SEC 330 BIPOLAR said:
Right. Soon they're gonna start to refer to us as "sonny-boys" and "wipper-snappers".
)Belly up to the idiot bar....
More lies. Again i supposedly said that martz and sherman are superior and i implied that dungy was superior to lombardi. Yeah sure. Lombardi the second best coach in football history after ST PAUL of ALABAMA. That's just assinine.
The bottom line is that whatever a coach has accomplished gets urinated on by gut in his perilous attempt to defend his hero fisher. The point is that even if martz, sherman or dungy had a couple of super bowl rings gut would just crap on it and say they had all this hall of fame talent.
One coach that hasn't even been mentioned yet is john fox. Another coach who has done a better job than jeff fisher the last few years.
Watch as gut bashes fox and trys to tell us how his accomplishments don't matter. All for thre glorification of his exellency jeff fisher.:sad2:
More lies. Again i supposedly said that martz and sherman are superior and i implied that dungy was superior to lombardi. Yeah sure. Lombardi the second best coach in football history after ST PAUL of ALABAMA. That's just assinine.
The bottom line is that whatever a coach has accomplished gets urinated on by gut in his perilous attempt to defend his hero fisher. The point is that even if martz, sherman or dungy had a couple of super bowl rings gut would just crap on it and say they had all this hall of fame talent.
One coach that hasn't even been mentioned yet is john fox. Another coach who has done a better job than jeff fisher the last few years.
Watch as gut bashes fox and trys to tell us how his accomplishments don't matter. All for thre glorification of his exellency jeff fisher.:sad2:
Just out of interest, outside of RollTide and Gut, and BiPolar's special comments is anyone actually reading this?
I assume it is completely off topic.
I assume it is completely off topic.
I'll put your quote on the bottom just like you do because you are my hero!
Seriously, if Fisher had been terminated after the 98 season because Bud felt he wan't getting the job done and that was a good time to turn the job over to a guy like Sherman what do you think Sherman's record would have been for the next 5 years? The Titans had a core of players that were very talented and Sherman may have very well done as well or better with that talent. Same with Martz. That is reality.
Oh, if Fisher has another 5-11 or so season I would guess he might not be as hot of a commodity as a head coach as you might think. As Rolltide said, and gernerously at that, a Watermelon could have coached the team to a 5-11 record. Maybe even a veggie of some kind.
Seriously, if Fisher had been terminated after the 98 season because Bud felt he wan't getting the job done and that was a good time to turn the job over to a guy like Sherman what do you think Sherman's record would have been for the next 5 years? The Titans had a core of players that were very talented and Sherman may have very well done as well or better with that talent. Same with Martz. That is reality.
Oh, if Fisher has another 5-11 or so season I would guess he might not be as hot of a commodity as a head coach as you might think. As Rolltide said, and gernerously at that, a Watermelon could have coached the team to a 5-11 record. Maybe even a veggie of some kind.
Gut said:
Tide...
You can keep trying to spin your point in vain...but you can't argue logic or spin it away with insults or misquotes.
Where's the answer to my question?
If Dungy is better than Fisher because he's done something that Fisher has NOT done, why is he not better than Lombardi who has also not done that? Based on your argument, you did imply Dungy is as good as Lombardi. If he's not, then it's because you are using other criteria in judging a coach. You don't want to do that because it would make you look bad.
If you wanted to look at Fisher fairly, then you'd take all criteria into account...talent level, number of times rebuilding a team, wins, losses, playoff appearances, playoff wins and losses, Super Bowl appearances and SB record.
Instead, you selectively compare coaches using one criteria - which ever one makes them look better than Fisher. But I'm the one who's biased?
Just to show im not misquoting you about your claim that Dungy is BETTER than Fisher, here's your quote.
"I consider these coaches to be better than jeff fisher.
Bill Belichik
Jon gruden
Tony dungy
Mike shanahan
Andy reid
Bill cohwer"
Your reason for Dungy being better is 8 playoffs in 9 years...something Lombardi hasn't done either. So he's either better than Fisher and Lombardi based on that, or he's not because Lombardi and Fisher have done more when you take ALL the criteria into account. Which is it?
