The case for firing Rivera and the case for keeping Rivera

[Marguide]

And that is what they have done since Hurney's firing. Look at the OL. Look at the defense. How many rookies, backups and PS players were put into starting roles and look at how they played. Sorry but I have seem other coaches with better players do far worse,

So let me get this straight. You are saying that because RR finally got things turned around after Hurney got fired and he was put on the hot seat is a good reason to keep him?

What about the games we played before that when we had the starters (i.e. better players) and they were unprepared, undercoached, and couldn't execute to save their lives.

So all we need to do next year is put Ron on notice in training camp, give him scrub backups for the o-line, and we should be good to go, right?

[MHS831]

Teeray, I am also on the fence, but the wind is blowing me toward the "fire Rivera" side. Still, I am not convinced that such a move would solve anything, because we are playing better. However, we are still underperforming. Here are my reasons, ranked in order of significance:

Fire RR:

1. Discipline. When my QB ignores my QB coach on the sideline while donning a towel over his head that features the logo of a company the QB endorses, I have a problem with the coaching staff that would allow it. Not to mention that the QB had just kicked an opponent and bumped a ref--REGARDLESS OF THE REASON he did it. Now, this works both ways--the fact that Rivera did not pull Cam to help his attitudinal development is significant, but also significant is the fact that a player who knows the coach has his back is less likely to take matters into his own hands. Cam should have been benched for a. losing his composure, b. ignoring his coach c. pouting and not resuming his place as a team leader.

2. Game management. People forget, however, that RR was aware of the shortcomings he had on the field. You mention plays in which Norman and Nakamura were attacked by the opposition. I blame Hurney for the fact that RR had a special teamer and a 5th round rookie from a small school in the game. Norman is not physical and was outsized during the Chicago drive. Jamming the huge WR or taking away the slant was not realistic and would have led to a big play. Rivera did not have the cards to win the hand. HOWEVER, he had the player on the bench who could take that away from Chicago--the other Josh. Why was he not playing?

3. That leads to personnel decisions. I am not sure RR is playing the best people. Kuechly was better in the middle than Beason from day 1. Beason's injuries and his height made him a bit of a liability compared to Luke. Luke on the outside reduced his effectiveness as well. How often at the end of the season did you ask, "Why was Thomas not playing all season?" Our defense did not improve until Beason went to IR. Kearse was cut and then brought back to start over Fua. Looked pretty decent. What did Gettis do? After Atlanta, what made Nakamura better than Martin? I think he needs to evaluate talent every day, every week, etc. and start playing the best players.

[teeray]

Every team has times where they have to call a timeout unexpectedly, It's just part of the game. Too say they wasted the one timeout they took against the Saints is a bit nitpicking.

It will happen sometimes but it shouldn't happen multiple times in a game.

It was 1st down with 29 seconds left. If you spike the ball, you only have two opportunities to score a TD so you do not run to spike it but instead you try to get a play off. Maybe there was some mis-communications about the play called or someone lined-up incorrectly so they were forced to call the TO. Again, you have a 2nd year 23 year old QB with a make-shift OL. As it was, they still had 3 tries to score a TD instead of just the two.

I think not calling for a spike was the right call but then I am no expert.

If you have 2 timeouts calling a timeout is the right play. If you only have one I don't believe that it is.

I would not mind running down and running a play, but trying to get set and run a play on a short field is challenging. Spiking the ball there does a couple of things that I think makes it the better play even though you lose a down.

1) clock management- In football the most important thing at the end of each half is properly managing the clock. Keeping the timeout allows you the ability to better insure that you get the last play of the half.

2) Larger playbook- keeping that timeout allows you to broaden the playbook. With the ability to stop the clock you can run the ball, or run the read option, or throw the ball on a hitch or crossing route short of the goal line hoping you can get in after the catch. If you don't get a TD you have the ability to stop the clock quickly

3) Assures points- this is probably the most important reason. The SD game goes unnoticed because even though we didn't get a TD we got a field goal and of course we won the game. HOWEVER, if Cam were to have gotten sacked on either of the last two plays it is unlikely that everyone would have been able to get back to the line of scrimmage in time to spike the ball before the clock expired. If that were to happen then we would have not got any points at all. That is a disaster. It didn't happen in this case, but three points was the difference in the Dall, CHI, Tampa, ATL, and SEA games. Getting points in those situation is critical. And we put ourselves in a position to not get any points at the end of the half despite being on the 5 yard line with 30 seconds to play. In those situations in the NFL you have to insure you get points and by using our last timeout it put that insurance in serious jeopardy.

