Charlie Batch Sums it Up Nicely

That's just it, teams with franchise quarterbacks like Ben aren't supposed to be in transition. We have very good talent at the skill positions on offense. We've invested top draft picks on offensive linemen. We've got three linebackers who were number one draft picks (and one who was a number two) and supposedly can't miss prospects coming out of college. Our DL has Cam Heyward, a player coming into his own. Our secondary sucks but we gave a nice contract to Cortez Allen, signed our top target in free agency, Mike Mitchell, drafted Shamarko Thomas as our next great safety.

My point is, with a franchise (elite?) quarterback and all of these other pieces, WE HAVE ENOUGH TALENT TO WIN TODAY! At least IMHO. The coaching staff is failing at coaching these guys up to the next level. And to me, you give the "benefit of the doubt" to a HC that may lose to a lesser opponent as an anomaly, but when losing to a lesser opponent becomes the rule rather than the exception, the HC does not deserve the benefit of the doubt.

 

We don't always agree, Jack, but I definitely agree with you on this point.

I also find our inconsistency irritating, but I think you also have to look at the games individually. In some cases, we played badly. In some cases, we prepped badly. In some cases, the gameplan was wrong. And in others, the opponents just stepped up and played a blinder.

I suppose what I'm saying is: we're not just inconsistent, we're inconsistently inconsistent. And that's probably the number one frustration for me - whoever's fault it is - as it leads to all these blood-pressure raising Jekyll an Hyde seasons.

 

George Seifert.

 

I had thought of him too but he went back 95 with a different QB and won it all again. I was looking for someone that was handed a really good team and did not do much after most of his really good vets left or retired.

 

Simply showing up as the head coach of this team should get you 8 wins. A good coach will get you 2 or 3 more.

 

Does Norv Turner qualify? He was handed a 14-2 team.

 

No I was looking for Superbowl winners and Superbowl appearances since some on here think that its very important that MT won 1 and went to a second so he's a great coach with a plan that's taking shape. LOL

 

I think your introspection on the coaching personality is pretty good. I especially love the hard-nosed whiner analysis of the Ravens and the low football IQ for the Steelers - they have it in spades.

 

Seifert inherited the nucleus of a pretty good football team in SF. They still had guys named Rice and Lott and Young was a pretty good successor to Montana. There are some similarities to Tomlin in that as long as Seifert had strong veteran leadership drafted by and developed by the previous coach, he did okay. When it came time to draft and develop his own players the team declined. Of course, that was to be expected when you have some of the all-time greats aging out and a new group of players coming in. Seifert could not coach them through the transition and I'm not sure Tomlin can do that either. Seifert was also given a chance to build his own team in Carolina and failed miserably. I don't consider Seifert a good coach. He was average at best and, like Tomlin, a pretty good maintenance man but that's about it.

 

I agree here and that's what I am trying to say I don't think you need to be great or even that good to get a great group to a Superbowl. Tomlin was lucky and his true coaching ability is being tested and he is failing miserably.

" Also, that Cowboy team was a juggernaut, Tomlin has never had that kind of team. "

How can you say this the 2008 defense was one of the best every in the league in comparison to stats, that team was really good you cant say Tomlin has never had that kind of team.

 

Easily. The Cowboys were a complete team. A great defense, running game, passing game etc.

 

The problem with Seifert was that he always looked like someone's dad who'd turned up to pick them up from soccer practice.