Report: Rivera’s job in jeopardy

[Mage]

And acting as if "only" being in the top 15 is a bad thing is such a terrible train of thought.  So are you suggesting we keep firing HCs until we find someone who is in the top 10?  

I just don't think ya'll realize how inconsistent HCs are.  I mean some posters on this site be criticizing Sean Payton.  If you don't think Payton is a great coach, then I don't know what the hell some of ya'll want.  There aren't that many long-term HCs out there who are consistently churning out great teams.  Belichick, Reid, Payton... that's about it.  McVay I guess if you want to throw him in there now.

Like go down the list of HCs.  The vast majority of them have either been inconsistent or bad.  Panthers have had something like the 2nd most wins in the NFC since 2013.  We've been far better than most teams, but some of you guys have this narrative you just have to push.

[Mr. Scot]

8 minutes ago, Mage said:

Lol all you do is switch goal posts.

I was responding to you saying Rivera is bad every time.  Being in the top 15 /=/ bad.

I don't give a flaming rat's ass about artificial rankings. Rivera could be number 11 or number 26 out of 32 and it wouldn't make a difference to me.

There are only two classes coaches in the NFL. There are those who are good enough to win a Super Bowl and those who are not.

Rivera is not. And when paired with a subpar GM like Marty Hurney, he's not even good enough to make the playoffs.

Now, if you want to sit here with our top goal being good seasons or playoff appearances but no championships, then by all means, Rivera is your guy.

If you want something more than that, then you're going to have to find a better coach.

[Mage]

Lets look down the list of HCs for each team and if they are better than Rivera

Arizona Cardinals - Steve Wilks - Lol

Atlanta Falcons - Dan Quinn - Been inconsistent outside of the Super Bowl

Baltimore Ravens - John Harbaugh - Been inconsistent as hell since the Super Bowl

Buffalo Bills - Sean McDermott - Way too early to tell

Chicago Bears - Matt Nagy - 1st year head coach, but for the sake of discussion I'll put him over Rivera

Cincinnati Bengals - Marvin Lewis - LOL

Cleveland Browns - no HC

Dallas Cowboys - Jason Garrett - LOL

Denver Broncos - Vance Joseph - Easily the NFL's worst head coach

Detroit Lions - Matt Patricia - still only his 1st season, but dude has made some questionable decisions and the players hate him

Green Bay Packers - No HC 

Houston Texans - Bill O'Brien - he gets hated on too much, I'd say he's better than Rivera probably

Indianapolis Colts - Frank Reich - 1st year head coach, but for the sake of discussion I'll put him over Rivera

Jacksonville Jaguars - Doug Marrone - Nah

Kansas City Chiefs - Andy Reid - Yes

Los Angeles Chargers - Anthony Lynn - Yes

Los Angeles Rams - Sean McVay - Yes

Miami Dolphins - Adam Gase - Nah

Minnesota Vikings - Mike Zimmer - Yes

New England Patriots - Bill Belichick - Yes

New Orleans Saints - Sean Payton - Yes

New York Jets - Todd Bowles - LOL

Oakland Raiders - Jon Gruden - LMFAO

Philadelphia Eagles - Doug Pederson - Probably yes, although the Eagles have looked mediocre in the 2 seasons outside of 2017.  

Pittsburgh Steelers - Mike Tomlin - Probably yes

San Fransisco 49ers - Kyle Shanahan - Probably yes

Seattle Seahawks - Pete Carroll - Yes

Tampa Bay Buccaneers - Dirk Koetter - Lol

Tennessee Titans - Mike Vrabel - Too early to decide

Washington Redskins - Jay Gruden - Maybe?  I'll just say yes for the sake of

So that's 14 HCs at best we're saying are better than Rivera.  So tell me why the other 17 teams should fire their HCs?

[Mr. Scot]

7 minutes ago, Mage said:

And acting as if "only" being in the top 15 is a bad thing is such a terrible train of thought.  So are you suggesting we keep firing HCs until we find someone who is in the top 10?  

I just don't think ya'll realize how inconsistent HCs are.  I mean some posters on this site be criticizing Sean Payton.  If you don't think Payton is a great coach, then I don't know what the hell some of ya'll want.  There aren't that many long-term HCs out there who are consistently churning out great teams.  Belichick, Reid, Payton... that's about it.  McVay I guess if you want to throw him in there now.

Like go down the list of HCs.  The vast majority of them have either been inconsistent or bad.  Panthers have had something like the 2nd most wins in the NFC since 2013.  We've been far better than most teams, but some of you guys have this narrative you just have to push.

The narrative is being better than just "good".

Rivera's had eight years to show that he's got what it takes. He's failed.

How many more seasons are you wanting to give him in the hope that he somehow gets better?

