Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
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.
Rams miss Martz! (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter thetman
- Start date
Limp Ditka
Footballguy
Limp Ditka
Footballguy
How about setting me up with a little reality and posting the record for the Rams from 2002 - 2005
SJax sure does not miss Martz
rhawkins68
Footballguy
29-24 (53-32 overall).
TheFanatic
Footballguy
And if Martz knew anything about defense, clock management, grinding out the clock on the ground, and self control in terms of keeping the red hanky in his pocket the Rams would be sitting on 3 SB's. Instead, the Rams got woefully outcoached in a SB by arguably the best head coach ever. Move along fisherman....New coach, new OC, new DC, new schemes. 8-8 was about all you could expect this year. That's where they are headed. Talk to me next year Mr. Knee Jerk.....
redman
Footballguy
Mike Martz was a one-trick pony who benefitted from some of the greatest WR's-QB-RB quartets in league history, and from being in one of the weakest divisions in football, and in the weaker of the two conferences. He coached every season as if he had that 1999 team that jumped out to such huge leads early that its weak defense was never tested.
Tactically, he was a moron and made horrendously bad and impulsive decisions. His teams won in spite of him and not because of him. Frankly, he reminds me more of Mike Tice in that regard than anyone else.
He's a solid OC. He looks at the game situation, and within the confines of the strategic decisions being made by a head coach (e.g. "Do we go for it on 4th down or punt?; "Should we run out the clock to end the half or try for a score?"), his play-calling is good. He's just not leading man material.
Tactically, he was a moron and made horrendously bad and impulsive decisions. His teams won in spite of him and not because of him. Frankly, he reminds me more of Mike Tice in that regard than anyone else.
He's a solid OC. He looks at the game situation, and within the confines of the strategic decisions being made by a head coach (e.g. "Do we go for it on 4th down or punt?; "Should we run out the clock to end the half or try for a score?"), his play-calling is good. He's just not leading man material.
thesurfshop19
Footballguy
Is it not possible that Mike Martz in 2006 is Bill Belichick in 1996?
If I were an owner of a crappy team, I wouldn't rule him out just because a bunch of talking heads thought his lack of polish made him not fit to be a head coach.
He has a great football mind, and even with all his flaws and baggage he's worth a shot for a downtrodden team.
If I were an owner of a crappy team, I wouldn't rule him out just because a bunch of talking heads thought his lack of polish made him not fit to be a head coach.
He has a great football mind, and even with all his flaws and baggage he's worth a shot for a downtrodden team.
Ghost Rider
Footballguy
Martz obviously has a brilliant offensive mind, but is one of those guys who is too concerned with trying to be too innovative or too cute with his play-calling. Like others have said, he is a better OC than he is a head coach.
thesurfshop19
Footballguy
I understand this is the perception, as well as the talking heads point of view non-stop (you know, the people who all say that Martz is "overrated" even though every single person in the world says that to sound smart and he clearly isn't overrated compared to perceptions) ... but despite the lack of defensive talent or a defensive mind, his offensive prowess made up for it.In both 2001 and 2003, his team lost close games in seasons that Belichick's team eventually won the title, all off of close games. Is it not possible that if Martz had a Brady-caliber QB, that the roles would have been reversed in both seasons?The 2001 Super Bowl, where every single person thinks they're smart for pointing out "why didn't he run Marshall Faulk?!", came down to turnovers, not a lack of moving the ball. The Rams played risky all year and all three of their losses came when they turned it over. If you don't like the mindset, fine, but that's who the Rams were and it's the reason they were that good that year.Some coaches adjust their gameplans to what the defense does and are successful (Belichick being the best example of this). Others don't adjust their gameplans and do what they do and are successful (Cowher and Shanahan being good examples of this). There isn't only one way to coach -- if there were, Marshall Faulk owners would have been a lot less happy in 2000-2001 when the coach who "didn't run the ball enough" allowed his star to put up some of the best stats in history.
I'm not going to argue that, holistically, Martz is a top coach in the league. But he's clearly one of the best offensive minds and he did pretty well considering that was his first head coaching stop. The list of coaches who have failed in early-career stints is very long, and it includes your greatest of all time coach who beat Martz in 2001 ....
Ghost Rider
Footballguy
Some will argue that from 99-01, Warner was better than Brady has ever been. Injuries and an injured psyche obviously killed Warner's career, but let's not forget how awesome he was for three seasons. It wasn't just the system or the players around him. Warner was that good back then.
redman
Footballguy
Agreed. Warner was Joe Montana with a better arm for those three years. Nobody has looked better, and it was no illusion.
Good posting. But ESPN's just beat it into our heads so well that you see people - even smart people like redman, who I think is a good poster - basically just parroting things they heard on TV without apparently realizing it. You've got to pair him with a good GM - something he did not have in StLouis - but if so he'd be a good hire imo.
thesurfshop19
Footballguy
I was talking more about 2003 than 2001, but point well taken.
