Head Coach Discussion Thread

Team Discussions regarding games, players, coaches, or anything else related to Buccaneer Football.
post

Re: Head Coach Discussion Thread

Postby theBKwhopper » Thu Dec 28, 2017 5:20 pm

NavyBuc wrote:Gruden had a good quarterback in Oakland, and he took a 4-12 team and turned them into a Super Bowl contender in a couple years. You can say he took Dungy's team to the Super Bowl, but then you'd also have to say Callahan took Gruden's team to the Super Bowl. Either way, he got to a championship with his team.

My brother and I have a running joke that Gruden is the only coach to take two teams to the SuperBowl in the same year. Lol
User avatar
theBKwhopper
 
Posts: 3917
Joined: Sun Jan 18, 2015 3:39 am
Has thanked: 6 times
Been thanked: 76 times

Re: Head Coach Discussion Thread

Postby terrytate » Thu Dec 28, 2017 5:39 pm

Buc You wrote:This has to be one of the only times in history that people believe that someone will actually be better at something after not doing it at all for a decade.



It worked for **** Vermeil.
User avatar
terrytate
 
Posts: 2188
Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2015 1:49 am
Has thanked: 11 times
Been thanked: 89 times

Re: Head Coach Discussion Thread

Postby terrytate » Thu Dec 28, 2017 5:45 pm

theBKwhopper wrote:
NavyBuc wrote:Gruden had a good quarterback in Oakland, and he took a 4-12 team and turned them into a Super Bowl contender in a couple years. You can say he took Dungy's team to the Super Bowl, but then you'd also have to say Callahan took Gruden's team to the Super Bowl. Either way, he got to a championship with his team.

My brother and I have a running joke that Gruden is the only coach to take two teams to the SuperBowl in the same year. Lol



Yup. My take is this, the Raiders would likely have made and won the Super Bowl in 2002 if Gruden was there. Callahan changed nothing, he mostly just kept things rolling as Gruden left them as best he could. It's why Gruden was able to exploit them so easily in the Super Bowl, Callahan didn't know how to change things up and keep it working.

Now, Does anyone really think the Bucs win a Super Bowl in 2002 with Dungy and Shaun King as the QB?
User avatar
terrytate
 
Posts: 2188
Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2015 1:49 am
Has thanked: 11 times
Been thanked: 89 times

Re: Head Coach Discussion Thread

Postby MJW » Thu Dec 28, 2017 7:23 pm

terrytate wrote:
theBKwhopper wrote:My brother and I have a running joke that Gruden is the only coach to take two teams to the SuperBowl in the same year. Lol



Yup. My take is this, the Raiders would likely have made and won the Super Bowl in 2002 if Gruden was there. Callahan changed nothing, he mostly just kept things rolling as Gruden left them as best he could. It's why Gruden was able to exploit them so easily in the Super Bowl, Callahan didn't know how to change things up and keep it working.

Now, Does anyone really think the Bucs win a Super Bowl in 2002 with Dungy and Shaun King as the QB?


Brad Johnson was already in place, but yeah, valid point. Callahan made the Superbowl for the same reason Barry Switzer won a Superbowl in Dallas. He came in and had success with the last guy's team and culture. Gruden changed the culture here.

I think with Gruden, how excited you are depends a ton on how much you blame him for the bad drafting and lack of development from those picks. If you think he hand-picked these guys, you're worried. If you think they were good players who he couldn't develop, you're worried. If you think he got handed a lot of these guys and they couldn't play, you're not so worried.

