Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.
Three things. First, where is Shanahan without Elway? This year, he's 13-3 and has a first round bye.Second, where is Shanahan without Elway? Well, where is Bellichick without Brady?
Where is Belichick without Brady? Or Johnson without Aikman?
Brady is not on Elways level in my book, in terms of being able to win games singlehandedly, with the lesser team even. Yes, all coaches need the horses - but take Brady out and put in another good to very good (but not great like Brady) QB and NE wins still. Take Elway out, and - well... we see what happens then. They are just not getting back to the playoffs.
You really think New England would have won three of the last four Super Bowls with another good to very good QB? Have you actually seen Tom Brady play? The same Tom Brady who has more Super Bowl MVP awards than Elway. The Broncos have made the playoffs four out of seven years since Elway retired.
(1) No. But I believe they would have won at least one, and quite possibly two with a good to very good QB in that offense will Belichick at the helm.(1a) Yes. I think Brady is one of the top QBs in the game.
I would put Holmgren about on par with Cowher. I guess the SB victory gets him the nod - but since he left Favre and the Pack, what really has he done, until this year? If they dont win a game in the playoffs, which I do believe is possible, then he drops closer to Cowher... likewise if Cowher somehow wins the SB, or even gets there, they might flip spots.
As has been noted, Shanny has 4 playoff appearances in 7 years. In addition, one season he missed out on crazy tiebreakers to Cleveland (which would have made it 5 in 7), and another season was a rebuilding year after he lost 5 potential HoF players in the span of a year. It seems to me that Denver's "getting back to the playoffs" more than anyone else in the league. Only New England, Indy, and Denver have made the playoffs for 3 straight seasons. And only Indy has made the playoffs more frequently than Denver since Elway retired.Since 1995, when Shanahan took over, Denver is #1 in the NFL in offense, rushing offense, rushes, yards per rush, scoring offense, wins, and playoff appearances. Say what you want, but Elway was only around for 4 of those 11 seasons.
I agree with your comments more than your rankings. For example, while I'd fault Schotty for failing to win in the playoffs, I'd still rank him ahead of Cowher because Schotty's done it better for longer during the regular season in four different places. Shanahan should be ranked higher than Cowher, Schotty and maybe even JJ; I'm less convinced he should be ranked ahead of Parcells, Levy and Belichick as SSOG is arguing.
B. Belichick
Hey Redman,This was a tough one for me, for the reasons you postulated. The reason I give Belichick the edge is simply a respect I pay for the era Belichick has made his run. Gibbs was notorious for rostering such depth because money was no object. While Gibbs, in my mind, is the best Xs and Os offensive mind in this list, I need to see him make a run [perhaps this year] in this era where he's burdened by the salary cap and free agency; significant hurdles he didn't face while winning all those titles.
I gotcha. It's a legitimate point given that the "Injured Reserve" took on a whole new meaning with Gibbs and Beathard. Those guys were shameless.
The counter, however, would be that the only consistent unit from the beginning to end of Gibbs' tenure were the offensive line, with only rare exception (Darrell Green; Art Monk; Monty Coleman; Don Warren if you want to break out an H-back from the o-line). On the one hand it makes what he did all the more remarkable because the turnover on his roster was 66% or more from his first Super Bowl to his last, whereas Belichick's was far less.
Do you still feel that way even after his last 2 seasons? I would have thought that the generally acknowledged "best" offensive Xs and Os guy would have been Shanahan, since that's usually the first criticism I ever hear about him- "He's probably the best Xs and Os guy, but he's not a motivator!"Does anyone remember whether Levy was considered an offensive guy coming into the Buffalo job, or a defensive guy? I remember Buffalo had a great offense, but the 2000 Ravens had a great defense for a team with an "offensive genius" HC in Billick, too. I can't remember where Levy's roots were. It just struck me as interesting, though, that the majority of the "greatest coaches of all time" coaches were all defensive guys.
