We need a new Head Coach.......FIRE TOMLIN NOW!!!

[madinsomniac]

You don't think loosing more than 1/3 of your games is a poor record? I do. 12 and 4 is the bottom of the good records for me. A good record will get you into the top two seeds in the playoffs. In case it was not clear 10 and 6 is a poor record.

I think that is an unrealistic standard you have there...
IMO and I am sure plenty of others opinions as well:
-The best record is obviously 16 wins... virtually undoable

-A great record would be 13 or more wins. This kind puts you in contention for a top 2 seed every year.

-A good record is 10 to 12 wins, This usually gets you a playoff birth and often a division win

-An average record would be 7 to 9 wins. You can make the playoffs in this range, though its iffy as to if you belong there To be more specific, 7-9 is below average, 8-8 would be average, and 9-7 would be above average. Teams in this range shouldnt feel proud of themselves.

-A poor record is 4 to 6 wins.

-A terrible record is 1-3 wins

And finally if you go 0-16 that is the worse record.

 

[FAB802]

You don't think loosing more than 1/3 of your games is a poor record? I do. 12 and 4 is the bottom of the good records for me. A good record will get you into the top two seeds in the playoffs. In case it was not clear 10 and 6 is a poor record.

That NFL doesn't exist any more where every division winner was dominant. A couple teams make it there a season, but for the most part that's an anomaly more than something to expect.

 

[obxsteeler]

There are also a number of people who feel that would be an average season for them if they only were given the opportunity to coach.

 

[Omar10213245]

You don't think loosing more than 1/3 of your games is a poor record? I do. 12 and 4 is the bottom of the good records for me. A good record will get you into the top two seeds in the playoffs. In case it was not clear 10 and 6 is a poor record.

weeeell I wouldn't say that 10-6 is "poor", but sure, it's definitely not 12-4, that's true.

 

[Vader]

That NFL doesn't exist any more where every division winner was dominant. A couple teams make it there a season, but for the most part that's an anomaly more than something to expect.

I don't remember anytime where every division winner was dominant. Hell people on here think the loss to SD in 1994 was the worst loss in the history of the franchise. They won their division by 2 games over a 9-7 Chiefs team and were one game behind Pittsburgh at 11-5. Miami won their division that year at 10-6. Same with Minnesota (10-6). None of those teams dominated anything.

I think sometimes people remember the past differently because they dislike the present so much.

 

[Wingman]

I will stand behind that as being a poor record, 10 and 6 is 62.5 % of the time you win, those grades won't let you graduate from a reputable college. 12 and 4 is only a 75% winning percentage, wining 3 out of 4 games. Had we beat two teams we should have we would easily be on track for that, toss in the Browns game that we lost and we are ahead of that. That would be a good season for me. 8 and 8 flat out sucks.

 

[Omar10213245]

I will stand behind that as being a poor record, 10 and 6 is 62.5 % of the time you win, those grades won't let you graduate from a reputable college. 12 and 4 is only a 75% winning percentage, wining 3 out of 4 games. Had we beat two teams we should have we would easily be on track for that, toss in the Browns game that we lost and we are ahead of that. That would be a good season for me. 8 and 8 flat out sucks.

Over the course of the last 20 yrs or so, 10-6 would give a team a fairly decent chance of cracking the playoffs, so no, it really isn't all that terrible; this isn't a "reputable college", it's pro football divisional standings.

 

[topseed]

No. The pattern is when 2 years are left on the contract, they add three more years. If that happens again (like in 2012), you are looking at an extension to keep him here through 2019.

I guess that's one way to look at it. The first extension only locked the team in for four years instead of five, though.

The thought of the Steelers not having a head coach other than Mike Tomlin until at least 2020 chills me to the bone.

 

[topseed]

You don't think loosing more than 1/3 of your games is a poor record? I do. 12 and 4 is the bottom of the good records for me. A good record will get you into the top two seeds in the playoffs. In case it was not clear 10 and 6 is a poor record.

