What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Chargers Stoked By Turner's Fresh Concepts (1 Viewer)

wannabee

Footballguy
http://www.signonsandiego.com/sports/charg...s9chargers.html

Offense has new bag of tricks

Chargers say they're stoked by Turner's fresh concepts

By Kevin Acee

UNION-TRIBUNE STAFF WRITER

June 9, 2007

Antonio Gates, like many of his teammates, wondered just how much better the Chargers' offense could get under this offensive guru the team hired as its head coach in February.

“That's what's amazing about it,” Gates, the All-Pro tight end, said yesterday. “Just when we felt we had gotten everything out of this system, it's like, 'Wow! We can do this? You're putting this in?' ”

The Chargers began a three-day, closed-to-the-public minicamp yesterday. Despite the camp's voluntary nature, every player on the roster was in attendance. And those on the offense are particularly stoked about the direction they are headed under new head coach/de facto offensive coordinator Norv Turner.

The word of the day when Turner was hired was continuity, as he was the team's offensive coordinator in 2001 and installed the offense the Chargers have used ever since. But there has been some subtle and some not-so-subtle tweaking in the past month during offseason coaching sessions.

“We've installed things that have not been part of the offense, that may not have been handed down,” center Nick Hardwick said. “He must have kept them for himself.”

Turner, who has had his troubles as a head coach but is one of the most respected offensive coordinators in the league over the past two decades, is almost entirely concerned with the offense during practices. That is a departure from Marty Schottenheimer, who was primarily a defensive coach and was hardly involved in instituting the playbook on either side of the ball.

Turner, whose off-the-field persona is as laid-back as a hammock, is intensely vocal and just a bit salty on the field.

“He lights up,” quarterback Philip Rivers said.

Which is exactly what the Chargers expect to do. They return all but one offensive starter from a team that led the league with 492 points and was fourth in the NFL with 365 yards a game.

Every time Turner speaks of the offense it is with an underlying excitement about what is possible. He acknowledges how good they became under Cam Cameron, but he hints at greatness to come.

“There are things we can build on,” he said last month. “It's been a young group. Cam did a great job, but we'll take the young guys and utilize what they do best. There are a group of guys ready to build on what they've done.”

Players are buzzing about new routes and twists on old ones. Gates, for one, has added several new possibilities to a repertoire of routes that already has seen him lead the team in receptions each of the past three seasons and make three Pro Bowls. There appear also to be more deep options and no reluctance to dial long distance.

While Turner is a perfectionist and can often be heard hollering about a lack of discipline on a play, Rivers and others have been excited by his knack for ad-libbing and his acceptance of players doing different things to make plays.

“There is a lot more back-yardness to his style,” Rivers said.

“He makes it so visual,” receiver Vincent Jackson said.

While every offense in the NFL speaks of being able to impose its will, it appears this offense believes that is entirely possible.

They are following the lead of a head coach who sees the potential for something even more special from an offense that had six Pro Bowlers, including the league MVP, in 2006.

He is pushing them.

It did not escape Turner's notice that the Chargers played a half-dozen of the league's 10 lowest-rated defenses last season, scoring 234 points against those six teams. This season, they play eight games against defenses that in '06 ranked in the top 10.

“The challenge I put to them is that you look at our schedule and we play a number of the best defenses in our league,” Turner said. “The real test is if you want to be one of the elite offenses you have to play against the best defenses. If you go out and score 45 points against a defense that isn't that good, it doesn't help you the next week.”

His résumé, which includes being offensive coordinator of the Dallas Cowboys when they won Super Bowls after the 1992 and '93 seasons, gave him instant credibility, players said. That credibility has only grown.

“He's been part of some great teams,” tackle Shane Olivea said. “There's a difference between getting there and staying there. He sees a team that has the possibility of staying great for a long time.”

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Kevin Acee: (619) 293-1857; kevin.acee@uniontrib.com

 
His résumé, which pretty much consists of being offensive coordinator of the Dallas Cowboys when they won Super Bowls after the 1992 and '93 seasons and then a whole bunch of stints where he's presided over horrible offenses and gotten fired, but always gotten another chance because he just happened to coordinate a good offense once 15 years ago, even though Rich Kotite couldn't have possibly screwed up an offense that fielded Emmitt Smith, Troy Aikman, Michael Irving, and one of the best offensive lines in NFL history, gave him instant credibility, players said. That credibility has only grown.
Fixed.Here is a great rebuttal to this article.

 
Turner will f it up, just not this year. Of course if he moves Gates to full time wr, that won't help this year. My opnion is this team is talented, has strong player leadership and they now have a chip on their shoulder. If I was a Charger fan I'd book a room for the SB.

The up coming years are more in question, then this year IMHO.

 
Here is a great rebuttal to this article.
Norv Turner is a lousy coach. He might be effective as a receivers or quarterbacks coach, where he can teach footwork and arm motion and never make a game-affecting decision. But he's awful as a coordinator and poison as a head coach. The Chargers made a stupid decision. He'll take them to 10-6 this season, miss the playoffs, and claim success.
His team will gradually make more and more fundamental mistakes, and he'll tolerate it because he doesn't know how to do anything about it.His team will begin to lose close games due to those mistakes, which he'll handle by mumbling about "a break here or there."

