ok not preferred but of the Phillips 3-4 guys... (I actually really do like the Phillips 3-4 for it's aggression and flexibility... PLUS you aren't tied to a fatass NT)

I am trying to think of someone who isn't currently coaching d-line at the NFL level... which pretty much leaves us with former d-linemen or college coaches... unless there is an asst d-line coach I'm unaware of.

Maybe this is where people think we should take one of those D-Line coaches and make them our coordinator???

New England has great ownership, Belichick and Tom Brady.

We have none of those.

Indianapolis has great ownership, a great front office (who built 3 contenders) and Peyton Manning.

Pittsburgh has great ownership, Polamalu, Hampton, and Roethlisberger.

Our problem is that we have no organizational philosophy aside from "Just do exactly what happened in New England".

Well, no two scenarios are exactly the same.

The reason why a guy like Mike Tomlin is a good coach is b/c he's a Tampa 2 guy but he realizes his talent works best in a 3-4, so he doesnt' **** with it. Pittsburgh also drafts to the strength of the draft (which is why they drafted multiple OL in the mid-late rounds last year, and got a guy like Mike Wallace and a better 5 tech at 32 than we did at 3)

Why isn't Clark Hunt a great owner?

It just blows my mind that you can point out several draft built cap savvy teams, Colts, Ravens, Eagles, Packers, Pittsburgh..

And we hire people from the franchise that tripped assbackwards into it's QB and masks it's draft failures by using it's big market cash.

One of those teams is not like the others, one of those teams does not have a repeatable strategy.

Because he hasn't proven jack yet. Other than the fact that he can be an executor of change.

My opinon he's a cheap ****er.

Clark Hunt hired the biggest name GM on the market, that's a bit concerning to me many times the biggest name guy out there isn't the best choice.

Okay, well if our ownership sucks, I don't know what you want. What is your solution other than cheering for Pittsburgh? These people are already taken, and the ones you're saying work in these organizations IMO are the same style of people we've taken from NE. With both groups its whether or not this person has anything to do with the success of the team.

I don't see any difference between doing what we're doing now, and doing what you're proposing other than basing it around different teams. The people are different, but its not like there's any less of a risk either way. I don't see a difference in risk hiring Weis than anyone in the Steeler organization that they are actually willing to part with. And a difference in talent is something neither you nor I can accurately measure, nor anyone else can. So that's a moot point.

I don't know about this. It would have been easy for him to mandate keeping Thigpen because Cassel was "too expensive."

If Clark was as cheap as you think there were a lot cheaper options than making Pioli the highest-paid GM in football.

Its like the draft. A lot of times the biggest name isn't the best choice. But at the same time everything you've been told about the person and everything you've seen tells you its the right move.

It took him forever to hire a GM. He was probably trying to squeeze every penny out of Pioli.

You should look at my post about what teams have a repeatable strategy and what team doesn't.

And then making Haley keep Gailey? Wtf?

I think he was performing his due diligence.