In 1986, when Marv Levy was chosen to direct the fortunes of the Buffalo Bills, he brought with him more than 30 years of coaching experience. A graduate of Coe College, Levy began his pro coaching career in 1969 as kicking teams coach for the Philadelphia Eagles before joining George Allen’s staff as a special teams coach for the Los Angeles Rams in 1970.He followed Allen to Washington in 1971, where he served as the Redskins special teams coach for two seasons. Levy then served as the head coach of the Montreal Alouettes of the Canadian Football League for five seasons. After two CFL Grey Cup championships, Levy returned to the NFL in 1978 as head coach of the Kansas City Chiefs.
I don't see how the last two seasons would change one's opinion on this. It was complete foolishness to expect him to walk in after 12 years away from Xs and Os and design a good offense in his first year. (Almost every Redskins fan was guilty of this foolishness.) That absolutely pathetic offense from last year is now a good offense. My guess is next year it will be a great offense. They went from 30th in yards in 2004 to 11th in 2005 and 31st in points to 13th. That is a phenomenal jump for an offense that had two changes to personell: Santana Moss and Jon Jansen. I give those two a lot of credit for the change, along with Brunell's health and Portis putting on some weight to become a better "Gibbs-type" RB and buying in to the offensive philosophy (apparently Portis now asks, repeatedly, to run the ball inside). But, the bulk of it is Gibbs updating his offense, realizing how to best attack today's defenses. And, I might add, while not Xs and Os, that the change in Portis is Gibbs' work. So is the Brunell issue. Imagine what the locker room must think about Gibbs when he proves everyone, I mean everyone, wrong about Brunell. Xs and Os, as great as Gibbs is at it, isn't his best quality. He is simply a leader of men.
I agree that Gibbs is a very good Xs and Os guy, I was just asking if he was still "the best". I mean, he still hasn't put together a top-10 offense yet, and as you said, I've always considered him more of a leader than a schemer.Also, I don't know about the "change" in Portis. He did the bulk of his damage in Denver between the tackles, too, although not many people paid attention or realized it. He also bulked up after his rookie season for Denver, too. I checked his player page, and his listed weight (212) is actually a hair down from the 220 or so that he started his second season at. I credit Gibbs a ton for Brunell, but I think Portis has always been a stud, erroneously considered simply a product of Denver's system.
there are plenty of guys not on the list. I don't think that anyone is saying that this is THE LIST of all time best coaches. If so, there's a fellow named Lombardi out there. I think the NFL named a trophy after him for some reason.
Leaving Walsh off of the list was not a slight. I simply selected eight random coaches and asked everyone to rank them.
I'm guessing Ghost Rider didn't mean to suggest Walsh wasn't among the top 8 coaches [at least, I hope not]. I would put Walsh above everyone on this list but Belichick and Gibbs, FYI.Schottenheimer is the guy I can't figure out...in my mind, he's the epitome of a guy "just good enough" to get you there, but not good enough to get you over the hump.
Not at all. Basically, I was going for coaches of the last 15 years.
Gibbs is obviously very good scheming and game planning, and is a tremendous in-game coach, but I would have to agree that even that's not his strength. His strength is organizing and motivating and administrating a group of players and coaches. In my view he's second to none at that. His players would run through walls for him, and he gets them to do that without really raising his voice or ever swearing or really changing his demeanor. The players also love and appreciate that he and his staff are burning the midnight oil every night trying to find ways to help them win. I'm not saying that he's unique in any one aspect of his personality. It's the package that's unique.
Did you bother to read the entire thread before posting this? At least read posts 31 and 33. Then tell me where I said this was a ranking of the greatest coaches of all-time.
Oh, I'm not arguing whether he's the best or not, just whether these last two years would change anyone's mind on that. That's where I thought you were coming from. I thought you were saying, "He may have been the best Xs and Os guys before, but the last two years have changed my opinion on that."
I don't think 212 is right. I thought he was around 220 now. I didn't know he did the same in Denver. And, I agree he's a stud. His blocking is amazing. What do you know of his blocking when he was in Denver?