FWIW, if Licht sticks around (all indications are he will) I don't think he'd be okay with being a yes-man for Gruden's personnel ideas.
Image
User avatar
MJW
 
Posts: 8303
Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2015 5:17 am
Location: Nebraska
Has thanked: 187 times
Been thanked: 358 times

Re: Head Coach Discussion Thread

Postby Naismith » Thu Dec 28, 2017 7:30 pm

I think the Bucs could have won a Super Bowl with Dungy. Sometimes things just don't bounce right, like the 2000 NFC Championship Game.
User avatar
Naismith
 
Posts: 1349
Joined: Mon Sep 05, 2016 8:51 pm
Has thanked: 62 times
Been thanked: 85 times

Re: Head Coach Discussion Thread

Postby Mountaineer Buc » Thu Dec 28, 2017 8:40 pm

Naismith wrote:I think the Bucs could have won a Super Bowl with Dungy. Sometimes things just don't bounce right, like the 2000 NFC Championship Game.

Bert Emmanuel in 30 years will be screaming from a nursing home.

I CAUGHT THAT BALL!!
Image
User avatar
Mountaineer Buc
 
Posts: 12067
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2015 1:15 pm
Location: Crestucky
Has thanked: 124 times
Been thanked: 593 times

Re: Head Coach Discussion Thread

Postby DanTurksGhost » Thu Dec 28, 2017 11:34 pm

FYI:

As good a coordinator as Monte Kiffin was -- and he WAS a very good coordinator -- Jon Gruden elevated the defense when he got here. He invigorated his defense, and he challenged his defense. As QB Killa once very accurately said: "No Gruden, no Super Bowl".
User avatar
DanTurksGhost
 
Posts: 1444
Joined: Wed Sep 14, 2016 5:56 pm
Has thanked: 22 times
Been thanked: 52 times

Re: Head Coach Discussion Thread

Postby terrytate » Fri Dec 29, 2017 2:21 am

Naismith wrote:I think the Bucs could have won a Super Bowl with Dungy. Sometimes things just don't bounce right, like the 2000 NFC Championship Game.



Are you kidding? We held what was at the time the best ever offense to 13 points. We were just so bad on offense under Dungy that we could not win that game. We probably had the worst offense in the league, the only reason we weren't statistically the worst that year was the incredible defense giving short fields.

Honestly, does anyone really think Tony Dungy wins a title if he goes to any other team than the one with Peyton Manning and Marvin Harrison already in place?
User avatar
terrytate
 
Posts: 2188
Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2015 1:49 am
Has thanked: 11 times
Been thanked: 89 times

Re: Head Coach Discussion Thread

Postby theBKwhopper » Fri Dec 29, 2017 2:52 am

terrytate wrote:
Naismith wrote:I think the Bucs could have won a Super Bowl with Dungy. Sometimes things just don't bounce right, like the 2000 NFC Championship Game.



Are you kidding? We held what was at the time the best ever offense to 13 points. We were just so bad on offense under Dungy that we could not win that game. We probably had the worst offense in the league, the only reason we weren't statistically the worst that year was the incredible defense giving short fields.

Honestly, does anyone really think Tony Dungy wins a title if he goes to any other team than the one with Peyton Manning and Marvin Harrison already in place?

Honestly? No. I think he's a great coach. I'm just not sold he was elite.
User avatar
theBKwhopper
 
Posts: 3917
Joined: Sun Jan 18, 2015 3:39 am
Has thanked: 6 times
Been thanked: 76 times

Re: Head Coach Discussion Thread

Postby Sammich » Fri Dec 29, 2017 3:51 am

Jason Bourne wrote:
Super K wrote:
Because of the Gruden talk/speculation?

Meh...does nothing for me...fans love to relive our SB year, but forget some of the downright putrid/boring offenses he put out there...

Not trying to throw gas on a fire, but I agree with Sanka...I would've much rather us eyeballed and gone after someone with a fresh outlook on the game...(ie McVay w/Goff)

No one has bothered to bring up the abysmal record retread HC's usually deliver to fan bases either...MJW, wasn't this your forte during our "coaching searches" over the last decade?


