Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

Why is it all Rivera's fault?


  • Please log in to reply
114 replies to this topic

#106 panthers55

panthers55

    Starting all over again

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,723 posts
  • LocationAt the lake

Posted 03 January 2013 - 10:51 AM

I actually think you're starting to come around. :)

If roughly half of all coaches win in their first season, and of the remainder almost half win in their second season, then your chances to win with a new coach are over 50%. If you don't start winning until year three, your chances of winning are less than 50%. The data set is really low on this next one, rendering it anecdotal at best, but GMs who stay with coaches that haven't won yet always end up replacing them in the next two seasons.

And I know you are poised with all kinds of "but this time it's different!" arguments, to which I can only respond, "they're all different." In essence based on history we're more likely to be successful if we go in a new direction. Sure, there's a chance Rivera is successful, and he leads us to a decade of dominance. But it's probably just as likely as a player coming back successfully from three ACL surgeries on the same knee. :)


No I am just looking at the stats from a different perspective. You say half of the coaches since 1992 were successful in their first year. I just looked at current coaches for all 32 teams ( I included the just fired coaches since they haven't been replaced) and what I found is that 8 of the 32 coaches had a winning record in year 1. That means 75% of the coaches didn't win in the first year. Lets assume that without looking it up 50% of the coaches had a winning record in the second year. What that still doesn't address is that many of these coaches didn't necessarily build a successful program after that. Plus it doesn't include guys like Hue Jackson for the Raiders who was given only 1 year to succeed. So if we are looking for a guy who will win in the first 2 years irregardless of how they do down the road then lets can Rivera and go elsewhere. And we can do that over and over just like the Raiders until we find someone.

But what about the guys who won in year 1 or 2 and then struggled down the road?? For example Rex Ryan started off great guns at 9-7 and 11-5 his first 2 years. Since then 8-8 and 6-10. Given your criteria he is a proven guy who built a successful program. The reality is he is like Fox when he was here, he had some good years and some bad years. How bout Whisenhunt- he went 8-8 in year 1 and 9-7 in year 2 and 10-6 in year 3 and a Superbowl appearance. Successful guy right?? How about the last 3 years- 5-11, 8-8, 5-11. Yeah successful program.

I could go on and on.

The reality is your criteria is hardly a reason to fire Rivera based on selective stats. The vast majority of current coaches and just fired coaches were not successful in year 1 and even though more were successful in year 2, that didn't necessarily guaranteed future success.
So the notion that if you don't win early you won't win needs a sidebar which states that even if they have been successful in year 1 or 2 doesn't mean they will be successful in future years. Some will and some won't. Look at the current coaches.

As for going back and forth don't expect me to take your position. If I thought your argument had merit I would have agreed to begin with. And since I am at work won't have time to do a bunch of research. I had a no show this hour hence the postings.

#107 panthers55

panthers55

    Starting all over again

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,723 posts
  • LocationAt the lake

Posted 03 January 2013 - 11:07 AM

No I am just looking at the stats from a different perspective. You say half of the coaches since 1992 were successful in their first year. I just looked at current coaches for all 32 teams ( I included the just fired coaches since they haven't been replaced) and what I found is that 8 of the 32 coaches had a winning record in year 1. That means 75% of the coaches didn't win in the first year. Lets assume that without looking it up 50% of the coaches had a winning record in the second year. What that still doesn't address is that many of these coaches didn't necessarily build a successful program after that. Plus it doesn't include guys like Hue Jackson for the Raiders who was given only 1 year to succeed. So if we are looking for a guy who will win in the first 2 years irregardless of how they do down the road then lets can Rivera and go elsewhere. And we can do that over and over just like the Raiders until we find someone.

But what about the guys who won in year 1 or 2 and then struggled down the road?? For example Rex Ryan started off great guns at 9-7 and 11-5 his first 2 years. Since then 8-8 and 6-10. Given your criteria he is a proven guy who built a successful program. The reality is he is like Fox when he was here, he had some good years and some bad years. How bout Whisenhunt- he went 8-8 in year 1 and 9-7 in year 2 and 10-6 in year 3 and a Superbowl appearance. Successful guy right?? How about the last 3 years- 5-11, 8-8, 5-11. Yeah successful program.

I could go on and on.