Gut
RollTide said:
You can keep trying to spin your point in vain...but you can't argue logic or spin it away with insults or misquotes.
Where's the answer to my question?
If Dungy is better than Fisher because he's done something that Fisher has NOT done, why is he not better than Lombardi who has also not done that? Based on your argument, you did imply Dungy is as good as Lombardi. If he's not, then it's because you are using other criteria in judging a coach. You don't want to do that because it would make you look bad.
If you wanted to look at Fisher fairly, then you'd take all criteria into account...talent level, number of times rebuilding a team, wins, losses, playoff appearances, playoff wins and losses, Super Bowl appearances and SB record.
Instead, you selectively compare coaches using one criteria - which ever one makes them look better than Fisher. But I'm the one who's biased?
Just to show im not misquoting you about your claim that Dungy is BETTER than Fisher, here's your quote.
"I consider these coaches to be better than jeff fisher.
Bill Belichik
Jon gruden
Tony dungy
Mike shanahan
Andy reid
Bill cohwer"
Your reason for Dungy being better is 8 playoffs in 9 years...something Lombardi hasn't done either. So he's either better than Fisher and Lombardi based on that, or he's not because Lombardi and Fisher have done more when you take ALL the criteria into account. Which is it?
Gut
Sox...
A valid question. If Sherman had led the Titans during their prime, I don't think he would have done near as well as Fisher did. Not because Fisher is my hero, but because based on his record, he did 'less' with MORE talent.
Sherman inherited a team featuring a Hall of Fame QB in his prime and soon after got one of the top RB's in the league. That is significantly more than what the Titans had IMO. Plus, GB has played in a fairly weak division comparatively.
Based on that and with more talent, Fisher did more. My definition of more being he went deeper into the playoffs more times and nearly won a Super Bowl. You could argue that you think GB's talent was equal...but even in that case, Fisher still did more! IMO that is.
Gut
Soxcat said:
A valid question. If Sherman had led the Titans during their prime, I don't think he would have done near as well as Fisher did. Not because Fisher is my hero, but because based on his record, he did 'less' with MORE talent.
Sherman inherited a team featuring a Hall of Fame QB in his prime and soon after got one of the top RB's in the league. That is significantly more than what the Titans had IMO. Plus, GB has played in a fairly weak division comparatively.
Based on that and with more talent, Fisher did more. My definition of more being he went deeper into the playoffs more times and nearly won a Super Bowl. You could argue that you think GB's talent was equal...but even in that case, Fisher still did more! IMO that is.
Gut
Sad gut...
I think you need a course in logic. You have taken every angle possible to argue against these coaches. None of them the same. This discussion has had little to do with jeff fisher it is about you nit picking from every possible angle about how this guy had this player or how this guy didn't win this game or how this guy had a great assistant and jeff fisher has had all those things!
You said that sherman won with more talent than fisher won with. No he didn't.
The 99 and 2000 teams that went 13-3 back to back had a bonafide all time great player in matthews and no less than 10 near hall of fame players.
Mcnair-george-rolle-kearse-mason-hentrich-bishop-neal-wycheck-hopkins ---
Those 10 players have 24 pro bowls. 24 pro bowls! Whether any of them make the hall of fame or not there is no doubt they are all exellent players at their positions and all are high character guys.
In addition to matthews and the 10 players mentioned(i just named half a football team!) there were numerous other quality starting players.
Robertson-robinson-randall godfrey-john thornton-kenny holmes-jon runyon-jackie harris
Fisher did a good job back then but come on, who wouldn't win with that team?
I think you need a course in logic. You have taken every angle possible to argue against these coaches. None of them the same. This discussion has had little to do with jeff fisher it is about you nit picking from every possible angle about how this guy had this player or how this guy didn't win this game or how this guy had a great assistant and jeff fisher has had all those things!
You said that sherman won with more talent than fisher won with. No he didn't.
