Is Norv Turner the worst coach ever? (3 Viewers)

[Polar Dude]

This team would be better if they kept Schottenheimer.

The way that Schotty was dismantling the coaching staff and picking fights with his boss, are you sure?

 

[KnowledgeReignsSupreme]

To be fair, the Chargers lost because Kaeding missed 3 field goals.

Oh, we're being fair now? Because if we're being fair, it should be pointed out that when Schottenheimer got fired (after going 14-2), the Chargers lost because Cromartie made a game-winning INT and then fumbled it back to New England rather than just falling to the turf with it.

And the year before, lost due to a Keading missed field goal against the Jets.Turner sucks. Vincent Jackson kicking the challenge flag is a typical move for a Turner-coached team; no clue and no discipline.

Actually, it was two years before. The Chargers missed the playoffs in 2005. Turner's record with the Chargers is 32-16 in the regular season and 3-3 in the playoffs. You have a strange definition of "sucks" for a head coach.

32-16 and 3-3 isn't very impressive when you're taking over a 14-2 team. This team would be better if they kept Schottenheimer.

It's not like Turner took over a rebuilding project here.

 

[KnowledgeReignsSupreme]

Just to put this in perspective...

Schottenheimer was 47-33 and 0-2 in the playoffs under the Chargers. Sure that's not world beating but the five years before he got there the Chargers were:

23-57 with zero playoff appearances.

Turner takes over the team that Schotty rebuilt and was 14-2 the previous year, wins a couple of playoff games and suddenly he's a coach that "doesn't suck".

Let's not forget that Schotty built that team when the AFC West was much more competitive. Norv Turner is winning games against Herm Edwards and Art Shell.

 

[Tau837]

To be fair, the Chargers lost because Kaeding missed 3 field goals.

Oh, we're being fair now? Because if we're being fair, it should be pointed out that when Schottenheimer got fired (after going 14-2), the Chargers lost because Cromartie made a game-winning INT and then fumbled it back to New England rather than just falling to the turf with it.

And the year before, lost due to a Keading missed field goal against the Jets.Turner sucks. Vincent Jackson kicking the challenge flag is a typical move for a Turner-coached team; no clue and no discipline.

Actually, it was two years before. The Chargers missed the playoffs in 2005. Turner's record with the Chargers is 32-16 in the regular season and 3-3 in the playoffs. You have a strange definition of "sucks" for a head coach.

32-16 and 3-3 isn't very impressive when you're taking over a 14-2 team. This team would be better if they kept Schottenheimer.

Interesting. So you think they should have been 14-2 every season since then? What do you think Marty's record would likely have been over the past 3 years had he stayed?And you think going from 0-2, both home losses, to 3-3 is not a worthy improvement? What do you think Marty's postseason record would likely have been over the past 3 years had he stayed?

 

[CalBear]

And you think going from 0-2, both home losses, to 3-3 is not a worthy improvement? What do you think Marty's postseason record would likely have been over the past 3 years had he stayed?

I think Marty would likely have been better than 3-3 in the playoffs over the past three years. He's a better coach than Turner.

 

[Tau837]

And you think going from 0-2, both home losses, to 3-3 is not a worthy improvement? What do you think Marty's postseason record would likely have been over the past 3 years had he stayed?

I think Marty would likely have been better than 3-3 in the playoffs over the past three years. He's a better coach than Turner.

Then how is it that he was 0-2 with the Chargers, losing twice at home? How is it that he lost his last 5 postseason games? How is it that he compiled such a poor 5-13 playoff record?

 

[CalBear]

And you think going from 0-2, both home losses, to 3-3 is not a worthy improvement? What do you think Marty's postseason record would likely have been over the past 3 years had he stayed?

I think Marty would likely have been better than 3-3 in the playoffs over the past three years. He's a better coach than Turner.

Then how is it that he was 0-2 with the Chargers, losing twice at home? How is it that he lost his last 5 postseason games? How is it that he compiled such a poor 5-13 playoff record?

