Jump to content
Washington Football Team Logo
Extremeskins
Forum Rules and Guidelines

Who's the most overrated NFL head coach of ALL-Time?

michael_33

By michael_33
in The Stadium

Recommended Posts

heatman28

heatman28

Posted
Posted

I gotta say Parcells doesn't scare anyone and the media and so called "experts" picking dallas to go all the way is just comical! I also thin Brian Billick is another loser without Marvin Lewis there to help his pathetic offense to win a very lousy SB.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
WeownU

WeownU

Posted
Posted
I wouldn't say that Norv is the most overrated head coach because everyone knows he stinks. I do think however that he is the most overrated coordinator in the NFL by a wide margin. People still think of him as an offensive genius even though he has produced only one top 10 offense in his 13 years since leaving the Cowboys. What he does do is produce good fantasy running backs.

I would definetly agree with this. I don't see how people could label him as a genius because of the cowboys teams. Look at the talent he had. Any fool could call plays for that team. I know Aikman thinks the world of Norv, but I never got it. I always felt he was way to conservative.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
ouvan59

ouvan59

Posted
Posted
I would definetly agree with this. I don't see how people could label him as a genius because of the cowboys teams. Look at the talent he had. Any fool could call plays for that team. I know Aikman thinks the world of Norv, but I never got it. I always felt he was way to conservative.

Bingo, which is the exact reason we lost so many damn games in the 4th quarter when he was here. I actually think he is a good X's and O's coach but he completely cramps up during the game. He would script the first 15 plays or something like that and that would be generally successful but the second half was always a struggle.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
NWSkins

NWSkins

Posted
Posted

Bill Belichick

He single handedly brought down the Browns franchise from being a perrenial playoff team to one of the worst teams of the 90's. This of course led to their move to Baltimore. Most of know his rather awkward decision to release popular Bernie Kosar in favor of "i like to throw interceptions" Vinny Testaverde.

So then he goes to New England.

Yes he has sucess obviously, with 3 super bowl wins because of Tom Brady

But is he really the best coach of all-time? That's the only thing that makes him overrated. Him being put up with the best..i dont agree with it. Maybe you guys do. Of course he's a defensive genius, but the New England Defense has only finished in the top 10 once the past 4 years. I think without Mr. Weis controlling the Offense, the Pats are simply a strong but beatable team. They proved that this past year.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Santana_Fan

Santana_Fan

Posted
Posted
Bill Belichick.

Yes, he won three Super Bowls in four years, but he won three Super Bowls in four years. It was the same team. Once a team is dominating and gets to a Super Bowl level, then it's SUPPOSED to stay there until it loses its key players. That's how the salary cap era is supposed to work. New England never lost their key players in that four-year span, nor did they have any real competition within their division. The The Patriots won because they had great PLAYERS, but Bill never really did anything to contribute to that. He had the best quarterback in the league magically appear.

Gibbs, on the other hand, is the opposite. Hey had some core players, yes, but they were all castoffs. He never had the best quarterback in the league. He's had, what? ONE Hall of Famer and one player who should be in there if it weren't for Z and King? THAT is the sign of a brilliant coach. Three different quarterbacks and runningbacks. I'm so sick of that guy from New England being mentioned in top coach threads. He doesn't deserve it.

Aww man, I usually always agree with you, but I have to disagree on this one. I think he's the 2nd best coach after Gibbs. Before he won the first SB with the Pats, no one really paid Givens, Troy Brown, Patten, and Branch any attention. They had a bunch of no-name players, and I feel Belichick did a great job working with those players, and keeping them determined. I dont think anyone actually paid any of those receivers any attention until the 2nd SB. Some peopel didn't even know of Patten before he came here. Plus he had the Colts #'s every year and had them choke each year before last year....what teams can actually say they've done it? I mean the Pats defense wasn't alot of good names either, just a few like McGinest, Law (when he was there), Harrison, Bruschi, and Mike Vrabel, well maybe that is somewhat alot, but before the first SB, they werent even be acknowledged. Most def, almost everyone was on the side of the Rams handing them a defeat, except for those who are on the side of the underdogs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
DiscoBob

DiscoBob

Posted
Posted

I agree with much of the discussion on this topic, but the part that is bothering me is making statements like:

"well of course _____ won when he was in (Name of City), he had (name of really good player) how could he not win?"

The essence of being a good coach is getting good players, keeping them satisfied, gettting them to play well, motivating the team, etc.

This argument is OK when a coach comes into a team that another coach built, but in most scenario's is not a fair assessment....

We all know that Elway was a good QB, but you can't know how much of his success in the NFL was the result of coaching.....

Link to comment
Share on other sites
mtyquinn

mtyquinn

Posted
Posted

Dave Wanstadt - Lousy in Chicago and Miami

Norv Turner - Lousy in DC and Oakland

Marty Schottenheimer - Great regular season records (184-124-1), absolutely awful in the postseason (5-12).

Brian Billick - His success was a result of Marvin Lewis' talented defense. How else can a team go 5 weeks without scoring a touchdown yet still manage to win the Superbowl.

Andy Reid - Feasted on a weak division and then lets T.O. destroy the team.

Barry Switzer - That team had so much talent, a homeless person could have coached that team to the Superbowl.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
No_Pressure

No_Pressure

Posted
Posted

Anyone else think Coryell gets more credit than he deserves? I mean sure he coached a smart offensive system but IMO when you have Joe Gibbs as your offensive coordinator that makes things a lot easier, after Gibbs left the Chargers they had a bit of a drop off...