The 99 and 2000 teams that went 13-3 back to back had a bonafide all time great player in matthews and no less than 10 near hall of fame players.
Mcnair-george-rolle-kearse-mason-hentrich-bishop-neal-wycheck-hopkins ---
Those 10 players have 24 pro bowls. 24 pro bowls! Whether any of them make the hall of fame or not there is no doubt they are all exellent players at their positions and all are high character guys.
In addition to matthews and the 10 players mentioned(i just named half a football team!) there were numerous other quality starting players.
Robertson-robinson-randall godfrey-john thornton-kenny holmes-jon runyon-jackie harris
Fisher did a good job back then but come on, who wouldn't win with that team?
In 1999 it took a miracle play or the Titans would have been out in the first game of the playoffs. They almost lost to a Bills team that had both OTs hurt and out of the game. In 2000, when almost everyone thought the Titans were the most talented team in the NFL they laid an egg in the first playoff game. In short, Fisher came withing 1 inch (if the Wycheck pass was ruled a forward lateral) of losing two years in a row in the first round of the playoffs.
My whole point isn't trying to prove Sherman is better than Fisher or visa versa. My point is you can't say one guy was successfull just because he had superior talent while Fisher was successfull because he was a superior coach. It is obvious Fisher isn't anything special without superior talent either. Fisher has done nothing earth shattering as far as developing a UDFA or low pick QB into a pro-bowler or coming up with a new fangled offense or defense. Heck if Fisher had Farve as his QB he would have had him handing the ball off to EG 40 times a game.
My whole point isn't trying to prove Sherman is better than Fisher or visa versa. My point is you can't say one guy was successfull just because he had superior talent while Fisher was successfull because he was a superior coach. It is obvious Fisher isn't anything special without superior talent either. Fisher has done nothing earth shattering as far as developing a UDFA or low pick QB into a pro-bowler or coming up with a new fangled offense or defense. Heck if Fisher had Farve as his QB he would have had him handing the ball off to EG 40 times a game.
low tide
What's sad is your inability to answer a simple question. I'll repeat it here so you can take a second shot at it...
Your reason for Dungy being better is 8 playoffs in 9 years...something Lombardi hasn't done either. So he's either better than Fisher and Lombardi based on that, or he's not because Lombardi and Fisher have done more when you take ALL the criteria into account. Which is it?
As for your latest spin attempt...amusing.
Yes, Matthews is one of the greatest OL players and will be a first ballot Hall of Famer, but in '99 and 2000, he was way past his prime. And there is a very big difference in having one old Hall of Fame O-lineman vs having a Hall of Fame QB in his prime AND perhaps the best RB in the league. 10 'near' Hall of Famers? What's that? A guy you think is good but know he's not gonna be going to the Hall? Nice try. It's not like GB's other players all stunk!
Your spun point is that Fisher had a very good team and he did well with it. But Sherman had a better team and did much less. Dungy has had 5 better teams than those 2 that Fisher had and he hasn't sniffed the Super Bowl...even with a Hall of Fame QB, Hall of Fame WR, a pro bowl WR on the other side (IMO), and one of the best RB's in the league. They also have a likely hall of famer in his prime at RDE. And yet you say he's better than Fisher???
Amusing!
Gut
What's sad is your inability to answer a simple question. I'll repeat it here so you can take a second shot at it...
Your reason for Dungy being better is 8 playoffs in 9 years...something Lombardi hasn't done either. So he's either better than Fisher and Lombardi based on that, or he's not because Lombardi and Fisher have done more when you take ALL the criteria into account. Which is it?
As for your latest spin attempt...amusing.
Yes, Matthews is one of the greatest OL players and will be a first ballot Hall of Famer, but in '99 and 2000, he was way past his prime. And there is a very big difference in having one old Hall of Fame O-lineman vs having a Hall of Fame QB in his prime AND perhaps the best RB in the league. 10 'near' Hall of Famers? What's that? A guy you think is good but know he's not gonna be going to the Hall? Nice try. It's not like GB's other players all stunk!