Small sample sizes. I think the idea that he's a better coach than Norv in the regular season (which seems 100% obvious), but not as good in the post-season, is completely ridiculous.

 

[SSOG]

Then how is it that he was 0-2 with the Chargers, losing twice at home? How is it that he lost his last 5 postseason games? How is it that he compiled such a poor 5-13 playoff record?

If Marty had a 50% chance to win any individual postseason game, there's a 5% chance that he'd only manage 5 or fewer wins just through sheer dumb luck. If Norv Turner had a 28% chance to win any particular postseason game (significant because Schotty's career postseason win% is 28%), there's a 22% chance that he manages 3 or more wins just through sheer dumb luck. Because the sample sizes are so small, there is a HUGE statistical chance that the two guys have identical "true winning percentages" in the playoffs, and one guy has merely gotten lucky while the other has gotten unlucky. And I don't think calling Schottenheimer "unlucky" is any stretch at all- if not for The Drive, The Fumble, and the fumbled INT against New England, Marty has an 8-13 playoff record AT WORST, as well as two superbowl appearances.You're also ignoring the possibility that Schottenheimer's teams overachieved and had no business in the playoffs. I mean, imagine both Turner and Schottenheimer took over a team whose true talent level might warrant an 8-8 finish. Say Marty gets the team to overachieve, go 9-7, and they get eliminated in the wildcard round. Say Turner gets the team to underachieve, go 7-9, and never make the playoffs. Suddenly Marty's playoff record is being unfairly penalized because he lost in a situation where Turner would have also lost, if Turner had been a good enough coach to even find himself in that situation in the first place. If you wanted to correct for this so you weren't PENALIZING coaches for overachieving or rewarding them for underachieving, you could assign an extra "win" to the playoff record every time a coach simply made the playoffs, and a "loss" every time he didn't. That would bump Schotty's record to 18-21, and drop Turner's to 8-12.Really, though, it comes down to this: which do you assign more weight to, a sample size of 18 or a sample size of 327? How about a sample size of 8 or a sample size of 189?

 

[Polar Dude]

All I know about Schottenheimer's term as SD coach was that he was able to coach up the talent that AJ gave him and win some games when they had been dismal before. He also did a poor job of preparing them for playoff games - mental errors galore, players performing at epicly low levels, perplexing coaching decisions. That happened in the only two chances he had.

We have now seen Norv's teams exhibit those exact same symptoms in two games (last night and against the '07 Patriots). The difference is we have seen four other games under Norv that didn't look like that. (The loss to the Steelers was horrible and embarrassing, but it wasn't primarily due to lack of preparation).

Is that completely fair? Maybe not. But I bet if that was the scenario on your team, you would feel very similarly.

 

[Tau837]

Then how is it that he was 0-2 with the Chargers, losing twice at home? How is it that he lost his last 5 postseason games? How is it that he compiled such a poor 5-13 playoff record?

If Marty had a 50% chance to win any individual postseason game, there's a 5% chance that he'd only manage 5 or fewer wins just through sheer dumb luck. If Norv Turner had a 28% chance to win any particular postseason game (significant because Schotty's career postseason win% is 28%), there's a 22% chance that he manages 3 or more wins just through sheer dumb luck. Because the sample sizes are so small, there is a HUGE statistical chance that the two guys have identical "true winning percentages" in the playoffs, and one guy has merely gotten lucky while the other has gotten unlucky. And I don't think calling Schottenheimer "unlucky" is any stretch at all- if not for The Drive, The Fumble, and the fumbled INT against New England, Marty has an 8-13 playoff record AT WORST, as well as two superbowl appearances.You're also ignoring the possibility that Schottenheimer's teams overachieved and had no business in the playoffs. I mean, imagine both Turner and Schottenheimer took over a team whose true talent level might warrant an 8-8 finish. Say Marty gets the team to overachieve, go 9-7, and they get eliminated in the wildcard round. Say Turner gets the team to underachieve, go 7-9, and never make the playoffs. Suddenly Marty's playoff record is being unfairly penalized because he lost in a situation where Turner would have also lost, if Turner had been a good enough coach to even find himself in that situation in the first place. If you wanted to correct for this so you weren't PENALIZING coaches for overachieving or rewarding them for underachieving, you could assign an extra "win" to the playoff record every time a coach simply made the playoffs, and a "loss" every time he didn't. That would bump Schotty's record to 18-21, and drop Turner's to 8-12.Really, though, it comes down to this: which do you assign more weight to, a sample size of 18 or a sample size of 327? How about a sample size of 8 or a sample size of 189?

