Sometimes I wonder if you even read the posts completely. Your first paragraph reply makes no sense based on your reply to my post. Maybe you confused who you meant to reply to.
What I read is there is always a caveat...he did enough not to lose, he was a team manager. And maybe he was. None of us know for sure, including me. But maybe he also pushed buttons that no other coach was going to push at that moment in time. We know Tomlin was the coach when they won. I think with some it is just a given they would have won with just about anybody as head coach. I question that.
I didn't cover my ***. I don't have to. I simply pointed out the stark contrast between Seifert's win rate in San Fran versus Carolina. YOU are the guy who crowned him (and Tomlin) as "special" coaches.
Your argument is that Tomlin took AB as far as he could go. Keeping it together (whatever that means) and merely being "competitive" simply doesn't qualify. But we can agree to disagree.
I knew it!
I don't whine incessantly about Tomlin -- I tell it like it is, with factual support. I give him credit when it's due.
I nominate me.
You do? Interesting. That's what I do. Whoa...you are a secret Mike Tomlin lover! Welcome to the club.
Nah, you've given (and continue to give) Tomlin a lot more credit than he's due. Obviously. I guess you're about as special as he is.
No, not really. I'm honest about it, though. You stated your issues with Tomlin are based on facts, however, judging from the support you have shown for my least favorite argument, the "he won with Cowher guys," I would disagree. It is an argument that is too easy to pick at, which is why I don't like it. I think the arguments should be kept at stuff that cannot be refuted, for example, he has not won a playoff game in 6 years. Facts support this, you cannot argue with it. I can argue against the "he won with Cowher guys" too easily and make it look petty and weak.
We can all recognize as a fact that Cowher compiled a Super Bowl winning team in 2005. That team took a step back in 2006 due mostly to Ben's injuries. Then Tomlin took over in 2007. In 2008, with many of the same important core players, they won again. And it is a stone cold fact that they haven't won since, and have been retreating further and further away from the prize as Tomlin has made the team his own. And this included having a franchise quarterback in the prime of his career for most of that period.
The complaint is that Tomlin, over the last ten-plus years, has failed to establish his own team as one capable of competing for a Super Bowl win. Not sure why this is so incredibly difficult for you to understand.
My problem is that you supposedly want him fired, but you'll argue tooth and nail about how he won the Super Bowl a DECADE-AND-A-HALF AGO. Like this somehow matters given what we've all seen from the guy since then.
it is not, and I agree. But that is how the argument should be framed. It should not start with "He won with Cowher guys." Saying he hasn't established his own team is a truthful, solid argument. Saying "He won with Cowher guys" is petty. I think the semantics are important when making an argument.
No, what's "stupid" is to give somebody unilateral credit because he just happened to be there when something great happened. And what's even more stupid is to continue to stress that point 15 years later, given somebody's recent track record of playoff futility. I gave Tomlin some credit for the Super Bowl win for a while, then I realized pretty quickly that the guy was/is a fraud. Obviously.
Bullshit.
I said they get credit. I'm looking at that statement. Again, it was you who keeps bringing them up, not me. And I believe whoever is coaching a team when they win it gets credit for being the coach. I believe that. It is petty and childish not to. But I guess I shouldn't expect much more from a guy who is arrogant enough to think he could be an NFL coach. Make sure you announce here when someone hires you.
I couldn't quite understand the Seifert and Switzer references for this reason...they were both pretty good coaches! Seifert won 2 Super Bowls with the 49ers, and the 2nd one in '94...there was probably a good bit of turnover on the roster from when Walsh last coached in '88. And Switzer won 3 National Championships, and in college you are always building rosters, and he won a Super Bowl title.
I'm probably looking at it too deeply, but I am an older guy. Over the years I've noticed a big difference in the way parents and kids look at things and sports. If kids aren't playing enough today, it's because the coach sucks. Not because the kid may not be as good as someone in front of him or her, but it's the coach. And of course, every parent out there could be a better coach than whoever is coaching the team. My parents just didn't view it that way. It's a different world.
Since when? Ben and Mendenhall got plenty of blame; Mendenhall is still acting like Ray Finkle over it. The only real criticism Coach T got was for thinking that Whiff Johnson was capable of playing FB. The following year the pitchforks came out for Coach Lebeau. Tomlin didn't start getting widely criticized until the talent level (on the field and sidelines) started to fall off and the playoff success disappeared.
Wasn't his arm hit as he threw that ball? If it happened the way I remember, I could see why he'd get a bit of a pass. Other than the all out Tomlin haters, I don't really recall anyone laying all the blame for that game on him. Lately people have been pointing out deficiencies that have been around since then that may have been attributed to others at the time, so I guess I can kind of see what you're saying.