The reality is your criteria is hardly a reason to fire Rivera based on selective stats. The vast majority of current coaches and just fired coaches were not successful in year 1 and even though more were successful in year 2, that didn't necessarily guaranteed future success. You were the one saying you were looking toward 2014 and beyond.
So the notion that if you don't win early you won't win needs a sidebar which states that even if they have been successful in year 1 or 2 doesn't mean they will be successful in future years. Some will and some won't. The only reason there is a positive correlation between coaches having success early or being canned is that they get fired with all the pressure to win not because they can't win. What you are doing is looking at selective stats and predicting success for the future. The problem with that is these stats are skewed by coaches getting fired after one or two years before they have a chance to be successful in the league. Or they have one or two good years sandwiched between a bunch of mediocre or up and down records, not consistent winners.

As for going back and forth don't expect me to take your position. If I thought your argument had merit I would have agreed to begin with. And since I am at work won't have time to do a bunch of research. I had a no show this hour hence the postings.



#108 Cyberjag

Cyberjag

    Senior Member

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,658 posts

Posted 03 January 2013 - 12:01 PM

Since you're at work and can't do any research, here is a list of all coaches who were active at the end of the season and their predecessors. These are all the ones who managed to string together back-to-back winning seasons. I list their first non-losing season, and then the first winning season of what would become back-to-back winning seasons (which is why you don't see John Fox).

Ken Wisenhunt, first non-losing season: 1, first winning season: 2
Mike Smith, first non-losing season: 1, first winning season: 1
John Harbaugh, first non-losing season: 1, first winning season: 1
Lovie Smith, first non-losing season: 2, first winning season: 2
Marv Lewis, first non-losing season: 1, first winning season: 9
Mike McCarthey, first non-losing season: 1, first winning season: 4
Dennis Green (Minn), first non-losing season: 1, first winning season: 1
Brian Billick, first non-losing season: 1, first winning season: 2
Wade Phillips (Buffalo), first non-losing season: 1, first winning season: 1
Wade Phillips (Dallas), first non-losing season: 1, first winning season: 1
Mike Sherman, first non-losing season: 1, first winning season: 1
Gary Kubiak, first non-losing season: 2, first winning season: 6
Jim Caldwell, first non-losing season: 1, first winning season: 1
Jack Del Rio, first non-losing season: 2, first winning season: 2
Brad Childress, first non-losing season: 2, first winning season: 3
Pete Carroll (NE), first non-losing season: 1, first winning season: 1
Bill Belichick, first non-losing season: 2, first winning season: 2
Sean Payton, first non-losing season: 1, first winning season: 4
Tom Coughlin (Jax), first non-losing season: 2, first winning season: 2
Tom Coughlin (NYG), first non-losing season: 2, first winning season: 4
Rex Ryan, first non-losing season: 1, first winning season: 1
Andy Reid, first non-losing season: 2, first winning season: 2
Mike Tomlin, first non-losing season: 1, first winning season: 1
Norv Turner (Was), first non-losing season: 3, first winning season: 3
Norv Turner (SD), first non-losing season: 1, first winning season: 3
Jim Harbaugh, first non-losing season: 1, first winning season: 1
Jeff Fisher (TN), first non-losing season: 3, first winning season: 3
Mike Shanahan (Den), first non-losing season: 1, first winning season: 2
Ray Rhodes (Phil), first non-losing season: 1, first winning season: 1
Bill Cowher, first non-losing season: 1, first winning season: 1
Marty Schottenheimer (KC), first non-losing season: 1, first winning season: 1
Marty Schottenheimer (SD), first non-losing season: 1, first winning season: 3

Of the remainder who had winning years, but never had back to back ones, here's when they had their first winning year:
Chan Gailey (Dal), 1
John Fox (Car), 2
John Fox (Den), 2
Jim Schwartz, 3
Dick Jauron (Chi), 3
Eric Mangini (NYJ), 1
Dom Capers (Car), 2
Mike Mularkey (Buf), 1
Romeo Crennel (Cle), 3
Todd Haley, 2
Tony Sparano, 1
Leslie Frazier, 3
Pete Carrol (Sea), 3
Bill Belichick (Cle), 4
Mike Munchak, 1
Mike Shanahan (Was), 3
Jim Haslett (NO), 1
Jim Fassel, 1
Jim Mora (Atl), 1
Raheem Morris, 2

And here are the ones who have never had a winning season
Pat Shurmer
Jason Garrett
Bobby Petrino
Josh McDaniels
Rod Marinelli
Joe Philbin (rookie)
Dennis Allen (rookie)
Greg Schiano (rookie)
Hue Jackson
Mike Singletary
Steve Spagnoulo
Jim Zorn
Ron Rivera

#109 MechaZain

MechaZain

    Junior Member

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 299 posts

Posted 03 January 2013 - 04:12 PM

Constant running out of the shotgun.
Not running Dwill outside (All three RBs pound up the middle despite being different types of runners)
Not running Cam on 3 and 1 situations despite a 80% success rate
Offensive playbook doesn't factor in the weak o-line, needs more quick passes.
Epically bad time management.
Constant and ineffective zone coverage

and the play so bad it made national news.

