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!
Obviously it's better to have #1 seed that they had last year than the #3 seed this year, but if they don't win next week it's at least equal to last year since they didn't get to the AFC championship game. At the very least they finally won a home playoff game and proved they can win under pressure. The Jets and Patriots losses were sickening.
So if both the Patriots and Giants lose next week, I guess that makes Tom Coughlin Coach of the Year . . .
I'm not saying Norv has equaled Marty's career. I'm saying that I prefer Norv's results this season to Marty's results last season. Based on where this Chargers team was after last season, I wanted someone other than Marty. Results this season have justified that feeling IMO. Perhaps you value regular season vs. playoff wins differently than I do.
Well who's the one who said "I don't care how many playoff wins my franchise gets, I care how far they advance."You think shanny is a top coach despite the fact in the past nine years he hasn't advanced in playoffs any further than Norv Turner.... and shanny has been the HC of a team for nearly twice as many games over that same span. Or are you saying regular season wins are more important than playoff wins by bringing up his regular season winning % as a positive for shanny but are somehow discounting Turners playoff winning % over that span?
No, it will mean they were both ousted in the same round of the playoffs.
What do you mean Shanahan hasn't advanced any further in the playoffs than Turner? 2005 AFC Championship Game down? Shanahan has gotten further in the past 3 years than Turner has at any point in his entire career. And why are we arbitrarily picking the past 9 years? Over the past one year, Turner has advanced further in the playoffs than Bill Cowher. Over the past two years, he's advanced further in the playoffs than Andy Reid. You gonna make the case that he has a better postseason resume than either of those notables, too? Shanahan has two superbowl championships, two superbowl appearances, three AFCCG appearances, four divisional round appearances, and seven wildcard appearances in 14 years as a coach. Turner has 0 superbowl championships, 0 superbowl appearances, 0 League Championship appearances, two divisional round appearances, and two wildcard appearances in 10 years as a coach. Even if you do want to arbitrarily pick whatever window makes your point look not quite as asinine as it really is, you can compare Shanahan's postseason record over the past 9 years and it still blows out Turner's career postseason record. 1 AFCCG appearance, 1 divisional appearance, 4 wildcard appearances in 9 years trumps 0 AFCCG appearances, 2 divisional appearances, and 2 wildcard appearances in 10 years no matter how you slice it.
How long 'til the next alias?
Yes, it was actually. I had forgotten that den had earned a bye week that season.I do stand by the fact the last nine years is a better indicator of recent playoff success than the last one year though.
This isn't only about last yearLast year: Lost to NE at home2 years ago: Missed the playoffs3 years ago: Lost to the Jets at home
I am forgetting nothing. Tell you what, before this season, how did Turner do in his last two seasons as a head coach? Get back to me when you see the results.
Or how is this: In 10 seasons as a head coach, Turner has made the playoffs twice. In 21 seasons as a head coach, Schottenheimer has made the playoffs 13 times. I think Schottenheimer's poor playoff record has a lot to do with the fact that he often got teams to overachieve in the regular season, so teams that probably had no business being in the playoffs would often lose their first game. The '97 Chiefs are a good example. How that team finished 13-3 is still a mystery to me.As for the loss to the Jets three years ago, is it Schottenheimer's fault that his normally reliable kicker missed a very makable FG that would have won the game? Same thing happened to him in '95 with the Chiefs when they lost 10-7 to the Colts in the divisional round.He sucked with the Raiders. The same as every coach who has coached the Raiders since Gruden left. The people who are describing one year of Norv as improvement over Marty are Charger fans. Norv did in one year with Marty couldn't do in three with similarly talented teams.I am forgetting nothing. Tell you what, before this season, how did Turner do in his last two seasons as a head coach? Get back to me when you see the results.
So, does that mean that Bill Callahan was a better coach than the Jon Gruden because he got the Raiders to the Super Bowl when Gruden couldn't? Or that Gruden was better than Dungy because he won a Super Bowl in Tampa Bay and Dungy didn't?And to remind you, if the Chargers lose next week, Turner will have taken the Chargers no further this year than Schottenheimer did last year, but managed to get three less regular season wins despite playing in a much worse division. If you are happy with that, then you Chargers fans are easy to please.He sucked with the Raiders. The same as every coach who has coached the Raiders since Gruden left. The people who are describing one year of Norv as improvement over Marty are Charger fans. Norv did in one year with Marty couldn't do in three with similarly talented teams.I am forgetting nothing. Tell you what, before this season, how did Turner do in his last two seasons as a head coach? Get back to me when you see the results.