[Mage]

3 minutes ago, Mr. Scot said:

I don't give a flaming rat's ass about artificial rankings. Rivera could be number 11 or number 26 out of 32 and it wouldn't make a difference to me.

There are only two classes coaches in the NFL. There are those who are good enough to win a Super Bowl and those who are not.

Rivera is not. And when paired with a subpar GM like Marty Hurney, he's not even good enough to make the playoffs.

Now, if you want to sit here with our top goal being good seasons or playoff appearances but no championships, then by all means, Rivera is your guy.

If you want something more than that, then you're going to have to find a better coach.

I'm not going to get into this with you.  Your train of thought about this has proven to be so irrational time and time again, I won't even bother.  Explain to me again how Jon Gruden is better than Andy Reid like you did last time because Gruden won a Super Bowl LOL

Rivera has coached a team to a Super Bowl before.  So acting as if it is inconceivable that he could do it again is illogical.  

But oh wait, we can't ignore the gem that you said last time.  "You can't do anything until you prove that you can do it."  

So should every team in the NFL fire their head coach who is worse than Rivera?  Exactly how many quality head coach candidates do you think exist?

[Mr. Scot]

Just now, Mage said:

I'm not going to get into this with you.  Your train of thought about this has proven to be so irrational time and time again, I won't even bother.  Explain to me again how Jon Gruden is better than Andy Reid like you did last time because Gruden won a Super Bowl LOL

Rivera has coached a team to a Super Bowl before.  So acting as if it is inconceivable that he could do it again is illogical.  

But oh wait, we can't ignore the gem that you said last time.  "You can't do anything until you prove that you can do it."  

So should every team in the NFL fire their head coach who is worse than Rivera?  Exactly how many quality head coach candidates do you think exist?

Not a clue 

How many "quality candidates" existed when we parted ways with John Fox? Should we not have let him go either? After all, we didn't know for sure if anybody else was going to be any better.

I'll ask you here the same question I asked you in the other post. How many more years are you willing to give Rivera to prove that he can win the big one?

[Mage]

1 minute ago, Mr. Scot said:

The narrative is being better than just "good".

Rivera's had eight years to show that he's got what it takes. He's failed.

How many more seasons are you wanting to give him in the hope that he somehow gets better?

What, dude?  Stop switching the goalposts.  You said he's bad.  That is what I was responding to.

And I literally said in my 1st post that I think he should probably get fired.  

This is the probably arguing with Rivera detractors on this site.  If you don't think he's the worst head coach in the NFL, the other person just makes the assumption you want him to stay.  Rivera has flaws just like over half of the leagues head coaches do.  Even some of the top ones (Tomlin for example gets a TON of hate despite the Steelers consistent playoff success).  All I'm saying is he's clearly not bad.  He might not be great, but saying he's "bad every single time" is discrediting him.  We were 11-5 this year.  We were 6-2 this year until our offense started going stagnant because Cam's shoulder sucked, and the fact of the matter is a lot of our losses this year were due to bad luck (I find it funny how everyone criticized Rivera's 2 point call vs Detroit, but probably thought Lynn was the smartest HC ever for doing it against the Chiefs).

[Mage]

1 minute ago, Mr. Scot said:

Not a clue 

How many "quality candidates" existed when we parted ways with John Fox? Should we not have let him go either? After all, we didn't know for sure if anybody else was going to be any better.

I'll ask you here the same question I asked you in the other post. How many more years are you willing to give Rivera to prove that he can win the big one?

And I'll tell you the same thing I did because either you can't comprehend or you just love putting words in my mouth as you do every single time here.  I said I don't think Rivera should return.

And you are missing the point.  You are essentially suggesting we fire any HC who isn't a top 10 HC (because "only top 15" is mediocre to you).  That means 22 teams should fire their HC every year.  So should teams just keep playing Russian roulette until they find their guy?  It's stupid logic.

But this all started because you called Rivera bad and I showed he wasn't.  And now all you want to do is switch goal posts, because that's all you do.  Which is why you keep asking me how long I think Rivera should stay... even though I clearly said he shouldn't.

[Mr. Scot]

2 minutes ago, Mage said:

What, dude?  Stop switching the goalposts.  You said he's bad.  That is what I was responding to.

And I literally said in my 1st post that I think he should probably get fired.  

This is the probably arguing with Rivera detractors on this site.  If you don't think he's the worst head coach in the NFL, the other person just makes the assumption you want him to stay.  Rivera has flaws just like over half of the leagues head coaches do.  Even some of the top ones (Tomlin for example gets a TON of hate despite the Steelers consistent playoff success).  All I'm saying is he's clearly not bad.  He might not be great, but saying he's "bad every single time" is discrediting him.  We were 11-5 this year.  We were 6-2 this year until our offense started going stagnant because Cam's shoulder sucked, and the fact of the matter is a lot of our losses this year were due to bad luck (I find it funny how everyone criticized Rivera's 2 point call vs Detroit, but probably thought Lynn was the smartest HC ever for doing it against the Chiefs).