Timeouts are precious in the NFL IMO, and we waste too many of them. Sometimes it is unavoidable, but it is also a big reason why we have been so dysfunctional at the end of halves and games.

[teeray]

Teeray, I am also on the fence, but the wind is blowing me toward the "fire Rivera" side. Still, I am not convinced that such a move would solve anything, because we are playing better. However, we are still underperforming. Here are my reasons, ranked in order of significance:

Fire RR:

1. Discipline. When my QB ignores my QB coach on the sideline while donning a towel over his head that features the logo of a company the QB endorses, I have a problem with the coaching staff that would allow it. Not to mention that the QB had just kicked an opponent and bumped a ref--REGARDLESS OF THE REASON he did it. Now, this works both ways--the fact that Rivera did not pull Cam to help his attitudinal development is significant, but also significant is the fact that a player who knows the coach has his back is less likely to take matters into his own hands. Cam should have been benched for a. losing his composure, b. ignoring his coach c. pouting and not resuming his place as a team leader.

If a QB got benched for every time he cursed and got in a ref's face, Tom Brady and Philip Rivers would hardly ever play. The bump was unintentional, which is why he wasn't kicked out of the game. But it did happen which is why he got flagged.

Not to mention that he was being driven into the ground or hit late over and over again with no flag from the ref.

2. Game management. People forget, however, that RR was aware of the shortcomings he had on the field. You mention plays in which Norman and Nakamura were attacked by the opposition. I blame Hurney for the fact that RR had a special teamer and a 5th round rookie from a small school in the game. Norman is not physical and was outsized during the Chicago drive. Jamming the huge WR or taking away the slant was not realistic and would have led to a big play. Rivera did not have the cards to win the hand. HOWEVER, he had the player on the bench who could take that away from Chicago--the other Josh. Why was he not playing?

I am not debating the playcalling itself as much as using it as an example of a coach that is trying to find himself and his identity. I think after the ATL he over corrected and became too cautious when the CHI situation came up. He hasn't been a head coach long enough to have a strong conviction of how he should handle certain situations. When you have been a head coach for a while you become confident in your convictions because you have been successful doing things a certain way. If you have not been a head coach a while, when a game like ATL happens you start questioning yourself first. It is a process that almost any coach has to go through. Eventually Rivera will decide what works best for him, and then probably become stubborn about it like every coach does.

As far as the Norman point you made. I agree, but at some point, as the offense is getting closer to the scoring zone in a field goal game, you have to take the risk of getting beat over the top. You can't let the offense just move the ball right down the field like that for fear of getting beat deep. Not when they start getting close to midfield and all they need is a field goal.

3. That leads to personnel decisions. I am not sure RR is playing the best people. Kuechly was better in the middle than Beason from day 1. Beason's injuries and his height made him a bit of a liability compared to Luke. Luke on the outside reduced his effectiveness as well. How often at the end of the season did you ask, "Why was Thomas not playing all season?" Our defense did not improve until Beason went to IR. Kearse was cut and then brought back to start over Fua. Looked pretty decent. What did Gettis do? After Atlanta, what made Nakamura better than Martin? I think he needs to evaluate talent every day, every week, etc. and start playing the best players.

I agree with you on this. But sometimes it is hard to project practice to game day. I think you have coached before so you probably know that sometimes a guy looks great in practice but is invisible in a game, and sometimes a guy looks like he couldn't play dead in a John Wayne movie in practice but when the lights come on is an all-pro.

I think we learned a lot more about some of these players at the end of the season when they had a chance to get in some games.