And on and on. I don't envy Charger fans.

 
Who cares if Turner chokes it up as a head coach? From the fantasy perspective I expect LT to get his usual numbers, Rivers to progress and for AG to possible have a career year in terms of catches and yards.

 
His résumé, which pretty much consists of being offensive coordinator of the Dallas Cowboys when they won Super Bowls after the 1992 and '93 seasons and then a whole bunch of stints where he's presided over horrible offenses and gotten fired, but always gotten another chance because he just happened to coordinate a good offense once 15 years ago, even though Rich Kotite couldn't have possibly screwed up an offense that fielded Emmitt Smith, Troy Aikman, Michael Irving, and one of the best offensive lines in NFL history, gave him instant credibility, players said. That credibility has only grown.
Fixed.Here is a great rebuttal to this article.
He's a great OC, not a very good HC.from a fantasy perspective, the RB's he coaches, always do well. I guess people forget what he did with Terry Allen, Smith, Tomlinson ( as OC years ago), Stephen Davis, Frank Gore..

he's a trainwreck as a head coach, yes, but I don't think anyone could screw things up in SD, that team is on cruise control. Maybe Turner can actually win the playoff games that Shottenhiemer never could..?!?!

 
Last edited by a moderator:
His résumé, which pretty much consists of being offensive coordinator of the Dallas Cowboys when they won Super Bowls after the 1992 and '93 seasons and then a whole bunch of stints where he's presided over horrible offenses and gotten fired, but always gotten another chance because he just happened to coordinate a good offense once 15 years ago, even though Rich Kotite couldn't have possibly screwed up an offense that fielded Emmitt Smith, Troy Aikman, Michael Irving, and one of the best offensive lines in NFL history, gave him instant credibility, players said. That credibility has only grown.
Fixed.Here is a great rebuttal to this article.
He's a great OC, not a very good HC.
Norv Turner has presided over one offense that has finished in the top 10 in either points OR yards in the 13 years since he left Dallas (and Emmitt Smith/Troy Aikman/Michael Irving). By comparison, Mike Shanahan has reached that mark 10 times in the past 12 years, and **** Vermeil reached that mark 5 times in 5 years in KC, and Mike Martz reached that mark 5 times in 5 years in St. Louis. Heck, Bill Belichick, a noted DEFENSIVE guru, ran his own offense last year and finished in the top 10.I just don't get how everyone still thinks Turner is a great OC. Have any fans of any team he has ever left since Dallas really been sad to see him go? Redskins fans weren't, it seems. I know Dolphins fans weren't sad to see him go. Are Niners fans really sad to lose Turner, the guy who led them to finish ranked 24th in points and 26th in yards last year?

 
His résumé, which pretty much consists of being offensive coordinator of the Dallas Cowboys when they won Super Bowls after the 1992 and '93 seasons and then a whole bunch of stints where he's presided over horrible offenses and gotten fired, but always gotten another chance because he just happened to coordinate a good offense once 15 years ago, even though Rich Kotite couldn't have possibly screwed up an offense that fielded Emmitt Smith, Troy Aikman, Michael Irving, and one of the best offensive lines in NFL history, gave him instant credibility, players said. That credibility has only grown.
Fixed.Here is a great rebuttal to this article.
He's a great OC, not a very good HC.from a fantasy perspective, the RB's he coaches, always do well. I guess people forget what he did with Terry Allen, Smith, Tomlinson ( as OC years ago), Stephen Davis, Frank Gore..

he's a trainwreck as a head coach, yes, but I don't think anyone could screw things up in SD, that team is on cruise control. Maybe Turner can actually win the playoff games that Shottenhiemer never could..?!?!
I think you've contradicted yourself. You don't think anyone could screw up that head coaching job, and yet the Chargers asserted through his firing that Marty Schottenheimer - a guy high up in the all time head coaching wins rankings - could and did. Turner wishes he was as good of a head coach as Schotty. Turner is a very good offensive coordinator - I hesitate to use the word "great" there because I've seen too many play-calling brain farts on his part, but he's definitely in the top third in the league and at times shows amazing creativity.

He's simply plain flat out awful as a head coach. He comes across as the soft-spoken, weak, substitute teacher who the discipline cases figure out in the first five minutes of your junior high class and who is quickly marginalized. The most you can say for him in San Diego is that hopefully he won't get in the way of their success this year because I believe that he's incapable of contributing to it, especially because that was already a good offensive team when he got there.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
San Diego will not win the division this year.

Denver 11-5

San Diego 10-6

Oakland 4-12

Kansas City 4-12

They will be scrambling to make the Wildcard.