No one is trying to compare their coaching careers. They are simply saying Norv Turner for the Chargers specifically was an improvement. I don't remember nor do I really care about the 95' or 97' Chiefs, but before Keading missed his FG against the Jets (btw he missed a very makable FG today too) Marty went conservative. Instead of making an aggressive play call to try make it easier he lined up LT and ran him up the middle a few times.I am forgetting nothing. Tell you what, before this season, how did Turner do in his last two seasons as a head coach? Get back to me when you see the results.
But that is not true. They are no further this year at this point that than they were last year. And 11-5 is not better than 14-2.
Yeah, giving the ball to Tomlinson is never a recipe for winning a football game.Interestingly, many, including myself, feel that the Chargers blew the game against NE last year by not giving Tomlinson the ball enough, so Schottenheimer was damned if he did, and damned if he didn't.
Norv was and is better for the Chargers than Marty. I don't know how to make that statement more clear for you as to what it means and what it doesn't.The Chargers faced a much tougher schedule this year compared to last year. Their division may have been weaker, but they had the same record within it (5-1) so it doesn't really matter.So, does that mean that Bill Callahan was a better coach than the Jon Gruden because he got the Raiders to the Super Bowl when Gruden couldn't? Or that Gruden was better than Dungy because he won a Super Bowl in Tampa Bay and Dungy didn't?And to remind you, if the Chargers lose next week, Turner will have taken the Chargers no further this year than Schottenheimer did last year, but managed to get three less regular season wins despite playing in a much worse division. If you are happy with that, then you Chargers fans are easy to please.He sucked with the Raiders. The same as every coach who has coached the Raiders since Gruden left. The people who are describing one year of Norv as improvement over Marty are Charger fans. Norv did in one year with Marty couldn't do in three with similarly talented teams.I am forgetting nothing. Tell you what, before this season, how did Turner do in his last two seasons as a head coach? Get back to me when you see the results.
The regular season doesn't really matter. Its all about how you do in the playoffs. Norv's (1-0) trumps Marty's (0-2) with the Chargers. It's as simple as that.Anybody can hand the ball of to LT, thats not really the point. The play call was right up the middle. It was the typical conservative play call which ultimately led to him losing play calling control to Cam Cameron. Marty was focusing on centering Kaeding when he should have been focusing on getting the first down.
One of my best friends, a sports writer with a major metropolitan daily newspaper, said to me that today's win Justifies Marty's firing. I completely disagree. Today's win may partially Vindicate AJ Smith and the Spanos family for their decision last February, but nothing Justifies firing a 14-2 coach after a very serendipitous playoff loss at home last year.
Oh gawsh, don't get me started on our idiot kicker, the 3rd-round pick we wasted on him (and then a 3-year contract extension), and the fact that he's started today 1/3 FGs and finished 2/5 in playoff games. Vanderchoke anyone?</venting over stupid kicker>
I think that's true for this particular team at the place they were after the defeat to NE last season in the playoffs. The regular season means something but if this team would have lost like they did last year at home I don't think it would have been any different than 1-15 season to the players on this team.For those that say having a bye would be better than winning in the first round, I think that may be true for a Patriots or a Colts team... but not for the Chargers. It's a team with a young nucleus that needed some level of success in the playoffs to get any closer to being a true SB contender.
Or maybe Norv as HC is better for the Chargers than Marty with a new offense(having lost Cam) would have been.
That's a very fair comparsion imo. When Gruden left oak they pretty much made Callahan the HC because they felt they were already a contender and Callahan would cause the least disruption to what they were doing and what was successful. IMO what's really lost in all the Marty vs Norv debate is this.... Norv was hired to replace Cam more than Marty. SD had the #1 offense in '06 and when they weren't able to bring back Cam they did the closest offensive mind that was available. I think Cottrel was hired to run a defense similar to Wade Phillips and Norv was hired to run an offense similar to Cam's. They finished #5 in offense and #5 and defense so despite a HUGE amount of criticism for both coaching hires for most of the year... it all worked out pretty much as they had hoped.I'm not even trying to spin that Norv is the best coach out there. It's just funny to hear all the Norv-haters from months ago back pedal and back pedal on just how bad Norv is to the point where they now won't have a good season unless they beat one of the two best teams in the NFL(NE/IND) on the road. Even with Marty nobody would be taking SD on the road in IND/NE this weekend anyway. I don't know what the results will be this weekend(IND was favored in their last two meetings with SD and SD won both) but I can tell you I'm not any less confident because (Norv/Cottrell) are running things this weekend instead of (Marty/without Cam/without Wade) and that's not even a slight to Marty. If I was Blank(ATL) I'd hire Marty in a heartbeat to turn that franchise around.
Then explain the fact that he was offered a contract extension after the loss. Explain the fact that he wasn't fired until nearly a month after that loss. The lack of success may have been a good reason to fire him, but it certainly wasn't THE Reason. Let's let the facts dictate what happened instead of relying on your lazy conjecture.
