have the intensity of the games several decades ago. But since many of today's younger fans never watched games from the '70s or '80s, they would not know the difference. Even in the high scoring AFL, defensive players were allowed to tackle and hit the opposition without flags flying all over the place. Today's NFL is too contrived, scripted and predictable, which has taken a large part of the enjoyment out of the game.