 
Norv Turner has presided over one offense that has finished in the top 10 in either points OR yards in the 13 years since he left Dallas (and Emmitt Smith/Troy Aikman/Michael Irving). By comparison, Mike Shanahan has reached that mark 10 times in the past 12 years, and **** Vermeil reached that mark 5 times in 5 years in KC, and Mike Martz reached that mark 5 times in 5 years in St. Louis. Heck, Bill Belichick, a noted DEFENSIVE guru, ran his own offense last year and finished in the top 10.
Well, that certainly puts it in perspective. Wow.
 
Norv Turner has presided over one offense that has finished in the top 10 in either points OR yards in the 13 years since he left Dallas (and Emmitt Smith/Troy Aikman/Michael Irving). By comparison, Mike Shanahan has reached that mark 10 times in the past 12 years, and **** Vermeil reached that mark 5 times in 5 years in KC, and Mike Martz reached that mark 5 times in 5 years in St. Louis. Heck, Bill Belichick, a noted DEFENSIVE guru, ran his own offense last year and finished in the top 10.
Well, that certainly puts it in perspective. Wow.
There are two things that I think skew peoples' perspectives on Turner. One, he's a nice guy who has been fired by owners who sportswriters like to criticize (Dan Snyder; Al Davis) so criticism for his failures has been directed at the owners and not him. Two, he's been fantasy gold for owners of his starting HB's because he's a one-RB offensive coordinator in a RBBC age and he loves to run the ball and is successful doing so even when his offenses as a whole are mediocre. The NFL reality is very much in line with what SSOG laid out above.
 
His résumé, which pretty much consists of being offensive coordinator of the Dallas Cowboys when they won Super Bowls after the 1992 and '93 seasons and then a whole bunch of stints where he's presided over horrible offenses and gotten fired, but always gotten another chance because he just happened to coordinate a good offense once 15 years ago, even though Rich Kotite couldn't have possibly screwed up an offense that fielded Emmitt Smith, Troy Aikman, Michael Irving, and one of the best offensive lines in NFL history, gave him instant credibility, players said. That credibility has only grown.
Fixed.Here is a great rebuttal to this article.
He's a great OC, not a very good HC.
Norv Turner has presided over one offense that has finished in the top 10 in either points OR yards in the 13 years since he left Dallas (and Emmitt Smith/Troy Aikman/Michael Irving). By comparison, Mike Shanahan has reached that mark 10 times in the past 12 years, and **** Vermeil reached that mark 5 times in 5 years in KC, and Mike Martz reached that mark 5 times in 5 years in St. Louis. Heck, Bill Belichick, a noted DEFENSIVE guru, ran his own offense last year and finished in the top 10.I just don't get how everyone still thinks Turner is a great OC. Have any fans of any team he has ever left since Dallas really been sad to see him go? Redskins fans weren't, it seems. I know Dolphins fans weren't sad to see him go. Are Niners fans really sad to lose Turner, the guy who led them to finish ranked 24th in points and 26th in yards last year?
Why aren't you counting the Dallas years? I mean Shanahan, Vermeil, and Martz all had loaded offenses too.
 
And what Norv should really do is, get Michael Turner in there more, figure out how to use him more while LT2 is on the field, he is not being used anywhere near his full potential.

 
Wow, I'm surprised at the venom for Turner in this thread. I can understand it from Denver (SSOG) and Washington (redman) fans, but still surprised at the overall tone.

To some degree this reminds me of all the people knocking Rivers last preseason because of his inexperience, without taking into account the great situation he was in. Turner walked into that same great situation. I'm pretty sure he didn't have this much talent in any of his other OC jobs since Dallas... not even close.

In fact, let's take a look at those other OC jobs since Dallas (since I think everyone agrees he did a nice job as Dallas OC).

In 2000, the Chargers were #15 in passing yards, #31 (last) in rushing yards, #28 in total yards, and #26 in total points. Of course, this was with Ryan Leaf taking most of the QB snaps.

In 2001, the Chargers added Turner and Tomlinson and Flutie was the QB. They were #13 in passing yards, #20 in rushing yards, #15 in total yards, and #14 in total points. Obviously Tomlinson was a huge reason, as was the move from Leaf to Flutie. But is it fair to completely discount Turner's contribution?

In 2002, with Turner gone and Marty as HC, they were #23 in passing yards, #8 in rushing yards, #16 in total yards, and #20 in total points. They dropped in 3 of the 4 categories, despite the fact that Tomlinson had a monster year. Could that not be at least partly because of the loss of Turner?

So next was Miami.

In 2001, Miami was #20 in passing yards, #23 in rushing yards, #24 in total yards, and, surprisingly, #8 in points.

In 2002, Miami added Turner and Ricky Williams. They were #27 in passing yards, #2 in rushing yards, #15 in total yards, and #12 in total points. Though they dropped in total points, their offensive TDs went up (34 in 2001, 42 in 2002). While the passing yards dropped, note that Fiedler got hurt and Ray Lucas had to play extensively (160 attempts). All in all, looks like an improvement. Was it all because of Ricky Williams, or did Turner contribute?