The other thing with Grudens Offense is the verbage . It takes 15 seconds to call a play , with the multiple shifts and formations , calling out the protections , wonder how Winston would deal with that and I’m sure Gruden would be yelling and spitting into the radio


I'm not 100% sold on Jameis yet, but I have no concerns about this. Jameis is very smart and very adept at X's and O's. I actually think Gruden's offense would do a good job of hiding his deficiencies. Gruden's offenses relied more on being smart than being extremely physically gifted (of course that never hurts) which is why he always preferred veterans.

Jameis is actually pretty ideal for a Gruden offense- assuming it hasn't changed too much.
Sammich
 
Posts: 601
Joined: Wed Sep 14, 2016 2:52 pm
Has thanked: 26 times
Been thanked: 32 times

Re: Head Coach Discussion Thread

Postby Doctor » Fri Dec 29, 2017 10:05 am

Sammich wrote:
Jason Bourne wrote:
The other thing with Grudens Offense is the verbage . It takes 15 seconds to call a play , with the multiple shifts and formations , calling out the protections , wonder how Winston would deal with that and I’m sure Gruden would be yelling and spitting into the radio


I'm not 100% sold on Jameis yet, but I have no concerns about this. Jameis is very smart and very adept at X's and O's. I actually think Gruden's offense would do a good job of hiding his deficiencies. Gruden's offenses relied more on being smart than being extremely physically gifted (of course that never hurts) which is why he always preferred veterans.

Jameis is actually pretty ideal for a Gruden offense- assuming it hasn't changed too much.


And he is mobile enough too. Mobility was something Gruden didn't have very often in his QB, but when he did it was an added dimension he used very well. Remember Jeff?

Also, we'd likely be a lock to draft Saquon Barkley if he's there. Gruden LOVES pass catching RBs, it's a must for his offense. Not only is Barkley an elite RB prospect he's also one of the best pass catchers.
Image
User avatar
Doctor
 
Posts: 5030
Joined: Tue Jan 20, 2015 6:54 pm
Location: Out of the Office. Will return next Fall.
Has thanked: 209 times
Been thanked: 149 times

Re: Head Coach Discussion Thread

Postby MarineBuc » Fri Dec 29, 2017 10:08 am

Naismith wrote:I think the Bucs could have won a Super Bowl with Dungy. Sometimes things just don't bounce right, like the 2000 NFC Championship Game.

Nope...no chance in hell. Brooks, Sapp, and Lynch have all publicly stated this fact.

Now factor in the players that Gruden brought on for that Super Bowl season...Joe Jurevicius, Keenan McCardell, Michael Pittman, Ken Dilger, and Roman Oben. They all played key roles in winning the SB...the defense was already set.

How long did it take Dungy to win a SB with the best QB in the game (at that time)?

I always say that Buc fans should be more pissed at Dungy...that Defense deserved more than one ring.
User avatar
MarineBuc
 
Posts: 212
Joined: Tue Sep 13, 2016 7:44 am
Has thanked: 13 times
Been thanked: 5 times

Re: Head Coach Discussion Thread

Postby Teitan » Fri Dec 29, 2017 10:08 am

Sammich wrote:
Jason Bourne wrote:
The other thing with Grudens Offense is the verbage . It takes 15 seconds to call a play , with the multiple shifts and formations , calling out the protections , wonder how Winston would deal with that and I’m sure Gruden would be yelling and spitting into the radio


I'm not 100% sold on Jameis yet, but I have no concerns about this. Jameis is very smart and very adept at X's and O's. I actually think Gruden's offense would do a good job of hiding his deficiencies. Gruden's offenses relied more on being smart than being extremely physically gifted (of course that never hurts) which is why he always preferred veterans.

Jameis is actually pretty ideal for a Gruden offense- assuming it hasn't changed too much.



I can just imagine Gruden and Jameis getting to 1BP at 3 am and just watching hours of tape.