[Happy Panther]

The "coach thing" isn't wrong. The OP says Fox was paid about $6M in 2010 and his coaching staff was somewhere in the $11M range. The figures I posted for 2011 don't even have Fox breaking the $5M mark... so we're to conclude he took that much of a pay cut in Denver?

He didn't set the salary budget. The salary cap is what sets the budget, it's not like JR tells the GM, "This is your budget..."

Huge misconception there. Each team's salary cap and its current situation sets the limit for the checkbook, not the owner telling the GM, "I know we have a $120M salary cap, but I will only let you spend $100M."

And JR had nothing to do with it, Marty Hurney engineered the salary cap situation.

This is your argument for JR being cheap?

[Pimpdaddy]

...My gut is to keep Riviera...He's played the game, hes been a coordinator and has football acumen...he's been around the track so to speak. We have to set a course and stick with it...thru good and bad, ups and downs.Riv was handed a bag of sht and has not had a reasonable amount of time to put his mark on this team. We need stability and direction, not a coaching carrousel.

What made Foxy great was his outstanding coordinators, Henning and Del Rio and a lucky ass Duhlomme who had a guy named Smitty who would sacrifice his body for recognition. Fox was sht after they left....He's doing it again, he has the best o coordinator in Payton Manning...he'll ride this for another few years but he'll come back to reality if Manning goes down..

I think if we get some decent coordinators, shore up the o line, cut the dead weight and get rid of the 5-6 mofos standin on the sidelines that don't contribute jack we will be able to take that next step...

If we had some decent coordinators on both sides of the ball Rivera could concentrate on coaching. He has to deal with schizoid Chud and McDouchebag...Riv is putting his stamp on the D...you can see that.

[Anybodyhome]

This is your argument for JR being cheap?

You're the one that stated Richardson paid and/or overpaid players. I merely pointed out that is not the case and that paying players based upon a salary cap has nothing to do with paying coaches. This is beside the fact the GM is doing the contract negotiating and deciding the salary structure, not JR.

You used the example of overpaying players as evidence that he's not cheap. The argument has nothing to do with players; we were talking about coaches.

[Happy Panther]

You're the one that stated Richardson paid and/or overpaid players. I merely pointed out that is not the case and that paying players based upon a salary cap has nothing to do with paying coaches. This is beside the fact the GM is doing the contract negotiating and deciding the salary structure, not JR.

You used the example of overpaying players as evidence that he's not cheap. The argument has nothing to do with players; we were talking about coaches.

Ok. He paid John Fox $6.5M.

[Bj-Monster23]

It doesn't matter anymore we are stuck with being content and mediocre. The fact that reminds is Richardson is going to bring Rivera back. Smh

[Happy Panther]

It doesn't matter anymore we are stuck with being content and mediocre. The fact that reminds is Richardson is going to bring Rivera back. Smh

Hopefully Richardson isn't bringing Rivera back.

Richardson is hiring a GM who will make that decision.

Hopefully.

[cranky]

You are saying that because RR finally got things turned around after Hurney got fired and he was put on the hot seat is a good reason to keep him?

First, let me say thanks for at least admitting RR got things turned around :thumbsu:

Seriously though. All I am saying is that regardless of how he turned things around, he did. And because he did, he earned another year.

[Lumps]

This team is only competitive because we have Cam and Rivera knows how to coach up a defense. I don't believe we will ever reach our true potential with Ron as HC.

That said, I could live with him returning, but only if Chud is replaced by an OC/AHC with good game management skills (to help Ron in that area).

We go into next year with the same staff and I expect the same results as years 1 and 2. Flashes of brilliance, flashes of ineptitude.

this

[Kakarot]

All I know is, if we're going to keep him we need to get someone in here with some major NFL experience to help him out with things such as: clock management, knowing when to go for it or not, etc. We need to get an older offensive coordinator or assistant coach. Also, Chud needs to go.

[Razeyfingers]

So basically, I have become pretty indifferent about the whole thing because I think a strong case can be made for either firing him or keeping him. The new GM and JR have a tough decision to make, and no matter what they decide I will see the logic in it.

This post has been promoted to an article

Easily your best post ever on the Huddle, Teeray. good stuff man, money