In 2003, Miami did slip a bit. They were #26 in passing yards, #17 in rushing yards, #24 in total yards, and #17 in total points (31 offensive TDs). Fiedler was hurt again and the OL played poorly. I tend to agree that Turner did not do a particularly good job in this case.

In 2004, with Turner and Ricky Williams gone, Miami imploded offensively. They were #20 in passing yards, #31 in rushing yards, #29 in total yards, and #28 in total points (29 offensive TDs). And, although their rank in passing yards went up, that is because their attempts went from 450 (#30) to 586 (#3). So they actually were worse across the board. Was that all because of Ricky Williams, or possibly at least partly due to Turner's departure?

Next was San Francisco.

In 2005, SF was #32 in passing yards, #17 in rushing yards, #32 in total yards, and #30 in points. That was with a QB carousel that included rookie QB Alex Smith.

In 2006, SF added Turner. They were #29 in passing yards, #6 in rushing yards, #26 in total yards, and #24 in points. Improvement across the board. Where will they go this year without Turner?

So... other than Dallas, he was OC 3 other times, and in each case the offense improved. I suspect some of you want to attribute the improvement to other factors like personnel changes. IMO Turner contributed to the improvements.

Now, he is obviously HC now, not OC. I posted the above mostly to refute the bashing of his work as an OC. I do agree that his HC track record isn't great. Even so, he took over a bad Washington team and raised it to a respectable level, he just couldn't get it any further. In Oakland, he took over a bad team and didn't significantly elevate it in two years, not exactly damning. And note that both Oakland and Washington improved offensively by a pretty good margin under Turner.

From a fantasy perspective, his track record bodes well for Chargers offensive players. From a NFL perspective, this opportunity bears zero similarity to his previous track record, since in both of his other HC jobs he took over extremely bad teams. There is really no basis of comparison to his current job.

Personally, I think the Chargers are more likely to win a Super Bowl within the next couple of years with Turner than they would have been with Marty. I know that will put me in the minority, and I'm okay with that.

 
Wow, I'm surprised at the venom for Turner in this thread. I can understand it from Denver (SSOG) and Washington (redman) fans, but still surprised at the overall tone.To some degree this reminds me of all the people knocking Rivers last preseason because of his inexperience, without taking into account the great situation he was in. Turner walked into that same great situation. I'm pretty sure he didn't have this much talent in any of his other OC jobs since Dallas... not even close.In fact, let's take a look at those other OC jobs since Dallas (since I think everyone agrees he did a nice job as Dallas OC).In 2000, the Chargers were #15 in passing yards, #31 (last) in rushing yards, #28 in total yards, and #26 in total points. Of course, this was with Ryan Leaf taking most of the QB snaps.In 2001, the Chargers added Turner and Tomlinson and Flutie was the QB. They were #13 in passing yards, #20 in rushing yards, #15 in total yards, and #14 in total points. Obviously Tomlinson was a huge reason, as was the move from Leaf to Flutie. But is it fair to completely discount Turner's contribution?In 2002, with Turner gone and Marty as HC, they were #23 in passing yards, #8 in rushing yards, #16 in total yards, and #20 in total points. They dropped in 3 of the 4 categories, despite the fact that Tomlinson had a monster year. Could that not be at least partly because of the loss of Turner?So next was Miami.In 2001, Miami was #20 in passing yards, #23 in rushing yards, #24 in total yards, and, surprisingly, #8 in points.In 2002, Miami added Turner and Ricky Williams. They were #27 in passing yards, #2 in rushing yards, #15 in total yards, and #12 in total points. Though they dropped in total points, their offensive TDs went up (34 in 2001, 42 in 2002). While the passing yards dropped, note that Fiedler got hurt and Ray Lucas had to play extensively (160 attempts). All in all, looks like an improvement. Was it all because of Ricky Williams, or did Turner contribute?In 2003, Miami did slip a bit. They were #26 in passing yards, #17 in rushing yards, #24 in total yards, and #17 in total points (31 offensive TDs). Fiedler was hurt again and the OL played poorly. I tend to agree that Turner did not do a particularly good job in this case.In 2004, with Turner and Ricky Williams gone, Miami imploded offensively. They were #20 in passing yards, #31 in rushing yards, #29 in total yards, and #28 in total points (29 offensive TDs). And, although their rank in passing yards went up, that is because their attempts went from 450 (#30) to 586 (#3). So they actually were worse across the board. Was that all because of Ricky Williams, or possibly at least partly due to Turner's departure?Next was San Francisco.In 2005, SF was #32 in passing yards, #17 in rushing yards, #32 in total yards, and #30 in points. That was with a QB carousel that included rookie QB Alex Smith.In 2006, SF added Turner. They were #29 in passing yards, #6 in rushing yards, #26 in total yards, and #24 in points. Improvement across the board. Where will they go this year without Turner?So... other than Dallas, he was OC 3 other times, and in each case the offense improved. I suspect some of you want to attribute the improvement to other factors like personnel changes. IMO Turner contributed to the improvements.
This is simple regression to the mean. When you're #32 in total yards, improvement doesn't take an offensive genius; it merely takes sucking a little less. Turner can't coach his way out of a paper bag, and San Diego will take a significant step backwards this year with Schottenheimer leaving.
 