We've had this conversation, check the Martyball thread on the front page. You're not going to convince me and vice versa. So I suggest we stop hijacking this thread, since Marty has nothing to do with the thread topic. To which, by the way, the answer is obviously no.

 

[JJP]

No Dave Wannstedt is this poll?

 

[S.K.A.]

Bill Callahan /thread

 

[Raider Nation]

Shame on me for taking a Norv-coached team in a suicide pool early in the season.

 

[Tau837]

Shame on me for taking a Norv-coached team in a suicide pool early in the season.

Sure, shame on you. Bumping this thread is stupid, though.

 

[abricru]

I'd rather have him than Bobby Petrino.

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

No, no, no, no, no....

.....MIKE DITKA. New Orleans Saints version (1997-1999).

TRADED A WHOLE DRAFT for Ricky Williams, and announced he would in advance, maximizing what the team would have to pay to get him. Went golfing rather than attend the draft. There was no draft room.

Danny Wuerffel and Heath Shuler (again, traded multiple draft picks to get him) at QB.

Set an NFL record for most QB's named Billy Joe in a season or game - 2, Tolliver and Hobert.

Troy Davis at HB.

Keith Poole at WR.

Keith Naeole a No. 11 1st round pick.

The play calling, the lack of preparation.

Flipping off the fans. That was nice.

Mike Ditka exchanged money with an assistant coach during a game - they were betting on plays. Seriously.

Etc., etc.

 

[SacramentoBob]

Looks like it's time for our yearly analysis of how terrible a coach Norv Turner is. It's been apparent to many of us since the beginning that he is not a good coach. Yet his defenders try to point to his record with the Chargers and ignore the fact that he took over a team that was 14-2 the previous year and easily one of the best in the NFL. He has done nothing but run this team into the ground since and he will leave it nothing but a withered husk of it's former self. This might be a team that entices Bill Cowher to come out of retirement.

 

[B Maverick]

Norv took a 14-2 team and made them the most undisciplined, unfocused, unprepared team in what should be the 2nd easiest to win division (NFC West is worse outside SF).

I am not sure what naked pics or other dirt he has on AJ, but he still needs to go. Take a cue from Wade Phillips and go back to what you are good at.

Phillips = good DC, BAD HC

Norv = good OC, BAD HC

 

[Phlash]

cant wait till jim schwartz in on this list

lol

 

[Uncle Humuna]

119 posts, and no mention of Mike Singletary yet?

( o )

 

[msommer]

Spurrier?

 

[Tau837]

Norv took a 14-2 team and...

As is often the case, while this is true, it is also not the whole story. Over the 5 years since that 14-2 team, the talent level of the team has dropped off considerably:- The OL was a strength on that 2006 team and is now a weakness. The team has not brought in quality talent to help.- The pass rush was a strength on that 2006 team and is now a weakness. In general, the team has not brought in quality talent to help.- The run defense was a strength on that 2006 team and is now a weakness. In general, the team has not brought in quality talent to help.- The team went through Tomlinson's decline and had to ultimately replace him. This is one area where it appears the team has brought in quality talent to follow Tomlinson, but, unfortunately, those players have had trouble staying healthy.- The team is now going through Gates' decline and does not have a quality replacement.On top of that, the team has been through multiple holdouts for starters that stretched into the season, and the team has suffered a lot of injuries to key players.In general, these things are/were not Norv's fault. There is plenty that can be blamed on him, but IMO it is a misleading oversimplification to say Norv has taken the team from 14-2 to a mediocre team. I think A.J. Smith is just as much to blame, if not more so.