Gibbs is also not afraid to admit that something isn't working and to change it. For instance, last season he was adament that he would never use the shotgun formation. He never had and he never would. Then in the off season he brought in Bill Musgrave to be the QB coach. Musgrave convinced him that the shotgun was a way to get the QB (Brunell) a few extra seconds to look over the defense. Gibbs agreed to try it, and voila, it worked. So now the Skins use the shotgun with regularity.
In Denver, he bulked up to 220 in the offseason, although he lost it during the season and finished right around 208 again.His blocking has been great for as long as he's been a starter in Denver. Shanahan has a very simple rule- if you don't block, you don't play- and it applies not just to RBs, but to WRs as well. Clinton Portis was actually the best runner on the team at the beginning of the 2002 season- the reason he didn't get a start until game 5 was because his blocking was still a work in progress.
I was waiting for someone to mention Bill Walsh.Jimmy Johnson and Marv Levy are both contemparies to Walsh, so including them and leaving Walsh out looks odd. Also, the bulk of Gibbs work was in the 80s.
The turnover under Gibbs will be nearly 100% from start to finish. Darrell Green arrived in 83, after the 1st SB. Don Warren and Monte and Monte Coleman were long retired by the time Gibbs left. I think the only constants were Art Monk and Joe Jacoby, both rookies in 1981 when Gibbs started.I gotcha. It's a legitimate point given that the "Injured Reserve" took on a whole new meaning with Gibbs and Beathard. Those guys were shameless.
Still, because I thought Belichick's teams are the least talented "dynasty" in NFL history (and I mean that as a compliment), it's hard to argue that pick too much.
You're right that the names on my list were not literally there the entire time. I didn't mean it to be literal, but rather indicative of guys who were there for the lion's share. You're incorrect on Coleman and Warren, however. Warren retired in 1992, and Coleman retired in 1996.The turnover under Gibbs will be nearly 100% from start to finish. Darrell Green arrived in 83, after the 1st SB. Don Warren and Monte and Monte Coleman were long retired by the time Gibbs left. I think the only constants were Art Monk and Joe Jacoby, both rookies in 1981 when Gibbs started.I gotcha. It's a legitimate point given that the "Injured Reserve" took on a whole new meaning with Gibbs and Beathard. Those guys were shameless.
Still, because I thought Belichick's teams are the least talented "dynasty" in NFL history (and I mean that as a compliment), it's hard to argue that pick too much.
You are correct on Warren. Retired after the 1992 season. So he was there the entire Gibbs I tenure. He was there prior to Gibbs.I could not find Monte Coleman on pro-football-reference.com. But I found he was draftd in 1979 and still playing in 1994. So you are correct on him too.You're right that the names on my list were not literally there the entire time. I didn't mean it to be literal, but rather indicative of guys who were there for the lion's share. You're incorrect on Coleman and Warren, however. Warren retired in 1992, and Coleman retired in 1996.The turnover under Gibbs will be nearly 100% from start to finish. Darrell Green arrived in 83, after the 1st SB. Don Warren and Monte and Monte Coleman were long retired by the time Gibbs left. I think the only constants were Art Monk and Joe Jacoby, both rookies in 1981 when Gibbs started.I gotcha. It's a legitimate point given that the "Injured Reserve" took on a whole new meaning with Gibbs and Beathard. Those guys were shameless.
Still, because I thought Belichick's teams are the least talented "dynasty" in NFL history (and I mean that as a compliment), it's hard to argue that pick too much.
You would think Detroit fans would realize that their team hadn't had a double-digit win season in over a decade and would therefore be ECSTATIC to get a coach who has two losing seasons in 20 years as a coach.Trust Detroit fans to potentially wind up with a coach that will FINALLY get them back in the playoffs, and then complain that he won't win them a superbowl. Would Schottenheimer really be a step down from where you are now? It's not like you're winning all these playoff games without him, you know.
I never even have anything to add after SSOG gets threw commenting.
