rayzor

It's the head coach's job to take the team ge has and get it to win against beatable teams. This game is on Wilks. Win or lose, it would have been on him. Today was an important test and he failed it. Was he the only one that failed today? No, but failure of any component is ultimately a failure if the head coach.

He didn't have to go undefeated. He had to win this very winnable game with what he had....at home Time to move on

I was on the fence. This game was the thing that gets me off of it. I'm done.

Stupid rich man. He's the Russell Wilson of billionaires.

And for this, we should be looking at someone other than Wilks. This game was a must win for him and he didn't. No excuses. After this he'd have to make it to the conference championship to be seriously considered and we're not making it past Dallas. Again...

This was a game he had to win. He didn't.

I almost feel bad for the guy. Lol

yeah that's pretty much a given. i don't think there's any chance that cowboys won't finish out the 5th seed and there's no way that the NFCS winner isn't going to be the 4th seed. whichever team wins the NFCS, the prize is getting the cowboys to walk into their stadium.

agreed. if wilks can pull this off and we blow them out, it would goa long way in tepper's assessment of wilks. if we get embarrassed, wilks will for sure be looking for another job when the season is over. it's not THE deciding factor in whether Wilkes gets the full time job, but it's definitely one that will carry more weight than others.

tepper isn't going to be happy with a loss against his former team. the truth is we haven't won a game against them since '96. we're 1-6 against them all time. i think we're due one.

trap games are for teams that no one expects to lose. no one would be shocked if we managed to screw this one up. it would be an under .500 team acting like an under .500 team.

oh i know, i just hope they get down by a score or two early and feel like they need to throw it. it's not that their run game is scary. it's that it would be so much more fun to see horn get 3 INTs and that be half if the total INTs we get Sunday.

we owe the steelers a good beat down. unless the steelers decide to run the ball all game, i'd expect them to throw a few INTs. with mitch, it's more or less a given that they will throw a couple.

initially that's what i was thinking...situation is everything. but you watch him and the guy is smart, he's reading the defense, and he's making poo happen when things start to fall apart. of course things don't fall apart too often with that offense, but still when you watch him throughout the course of the game he doesn't look like some guy that's a rookie who was nearly undrafted playing in his second start. i mean the excitement between and after plays and scores is definitely there, but when he's in action the guy just looks for sure it's an ideal situation, but to me he looks better than Trey Lance ever did in that offense. looks better than Jimmy G, too. it could just be that purdy is one of a bunch of good QBs over the years that fell through the cracks.

because the colts owner is at his best moments a drunk and at his worst a cokehead.

i like him and would like for him to be around for a couple years, but don't overvalue or overpay the position...not anymore. offer maybe 2.5/mil a year for 2 years, at most $3mil. he's getting paid $2mil for this year. for what he brings i think he deserves that and a bit more...but the truth is we can replace him for not much. to be honest, i'm more interested in bringing back and locking up Shenault than Foreman.

these are the ones most intriguing to me - Jim Harbaugh - Frank Reich - Shane Steichen if it's not wilks it should be one of these three. imo, the best situation would be wilks with reich as the OC. i would really be happy with that.

tough call. i'm somewhere between the first two options.

agreed to all that. i mean if he doesn't get the gig, but we get some offensive genius...i'm not going to cry. but more and more i'm warming up to the idea of wilks being that coach. i just really like the way he's handled everything and the aggressiveness i've seen from the team since he took over. i feel like whatever scheme we take on with whatever OC we get with him that it will be aggressive in its nature. but there are so many elements to this team in its history that showed that aggressive character and nature that we lost with rhule (even though we had lost a good bit of it in the last couple years of both rivera and fox's regime). wilks has brought it back.

i think they had checked out at that point anyways. the cards were already looking ahead to the new regime. they had him keep a lot of the staff that was already there and they didn't give him much freedom to run or build the team how he wanted. i don't think they ever really trusted him to begin with. i think they felt pressured to hiring him, but didn't expect him to or set him up to succeed. the whole thing never had a real chance to succeed. it seems screwy, but their GM is a real headcase.

it actually is. quite a few reports were that mccoy was the choice of both the team president and GM and pushed mccoy on wilks.

doesn't sound much like fox or rivera aside from the idea that he's not an outschemer. fox started out good, but got lazy. he had success too quickly and he got complacent. after that superbowl run, there was never a desire to be great. rivera just coached too scared. i mean he had that moment of riverboat ron, but it wasn't a lasting moment and it was only done so because he got pushed to do something different but then reverted back to playing not to lose. rivera just wasn't/isn't a bold coach. wilks just seems like he's got his head on better than those other two and that he is a better manager of the situation. he's got a boldness that is much more ingrained than those other guys. the big thing with wilks is that in the same way he's bringing the best out of his players, i think he'll bring the best out of his coaches. again, much depends on making sure that we get the best possible OC and QB, but i really do think that wilks has what it takes more than fox or rivera did.

i think the hands off approach in managing the team helps with that, but this team has been a lot better at making adjustments. i'm hoping that the reason is that wilks can quickly realize or at least accept that something isn't working like they planned and pushes adapting to what is instead of what you hoped would be. i think he's taken the hierarchy out of the decision making process. you see a change that needs to be made, let's do it. let's don't have a meeting about it or think through it, just do it.