“Am I watching the same team as y’all” Part 2 (message for the homers edition)

[Mr. Scot]

3 minutes ago, Doc Holiday said:

Not saying he is immune from criticism just that you have to give credit where it is due.

shoot I hate that he holds onto vets too long, but at the same time some of that has to do with not having anyone behind them worth a damn. Like the later years of Jonathan Stewart.

Can't really fully explain that though. It's not like people didn't know Andrew Norwell was going to be good, yet it still took an injury to get him on the field.

Rivera's like every other coach. He has positives and negatives. The question is whether the overall package is good enough to win a championship.

I'm not convinced yet, but I acknowledge the possibility.

[*FreeFua*]

46 minutes ago, Doc Holiday said:

So after 2 replies with nothing but a gifs in my thread you make your own with a half assed reply via your own thread. Brilliant!!

Which is exactly what you do every time you want to post something. If it was anyone else I would’ve just replied in your thread but I wanted you to see just how dumb it looks to do it this way. 

Sean Payton, Mike Tomlin, Dan Quinn, Pete Carroll, Bellicheck all have better winning percentages than Rivera in this category and those are the only ones I bothered to look up. 

 

 

[Ace_Aladdin]

6 hours ago, *FreeFua* said:

I get what you’re saying and this was mainly for the ones who scream “3-1” every time someone says something negative about Ron. It was the same in 2015 when people brought up obvious issues with that team. 

We should be past the point of just being happy with going to the playoffs. We have enough talent on this roster that should make going to the playoffs every season a given. 

Coaching is a big part of this league. All these teams have talent. It just seems too often when we’re matched up against the better teams we fall short. The majority of that has to do with coaching.

I’m not going to go do this for other coaches so you can take these numbers with a grain of salt. I just thought it would be interesting to see what his numbers were like against the better teams each year as there’s a crowd of us who think Ron isn’t capable of getting us over that last “hump”

 

[TheSpecialJuan]

tremendous work 

[Pimpdaddy]

...other teams practice too..

[arbnranger]

3 hours ago, Mage said:

Jesus dude, you are so much smarter than this.  We were down 6 points until late in the 4th.  How in the hell is that comparable to the Bills getting blown out by 35 points?  But yes, I would absolutely say the 2nd Super Bowl the Bills/Cowboys played where the Bills led 13-6 at halftime they almost won.

But again, once again, you are missing the point.  The point is we made it to the Super Bowl.  If he can do that, he can win one, unless you think there is some mysterious force that prevents him from coaching a winning formula once he gets in said game.  Which would be dumb.

I think Scott is pretty smart when it comes to football and football history. He’s a little jaded when it comes to Rivera for whatever reason.

It’s all about the lens you’re looking through. I agree with you 100% btw.  

[Mr. Scot]

32 minutes ago, arbnranger said:

I think Scott is pretty smart when it comes to football and football history. He’s a little jaded when it comes to Rivera for whatever reason.

It’s all about the lens you’re looking through. I agree with you 100% btw.  

What you call jaded, I call realistic.

Again though, I'm not saying fire him. I am saying don't fit him for his gold jacket just yet.

[t96]

4 hours ago, Mr. Scot said:

I definitely don't underestimate how hard it is to win a Super Bowl.

Knowing exactly how hard it is is one of the big reasons why I question whether Rivera is capable of doing it.

Tom Landry took 12 years to win a SB and he's easily one of the greatest HC of all time. Rivera has proven capable.

[Mr. Scot]

1 minute ago, t96 said:

Tom Landry took 12 years to win a SB and he's easily one of the greatest HC of all time. Rivera has proven capable.

You're talking about a very different era of football back then, though 

[t96]

Just now, Mr. Scot said:

You're talking about a very different era of football back then, though 

Took him 12 years with significantly less competition...

[Mr. Scot]

1 minute ago, t96 said:

Took him 12 years with significantly less competition...

And no free agency, and rules that didn't favor scoring like you have now.

[Davidson Deac II]

7 hours ago, *FreeFua* said:

Not really...

2013 we were 12-4 and 3-2 against playoff teams during the regular season. We lost to SF in the playoffs a team in which we beat during the regular season. 

2014 we were awful against playoff teams... beat a back up QB then went on to lose the next game.

2015 was 2015.

2017 we went .500 only to see us lose for a 3rd time in one season to the Saints.

Again, for the amount of talent on this roster we should be getting a lot more in return. This is people’s biggest gripe. Games like Sunday shouldn’t be so close and we shouldn’t need to rely on some lucky bounces. 

I think you greatly over estimate the amount of talent we had on the roster in some of those years.  Once Steve Smith was cut, our receiver corps wasn't that good.  Stewart was a solid running back, but not a superstar.  Cam is a top 10 qb, but at least on the offensive side, I think most objective observers would say that our talent level was well below that of other playoff teams.  

[t96]

3 minutes ago, Mr. Scot said:

And no free agency, and rules that didn't favor scoring like you have now.

That's completely irrelevant.

[Mr. Scot]

Just now, t96 said:

That's completely irrelevant.

I disagree.

Disagree with the idea of lesser competition as well. Having thirty-two teams leaves everybody's talent pool pretty thin.

Bottom Line: You can't rightly compare that era of football with this one without some pretty stringent qualifying factors.