I will stand behind that as being a poor record, 10 and 6 is 62.5 % of the time you win, those grades won't let you graduate from a reputable college. 12 and 4 is only a 75% winning percentage, wining 3 out of 4 games. Had we beat two teams we should have we would easily be on track for that, toss in the Browns game that we lost and we are ahead of that. That would be a good season for me. 8 and 8 flat out sucks.

No, 10-6 is not a poor NFL record. A .625 winning percentage would put a guy in the top 25 of all-time out of the 164 who have coached at least 50 games.

College grades are based on a much different scale. I'm pretty sure most universities would let you pass through with an 85 average, and wouldn't consider it to be "poor."

 

[Troglodyte]

You don't think loosing more than 1/3 of your games is a poor record? I do. 12 and 4 is the bottom of the good records for me. A good record will get you into the top two seeds in the playoffs. In case it was not clear 10 and 6 is a poor record.

You do realize that several SB Champions have had regular season records several losses worse than 12-4, don't you?

 

[obxsteeler]

12-4 is a 75% winning percentage. No coach in NFL history has ever had a 75% winning record.

 

[Xc944]

I hate Tomlin but 10-6 is not a bad record. At the same time I don't consider 8-8 a non losing season

 

[Steelers1282]

12-4 is a 75% winning percentage. No coach in NFL history has ever had a 75% winning record.

John Madden says hello, he had a .763 winning percentage.

 

[Wingman]

Generally a coach has some good years and some bad years during their time. In many instances they put together a few bad years and are then replaced. I will say your record of achievement is your record just because half of your peers are not that good does not make what you achieved any better.

Including postseason but excluding exhibition games, Lombardi went on to compile a 105–35–6 (.740 winning percent) record as head coach, and he never suffered a losing season.

That is good coaching. Might be why the trophy is named after him.
Bruce Arians Cardinals 2013 18 7 .720
Jim Harbaugh 49ers 2011 41 15 .732
Ray Flaherty** 1936–1942 StarIconBronze.png Boston / Washington Redskins 54 21 54 21 3 .720 [83]
Guy Chamberlin** 1922–1923 Canton Bulldogs 21 0 58 16 7 .784 [76]
1924 Cleveland Bulldogs 7 1
1925–1926 StarIconBronze.png Frankford Yellow Jackets 27 8
1927 Chicago Cardinals 3 7
Vince Lombardi** 1959–1967 StarIconBronze.png Green Bay Packers 89 29 96 34 6 .738 [39]
1969 Washington Redskins 7 5
John Madden** 1969–1978 StarIconBronze.png Oakland RaidersFootball.gif 103 32 103 32 7 .752
George Allen** 1966–1970 Los Angeles Rams 49 17 116 47 5 .709 [30]
1971–1977 StarIconBronze.png Washington Redskins 67 30

Looks like there are more than just one or two guys that average over 70% and some are getting close to 75% and a couple have passed it.

 

[topseed]

You don't think loosing more than 1/3 of your games is a poor record? I do. 12 and 4 is the bottom of the good records for me. A good record will get you into the top two seeds in the playoffs. In case it was not clear 10 and 6 is a poor record.

Generally a coach has some good years and some bad years during their time. In many instances they put together a few bad years and are then replaced. I will say your record of achievement is your record just because half of your peers are not that good does not make what you achieved any better.

Including postseason but excluding exhibition games, Lombardi went on to compile a 105–35–6 (.740 winning percent) record as head coach, and he never suffered a losing season.

That is good coaching. Might be why the trophy is named after him.
Bruce Arians Cardinals 2013 18 7 .720
Jim Harbaugh 49ers 2011 41 15 .732
Ray Flaherty** 1936–1942 StarIconBronze.png Boston / Washington Redskins 54 21 54 21 3 .720 [83]
Guy Chamberlin** 1922–1923 Canton Bulldogs 21 0 58 16 7 .784 [76]
1924 Cleveland Bulldogs 7 1
1925–1926 StarIconBronze.png Frankford Yellow Jackets 27 8
1927 Chicago Cardinals 3 7
Vince Lombardi** 1959–1967 StarIconBronze.png Green Bay Packers 89 29 96 34 6 .738 [39]
1969 Washington Redskins 7 5
John Madden** 1969–1978 StarIconBronze.png Oakland RaidersFootball.gif 103 32 103 32 7 .752
George Allen** 1966–1970 Los Angeles Rams 49 17 116 47 5 .709 [30]
1971–1977 StarIconBronze.png Washington Redskins 67 30

Looks like there are more than just one or two guys that average over 70% and some are getting close to 75% and a couple have passed it.

