Sgt Schultz

I don't think Tepper has any idea what to do about this mess. He is not used to organizational decisions coming under public scrutiny and criticism. Running a hedge fund is no easy task, and it takes thick skin and smarts to pull off. But those are not the same smarts it takes to be the owner of an NFL franchise.

I would normally say this will be surpassed in that honor probably twice by the end of the day. But, man, the OP in this thread did set a high bar.

McCarthy will distract them. Dallas is a huge market, McCarthy's seat was getting warmer there from the first Cowboys loss under his reign, and they both will be mentioned as heads on the chopping block all year, unless their teams start winning.

I'd like to see how he performs when utilized by a good DC in a strong NFL-style defense. He looks like more of a fit for a 3-4, and as Scot said, he was drafted at a time when we were "sorta" switching to a 3-4 and we never really did. The problem I see is the price tag he will command when the time comes. The decision may be made for us. Maybe it's me, but I don't feel like we have had a coherent defensive scheme/strategy since the brain trust at the time thought the 3-4 was the answer to our problems. I'd like to see one before I start parting with talent. If we don't see one, we probably have to be prepared to see him elsewhere, whether we like it or not.

Add Greg Schiano. He was the Bucs version of Neidermeyer from Animal House, and had they not canned him he might have been "shot by his own troops." The worst ever is some pretty rare air.

Arizona is another headless animal. Kingsbury was reported to be on the hot seat because of dissatisfaction with how they have progressed, and then that. Murray was reported to be in the doghouse, then they upped his ante with a new contract (which almost nobody can understand the rationale behind). Although Murray's contract has an "independent study" clause, which to me is a first. It's kinda like their mantra is "we're fed up and not going to take this anymore, so let's do more of it!" And obviously expect different results in the process. I'll say this: their results yesterday were certainly different.

I agree with you, and if we just looked rusty in the first half I would chalk that up to exactly what you said. The fact was we looked completely unprepared. The game plans in the first half looked like we had no idea who the opponent was until they walked onto the field. I didn't expect things to be polished, but I was also not prepared for them to be as bad as they were. Although perhaps that is on me, given my own misgivings about the way some things were handled in training camp and preseason. And, as CRA just said, Rhule's teams have generally started out okay and then faded as teams see what they are doing. About the only conclusions I can come to from week one are that Kansas City and Buffalo, who were expected to be good, are and were ready. If I were a career counselor, I would be telling Mike McCarthy to have his agent keep a close eye on coaching jobs that may come available by the end of the year. Rhule and I would have already talked about colleges who may be hiring by year's end.

I grew up a St. Louis Cardinals fan. During the last week of the 1985 season, during the second half of their 11th loss, Bill Bidwill (the owner) quietly had a locksmith change the locks on the door to the coaches office. Jim Hanifan learned he was fired when the team came into the locker room after the game and he couldn't get into his office. Pretty classless, considering Hanifan was not a snake oil salesman, just an ineffective head coach (great OL coach though).

You are not giving him enough credit. That is pretty good........if you are a MLB hitter. If you look at that winning percentage and turn your head on about a 30-degree angle, and take a deep breath, you'll get an entirely different perspective. You'll accept that you can't possibly understand the unmistakable wisdom of The Process, and it is working. You just can't see it. And you likely never will.

They don't need no stinking reps. What we need is more competition for who starts next week. They scored 17 points in the 4th, and may well have scored 20 or 22 and sealed the deal had they been allowed to. I'm not sure, but I think we made something called adjustments. I can't be sure because we haven't seen anything like that in, well, years. Last year, we responded to similar situations by blank stares and mumbling the process is working.

The Giants rushing stats today should cause concern, especially when we look at the Browns rushing stats today.

The article is spot on. We had an offensive game plan out of the chute that was somewhere between curious and stupid, a defense that knew the opponent was going to run and proudly held them to 217 yards and 5.6 ypc. It's like the entire team took last week off, coaches and all. And, once again we forced zero turnovers. The good news is we only turned it over once, ourselves. Then there was the final drive where we played for the lead instead of the win. With our defense, a 2 point lead with a buck 15 left is far from secure, regardless of time outs. If we had our 2015 defense, the answer would be different. We needed to focus on the first down, not simply draining their time outs. There were a lot of teams that looked rusty today. We looked completely unprepared for the entire first half. Of the teams I saw, we won the title for most unprepared, although Arizona is getting their heads handed to them at home against KC (with another college coach who may be destined to head back). The bright side is they made some adjustments and warmed to the task. But honestly, our best offensive plays were two blown coverages that led to a 75 yard bomb to RA and a 50 yard gain to Thomas. Aside from those two plays I think we had a total of 111 yards. Our other big play did not enter the stat sheet because it was CMC advancing a fumble 30+ yards. As for Rhule, Notre Dame just lost to Marshall in South Bend and looked flat doing it. Their fans already want a change (not that they will get it), and Rhule's name was mentioned with that job last year. Kingsbury and Rhule may be competing for some of the open jobs.

It was the PAT after the TD. Cincy's long snapper is out with a biceps injury, and it looked like the snap on what would have been the winning PAT was a changeup, not a fast ball. That gave the Steelers just a touch longer to block it.

I have no feed on this game to watch it, and I am thankful for that based on what I am seeing on the game follower I have up. It appears the Panthers are not ready to play, and I am not sure how to describe what I the Browns are doing. This game sounds like it could set football back 70 years.