 

[Getinthemix]

119 posts, and no mention of Mike Singletary yet?( o )

Single worst coach I have ever seen.

 

[CalBear]

Maybe "Worst coach who hung on long enough to amass over 100 losses"?

Only competition in this stat: Sam Wyche and Norm van Brocklin.

 

[Iwannabeacowboybaby!]

He's not the worst coach ever, you guys have to be kidding me.

Just to name a few that are recent, and there are many many more:

Jim Zorn, Washington

Eric Mangini, Cleveland

Tom Cable, Oakland

 

[Ghost Rider]

Norv took a 14-2 team and...

As is often the case, while this is true, it is also not the whole story. Over the 5 years since that 14-2 team, the talent level of the team has dropped off considerably:- The OL was a strength on that 2006 team and is now a weakness. The team has not brought in quality talent to help.

- The pass rush was a strength on that 2006 team and is now a weakness. In general, the team has not brought in quality talent to help.

- The run defense was a strength on that 2006 team and is now a weakness. In general, the team has not brought in quality talent to help.

- The team went through Tomlinson's decline and had to ultimately replace him. This is one area where it appears the team has brought in quality talent to follow Tomlinson, but, unfortunately, those players have had trouble staying healthy.

- The team is now going through Gates' decline and does not have a quality replacement.

On top of that, the team has been through multiple holdouts for starters that stretched into the season, and the team has suffered a lot of injuries to key players.

In general, these things are/were not Norv's fault. There is plenty that can be blamed on him, but IMO it is a misleading oversimplification to say Norv has taken the team from 14-2 to a mediocre team. I think A.J. Smith is just as much to blame, if not more so.

I agree with a lot of that, but in regards to what I bolded, if the pass rush and run defense are now a weakness, how is the defense (which was number 1 last year) still a top 10 defense? Overall, I would not say Turner is a bad head coach, much less the worst coach ever, but I definitely agree with those who say he is much better as an OC than a head coach.

Do you think A.J. Smith or Norv Turner is more to blame for the failings of the last year and a half?

 

[Zeff]

And you think going from 0-2, both home losses, to 3-3 is not a worthy improvement? What do you think Marty's postseason record would likely have been over the past 3 years had he stayed?

I think Marty would likely have been better than 3-3 in the playoffs over the past three years. He's a better coach than Turner.

Then how is it that he was 0-2 with the Chargers, losing twice at home? How is it that he lost his last 5 postseason games? How is it that he compiled such a poor 5-13 playoff record?

Small sample sizes. I think the idea that he's a better coach than Norv in the regular season (which seems 100% obvious), but not as good in the post-season, is completely ridiculous.

It's not ridiculous at all. Post-season coaching is an entirely different skill.Coaching successfully across the span of a regular season is about having a good plan in place, teaching it effectively and efficiently, maintaining discipline, and keeping team morale and psychology nice and level. Do that, and you'll have a winning team.Coaching successfully in the post season is about motivating and adapting. With everything on the line, you have to be the type of coach who can break down an opponent, find their weaknesses, and integrate a winning gameplan that might radically differ from your week-to-week preparation...all without sacrificing the important team-specific fundamentals you've coached into your squad over the course of (maybe) several seasons. You have to be able to bring them to a higher emotional and psychological plane, get them to grasp that they have major changes to make in a short period of time, and then do it again the next week.Marty was so successful reg. season precisely because he was so disciplined, consistent, and conservative. But his post-seasons show he couldn't adapt from that. When all the chips were on the line, better coaches outadapted him, time after time, and Marty never had any answers.Had he stayed, SD would have continued to look really good, really prepared, and really solid 17 weeks a year. And then he would have had his hat and coat handed to him again and again early in the playoffs. A master of good football. Never a threat to see his teams sink into bad football...never a threat to force them to rise into greatness.