Those two passionate guys would probably feed off each other so much.
User avatar
Teitan
 
Posts: 4105
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2015 1:07 pm
Has thanked: 212 times
Been thanked: 167 times

Re: Head Coach Discussion Thread

Postby Teitan » Fri Dec 29, 2017 10:13 am

Doctor wrote:
Sammich wrote:
I'm not 100% sold on Jameis yet, but I have no concerns about this. Jameis is very smart and very adept at X's and O's. I actually think Gruden's offense would do a good job of hiding his deficiencies. Gruden's offenses relied more on being smart than being extremely physically gifted (of course that never hurts) which is why he always preferred veterans.

Jameis is actually pretty ideal for a Gruden offense- assuming it hasn't changed too much.


Also, we'd likely be a lock to draft Saquon Barkley if he's there. Gruden LOVES pass catching RBs, it's a must for his offense. Not only is Barkley an elite RB prospect he's also one of the best pass catchers.


Isn’t Le’Veon Bell a free agent after this season? If Big Ben retires, maybe we look like an attractive option..
User avatar
Teitan
 
Posts: 4105
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2015 1:07 pm
Has thanked: 212 times
Been thanked: 167 times

Re: Head Coach Discussion Thread

Postby beardmcdoug » Fri Dec 29, 2017 10:39 am

Teitan wrote:
Doctor wrote:
Also, we'd likely be a lock to draft Saquon Barkley if he's there. Gruden LOVES pass catching RBs, it's a must for his offense. Not only is Barkley an elite RB prospect he's also one of the best pass catchers.


Isn’t Le’Veon Bell a free agent after this season? If Big Ben retires, maybe we look like an attractive option..


Duuude... Gruden shows up... We sign Leveon Bell...

Image
User avatar
beardmcdoug
 
Posts: 2654
Joined: Mon Sep 12, 2016 12:30 pm
Has thanked: 304 times
Been thanked: 197 times

Re: Head Coach Discussion Thread

Postby Nano » Fri Dec 29, 2017 10:43 am

Wtf
User avatar
Nano
 
Posts: 7102
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2015 6:30 pm
Location: Somewhere above Tampa
Has thanked: 29 times
Been thanked: 247 times

Re: Head Coach Discussion Thread

Postby uscbucsfan » Fri Dec 29, 2017 10:44 am

Bell turned down a 5 year 12 million per year deal from the Steelers last year. He wants 15 million per year. I think if we really wanted him we could get him as not many around the league would be interested that price tag.
Image
User avatar
uscbucsfan
 
Posts: 4153
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2015 1:21 pm
Has thanked: 91 times
Been thanked: 108 times

Re: Head Coach Discussion Thread

Postby RedLeader » Fri Dec 29, 2017 10:52 am

uscbucsfan wrote:Bell turned down a 5 year 12 million per year deal from the Steelers last year. He wants 15 million per year. I think if we really wanted him we could get him as not many around the league would be interested that price tag.


Do it, Jon!
User avatar
RedLeader
 
Posts: 2414
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2015 3:27 pm
Location: G14 Classified
Has thanked: 84 times
Been thanked: 89 times

Re: Head Coach Discussion Thread

Postby Bootz2004 » Fri Dec 29, 2017 10:53 am

uscbucsfan wrote:Bell turned down a 5 year 12 million per year deal from the Steelers last year. He wants 15 million per year. I think if we really wanted him we could get him as not many around the league would be interested that price tag.


Hopefully we aren't interested in that price tag either. That's ridiculous for a RB in this era of the NFL. Throw that money at some pass rushers or a guard. Corners even. Hell we will have to throw Mike Evans a bone within the next 14 months. Not spending $15mil on a RB with this Oline in the position it's in.
User avatar
Bootz2004
 
Posts: 21952
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2015 4:17 pm
Has thanked: 101 times
Been thanked: 464 times

Re: Head Coach Discussion Thread

Postby real bucs fan » Fri Dec 29, 2017 10:55 am

This statement will prove I'm not just biased for RBs...

I love Bell and think he's the best RB in the game, but giving a veteran RB 15 million per on a long term deal?

I'd much rather Barkley on a 5 year deal at the 6-7 million or so he'd get.

