Degree of excitement…………….

[diver]

I think at the very least it's a symptom of the disease. Whether or not you have a coaching tree who gives a sheeeet if you win right? And obviously there are coordinators who leave a championship team and suffer. There are also cases of one's doing very well. It's a mixed bag. Haslam is an NFL owner so obviously stupid decisions are made all the time but you can't say coordinators sought after by other franchises is meaningless. It's not like all owners and GMs are dunces and they are throwing a dart. Successful coordinators that are wanted elsewhere means something. It does reflect on the ability of a head coach to surround himself with talented coaches.

If we compare rhe coordinators early in tomlins career to the last 10 years there is a noticeable difference. I don't think you can argue Lebeau vs Austin or Whisenhunt or Arians vs Canada and the list goes on.

When all other franchises don't want your coordinators do you honestly really believe all the FOs are plain ole stupid and can't see the amazing talent Mike surrounded himself with?

Look at the Lions post Ben Johnson. Look at the Bears. You can't tell me he wasn't an outstanding coordinator.

I don't know what the issue was. Was Mike a control freak? Did Mike have difficulties in assessing coaching talent? Did the best coordinators find the Steelers unattractive? I really don't know what exactly the issue was but to me we underachieved with our talent the last ten plus years and it was the X and Os that did us in and to me that's all because we had coordinators that were below the talent we had and that's on Tomlin. So yeah the fact that his coaching tree sucked isn't directly the issue but it's Indicitive of the issue

He certainly didn't have the best coordinators. And I'm not sure either as to why.

I think you have to play the coaching tree argument in real world applications, and if you do, is it as important or fun to talk about then? McCarthy has said there are two coaches on his staff that could be potential head coaches, Tom Arth and Patrick Graham. Let's do a hypothetical. The Steelers have a great year, and Tom Arth gets hired as Cleveland's next head coach. Not out of the realm of possibility, Cleveland goes through head coaches like crap through a goose. But the stars align, Cleveland drafts the next great thing at QB and Tom Arth is the coach when they finally turn that mess around. McCarthy is still in Pittsburgh, he signed a 5 year deal, but now Cleveland is a much bigger threat to everybody in the division. Are we all gonna sit here and go, "That's fine we lost to the Browns. Tom Arth is the coach, and he is from Mike McCarthy's tree?" Will that sooth anyone? Beside the fact that I believe every coach has to be his own man to be successful anyway, the real world hypothetical I just laid out just doesn't make me excited to talk about coaching trees, because it has happened. Were 49er fans fine losing to Holmgren and Green Bay? How about Green Bay fans to Reid and the Eagles? Do you remember in 2001 when the Steelers were rolling and they go out to Cincy with Dick LeBeau as head coach? Cowher is giving LeBeau a candy bar before the game, the Steelers went up 14-0 and it felt like they let their foot off the gas, they lose. I remember being so pissed because it felt like they let up. The thought of coaching tree, while it never entered my mind, sure as helll wouldn't have helped.

 

[Polambertberger]

He certainly didn't have the best coordinators. And I'm not sure either as to why.

I think you have to play the coaching tree argument in real world applications, and if you do, is it as important or fun to talk about then? McCarthy has said there are two coaches on his staff that could be potential head coaches, Tom Arth and Patrick Graham. Let's do a hypothetical. The Steelers have a great year, and Tom Arth gets hired as Cleveland's next head coach. Not out of the realm of possibility, Cleveland goes through head coaches like crap through a goose. But the stars align, Cleveland drafts the next great thing at QB and Tom Arth is the coach when they finally turn that mess around. McCarthy is still in Pittsburgh, he signed a 5 year deal, but now Cleveland is a much bigger threat to everybody in the division. Are we all gonna sit here and go, "That's fine we lost to the Browns. Tom Arth is the coach, and he is from Mike McCarthy's tree?" Will that sooth anyone? Beside the fact that I believe every coach has to be his own man to be successful anyway, the real world hypothetical I just laid out just doesn't make me excited to talk about coaching trees, because it has happened. Were 49er fans fine losing to Holmgren and Green Bay? How about Green Bay fans to Reid and the Eagles? Do you remember in 2001 when the Steelers were rolling and they go out to Cincy with Dick LeBeau as head coach? Cowher is giving LeBeau a candy bar before the game, the Steelers went up 14-0 and it felt like they let their foot off the gas, they lose. I remember being so pissed because it felt like they let up. The thought of coaching tree, while it never entered my mind, sure as helll wouldn't have helped.

I think part of the coaching tree argument that is hard to flush out is just because a DC or OC failed as a head coach doesn't necessarily mean he was a bad OC or DC. Being a head coach requires multiple skill sets and I think anyone who said Tomlin didn't excel at any of those is just a hater. It's hard to win in the NFL and the players loved playing for him. To consistently have a winning record in the NFL is extremely hard so he did certain things really well obviously. The question is what did he do well and what did he struggle with?

We can go on and on about the coaching tree thing as an indication he had bad coordinators or we can say it's meaningless. Who really gives a flying F. The fact is he didn't have great coordinators for lomg stretches of his tenure and that to me was his downfall......not the FO, not the talent, not his ability to connect with the players, not work ethic, and not organization. I think he had a poor coordinator hiring tenure and I also think he wasn't flexible enough in his systems (which corresponds to not having the right coordinators).

From what I understood Mike was more of a here's the system and we just need to execute instead of questioning the system in the first place. The coordinators and his rigidity to the system they employed together to me was his issue. I never felt like they attacked their opponent week to week. They just focused on executing their plan. If the plan is flawed based on their opponent then execution is not very meaningful.

He was a likeable guy in many ways but it's hard to love him when you can't win a playoff game. He won a SB. That was great but with the way the last decade went I feel all he managed to do with that SB win was execute Cowhers team.....so he gets credit but not the same as Cowhers SB because not only did Cowher build the team but he executed as well.