redman said:
pfalvey said:
I think the Steelers look for leadership qualities first and foremost from their HC and the scheme issues of the HC are not as important concern as they are for the coordinators. I think Tomlin's energy, enthusiasm and passion for the game remind me alot of a young Bill Cowher. Grimm seemed to me to be very low-key, almost too much so, and I think this hurt his chances. Simply put, Grimm may have had the football mind for the job, but not the personality. As a Steeler fan, I'm pretty excited about the Tomlin hire and think the Rooney's did very good.
After the 1988 season, Dan Rooney instructed Chuck Noll to fire Tony Dungy as defensive coordinator. He didn't think Dungy could be forceful or effective enough in that role. After Dungy's success as a DC elsewhere, Rooney was contacted by teams looking for a head coach and asked his opinion of Dungy. His pessimistic view was that, while Dungy had a good football mind, he was too low-key to command respect and to run an NFL team.I can see Grimm going elsewhere and being successful. He was a finalist for the Pittsburgh job which he nearly got. I would call Belichick and Noll low-key and they've been pretty good coaches, wouldn't you say?
Your right about Noll and Dungy being low-key. However, I think there's a difference between being low-key and non-assertive. In Grimm's interview with the media last week, he sounded very tentative and a bit nervous. The Rooney's may have had concerns he would be a bit of a pushover in the locker room and that Grimm could easily lose the respect of some of his players.
Making things worse, I also think it's harder for an assistant to gain the respect of the players as the new HC than it is for a newcomer such as Tomlin.
This may be the key - promotions in the military and many large companies, for example, are often accompanied by a transfer to a different unit/division/location because of that very reason. It's hard not to be seen as the former assistant as opposed the head coach.
Absolutely. Yet there are many examples of assistants over the years who've ascended to head coach of that same team and led them to greater heights than the predecessor. Further, there've been coordinators/assistants who inspired players and were held in a higher regard than the HC. An illustration would be Buddy Ryan in Chicago whose Bear defense allegiance was such that half of them wanted to jump ship and join the Eagles when he moved on. Didn't they carry Ryan off the field when they beat the Patriots in the Super Bowl? More recently, we heard of the great affinity the Steelers defense demonstrated toward **** LeBeau leading up to the Super Bowl last year.When the Steelers hired Cowher, they allowed him to assemble his own coaching staff (except for the untouchable **** Hoak). The 1991 team was coming off an average season much like the 2006 Steelers. So why the emphasis on continuity now in terms of retaining Arians and LeBeau? If Tomlin's defensive philosophy is such a contrast to LeBeau's, it makes one wonder what the point was in hiring an outsider as head coach. If Tomlin is the great football mind and motivator he is being heralded as, why not let Tomlin be Tomlin and allow him to fashion a staff consistent with his vision? It appears that the Steelers want it both ways: they want to appease the veteran players and the fans and reassure them they won't have to worry about change for the time being while lauding Tomlin for being a breath of fresh air. Bottom line----they must crave continuity for now, so Tomlin will be hamstrung for awhile until he can implement the system he wants. This implies 2 things: 1. The agent for Whisenhunt and Grimm must have really ticked off the Rooneys if continuity was indeed vital, and 2. The Rooneys are not prepared yet to give their new head coach free reign; there are some trust issues that will have to play out during 2007.
I've been a Steeler fan over 40 years, folks, and want them to succeed. This is not meant as subversion, just opinion.