His résumé, which pretty much consists of being offensive coordinator of the Dallas Cowboys when they won Super Bowls after the 1992 and '93 seasons and then a whole bunch of stints where he's presided over horrible offenses and gotten fired, but always gotten another chance because he just happened to coordinate a good offense once 15 years ago, even though Rich Kotite couldn't have possibly screwed up an offense that fielded Emmitt Smith, Troy Aikman, Michael Irving, and one of the best offensive lines in NFL history, gave him instant credibility, players said. That credibility has only grown.
Fixed.Here is a great rebuttal to this article.
He's a great OC, not a very good HC.
Norv Turner has presided over one offense that has finished in the top 10 in either points OR yards in the 13 years since he left Dallas (and Emmitt Smith/Troy Aikman/Michael Irving). By comparison, Mike Shanahan has reached that mark 10 times in the past 12 years, and **** Vermeil reached that mark 5 times in 5 years in KC, and Mike Martz reached that mark 5 times in 5 years in St. Louis. Heck, Bill Belichick, a noted DEFENSIVE guru, ran his own offense last year and finished in the top 10.I just don't get how everyone still thinks Turner is a great OC. Have any fans of any team he has ever left since Dallas really been sad to see him go? Redskins fans weren't, it seems. I know Dolphins fans weren't sad to see him go. Are Niners fans really sad to lose Turner, the guy who led them to finish ranked 24th in points and 26th in yards last year?
He has been OC 3 times since Dallas and HC 2 times. In every case, the offense improved by a fair margin. Do you dispute that?A great OC is not defined solely by getting an offense into the top 10. That requires not only great coaching but also great talent. A coach can still be a great OC without great talent, but in that case you might not see a top 10 finish. :banned:

 
Wow, I'm surprised at the venom for Turner in this thread. I can understand it from Denver (SSOG) and Washington (redman) fans, but still surprised at the overall tone.To some degree this reminds me of all the people knocking Rivers last preseason because of his inexperience, without taking into account the great situation he was in. Turner walked into that same great situation. I'm pretty sure he didn't have this much talent in any of his other OC jobs since Dallas... not even close.In fact, let's take a look at those other OC jobs since Dallas (since I think everyone agrees he did a nice job as Dallas OC).In 2000, the Chargers were #15 in passing yards, #31 (last) in rushing yards, #28 in total yards, and #26 in total points. Of course, this was with Ryan Leaf taking most of the QB snaps.In 2001, the Chargers added Turner and Tomlinson and Flutie was the QB. They were #13 in passing yards, #20 in rushing yards, #15 in total yards, and #14 in total points. Obviously Tomlinson was a huge reason, as was the move from Leaf to Flutie. But is it fair to completely discount Turner's contribution?In 2002, with Turner gone and Marty as HC, they were #23 in passing yards, #8 in rushing yards, #16 in total yards, and #20 in total points. They dropped in 3 of the 4 categories, despite the fact that Tomlinson had a monster year. Could that not be at least partly because of the loss of Turner?So next was Miami.In 2001, Miami was #20 in passing yards, #23 in rushing yards, #24 in total yards, and, surprisingly, #8 in points.In 2002, Miami added Turner and Ricky Williams. They were #27 in passing yards, #2 in rushing yards, #15 in total yards, and #12 in total points. Though they dropped in total points, their offensive TDs went up (34 in 2001, 42 in 2002). While the passing yards dropped, note that Fiedler got hurt and Ray Lucas had to play extensively (160 attempts). All in all, looks like an improvement. Was it all because of Ricky Williams, or did Turner contribute?In 2003, Miami did slip a bit. They were #26 in passing yards, #17 in rushing yards, #24 in total yards, and #17 in total points (31 offensive TDs). Fiedler was hurt again and the OL played poorly. I tend to agree that Turner did not do a particularly good job in this case.In 2004, with Turner and Ricky Williams gone, Miami imploded offensively. They were #20 in passing yards, #31 in rushing yards, #29 in total yards, and #28 in total points (29 offensive TDs). And, although their rank in passing yards went up, that is because their attempts went from 450 (#30) to 586 (#3). So they actually were worse across the board. Was that all because of Ricky Williams, or possibly at least partly due to Turner's departure?Next was San Francisco.In 2005, SF was #32 in passing yards, #17 in rushing yards, #32 in total yards, and #30 in points. That was with a QB carousel that included rookie QB Alex Smith.In 2006, SF added Turner. They were #29 in passing yards, #6 in rushing yards, #26 in total yards, and #24 in points. Improvement across the board. Where will they go this year without Turner?So... other than Dallas, he was OC 3 other times, and in each case the offense improved. I suspect some of you want to attribute the improvement to other factors like personnel changes. IMO Turner contributed to the improvements.
This is simple regression to the mean. When you're #32 in total yards, improvement doesn't take an offensive genius; it merely takes sucking a little less. Turner can't coach his way out of a paper bag, and San Diego will take a significant step backwards this year with Schottenheimer leaving.
Then why did his teams get worse offensively after he left? That would imply regressing away from the mean.
 