Fixed. This isn't college football.
Yes it is. The end result matters. You talk like the Patriots were undefeated last year; they weren't. The Patriots didn't have a bye and had to play on the road. A couple years before that, the Jets weren't the most powerful team in the conference. Those games were at home, and the Chargers did just enough to lose both times. You can make excuses for one season, but the trend with Marty was clear. Maybe he got nervous, maybe he was unlucky or maybe he out-coached himself. But he didn't win enough in the playoffs. He wasn't the SB answer.
Perhaps comparing last years New England Patriots to this years Tennesseee Titans is in order. Marty is a much better coach than Norv Turner will ever be. Next season will be Norv Turners last as a head coach. He's a coordinator. And a great one at that.Yup, way to go Norv. He got San Diego to the second round of the playoffs. The Chargers haven't made it this far since... last year, when Marty Schottenheimer coached the team to a 14-2 record and a first-round bye before getting fired in the offseason.I don't care how many playoff wins my franchise gets, I care how far they advance. 2-1 and SB loser beats the heck out of 2-1 and AFCCG loser.Norv steps up and gets a playoff win.
2006 Pats: 12-4, Won Division2007 Titans: 10-6, 3rd place in division, Wild Card Team2006 Pats Offense: 7th in points, 11th in yards2007 Titans Offense: 22nd in points, 21st in yards2006 Pats Defense: 2nd in points, 6th in yards2007 Titans Defense: 8th in points, 5th in yardsI don't know how anyone can say this team has been better under Norv than Shotty.
Making a statement like, "Norv was and is better for the Chargers than Marty," doesn't make it true just because you think it isn't clear enough for me. And sorry, but just because they had the same division record does not mean that it is equally impressive. Last year, the Chiefs and Broncos both finished over .500. This year, both finished under .500. In other words, with basically the same team, and playing in a much weaker division, Turner was three games worse than Schottenheimer.
It is not as simple as that, unless you think Callahan was a better coach for the Raiders than Gruden was, too. Is that what you are saying? Is Tomlinson incapable of gaining yards while running right up the middle?
I am not one of those Norv Turner bashers who was all over him back in September. Yes, I probably dogged him at some point, but given that the rest of the division wasn't good this year, is anyone really surprised that the Chargers, by far the most talented team in the division, eventually took advantage of it? Good point, too, about Turner replacing Cameron. He was basically brought in because he knew their offensive system well, so it would be an easy transition. However, if you look at most of SD's games this year against good teams, they haven't faired well at all. Heck, even the Titans, who were a crippled team yesterday, had them on the ropes for a while. Their win over the Colts back in November was their most impressive of the season, and even that was probably the luckiest win a team had all year, what with Vinatieri missing a kick he makes 99 times out of 100 and Manning inexplicably throwing six picks.
The Patriots were still a great team last year. You disagree?And while that Jets team did overachieve big time, they were one FG away from getting to the AFC title game the following week, so it is not like Schottenheimer's Chargers lost to some chump team that got blown out in their next playoff game.
Norv went 5-1 against the division, just as Marty was, so Norv was three games worse against their non-division opponents. Let's compare the quality of those non-division opponents:2006: non division opponent record was 77-83 (0.481)2007: non division opponent record was 98-62 (0.613)Looks like Norv's non division opponent schedule was significantly harder. IMO it is understandable that they were 3 games worse off against that much stronger schedule, especially when you consider 2 of the 3 non division losses were in the first 3 weeks, while the team was still adjusting to the new coaching staff, to New England and Green Bay.IMO the only real issues to potentially argue here is that with a weaker division, the Chargers should have gone 6-0, and that they should have won at Minnesota. So they should have won those 2 games. But I would say they got one of those games back against Indy.So perhaps they "should have" gone 12-4 rather than 11-5 in the regular season. But to bring this back to Marty, his Chargers team "should have" won its playoff game at home last year and didn't. Norv's team should have beaten the Titans in this year's playoffs and did so.
Yep. The Chargers won by 11, and Vegas had them as ~ 10 pt favorites. So the Chargers took care of business almost exactly as most expected.
The Chargers may lose to Indy this week, but they won't be "exposed". The Chargers are 2-0 against the Colts since 2005, winning at Indy when Indy was 13-0 and beating the Colts earlier this year in San Diego. These two teams are very evenly matched.
Huh??? The Chargers are now 12-5, with 4 of those 5 losses coming on the road at NE, at GB, at Minn, and at Jax. The only bad loss was a home stinker to KC. Otherwise, the Bolts are exactly where they were last year at this time, although most would argue that they have more momentum now. And last years final result was a stunning, disappointing loss to NE, when the Chargers were at home and favored.
I actually agree with tommy here. what has happened??