Your spun point is that Fisher had a very good team and he did well with it. But Sherman had a better team and did much less. Dungy has had 5 better teams than those 2 that Fisher had and he hasn't sniffed the Super Bowl...even with a Hall of Fame QB, Hall of Fame WR, a pro bowl WR on the other side (IMO), and one of the best RB's in the league. They also have a likely hall of famer in his prime at RDE. And yet you say he's better than Fisher???
Amusing!
Gut
RollTide said:
HIT GAYTON P-man EVERY PLAY
the dolts will just get 15 the next play anyways so go ahead and take that extra step, the ref just might let ya play football instead of pitch-n-catch
the dolts will just get 15 the next play anyways so go ahead and take that extra step, the ref just might let ya play football instead of pitch-n-catch
Mathews past his prime in 99 and 2000...?
He made the pro bowl both years.
Yeah he probably wasn't as good at 38 as he was at 28. So? Does that make jeff fisher a better coach? Does that mean that team was not talented? Dumb!
Your question you demand to be answered is idiotic. There are numerous things lombardi did that dungy did not icluding winning 5 championships. What in the hell is wrong with your thinking? You wasted 4 posts on this crap.
What you are claiming, dishonestly, is that i have one simple formula for determinging how to compare coaches when that has not been the case at all. You are the one using simple formula's the problem is that you have a different one for each coach.
In this age of the salary cap tony dungy has brought 8 straight teams to the playoffs. Anyone who doesn't think he is an outstanding coach is a moron.
And no sherman did not have a better team either. The 2 12-4 packer teams in 2001 and 2002 had a total of 9 pro bowl appearences(3 and 6). The 99&2000 titans had 12 pro bowls(4 & 8). The 2000 titans had 8 players make the pro bowl and they were not talented? And steve mcnair wasn't one of them. :sad2: :sad2:
He made the pro bowl both years.
Yeah he probably wasn't as good at 38 as he was at 28. So? Does that make jeff fisher a better coach? Does that mean that team was not talented? Dumb!
Your question you demand to be answered is idiotic. There are numerous things lombardi did that dungy did not icluding winning 5 championships. What in the hell is wrong with your thinking? You wasted 4 posts on this crap.
What you are claiming, dishonestly, is that i have one simple formula for determinging how to compare coaches when that has not been the case at all. You are the one using simple formula's the problem is that you have a different one for each coach.
In this age of the salary cap tony dungy has brought 8 straight teams to the playoffs. Anyone who doesn't think he is an outstanding coach is a moron.
And no sherman did not have a better team either. The 2 12-4 packer teams in 2001 and 2002 had a total of 9 pro bowl appearences(3 and 6). The 99&2000 titans had 12 pro bowls(4 & 8). The 2000 titans had 8 players make the pro bowl and they were not talented? And steve mcnair wasn't one of them. :sad2: :sad2:
Stats are like a cheap date.... You can get them to do anything you want!
Gut....
This is pretty much it for me and this debate. We happen to disagree so what? We both made good points and i respect your opinion. Where else can we go?
You are a cool guy and i have always digged that avatar. The little black dude eating beans out of a can? That's what that is right? Funny...
Maybe a couple of years from now there won't be a debate about fisher because he will winning a super bowl. With the help of vince young of course.:greedy:
This is pretty much it for me and this debate. We happen to disagree so what? We both made good points and i respect your opinion. Where else can we go?
You are a cool guy and i have always digged that avatar. The little black dude eating beans out of a can? That's what that is right? Funny...
Maybe a couple of years from now there won't be a debate about fisher because he will winning a super bowl. With the help of vince young of course.:greedy:
Well?
What the hell is it that the little dude is eating? I asked my wife and she gave me several possible answers. Popcorn, cookies and french fries.
Maybe we should start a whole thread on the issue. What food is gut's little dude eating?
What the hell is it that the little dude is eating? I asked my wife and she gave me several possible answers. Popcorn, cookies and french fries.
Maybe we should start a whole thread on the issue. What food is gut's little dude eating?
- Status
- Not open for further replies.