I think its funny that people think that players can improve and add dimensions to their games but coaches can't. I would assume that Norv has heard the criticisms regarding his head coaching and worked to improve on them, no?

 
By the way, for those bashing Turner, please tell us which of his previous opportunities best compares to his current situation. To me, it is obviously Dallas and he did well there as OC. To me, he has had no comparable situation as HC.

If you see some basis for valid comparison, let's hear it.

 
I think its funny that people think that players can improve and add dimensions to their games but coaches can't. I would assume that Norv has heard the criticisms regarding his head coaching and worked to improve on them, no?
How many coaches (or for that matter players) show for the first time this improvement you describe in their third job? Are you expecting Schottenheimer to improve during his next go-round? Dennis Green? The Bill Belichicks (and Thomas Joneses) of the world are few and far between. At some point we've seen enough of someone to draw some pretty valid conclusions about their ceiling. After over 15 years of watching Turner I'd say we've reached that point with him.
 
Then why did his teams get worse offensively after he left? That would imply regressing away from the mean.
Going from #15 to #16 in total offense isn't exactly "getting worse offensively." In fact, when Turner left, San Diego gained more yards and scored more points than they did with Turner in 2001; it is only their relative rank which went down. As for Miami, what exactly would you expect to happen when a team loses its starting QB and RB?
 
I am less worried about Turner as HC/OC than I am about the Chargers 3rd and long D. This team will put up points, it's the fact that they get teams on the ropes time after time and let them off the hook.

In reply to MOP Post #9. :banned:

 
Then why did his teams get worse offensively after he left? That would imply regressing away from the mean.
Going from #15 to #16 in total offense isn't exactly "getting worse offensively." In fact, when Turner left, San Diego gained more yards and scored more points than they did with Turner in 2001; it is only their relative rank which went down. As for Miami, what exactly would you expect to happen when a team loses its starting QB and RB?
OK, for the record, do you expect the SF offense to be better, the same, or worse this year in comparison to last year, and why?
 
His résumé, which pretty much consists of being offensive coordinator of the Dallas Cowboys when they won Super Bowls after the 1992 and '93 seasons and then a whole bunch of stints where he's presided over horrible offenses and gotten fired, but always gotten another chance because he just happened to coordinate a good offense once 15 years ago, even though Rich Kotite couldn't have possibly screwed up an offense that fielded Emmitt Smith, Troy Aikman, Michael Irving, and one of the best offensive lines in NFL history, gave him instant credibility, players said. That credibility has only grown.
Fixed.Here is a great rebuttal to this article.
He's a great OC, not a very good HC.
Norv Turner has presided over one offense that has finished in the top 10 in either points OR yards in the 13 years since he left Dallas (and Emmitt Smith/Troy Aikman/Michael Irving). By comparison, Mike Shanahan has reached that mark 10 times in the past 12 years, and **** Vermeil reached that mark 5 times in 5 years in KC, and Mike Martz reached that mark 5 times in 5 years in St. Louis. Heck, Bill Belichick, a noted DEFENSIVE guru, ran his own offense last year and finished in the top 10.I just don't get how everyone still thinks Turner is a great OC. Have any fans of any team he has ever left since Dallas really been sad to see him go? Redskins fans weren't, it seems. I know Dolphins fans weren't sad to see him go. Are Niners fans really sad to lose Turner, the guy who led them to finish ranked 24th in points and 26th in yards last year?
Why aren't you counting the Dallas years? I mean Shanahan, Vermeil, and Martz all had loaded offenses too.
Shanahan, Vermeil, and Martz have all had loaded offenses, but they've all constantly reloaded their offenses. I mean, Shanahan had a top-10 offense with Elway/Smith/McCaffrey/Sharpe/Davis, sure... but he also had a top-10 offense with Plummer/Smith/Lelie/Putzier/Mike Anderson. Martz made top-10 offenses that started a former grocery store bag boy and a 6th rounder at QB. Vermeil made a top-10 offense that featured an 8th round QB that had been let go from his previous team, an undrafted running back that had been let go from his previous team, and a bunch of castoffs at WR. Hardly a loaded roster, there. In Miami, Turner had a dominant RB, a very good offensive line, a very highly-regarded WR, and a great TE, and yet the offense declined every single season he was there and improved dramatically the season after he left.I'm not discounting the Dallas years, I'm simply noting that he hasn't done much of ANYTHING outside of the Dallas years, yet he's still considered a genius. Brian Billick hasn't done anything since Minnesota, and people have stopped calling him an offensive genius as a result. Generally, if you suck (or are mediocre) for a long time, people stop calling you great... but for some reason, Turner has been a whole heaping pile of mediocre for a long time now, and he still gets roundly praised for his genius.

