SDS

He's straight?

Kelly... you're as cool as the other side of the pillow. Props to you.

TO will be a dominate, well-behaved player next year. Mark my words.

I agree with what you are saying, but trying to land a great football mind is just as important in my book as some other attributes. Sadly, it appears that 1% really soaks up most of the glory as defined by Championships.

When all the marbles were on the line - even WITH superior talent he lost. And for that - I refuse to scrub his scrotum.... Like I mentioned previously, I see no point in romanticizing an individual's ability to keep a team together in the face of adversity when it is of my opinion that the adversity was created by the same person.

I think you could put in Shanahan, Holmgren, Walsh, perhaps Vermiel (on the offense)... Maybe you could argue Parcells, but he DOES have mucho input and to me that seems the natural way to go. If not, why not have Steve Jobs as your HC? If you have other football men running the show, then what is the need for a top coordinator, etc.. to assume a HC position when in fact you are advocating removing the HC from the essential workflow that needs to take place in order to prepare for your opponent?

I'm not in the mood for a game of gotcha, so just make your point.

In one sentence - that is EXACTLY what I mean and highlights my issues with Marv. I guess I shouldn't rag on Levy for being who he is, just like I don't rag on Parrish for being who he is. They can't help it. They are who they are and they are doing the best that can given their limited abilities. I was just always resentful that our opponents in the big game had a head coach providing added value and direction that allowed them to beat us. My position is that if we had a head coach that was on par with our opponents, one who could provide that added value, that direction, that knowledge of a weakness we could exploit, that we would have won those big games. Marv was a wonderful head cheerleader that made everyone feel warm and fuzzy after the SB losses. Well, in my book, that is like the admiring the orphan who pulls himself together after he killed his parents...

Blame women for most of these complaints. They are the ones driving the human interest stories. The networks figure the men will watch regardless, so they try and draw more women in with all the bull sh--.

yes and no... Coach Levy made sure the buses ran on time and was generally pleasant to be around. Parcells, Gibbs, Belichek... those guys provide more detailed direction on how to defeat the next opponent. They keep their coordinators in check, incase they come up with things that won't work in their estimation. As HC's they display week in and week out why they know more than their underlings (and their counterparts across the field). Personally, I would rather have a guy who is smart enough and knows the game/opponent well enough to provide key input every Sunday than someone who just walks the sidelines yelling for the punt team every now and then.

or take it in the can from the Pats...

Now that the Olympics are every 2 years - does anyone else think they really dampened the excitement? When it was every 4 years - everyone was pumped. I don't sense that much excitement anymore....

Holy crap - where have you been?

every minute you spend posting here is one less minute searching for the girl in your avatar!

So, the guy who hasn't interviewed yet is in 2nd place? wow, Clayton nailed that one.

Give me a minute, I'm searching for my photo with the hooter's girls.

Clayton is a big supporer of Jauron. I guess he likes what he sees in Dick.

Sherman coached on the Pack staff when they lost to Denver... that's all I got.

Just look at the size of Sherman's head! Here it is in in 1986 and now it is 3x the size!

Well, Rivers is out too then... There probably is a pony in there somewhere. I think the real analysis is the % of cap money going to your starting QB position - regardless of draft position or how they were acquired. That may be worthwhile because there is a cause and effect there.

Does Jim McMahon or Phil Simms mean anything to you? Are you going to throw in the John Elway minor technicality that he was drafted then immediately traded? Because somehow, someone thinks that drafting a guy is different then trading for him a week after the draft...

Not really. Toilet humor is what you get when you set up a self-serving proposition and you get called on it. Year after year after year. Since we are using simple statistical analysis to prove our opinions One fact that I know, and you can't tell me otherwise - churches cause crime. Look it up if you doubt me. As the density of churches increases in an area, so does the crime. I will not listen to, nor accept any explanation of this data point, since it is an observable fact. Lotsa churches. Lotsa crime. Direct correlation.

when you pull out ridiculous scenarios filled with all sorts of caveats - then expect to catch some crap. You narrowly specify one way to obtain a QB and say that isn't as successful as the other 100 ways combined and yet you want some sort of credibility? Any meaningful analysis of this tripe is dismissed in some robot like fashion that doesn't allow for the digestion of data because it shoots all kinds of holes in your theory. You take this weeks games as some sort testament to your theory despite the fact that matchups forced a certain outcome.You say "17 years worth of data" when it is well known that expecting Alex Smith to lead the 49ers to a SB championship in 2005 is an asinine data point to include. The exclusion of Elway, Simms, etc... just goes to show how far you will manipulate and stipulate your theory to arrive at your preconceived outcome.

<flush> yes.

What is MV's accuracy outside and in cold weather? If it is as good as his performance in the dome, then it is better to have someone clutch during the regular season who may choke in the playoffs, than to have someone you can never rely on.