He doesn't have to be "the worst coach in the NFL" in order to get fired.

He just has to not be good enough to win a championship.

He's not.

This isn't a difficult thing to understand, or at least it shouldn't be.

[Mage]

1 minute ago, Mr. Scot said:

He doesn't have to be "the worst coach in the NFL" in order to get fired.

He just has to not be good enough to win a championship.

He's not.

This isn't a difficult thing to understand, or at least it shouldn't be.

It also isn't a difficult thing to understand when my initial comment was about you saying Rivera is "bad every single time", or how I said he shouldn't return but you keep asking me why I think he should stay, but alas. 

 

[Mr. Scot]

Just now, Mage said:

It also isn't a difficult thing to understand when my initial comment was about you saying Rivera is "bad every single time", or how I said he shouldn't return but you keep asking me why I think he should stay, but alas. 

"Not bad every single time" isn't good enough. Neither is "not bad" in general. Nor should "well it wasn't completely his fault" or "he didn't totally screw it up" be considered as positives.

As someone else recently said ((LG or Rayzor, I  think) way too much of this fanbase is so scared of any kind of risk that they'll settle for being half-decent rather than take a chance on being great.

That's not something I want any part of.

[raz]

its nice to not have to worry about jerry's cheapskate coach search.

[Mage]

11 minutes ago, Mr. Scot said:

"Not bad every single time" isn't good enough. Neither is "not bad" in general. Nor should "well it wasn't completely his fault" or "he didn't totally screw it up" be considered as positives.

Oh my God.  

This is what you said:

"I will take a chance on someone who might be bad but also might be good over someone whom I know is bad every single time without a single regret or a second thought."

You suggested he was bad every single time, or that he's a bad head coach.  He's clearly not.  That, along with me actually saying he shouldn't return, is all I said in response.  I made the comment he was in the top 15, which he is, and then you suggested that is somehow a bad thing.  Now you keep trying to switch it up, or try to make me sound unintelligent while going on with your holier than thou act, or whatever you keep doing by grouping me with this imagined pack of people who "accept mediocrity".

It ain't about being scared of change, so stop trying to spew out that drivel over and over again in replacement of actually making a sound argument.  

There is nothing wrong with being a top 15 HC.  And if your logic is that kind of head coach should be fired every single time he's not unequivocally great with nothing but nonstop consistent success, then your logic sucks considering there's only like 3-4 guys who even fit that bill in the NFL right now.  It's that simple.  It isn't about being scared of change.  It's the simple fact you can't just keep firing head coaches until you find a Sean Payton or Bill Belichick.  It's a terrible way to run a franchise (see: Cleveland Browns, Oakland Raiders, or any other team who has marathon-ed head coaches).

If/when we fire Rivera and we hire another head coach, if he's merely a top 15 HC, should we fire him too?

Are the Ravens stupid for re-signing Harbaugh, who is only a top 15 HC?  I guess they don't know how to run an NFL franchise, right?

 

[Mr. Scot]

4 minutes ago, Mage said:

Oh my God.  

This is what you said:

"I will take a chance on someone who might be bad but also might be good over someone whom I know is bad every single time without a single regret or a second thought."

You suggested he was bad every single time.  He's clearly not.  That, along with me actually saying he shouldn't return, is all I said in response.  I made the comment he was in the top 15, which he is, and then you suggested that is somehow a bad thing.  Now you keep trying to switch it up, or try to make me sound unintelligent while going on with your holier than thou act, or whatever you keep doing by grouping me with this imagined pack of people who "accept mediocrity".

It ain't about being scared of change, so stop trying to spew out that drivel over and over again in replacement of actually making a sound argument.  

There is nothing wrong with being a top 15 HC.  And if your logic is that kind of head coach should be fired every single time he's not unequivocally great with nothing but nonstop consistent success, then your logic sucks considering there's only like 3-4 guys who even fit that bill in the NFL right now.  It's that simple.  It isn't about being scared of change.  It's the simple fact you can't just keep firing head coaches until you find a Sean Payton or Bill Belichick.  It's a terrible way to run a franchise (see: Cleveland Browns, Oakland Raiders, or any other team who has marathon-ed head coaches).

Aaaahhh, so reading comprehension is the problem here 

What I said was that I would take a chance on someone who might be good over keeping someone that I know is bad every single time. If you diagram the sentence you'll find "every single time" describes how often I would take the chance, not the word "bad".

Hilarious 

Now my guess is you'll probably try to pin that on me, but I've said it many times and so far you're the only person who's misunderstood, so...