Up 28-27 and faced with fourth-and-1 on the Atlanta 45 with 1:44 left in the game, armed with two highly paid running backs and possibly the greatest short-yardage running quarterback in NFL history, and having gashed the Falcons that day for 5.7 yards per carry, Carolina Panthers head coach Ron Rivera punted. And there was a great disturbance in the Force, as if millions of stat analysts suddenly cried out in terror and were suddenly silenced.



For the record I want the whole coaching staff wiped clean. They haven't improved the team in any aspect. When we win it's due to individual effort that overcomes the consistently terrible terrible playcalling.


#110 DeAngelo's #1 Fan(CRA)

DeAngelo's #1 Fan(CRA)

    Senior Member

  • Moderators
  • 25,351 posts

Posted 03 January 2013 - 06:03 PM

The 2011 offense got exposed. Teams were playing the read option and keeping Newton in the pocket. They doubled Smitty and played tight man on everyone else. That was different than they did last year and it showed. I don't think the offense run last year was much different than what we debuted this year.


You don't think the fact our OL looked different and quit using 12 personel as our main package played a bigger role than teams "figuring out" the read option.

The Golden Calf of Bristol, RG, Wilson, Kapernick and Cam all run the zone read successfully.


#111 Bj-Monster23

Bj-Monster23

    Slam Newton

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,124 posts
  • LocationRaleigh NC

Posted 03 January 2013 - 07:09 PM

Since you're at work and can't do any research, here is a list of all coaches who were active at the end of the season and their predecessors. These are all the ones who managed to string together back-to-back winning seasons. I list their first non-losing season, and then the first winning season of what would become back-to-back winning seasons (which is why you don't see John Fox).

Ken Wisenhunt, first non-losing season: 1, first winning season: 2
Mike Smith, first non-losing season: 1, first winning season: 1
John Harbaugh, first non-losing season: 1, first winning season: 1
Lovie Smith, first non-losing season: 2, first winning season: 2
Marv Lewis, first non-losing season: 1, first winning season: 9
Mike McCarthey, first non-losing season: 1, first winning season: 4
Dennis Green (Minn), first non-losing season: 1, first winning season: 1
Brian Billick, first non-losing season: 1, first winning season: 2
Wade Phillips (Buffalo), first non-losing season: 1, first winning season: 1
Wade Phillips (Dallas), first non-losing season: 1, first winning season: 1
Mike Sherman, first non-losing season: 1, first winning season: 1
Gary Kubiak, first non-losing season: 2, first winning season: 6
Jim Caldwell, first non-losing season: 1, first winning season: 1
Jack Del Rio, first non-losing season: 2, first winning season: 2
Brad Childress, first non-losing season: 2, first winning season: 3
Pete Carroll (NE), first non-losing season: 1, first winning season: 1
Bill Belichick, first non-losing season: 2, first winning season: 2
Sean Payton, first non-losing season: 1, first winning season: 4
Tom Coughlin (Jax), first non-losing season: 2, first winning season: 2
Tom Coughlin (NYG), first non-losing season: 2, first winning season: 4
Rex Ryan, first non-losing season: 1, first winning season: 1
Andy Reid, first non-losing season: 2, first winning season: 2
Mike Tomlin, first non-losing season: 1, first winning season: 1
Norv Turner (Was), first non-losing season: 3, first winning season: 3
Norv Turner (SD), first non-losing season: 1, first winning season: 3
Jim Harbaugh, first non-losing season: 1, first winning season: 1
Jeff Fisher (TN), first non-losing season: 3, first winning season: 3
Mike Shanahan (Den), first non-losing season: 1, first winning season: 2
Ray Rhodes (Phil), first non-losing season: 1, first winning season: 1
Bill Cowher, first non-losing season: 1, first winning season: 1
Marty Schottenheimer (KC), first non-losing season: 1, first winning season: 1
Marty Schottenheimer (SD), first non-losing season: 1, first winning season: 3