How anyone would want to give Bell that money but be against drafting Barkley makes zero sense.
Image
real bucs fan
 
Posts: 7748
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2015 2:59 pm
Has thanked: 836 times
Been thanked: 109 times

Re: Head Coach Discussion Thread

Postby Teitan » Fri Dec 29, 2017 10:58 am

Just throwing out scenarios. It makes zero sense to not consider all the options.
User avatar
Teitan
 
Posts: 4105
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2015 1:07 pm
Has thanked: 212 times
Been thanked: 167 times

Re: Head Coach Discussion Thread

Postby uscbucsfan » Fri Dec 29, 2017 11:02 am

real bucs fan wrote:This statement will prove I'm not just biased for RBs...

I love Bell and think he's the best RB in the game, but giving a veteran RB 15 million per on a long term deal?

I'd much rather Barkley on a 5 year deal at the 6-7 million or so he'd get.

How anyone would want to give Bell that money but be against drafting Barkley makes zero sense.


I don't know that anyone is for giving Bell that sort of money. I think it's ridiculous.

Also, Barkley =/= Bell so it's not an apples to apples comparison. Barkley has just as much of a chance to be Trent Richardson than he does Bell.
Image
User avatar
uscbucsfan
 
Posts: 4153
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2015 1:21 pm
Has thanked: 91 times
Been thanked: 108 times

Re: Head Coach Discussion Thread

Postby real bucs fan » Fri Dec 29, 2017 11:14 am

uscbucsfan wrote:
real bucs fan wrote:This statement will prove I'm not just biased for RBs...

I love Bell and think he's the best RB in the game, but giving a veteran RB 15 million per on a long term deal?

I'd much rather Barkley on a 5 year deal at the 6-7 million or so he'd get.

How anyone would want to give Bell that money but be against drafting Barkley makes zero sense.


I don't know that anyone is for giving Bell that sort of money. I think it's ridiculous.

Also, Barkley =/= Bell so it's not an apples to apples comparison. Barkley has just as much of a chance to be Trent Richardson than he does Bell.


I'd disagree big time there. Richardson was always fools gold. Barkley's athletic ability alone puts him on a different stratosphere than Rich.
Image
real bucs fan
 
Posts: 7748
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2015 2:59 pm
Has thanked: 836 times
Been thanked: 109 times

Re: Head Coach Discussion Thread

Postby Teitan » Fri Dec 29, 2017 11:17 am

You get so fixated it’s unreal.
User avatar
Teitan
 
Posts: 4105
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2015 1:07 pm
Has thanked: 212 times
Been thanked: 167 times

Re: Head Coach Discussion Thread

Postby real bucs fan » Fri Dec 29, 2017 11:20 am

Teitan wrote:You get so fixated it’s unreal.

I just can't believe there are so many posters here who want nothing to do with Barkley. I'm not "fixated", heck he's not even the top guy on my board...
Image
real bucs fan
 
Posts: 7748
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2015 2:59 pm
Has thanked: 836 times
Been thanked: 109 times

Re: Head Coach Discussion Thread

Postby Teitan » Fri Dec 29, 2017 11:25 am

real bucs fan wrote:
Teitan wrote:You get so fixated it’s unreal.

I just can't believe there are so many posters here who want nothing to do with Barkley. I'm not "fixated", heck he's not even the top guy on my board...



Yet it’s all you seem to talk about everywhere.

I’m not so much against Barkley. I just don’t prioritize RB over some other issues. Especially when you can find good RBs later on.
User avatar
Teitan
 
Posts: 4105
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2015 1:07 pm
Has thanked: 212 times
Been thanked: 167 times

Re: Head Coach Discussion Thread

Postby Bootz2004 » Fri Dec 29, 2017 11:32 am

real bucs fan wrote:
uscbucsfan wrote:
I don't know that anyone is for giving Bell that sort of money. I think it's ridiculous.