 

[Ghost Rider]

Funny to talk about Marty and discipline, because his teams always struck me as undisciplined from the standpoint of going over the line with personal fouls and whatnot. I always noticed it with the Chiefs in the 90s, and I remember the Chargers committing several critical 15-yard penalties in that crushing loss to the Patriots in the divisional round. Marty strikes me as the type of coach who gets his players to teeter on the edge of rough play and going too far, and it seemed like his teams always went a bit too far with the late hits or whatnot in the playoffs, and often at the worst times. That is my perception anyway.

 

[flapgreen]

Anyone who trades Cutler, then pisses his #1 WR and TE off is a worst coach... McDaniels is a failure, and they got rid of Shanahan for him??

Then they brought in John Fox.

 

[Tau837]

Norv took a 14-2 team and...

As is often the case, while this is true, it is also not the whole story. Over the 5 years since that 14-2 team, the talent level of the team has dropped off considerably:- The OL was a strength on that 2006 team and is now a weakness. The team has not brought in quality talent to help.

- The pass rush was a strength on that 2006 team and is now a weakness. In general, the team has not brought in quality talent to help.

- The run defense was a strength on that 2006 team and is now a weakness. In general, the team has not brought in quality talent to help.

- The team went through Tomlinson's decline and had to ultimately replace him. This is one area where it appears the team has brought in quality talent to follow Tomlinson, but, unfortunately, those players have had trouble staying healthy.

- The team is now going through Gates' decline and does not have a quality replacement.

On top of that, the team has been through multiple holdouts for starters that stretched into the season, and the team has suffered a lot of injuries to key players.

In general, these things are/were not Norv's fault. There is plenty that can be blamed on him, but IMO it is a misleading oversimplification to say Norv has taken the team from 14-2 to a mediocre team. I think A.J. Smith is just as much to blame, if not more so.

I agree with a lot of that, but in regards to what I bolded, if the pass rush and run defense are now a weakness, how is the defense (which was number 1 last year) still a top 10 defense? Overall, I would not say Turner is a bad head coach, much less the worst coach ever, but I definitely agree with those who say he is much better as an OC than a head coach.

Do you think A.J. Smith or Norv Turner is more to blame for the failings of the last year and a half?

Regarding your bolded question, consider:- San Diego is giving up 25.3 ppg, 6th worst in NFL

- San Diego is giving up 5.8 yards per play, tied for 8th worst in NFL

- San Diego is giving up 127.9 rushing yards per game, 8th worst in NFL

- San Diego is averaging 2.0 sacks per game, tied for 9th worst in NFL

These are all rate metrics, to avoid the problem of comparing teams that have had their byes to those that haven't. IMO it is pretty clear that the pass rush and run defense are both weaknesses, as I stated. And the rest of the defense isn't so good either.

I can only conclude that you are looking at the wrong metrics when you characterize San Diego as a top 10 defense.

Not sure how to determine who is more to blame for the 2010 and 2011 seasons. It's easier to point to Norv, but my feeling is that it's very close and could be Smith.

 

[Maurile Tremblay]

Not sure how to determine who is more to blame for the 2010 and 2011 seasons. It's easier to point to Norv, but my feeling is that it's very close and could be Smith.

It's easy to blame Norv, but when you look at the Chargers' roster, it's full of players who make repeated mental errors, lack consistent motivation and discipline, and fail to make appropriate half-time adjustments. Sure, there are some talented athletes, but to give Norv's staff a realistic chance of success, the front office needs to start bringing in some players who aren't so poorly coached.

 

[Tau837]

Not sure how to determine who is more to blame for the 2010 and 2011 seasons. It's easier to point to Norv, but my feeling is that it's very close and could be Smith.