Like I said, I think the easiest way to sum it up is to ask fans of any team that Turner has coached other than Dallas whether they were sad to see him go, or whether they've missed him since. I mean, if he was even a halfway decent coach, then unless his replacements were great, SOMEONE would miss him, right?

 
Then why did his teams get worse offensively after he left? That would imply regressing away from the mean.
Going from #15 to #16 in total offense isn't exactly "getting worse offensively." In fact, when Turner left, San Diego gained more yards and scored more points than they did with Turner in 2001; it is only their relative rank which went down. As for Miami, what exactly would you expect to happen when a team loses its starting QB and RB?
OK, for the record, do you expect the SF offense to be better, the same, or worse this year in comparison to last year, and why?
I don't think SF's offense could be much worse, so I expect it to be about the same or better. If Jackson plays 12+ games, it will probably be better, if he doesn't, it will probably be about the same.
 
In Miami, Turner had a dominant RB, a very good offensive line, a very highly-regarded WR, and a great TE, and yet the offense declined every single season he was there and improved dramatically the season after he left.
Turner was there in 2002 and 2003. The season after he left is therefore 2004.2003 Miami offense:

Code:
|---------- PASSING -----------||----- RUSHING -----|  TOTAL 			  CMP  ATT   YD	YPA   TD INT  ATT   YD	YPA  TD	 YD   			  258  450  3001   6.67  17  19  487  1817  3.73  14   4818NFL rank --->  29   30   26	 15   24  22	8   17	27   14	 24
2004 Miami offense:
Code:
|---------- PASSING -----------||----- RUSHING -----|  TOTAL 			  CMP  ATT   YD	YPA   TD INT  ATT   YD	YPA  TD	 YD   			  309  586  3391   5.79  19  26  384  1339  3.49  10   4730NFL rank --->  14	3   20	 29   23  32   29   31	32   24	 29
Please explain the dramatic improvement to which you referred above.
 
San Diego will not win the division this year.Denver 11-5San Diego 10-6Oakland 4-12Kansas City 4-12They will be scrambling to make the Wildcard.
Agreed. They have a very, very difficult schedule this year. LT and the boys will have their work cut out for them. Owning LT and others in several leagues, I HOPE they do very well under Turner... *crosses fingers*
 
Lights Out said:
Do you think the Chargers will have a top ten offense next year?
Yes. Turner has proven that when he gets this much talent, even he can't screw it up. Still, I expect their offense will be worse next year than it was last year. Furthermore, I don't think it's simply regression to the mean, either- I think their offense will be worse next year with Turner than it would have been next year with Cameron, instead. Of course, that'll be impossible to ever prove...
In Miami, Turner had a dominant RB, a very good offensive line, a very highly-regarded WR, and a great TE, and yet the offense declined every single season he was there and improved dramatically the season after he left.
Turner was there in 2002 and 2003. The season after he left is therefore 2004.2003 Miami offense:

|---------- PASSING -----------||----- RUSHING -----| TOTAL CMP ATT YD YPA TD INT ATT YD YPA TD YD 258 450 3001 6.67 17 19 487 1817 3.73 14 4818NFL rank ---> 29 30 26 15 24 22 8 17 27 14 242004 Miami offense:
Code:
|---------- PASSING -----------||----- RUSHING -----|  TOTAL 			  CMP  ATT   YD	YPA   TD INT  ATT   YD	YPA  TD	 YD   			  309  586  3391   5.79  19  26  384  1339  3.49  10   4730NFL rank --->  14	3   20	 29   23  32   29   31	32   24	 29
Please explain the dramatic improvement to which you referred above.
Sorry, I was thinking he left after 2004 and then only spent one year in Oakland. Feel free to change "improved dramatically" to "remained poor".I notice we still haven't heard from any non-Dallas fan who was sad to see Norv Turner go, though.

 
By the way, for those bashing Turner, please tell us which of his previous opportunities best compares to his current situation. To me, it is obviously Dallas and he did well there as OC. To me, he has had no comparable situation as HC.If you see some basis for valid comparison, let's hear it.
You are comparing the San Diego Chargers to the Dallas Cowboys...you got big footballs man. Dallas is a team that has a storied franchise and also one of the greatest coaches of all time that lead them to several Super Bowls long before Jimmy and the boys arrivesd...I really think you need to check that Rivers NC State ego which is why you defend the Chargers so much and take a step back and look at your statements. Turner was in Washington IIRC 5-6 seasons??? Long enough to make that team whatever he felt it should be and he had nothing to show for it. He has proven time and time again that he is best suited as an OC...not all NFL OC/DC need to be head coaches.
 