Last season, San Diego was 3-3 vs. teams with a winning record. They beat Denver (9-7) twice and Kansas City (9-7) once. They lost to Kansas City (9-7), New England (12-4), and Baltimore (13-3).This season, San Diego is also 3-3 vs. teams with a winning record, so far. They beat Indy (13-3) once and Tennessee (10-6) twice. They lost to Green Bay (13-3), New England (16-0), and Jacksonville (11-5). IMO, the quality of their opponents in the 3 victories this year seems the same or better as last year, and the quality of the opponents in their losses seems higher. And all of these losses this year were on the road. Last year, they lost to New England at home.Now they have a chance to beat Indy again. We'll see.
I don't think I was Charger bashing in my post...you seem to be apoligizing or posting as a Boltsfan, which you are TG and that's fine...I think the fans spoke the loudest when they didn't have this game sold out as of Friday last week...most teams you can't even get playoff tickets, and I think the Murph only holds about 55,000 IIRC...I'm just saying the fans were not excited about the game this past Sunday and I think most people understand why. 2007 Chargers are not as good as the 2006 Chargers...in fact the 2006 Chargers would destroy the 2007 Chargers.
Injuries are part of the game. Gates went out early with an injury. There were some Chargers O-linemen that had no business seeing the light of day that saw significant action. Eric Parker and Lorenzo Neal were on the IR.
They had a lead in the final few minutes against GB, and only lost by one play. They played Jacksonville tough, and only lost to them by one play. They beat the Colts. The only team that they really "struggled mightily" with was the Patriots, and they were far from the only ones.
The only justification of Norv is that he was the best option available. I'm not so sure that he hasn't proven that.
The best non-conference teams that the Chargers beat last year were Pitt, Cin, and Sea. That's not extremely impressive. As has been pointed out over and over in this thread, he wasn't fired for the playoff losses, so i doubt the success of the Patriots would have had any bearing.
This team was 5-5 at one point and playing in one of the easiest divisions this year...what was going on with the team back 2 months ago? They beat up on some pretty awful teams and managed to come back twice on Tennessee who is not that good. They(Titans) have absolutely no WR to throw to...I think Reggie, Marvin, Anthony, and Dallas will have a much bigger impact this week on their secondary.
I think Chambers and Vjax looked pretty good vs Tenn in the 2nd half, and quietly CHambers has been producing well since his arrival. I think the Colts game hinges on LT getting back to his old ways and generating a pass rush on Peyton without going blitz crazy
Good points BSS
Out of curiosity, did you watch the game against the Colts earlier in the year? The one where Manning threw 6 ints and was running for his life? I'm not saying the Bolts are going to win, but you are making it sound like they can't compete with Indy, heck the beat them in Novemeber.
What is so hard to understand? They had an entirely new coaching staff and took some time to gel. Unfortunately, their first 3 games included away games at New England and Green Bay. Those losses don't look so bad right now. When they were 5-5, they had beaten Chicago, Denver (away), Oakland, Houston, and Indy and they had lost to Green Bay (away), New England (away), Kansas City, Minnesota (away), and Jacksonville (away). After opening 1-3, they righted the ship and went 10-2 the rest of the way. Now 11-2.Yes, of course, their secondary will be tested more by the Colts passing game. Duh. Is that supposed to be some sort of revelation? That may well be their undoing this week, but it remains to be seen.
Excellent point GPN, however I feel like Indy is in better shape right now than they were coming off a tough loss at home agianst New England...they were up by 10 in the 4th and let the game slip away...I like to think they had a big hangover going into the San Diego game...which they had a chance to win as well. I don't like to predict scores but I think Indy will win this game rather easily, somewhere in the 34-17 range. It almost seems like destiny that Indy should play NE in the AFCC...not a lot of facts in that prediction but there is something going on with NE and Indy that is bigger than the rest of us sort of speak. We had Dallas/SF for many years and now we are getting NE/Indy, and really that will likely be the Super Bowl as I can't see any of the NFC teams able to take down either one of those teams.
Why do you take what I post personally? Look at your response as you go into the "Duh...revelation" comment...it really lowers the posting back and forth. You're a smart guy in here, never understand why you take it down levels when there is no need to. I simply stated they were 5-5 at one point and asked what was going on 2 months ago...It's hard to debate with fans of the team, they just simply cannot look at things objectively(Not everyone of course), and that's why when I used to post point spreads that I always said don't bet on the teams you root for because you likely will be looking at them with at least a hint of rose color in those glasses. I root for Miami and Tampa Bay, and I haven't bet on either team in the last 7-8 years...no matter what. I understand some fans can do it but the majority cannot. Don't get mad JWB, I stopped posting in this thread awhile back, and I can see you have a lot of strong feelings about San Diego.
norv 07 (11-5) win in wild card game