It's easy to blame Norv, but when you look at the Chargers' roster, it's full of players who make repeated mental errors, lack consistent motivation and discipline, and fail to make appropriate half-time adjustments. Sure, there are some talented athletes, but to give Norv's staff a realistic chance of success, the front office needs to start bringing in some players who aren't so poorly coached.

I see what you did there.What is your serious take on how well Smith has done over the past 4-5 years, including drafting, trades, free agents, franchise tags, cap, contracts, etc.?

 

[Raider Nation]

Yes.

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

Yes.

I can name at least 5 ex-Saints coaches worse than Norv Turner. You don't even know how bad it can be.But also, who remembers the Lions coach who had his punter throw a pass on a fake punt from his own 20? Or how about that Jim Zorn call on the Redskins swinging gate fake kick? Or how about that Denver coach who actually tried starting a fullback at QB..... oh wait. Then there was the Eagles coach who I actually saw punt the ball away while losing in a playoff game with not enough timeouts to get the ball back before the game ended (er, also still coaching).Schottenheimer belongs nowhere NEAR this conversation: he was the classic example of what Bum Phillips always said - he could take your'n and beat his'n and he could take his'n and beat your'n, and that's great coaching.

 

[flapgreen]

He's bad.

 

[KellysHeroes]

Review KC / Oak / Josh McD and get back to me

 

[Jagov]

Mike Tice

-

 

[bicycle_seat_sniffer]

Norv is the worst head coach with any kind of longevity and to have multiple jobs as HC.

and he wont be unemployed long when SD finally fires him, he will be someones OC and a darn good one too, he is just not HC material

 

[Banger]

Norv is the worst head coach with any kind of longevity and to have multiple jobs as HC.and he wont be unemployed long when SD finally fires him, he will be someones OC and a darn good one too, he is just not HC material

I agree. There have been a TON of worse coaches but they usually last a year, two max. I think Norv can manage a team that has talent but I never feel that Norv gets the most out of his players and to me that's the definition of a good coach.

 

[Dr. Awesome]

Andy Reid is giving Norv a run for his money this year.

 

[SSOG]

Andy Reid is giving Norv a run for his money this year.

Norv is 110-116. Andy Reid is 129-84-1. Norv has made the playoffs 4 times in 14 years. Reid has made the playoffs 9 times in 13 years. Norv has 5 losing seasons in his career. Reid has two. Reid has made the conference championship 5 times and the SB once. Turner has made the conference championship once and the SB zero times. Reid took over a bad team and turned it into a perennial powerhouse. Turner took over a powerhouse and underperformed until it slid into irrelevance. I don't get the Andy Reid hate. He's not Belichick, but I'd say he's pretty solidly one of the top 5 coaches in the league since 2000, and a 3-4 start to this season hardly erases all that. Turner, on the other hand, deserves every single bit of disdain directed his way. 35 coaches in history have recorded 100 wins, and Turner is the only one of them with a sub-.500 record. And this is despite being the only guy in history to take over a 14-2 team after they fired their current coach.

 

[TwinTurbo]

Andy Reid is giving Norv a run for his money this year.

Norv is 110-116. Andy Reid is 129-84-1. Norv has made the playoffs 4 times in 14 years. Reid has made the playoffs 9 times in 13 years. Norv has 5 losing seasons in his career. Reid has two. Reid has made the conference championship 5 times and the SB once. Turner has made the conference championship once and the SB zero times. Reid took over a bad team and turned it into a perennial powerhouse. Turner took over a powerhouse and underperformed until it slid into irrelevance. I don't get the Andy Reid hate. He's not Belichick, but I'd say he's pretty solidly one of the top 5 coaches in the league since 2000, and a 3-4 start to this season hardly erases all that. Turner, on the other hand, deserves every single bit of disdain directed his way. 35 coaches in history have recorded 100 wins, and Turner is the only one of them with a sub-.500 record. And this is despite being the only guy in history to take over a 14-2 team after they fired their current coach.