I am less worried about Turner as HC/OC than I am about the Chargers 3rd and long D. This team will put up points, it's the fact that they get teams on the ropes time after time and let them off the hook. In reply to MOP Post #9. :popcorn:
Do you wanna make a sig bet that San Diego will not repeat those 14 wins they had a year ago??? They play in an awful tough conference and I don't see where they are head and shoulders above NE, Indy, or Baltimore, do you Mr :lmao: ...and I think there is a solid chance they don't even win their own division. Have you looked at the schedule?Wk1 Chicago: Could easily lose this gameWk2 @New England: Could start the season off 0-2...what would the team do at that point? Implode is my guess.Wk4,5,6 they play the division...I wouldn't be penciling in a clean sweep there.Wk10 Indy: I'm sure Chargers fans feel like they own Indy, I would not share that feeling.Wk11 @Jax: I promise that won't be easyWk12 Baltimore: How much gas in the tank at the end of these 3 tough games...can't win 'em all.Close with @KC, @TN, DET, DEN, @OAK...not as tough as some of the other schedule but 2 divisonal games on the road, but I bet since they went 14-2 last year that you and SD World have them sweeping all of these games.Denver is set up better on the schedule. They get to open @Buff, and OAK at home before they see Jax and Indy...when you look at the rest of their schedule they rarely see two really tough teams back to back weeks so IMO Denver can win the division with an 11-5 record and splitting with San Diego. Plus Norv Turner is in the mix... :bye:
 
Last edited by a moderator:
By the way, for those bashing Turner, please tell us which of his previous opportunities best compares to his current situation. To me, it is obviously Dallas and he did well there as OC. To me, he has had no comparable situation as HC.If you see some basis for valid comparison, let's hear it.
You are comparing the San Diego Chargers to the Dallas Cowboys...you got big footballs man. Dallas is a team that has a storied franchise and also one of the greatest coaches of all time that lead them to several Super Bowls long before Jimmy and the boys arrivesd...I really think you need to check that Rivers NC State ego which is why you defend the Chargers so much and take a step back and look at your statements. Turner was in Washington IIRC 5-6 seasons??? Long enough to make that team whatever he felt it should be and he had nothing to show for it. He has proven time and time again that he is best suited as an OC...not all NFL OC/DC need to be head coaches.
I am not comparing the franchises, so what happened before and after Turner was in Dallas is irrelevant. My point is that I thinkQB RiversRB TomlinsonTE GatesWR JacksonFB Nealgood OLis reasonably comparable toQB AikmanRB SmithWR IrvinTE NovacekFB Johnstongood OLMaybe you don't think so. Fine, we can agree to disagree.My question was whether or not you see a basis for comparison in Norv's career to his current situation. IMO the talent was not comparable in Washington. They won 4 games the season before Norv arrived. Last season the Chargers won 14. Is that comparable? :no:During Norv's tenure, Washington went from that 4 win team to a team that won 10 games and a playoff game in his last full season and was 7-6 with every loss a close loss when he was fired the following season. I agree that he didn't do a great job, but I don't think it was as bad as it is made out to be in this thread.So again I ask, what situation in Norv's background is comparable to his current situation?
 
Some Chargers say they're stoked by Turner's fresh concepts with a straight faceBy Kevin AceeUNION-TRIBUNE STAFF WRITERJune 9, 2007 Every time Turner speaks the entire team falls asleep. They begin to daydream of trips to the club or their next round of golf.
Fixed
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Ha ha ha... Turdner is a joke as a head coach. He's the antithesis of Shytenheimer... Good play caller, but a terrible leader of men.

He will lead the Chargers to another division title on player talent and locker seasoning, but like his predecessor will choke when it counts. This is where the two are actually the same, ironically.

The best part is it will take the team at least two years to figure out that he's a loser.

Sorry Charger fans.

At least LT is that much more of a lock for big numbers, assuming continued good health.

 
His résumé, which pretty much consists of being offensive coordinator of the Dallas Cowboys when they won Super Bowls after the 1992 and '93 seasons and then a whole bunch of stints where he's presided over horrible offenses and gotten fired, but always gotten another chance because he just happened to coordinate a good offense once 15 years ago, even though Rich Kotite couldn't have possibly screwed up an offense that fielded Emmitt Smith, Troy Aikman, Michael Irving, and one of the best offensive lines in NFL history, gave him instant credibility, players said. That credibility has only grown.
Fixed.Here is a great rebuttal to this article.
If you think Kotite couldn't have screwed up that Cowboys offense, you're wrong.
 
The Raiders were a garbage team with a garbage roster when Norv got there - we saw just how bad they were last year. I don't know there are many, if any, coaches who would have done much with that situation. Washington, well he didn't do very well there, granted. I'm not ready to completely write the guy off, but I am skeptical.

There's a lot of room for improvement on this team. I think they take a collective step up this year, and possibly depsite Turner, win it all. The offense will definitely show a few new dimensions this year which I think will lead them to being even more productive.

Sure I'm a :thumbup: , but that's how I honestly see it. Those of you with preconceived notions will keep them regardless, so it's a moot point. I guess we'll know the answer for sure come January or so.

Re: Third and long - I think Marty put a collar on Phillips in those situations and played soft. I think Cottrell may get an opportunity to turn the guys loose in those situations this year - I expect mayhem and more sacks/pressures/stops. Also the safties were really banged up last year, hopefully they can have better health this season and if so I expect them to make more plays.

 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top