From what I have gathered about him since he got to Cleveland, his opinion of himself is not matched by the results. His handling of Mayfield's injury last year was either "rub some dirt on it and get back in there" or "I'll show you whose boss around here." We should recognized those, as Rivera was a rub some dirt on it guy, and Fox wanted to prove a point with Moore's concussion. He also seems like another control freak. Those generally do not end well in the NFL.

I hadn't thought about that aspect of today, but you make a good point. Outcoaching Stefanski should not be like having to out-calculate Einstein.

Screaming can cure a lot, too! I've done it with a guy I work with a few times, and it seems to cure a lot for both of us: it slows the rate of his idiotic decisions and also my frustration with them! If nothing else, now when he makes an idiotic decision these days, he tries to hide it. On the realm of cautious optimism, Marshall just beat Notre Dame in South Bend. There was some chatter after last year that Rhule could go to Notre Dame. I am cautiously optimistic that could start again if things don't change in South Bend. I am not optimistic about tomorrow: specifically about me seeing it. The game is not on here, and I have my doubts that any of the half-arsed sports bars we have will have it, either. So, I am hoping to watch highlights of a Panthers win later after the fact.

He keeps narrowing what he is looking at. Pretty soon it will be at BofA only in September, between the 10th and 15th.

I don't draw many conclusions from September games. I generally expect good teams will get better throughout the month and bad teams who turn heads in the first couple of weeks will show their true colors once everybody gets up to speed. Trying to figure out too much in the first four weeks is like trying to determine the winner of the Belmont Stakes as the horses enter the first turn: you might be able to do it, but the odds are very likely the horse leading at that point will wind up out of the money. That said, the Bills were expected to be really good, they generally looked really good (considering it is September), they were coached really well during the game, and they were obviously ready to play. The Rams were built to win a Superb Owl in the near term and they accomplished that. They are a good team, but the concern about any team built to win sooner rather than over the long haul is they will decline shortly after they either win their Owl or after they peak and don't win it. They showed brief flashes last night, particularly in the second quarter, so I think they will land on their feet as the season progresses. But the NFCW is tough, so landing on their feet might not get them much. Stafford's arm has to be a concern. They made it a point to talk about his rehab being based on the regiment MLB pitchers with the same injury go through. What they did not talk about is that some of those pitchers are never the same. We'll see how that works out.

OK, he listed 6 new teams but said there were 5. I was going to further my morbid curiosity by seeing which conference was missing a team, thinking it might give the Panthers one less barrier on their playoff run. But, alas, both conferences have 7 teams based on his list. Now I can have that drink to celebrate having solved this great mystery.

OK, granted, it is the end of a work day and I am tired. But riddle me this: Last year there were 14 playoff teams. He says 6 of them will miss the playoffs this year, leaving 8 to repeat. Then there will be 5 new playoff teams. If 6 of last year's playoff teams miss, unless they are reducing the field by a team, do there not need to be 6 new playoff teams to replace them? Or do I need a drink more than I think I do?

Your probably onto something, especially if they are running to protect a lead and keep Big Ben winding down. We've seen the numbers that teams ran a lot at the middle of our defense, which stbugs talked about a few posts up and somewhere in the last few days. Teams that are ahead and running to wind down the clock are generally going to do so with low risk plays and the ball firmly secured rather than anything creating any risk. So they would not only be running plays, but low risk running plays.

I'm not a big stats guy because there is usually some context behind them that gets overlooked. That said, if there is one I want to see get significantly better this year it is the turnover differential. We were at -13 last year, tied with the Bears (6-11) and Jets (4-13) and only better than the Jags (-20, 3-14). The Raiders (-9) were the worst in this category with a winning record and to make the playoffs. In fact, after the Raiders, the next worst team to make the playoffs were the 49ers at -4. Turnover differential is by no means a magic bullet, and it takes both sides of the ball to improve it. And there is some context to be lost in the interception number (picked Hail Marys at the end of a half, 45 yard bombs that are picked not not returned both count the same as the 7 yard pass that is picked off and returned 15 yards). Last year our problem was interceptions (no shite, Schultz), as we only collected 9 (tied for 26th in the league) and we threw 21 (worst in the league). It also accounts for -12 of the -13 differential. If we can improve that -13 to something around the break even point or even into positive territory, our mountain to climb gets less steep.

Whenever the league office of any sport issues a "point of emphasis" or a "clarification" you know trouble lies ahead.

Somebody mentioned no apology to Jags fans for Urban Meyer. I don't remember one to Bucs fans for Schiano. I may have (honestly) missed it, but I don't remember an apology to Eagles fans for giving Kelly "full control" of personnel, which started his swirl down with the Ty-D-Bowl Man (I think his demise was inevitable, but that accelerated it). I don't remember the 49ers organization (or disorganization at that point) apologizing for hiring Mr. Dunkin Donuts 2015, Jim Tomsula. If none of those fairly recent screw-ups got an apology, why would anyone expect one from Tepper if and when he dispatches Rhule? I don't agree than any firing of a HC prior to the end of their contract is a mistake. Was Jerrah Jones hiring Johnson a mistake? I do think if a HC gets fired without making the playoffs, at a minimum, you can infer their hiring was a mistake unless the organization sabotaged that effort purposely or through incompetence. If the organization is the problem, them hiring any HC is a mistake until they unfug themselves.