LOL. Yet Vince Lombardi himself falls short of your "bottom of the good records" standard.

Get a grip, man.

 

[Wingman]

LOL. Yet Vince Lombardi himself falls short of your "bottom of the good records" standard.

Get a grip, man.

I am not expecting the coach to have a good record every year and few of them do. Maybe 8 and 8 is a good record for you lots of teams fall below that as well. The records are career records for coaches many of which went through a rebuild of their team during their time as coach. Like any average toss in a few years that are poor or below the line and you bring down the average.

 

[ark steel]

It's too bad Tomlin doesn't have his team riding on top like Harbaugh has the 49'ers....

 

[topseed]

I am not expecting the coach to have a good record every year and few of them do. Maybe 8 and 8 is a good record for you lots of teams fall below that as well. The records are career records for coaches many of which went through a rebuild of their team during their time as coach. Like any average toss in a few years that are poor or below the line and you bring down the average.

Uh, maybe not. Never said 8-8 was a good record. Said 10-6 was.

You said 12-4 is barely a good record in the NFL, which is an asinine statement, because simply averaging your "bottom of the good records" would put a coach at third-best of all-time, just ahead of that "good" coach Vince Lombardi.

Whatever it takes, bro. Don't stop believin'. I just hope your kids never brought home an A-minus.

 

[topseed]

It's too bad Tomlin doesn't have his team riding on top like Harbaugh has the 49'ers....

Actually, they're both riding in exactly the same spot...8th position in their respective conferences.

 

[ark steel]

Actually, they're both riding in exactly the same spot...8th position in their respective conferences.

Which was my point. Used Harbaugh as an example, but Harbaugh has his team in the exact same position that Tomlin does, with losses to the 3-6 Bears and the 3-6 Rams. How can that be?

 

[topseed]

Which was my point. Used Harbaugh as an example, but Harbaugh has his team in the exact same position that Tomlin does, with losses to the 3-6 Bears and the 3-6 Rams. How can that be?

They're in similar shape this year. Difference is, San Francisco has been to 3 conference championships in the last 3 years, while the Steelers haven't won a playoff game.

 

[Wingman]

Uh, maybe not. Never said 8-8 was a good record. Said 10-6 was.

You said 12-4 is barely a good record in the NFL, which is an asinine statement, because simply averaging your "bottom of the good records" would put a coach at third-best of all-time, just ahead of that "good" coach Vince Lombardi.

Whatever it takes, bro. Don't stop believin'. I just hope your kids never brought home an A-minus.

Some folks are ok with mediocrity, I'm not.

 

[slashsteel]

They're in similar shape this year. Difference is, San Francisco has been to 3 conference championships in the last 3 years, while the Steelers haven't won a playoff game.

this................

 

[Idioteque]

They're in similar shape this year. Difference is, San Francisco has been to 3 conference championships in the last 3 years, while the Steelers haven't won a playoff game.

Not to mention they've missed big, big components of their core this year. GOOD players, too. Willis, Bowman, Aldon Smith (their three best defenders).. Iupati.. Vernon Davis.. None of that "Gilbert was out and Woodley is only 80%; THAT'S why we keep losing!" stuff.

 

[ark steel]

Not to mention they've missed big, big components of their core this year. GOOD players, too. Willis, Bowman, Aldon Smith (their three best defenders).. Iupati.. Vernon Davis.. None of that "Gilbert was out and Woodley is only 80%; THAT'S why we keep losing!" stuff.

LOL

Does that help in the polls? I would have thought Aldon Smith would have been a sign that JH doesn't have control of his team...