This is a good post. Another angle is that even the best coaches will lose without a good QB, but the worst coaches will find a way to lose with an above average QB. You could give Tom Brady to Norv Turner and he would still coach his way to a mediocre season and miss the playoffs. I'm not saying that Norv is the worst coach ever because he's not. But he is a below average, risk adverse HC that does less with more.

 

[asuterlowe]

Romeo Crennel

 

[drummer]

I'm sooooooo glad Turner left SF for SD after 2006. Or else we'd be stuck with him after Nolan.

 

[finito]

Andy Reid is giving Norv a run for his money this year.

Norv is 110-116. Andy Reid is 129-84-1. Norv has made the playoffs 4 times in 14 years. Reid has made the playoffs 9 times in 13 years. Norv has 5 losing seasons in his career. Reid has two. Reid has made the conference championship 5 times and the SB once. Turner has made the conference championship once and the SB zero times. Reid took over a bad team and turned it into a perennial powerhouse. Turner took over a powerhouse and underperformed until it slid into irrelevance.

In Awesome's defense, he did specifically say "this year." Reid has had a great career, but "this year" is different.

 

[doeseatplace]

Romeo Crennel

Absolutely

 

[SSOG]

Andy Reid is giving Norv a run for his money this year.

Norv is 110-116. Andy Reid is 129-84-1. Norv has made the playoffs 4 times in 14 years. Reid has made the playoffs 9 times in 13 years. Norv has 5 losing seasons in his career. Reid has two. Reid has made the conference championship 5 times and the SB once. Turner has made the conference championship once and the SB zero times. Reid took over a bad team and turned it into a perennial powerhouse. Turner took over a powerhouse and underperformed until it slid into irrelevance.

In Awesome's defense, he did specifically say "this year." Reid has had a great career, but "this year" is different.

The question is who is the worst coach, not who is having the worst season. And even if the question were who was having the worst season, the guy coaching the 3-4 Eagles doesn't even merit mentioning. Not when you have Crennel, Rivera, and Gailey to choose from. No, there's no defense- it's just a cheap shot at a coach who at his absolute worst is still mediocre. As I said in the second half of my post, I just can't understand the Andy Reid hate. Maybe it's because he's so terrible at in-game management. In-game management is probably 5% of a coach's job, but it's 95% of what the casual fan sees of a coach's job, so the casual fan always has way too much hate for the coaches who excel in every facet except for in-game management. Turner's sort of the Anti-Reid in that respect- he doesn't make glaring clock management errors, call dumb challenges, waste his timeouts, or forget he has a running game. Instead, he just leaves his teams so unprepared that they continually cough up even properly managed games to inferior opponents.

 

[gradin123]

Norv is the worst head coach with any kind of longevity and to have multiple jobs as HC.and he wont be unemployed long when SD finally fires him, he will be someones OC and a darn good one too, he is just not HC material

I agree. There have been a TON of worse coaches but they usually last a year, two max. I think Norv can manage a team that has talent but I never feel that Norv gets the most out of his players and to me that's the definition of a good coach.

Norv Turner is like Wade Phillips IMO. Better Coordinator than head coach.

 

[SSOG]

Norv is the worst head coach with any kind of longevity and to have multiple jobs as HC.and he wont be unemployed long when SD finally fires him, he will be someones OC and a darn good one too, he is just not HC material

I agree. There have been a TON of worse coaches but they usually last a year, two max. I think Norv can manage a team that has talent but I never feel that Norv gets the most out of his players and to me that's the definition of a good coach.

Norv Turner is like Wade Phillips IMO. Better Coordinator than head coach.

Except Turner isn't a grea coordinator, either. Outside of crafting a dominant offense out of an immensely talented bunch in dallas two decades ago, what has he done? Phillips turned the Texans from perhaps the worst defense in the league to perhaps the best.

 

[Buck Bradcanon]

6 points against Cleveland? The hell?