I think Coryell was a good coach of coaches but maybe not necessairily an NFL genius like he is made out to be.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
nonniey

nonniey

Posted
Posted

What about Norv Turner? For years after he should have been fired for rank incompetence, the media and even many Redskins fans thought he was a great coach. Heck, even now you'll find some fool who thinks we should have stuck by him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
NewCliche21

NewCliche21

Posted
Posted
Aww man, I usually always agree with you, but I have to disagree on this one. I think he's the 2nd best coach after Gibbs. Before he won the first SB with the Pats, no one really paid Givens, Troy Brown, Patten, and Branch any attention. They had a bunch of no-name players, and I feel Belichick did a great job working with those players, and keeping them determined. I dont think anyone actually paid any of those receivers any attention until the 2nd SB. Some peopel didn't even know of Patten before he came here. Plus he had the Colts #'s every year and had them choke each year before last year....what teams can actually say they've done it? I mean the Pats defense wasn't alot of good names either, just a few like McGinest, Law (when he was there), Harrison, Bruschi, and Mike Vrabel, well maybe that is somewhat alot, but before the first SB, they werent even be acknowledged. Most def, almost everyone was on the side of the Rams handing them a defeat, except for those who are on the side of the underdogs.

Sorry, I can't agree. The Colts choke on their own no matter who they're playing. While I understand your point about those players, he still won with the same players. My whole argument is that if you keep the same team together that's won a Super Bowl, then there's no reason that they shouldn't win more than one. Belichick is top 20 for sure, but there's no way in hell that he's anywhere near the likes of Gibbs or Lombardi. Not by a long shot.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Duckus

Duckus

Posted
Posted
Sorry, I can't agree. The Colts choke on their own no matter who they're playing. While I understand your point about those players, he still won with the same players. My whole argument is that if you keep the same team together that's won a Super Bowl, then there's no reason that they shouldn't win more than one. Belichick is top 20 for sure, but there's no way in hell that he's anywhere near the likes of Gibbs or Lombardi. Not by a long shot.

For me, I hate Belichick A LOT, but I still see him as a top 5 of all time. The argument that if you win and keep the players then there's no reason that you should not win more is too simplistic. It does not take into what other teams to do improve in the league, how you become the "hunted" team in the league, the change in schedules, ect. Winning a Super Bowl is an enormous task and just because you have the same players as the year before does not mean you should win again.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Heidenreich

Heidenreich

Posted
Posted
I don't understand why so many are nominating the likes of Spurrier, Turner or Switzer. I don't think anyone is actually fawning over their coaching prowess. With that said, I nominate Holmgren, Reid, and Denny Green.

Spurrier was talked up when he came here, but I see your point. They fall along the lines of other great coaches like Dave Campo, Ray Handley, and Wayne Fontes. Props to LW for busting that name out.

wayne fonts

As for a serious addition to the conversation, Mike Martz.......

Link to comment
Share on other sites
NewCliche21

NewCliche21

Posted
Posted
For me, I hate Belichick A LOT, but I still see him as a top 5 of all time. The argument that if you win and keep the players then there's no reason that you should not win more is too simplistic. It does not take into what other teams to do improve in the league, how you become the "hunted" team in the league, the change in schedules, ect. Winning a Super Bowl is an enormous task and just because you have the same players as the year before does not mean you should win again.

No way. Johnson did the same thing that Belichick did, and he did it before it was cool. Is Johnson top-five all-time? Hell no.

The Patriots of the first half of this decade were amazing, yes. But that wasn't a reflection on Belichick. Gibbs went out and won with nobody, and once Gibbs left, the organization went to hell. If Belichick leaves with the '04 or '05 squad still in tact, then they should still have about the same record as last year. Belichick did help, but he was along for the ride. Gibbs, on the other hand, carried his 47- and 53-man teams.

To put it simply:

Belichick was the coach of a 3-time winning team.

Gibbs was 3 Super Bowl-winning teams.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Duckus

Duckus

Posted
Posted
No way. Johnson did the same thing that Belichick did, and he did it before it was cool. Is Johnson top-five all-time? Hell no.

The Patriots of the first half of this decade were amazing, yes. But that wasn't a reflection on Belichick. Gibbs went out and won with nobody, and once Gibbs left, the organization went to hell. If Belichick leaves with the '04 or '05 squad still in tact, then they should still have about the same record as last year. Belichick did help, but he was along for the ride. Gibbs, on the other hand, carried his 47- and 53-man teams.

To put it simply:

Belichick was the coach of a 3-time winning team.

Gibbs was 3 Super Bowl-winning teams.

We will have to agree to disagree, as everyone is going to see coaches and their impact differently. To me Belichick put together a great group of players and was able to find Brady, who will probably go down as one of the best QBs in recent times. He seems to have a great ability to find players, fill holes from injuries, get players to believe in his system of "no starts" and able to game plan extremely well. Winning 3 Super Bowls and being the "it" team for several years is a huge accomplishment and to me I see him as a top 5 coach (maybe more like 5-10 though). I just think that your claim that he was "along for the ride" is a stretch to say the least and is ignoring the complexity of football and the importance of the coach. I am also confused on how you know that if he left, they would have the same record? We have no idea what their record would have been. But as I said before, everyone is going to see coaches differently.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...