Ron Rivera vs John Fox

[Porn Shop Clerk]

we had a much softer schedule fox's first year

our division was poo then too

[Cyberjag]

1) Richardson. What's been reported/speculated on is that Richardson didn't want to risk paying two coaching staffs in the event of a lockout, so he decided to let Fox work out his contract. It's also been reported/speculated that he gave the order to purge the rosters of veterans.Fox is a good coach, and so is Mike Holmgren. But both were terrible in their last years, in large part because it was well-known that it was their last year. Lame duck coaches almost never do well (at some point last year I actually looked up a bunch and provided stats on this board, it was ugly). Richardson was clearly done with Fox's consistency, he wants the big reward so he decided to take the big risk. And in doing so he gave Fox the kind of roster that goes against what he wants. So Fox was totally set up to fail.

2) No, unless it's down to the two teams again for the number one pick, in which case I hope Denver edges Carolina in the wins dept (Luck is going to be worth a LOT of picks). But I doubt either team picks in the top 5. I actually expect Denver to have a better record, just because they get to play Kansas City twice. But the personnel are different, and the schedules are different, that has little to do with the coaches.

3) Assuming that the scenario extends to the entire staff, Rivera would win more. Chud is way the hell better than Davidson, and how can you be worse than Scherer? Frankly, Rivera's staff is more teaching-oriented than Fox's was, which is what you need for a young team. And again, Fox was also stuck with the staff he could get, because who would go to work for a single year? Rumor has it that after the playoff loss, Fox privately told his staff that they should look around, it's not like it was some big secret. Does that mean I think Rivera is a better coach? Absolutely not, there's no real basis to compare the two yet. But I don't much care which coach is better, so long as Rivera wins more consistently and bigger. And having Newton may be the key to that.

Nice troll, BTW. :)

[Mr. Scot]

1) Richardson. What's been reported/speculated on is that Richardson didn't want to risk paying two coaching staffs in the event of a lockout, so he decided to let Fox work out his contract. It's also been reported/speculated that he gave the order to purge the rosters of veterans.Fox is a good coach, and so is Mike Holmgren. But both were terrible in their last years, in large part because it was well-known that it was their last year. Lame duck coaches almost never do well (at some point last year I actually looked up a bunch and provided stats on this board, it was ugly). Richardson was clearly done with Fox's consistency, he wants the big reward so he decided to take the big risk. And in doing so he gave Fox the kind of roster that goes against what he wants. So Fox was totally set up to fail.

2) No, unless it's down to the two teams again for the number one pick, in which case I hope Denver edges Carolina in the wins dept (Luck is going to be worth a LOT of picks). But I doubt either team picks in the top 5. I actually expect Denver to have a better record, just because they get to play Kansas City twice. But the personnel are different, and the schedules are different, that has little to do with the coaches.

3) Assuming that the scenario extends to the entire staff, Rivera would win more. Chud is way the hell better than Davidson, and how can you be worse than Scherer? Frankly, Rivera's staff is more teaching-oriented than Fox's was, which is what you need for a young team. And again, Fox was also stuck with the staff he could get, because who would go to work for a single year? Rumor has it that after the playoff loss, Fox privately told his staff that they should look around, it's not like it was some big secret. Does that mean I think Rivera is a better coach? Absolutely not, there's no real basis to compare the two yet. But I don't much care which coach is better, so long as Rivera wins more consistently and bigger. And having Newton may be the key to that.

Nice troll, BTW. :)

Nah. Not trolling.

Told my buddy I was gonna put his comment online and see what happened. Also told him to watch out for flaming sacks of dog crap on his porch :lol:

[Porn Shop Clerk]

cam sucks y? becuz hasn't he won at least 3 superbowls yet r u guys serious cut him before he steals all our laptops

[panther4life]

1. Fox....he lost the team last year

2. I dislike Fox for numerous reasons and yes it matters very much to me that we outshine him.

3.Too much hypotheticals, 1 example...Rivera would have passed on Clausen

Rivera has been as honest and straight forward with fans as possible without giving up a competitive advantage. Fox danced around the facts and mastered how to say nothing of meaning. His cliches hwere sometimes funny but very much played out.

Also, as I stated earlier players gave up on Fox last year, this year as evidenced by the efforts against Green Bay this team will lay everything on the line for Rivera

[Mr. Scot]

Completely non-related to football, but the Panthers Huddle and panther Talk programs are way better with Rivera.

[Razzy]

1) I think it was everyone at large, including the some of players. It just had a "throwaway" season feel from the start.

2) No. Broncos are AFC.

3) We'll never know, it all depends on how well Rivera's new QB coach could have developed Matt or Pickles, assuming we still draft him.

Nothing against Fox, but I'll take Rivera's fire any day.

[frash.exe]

1) Who do you hold most responsible for last year's debacle? John Fox, Marty Hurney or Jerry Richardson?

2) Does it matter to you whether the Broncos do better than the Panthers this season? If so, how much?

3) had the team gone ahead and made the coaching change last season, what kind of record do you think Rivera could have manager with last year's roster?

(keeping in mind that the pass heavy attack we're currently watching would have been implemented with Jimmy Clausen or Matt Moore pulling the trigger)

1. Fox - The talent that was on the team wasn't as bad as they performed. Most of the vets that were cut had long outlived their usefulness. Delhomme was finished. Moose hadn't been the threat he once was. Kemo blew out his achilles the year before and didn't do anything to improve Washington's defensive line so I don't know why anyone would assume he would've been more effective here. Clausen ended up starting most of the games but Hurney didn't plan for him to. The reality of the rift between Fox and Hurney/Richardson began with Hurney building veteran teams with Fox's input and Fox failing to deliver. In 2006 they stacked the team with veteran talent, in 2007 after dropping Weinke they replaced him with another ineffective vet, and the backup we had that performed the best turned out to be an undrafted rookie, 2008, 2009, etc. All vet teams that underachieved under his leadership.

2.

• it would only be one season
  
• it wouldn't take anything away from the fact that we were spinning our wheels with fox by last year.
  

3. Do you mean can Rivera do a better job than Fox did in 2010, where 8 of the games saw us down by at least 2 possessions by halftime? Seifert would've done a better job in that situation.

[Mr. Scot]

I hadn't been all that clear how you felt about John Fox before now :sosp: