Quote:
Originally Posted by WhiteWhale
Cleveland was a mess. Miami was a mess. There was far too much wrong with the players on the field for anyone to form a decisive conclusion about the man's abilities as a coordinator.
All of you people freaking out about this are the same exact reeruns who say you NEED a franchise QB. Derp dee derp, but OC's who are shackled with terrible QB's are bad, and ones who take jobs with great QB's are smart?
Am I the ONLY person who sees the rather stupid circular logic that kind of assessment is based around?
Now here's why I don't like it: Pioli did the safe thing AGAIN. He hired what he was familiar with. Here's another thing that pisses me off: I think this has a lot to do with Matt Cassel. We bring in another Earhardt-Perkins guy because it's the only offense Cassel knows and he apparently struggled with the minor changes in philosophy between NE, Haley, and Weis (all of whom run the same system!). Not only that, but because the system changes so little it doesn't create a learning curve that would expose Cassel's lack of actual ability in a competition with another QB.
The positive in this is that it would require the least transition because it's the same system.
The problem is that his background won't excite anyone. Still though, fans over-rate coordinators. Talent is more important. Get a better QB. As long as he understands 'run on 3rd and short" and 'pass on 3rd and long", it's up to the talent to execute. I'm sick of us blaming coordinators instead of fixing the talent issues. We did it with the defense during the DV years. We need a better QB, and until we get one we'll be cycling through OC's.
I don't like the hire, but it's not so much an indictment on Daboll's abilities, which I think are hard to discern. I don't like it because it's exactly who I expected us to hire. Safe and predictable. Blah.
|
I disagree. I think football is won with execution, and execution is the sum of coaching, repetitions and muscle memory