Of the remainder who had winning years, but never had back to back ones, here's when they had their first winning year:
Chan Gailey (Dal), 1
John Fox (Car), 2
John Fox (Den), 2
Jim Schwartz, 3
Dick Jauron (Chi), 3
Eric Mangini (NYJ), 1
Dom Capers (Car), 2
Mike Mularkey (Buf), 1
Romeo Crennel (Cle), 3
Todd Haley, 2
Tony Sparano, 1
Leslie Frazier, 3
Pete Carrol (Sea), 3
Bill Belichick (Cle), 4
Mike Munchak, 1
Mike Shanahan (Was), 3
Jim Haslett (NO), 1
Jim Fassel, 1
Jim Mora (Atl), 1
Raheem Morris, 2

And here are the ones who have never had a winning season
Pat Shurmer
Jason Garrett
Bobby Petrino
Josh McDaniels
Rod Marinelli
Joe Philbin (rookie)
Dennis Allen (rookie)
Greg Schiano (rookie)
Hue Jackson
Mike Singletary
Steve Spagnoulo
Jim Zorn
Ron Rivera


Damn, it must suck for Rivera to be on that list.

#112 Ivan The Awesome

Ivan The Awesome

    That wasn't a Penalty.

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,833 posts
  • LocationNC

Posted 03 January 2013 - 07:34 PM

The Indianapolis Colts and Washington Redskins would like a word...

The two best starting seasons in NFL HISTORY for a quarterback and both end in losing seasons while Andrew Luck and RG3 are in the playoffs in their first seasons.

As a Panthers fan, that is infuriating.


Skins have had Shanahan for 3 years now. The first two weren't great...So that's a quick turn around? No it's not. Took a little bit for them to do it.


Colts are playing for their lukemia fighting coach, those types of emotions will help, and they have Luck. Yes, those circumstances will help a quick turnaround. Believe it or not.


In the last 10 years, name the teams that fired and quickly turned things around. Not just this year and last year.


It's not a common thing. People shouldn't expect this to happen because we try it.

And let's throw out the lockout year I suppose to. This year was horrible though.

#113 panthers55

panthers55

    Starting all over again

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,723 posts
  • LocationAt the lake

Posted 03 January 2013 - 08:23 PM

You don't think the fact our OL looked different and quit using 12 personel as our main package played a bigger role than teams "figuring out" the read option.

The Golden Calf of Bristol, RG, Wilson, Kapernick and Cam all run the zone read successfully.


If it is run a couple times a game it is fine. Anyone run it as their primary offense? As for 12 personnel we went to 22 personnel and sometimes 21 personnel. Instead of a second tight end lined up in the backfield we went with a fullback. Frankly the same blocking scheme. If you looked at our offense in the read option you could see that the DEs crashed down and read Newton waiting to crunch him or the running back while Newton was supposedly reading them.

#114 Toundra

Toundra

    100% French meat

  • ALL-PRO
  • 1,851 posts

Posted 04 January 2013 - 05:56 AM

If you are looking closely at the Panthers season Rivera did well, we are 7 -9 but look closely, 6 games are 1 TD short defeats.

#115 rayzor

rayzor

    shula is who i thought he was.

  • Moderators
  • -29,425 posts

Posted 04 January 2013 - 09:24 AM

If it is run a couple times a game it is fine. Anyone run it as their primary offense? As for 12 personnel we went to 22 personnel and sometimes 21 personnel. Instead of a second tight end lined up in the backfield we went with a fullback. Frankly the same blocking scheme. If you looked at our offense in the read option you could see that the DEs crashed down and read Newton waiting to crunch him or the running back while Newton was supposedly reading them.

the reason it didn't work was because blocking sucked and the OL wasn't trained on how to block for an option and the only time it was used was on running plays. it was obvious. had we been able to block better and done more than run the ball out of that formation it would have worked better.

the reason it didn't work was the same reason our running game ceased being effective when davidson was the OC...the run game and offense as a whole was predictable, unbalanced, and didn't have all the personnel needed to make work what davidson intended.

read option is just another running play and the things that limit it are the same things that limit any running plays or run first offense.


0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

Shop at Amazon Contact Us: info@carolinahuddle.com