Also, Barkley =/= Bell so it's not an apples to apples comparison. Barkley has just as much of a chance to be Trent Richardson than he does Bell.


I'd disagree big time there. Richardson was always fools gold. Barkley's athletic ability alone puts him on a different stratosphere than Rich.


And just like that you're back to showing your bias for RBs and your lack of knowledge as it pertains to football.

Athletic ability was what made Richardson so damn appealing. Richardson is big, powerful, fast, agile, quick, has great acceleration. His athletic ability made him an easy top prospect. He won the Heisman off of his athletic ability. When he got to the league it was the other things that hindered him. His vision never got better. He was horrible as a route runner and pass catcher. He also couldn't stay healthy to save his life. As a result he was very hesitant as a runner and didn't get the most out of his runs. The same could just as easily happen for Barkley but you seem to think he's a lock to succeed. He's not. Athletically he and Richardson aren't far off from each other. Barkley will have to do well in other areas.
User avatar
Bootz2004
 
Posts: 21952
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2015 4:17 pm
Has thanked: 101 times
Been thanked: 464 times

Re: Head Coach Discussion Thread

Postby real bucs fan » Fri Dec 29, 2017 11:37 am

Bootz2004 wrote:
real bucs fan wrote:
I'd disagree big time there. Richardson was always fools gold. Barkley's athletic ability alone puts him on a different stratosphere than Rich.


And just like that you're back to showing your bias for RBs and your lack of knowledge as it pertains to football.

Athletic ability was what made Richardson so damn appealing. Richardson is big, powerful, fast, agile, quick, has great acceleration. His athletic ability made him an easy top prospect. He won the Heisman off of his athletic ability. When he got to the league it was the other things that hindered him. His vision never got better. He was horrible as a route runner and pass catcher. He also couldn't stay healthy to save his life. As a result he was very hesitant as a runner and didn't get the most out of his runs. The same could just as easily happen for Barkley but you seem to think he's a lock to succeed. He's not. Athletically he and Richardson aren't far off from each other. Barkley will have to do well in other areas.

Richardson had a big body, and in a straight line had good explosiveness, but Barkley is otherworldly in terms of his agility.

Richardson benefited greatly from that Bama offence. Barkley IS the Penn State offence. Major difference.
Image
real bucs fan
 
Posts: 7748
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2015 2:59 pm
Has thanked: 836 times
Been thanked: 109 times

Re: Head Coach Discussion Thread

Postby real bucs fan » Fri Dec 29, 2017 11:39 am

Teitan wrote:
real bucs fan wrote:I just can't believe there are so many posters here who want nothing to do with Barkley. I'm not "fixated", heck he's not even the top guy on my board...



Yet it’s all you seem to talk about everywhere.

I’m not so much against Barkley. I just don’t prioritize RB over some other issues. Especially when you can find good RBs later on.

The moment we are eliminated, I begin focusing on the draft yes.

And as for your last sentence, that philosophy is what we did last year, and how did that work out?
Image
real bucs fan
 
Posts: 7748
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2015 2:59 pm
Has thanked: 836 times
Been thanked: 109 times

Re: Head Coach Discussion Thread

Postby MarineBuc » Fri Dec 29, 2017 11:41 am

real bucs fan wrote:
Teitan wrote:

Yet it’s all you seem to talk about everywhere.

I’m not so much against Barkley. I just don’t prioritize RB over some other issues. Especially when you can find good RBs later on.

The moment we are eliminated, I begin focusing on the draft yes.

And as for your last sentence, that philosophy is what we did last year, and how did that work out?

We picked the wrong guy, obviously...and waited too long. When was Kamara drafted?
User avatar
MarineBuc
 
Posts: 212
Joined: Tue Sep 13, 2016 7:44 am
Has thanked: 13 times
Been thanked: 5 times

PreviousNext

post

Return to Team Discussions

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Baidu [Spider], Four Verticals, Google [Bot], IchabodCrane84, Mountaineer Buc and 12 guests