PEWTER REPORT FORUM

The real problem with the Bellicheck example is that he screwed the pooch early on in his career as an HC, you also see that with Landry's early body of work and even Parcells' first year. That logic fails in the Gruden era here since you are looking at his "mature" body of work. The fact that he's grown into a coach that has disasterous campaigns rather than one who grows out of it should worry the original poster.

Jon

Once he stops designing an offense that is the worse we have seen in Tampa since 1977 (really!!!!), then we will learn to spell his name.

Right, the man helped to get you that Super Bowl 37 shirt that we all wear around town, he's been here what 5 seasons? And some of you can't spell Jon as his mother named him, yet jump on him for the Mark / Mike fiasco?

A SIMPLE FACT THAT I DON'T THINK ANYONE HAS MENTIONED.  THE GLAZERS PICKED GRUDEN!!  WHY WOULD THEY CONSIDER FIRING THE MAN THE BROUGHT THEM THE BUCS FIRST SUPER BOWL??  THE GLAZERS WON"T LISTEN TO ANY MULLET HEADED FANS OR MEDIA FOR THEIR DIRECTION. HE IS THEIR MAN! DOES EVERYONE HAVE AMNESIA?  DOES EVERYONE NOT REMEMBER MCKAY ALMOST LEAVING IN SNIT BECAUSE THE GLAZERS OVER-RULED HIM?   BUCS WILL IMPROVE NEXT SEASON AND BE READY FOR ANOTHER SERIOUS RUN BY 08. IMHO


Oh and Dalbuc what was the Bucs record the year after 5-11??

njligernj - hey, no facts please.  LMAO

And Dal - you are right as well, just not about the losing gig for great coaches. 

This entire debate is just ridiculous. Facts are facts, Gruden walked into a nightmare situation concerning the future and everyone knew it. He had to win in 2002 and he did. There is one certainty regarding Gruden. If he has the talent he has proven he can get the job done, while Dungy has proven he cannot. Yet most of the anti-Gruden crowd seem to be all over Dungy's jock. Think about what I just said the next time you guys want to defend one and bash the other.  Defensively Gruden took over Dungy's team, and then added SEVERAL offensive FA's that year that helped us win the SB. He turned a bunch of turds into diamonds that year in FA and when we were dealing with the lack of money we had that year and several years after, you can only hope to get lucky once or twice as far as production. As Gruden has said, we were shopping the discount stores these past few years and the playing field was not level.


When you anti's bash Gruden and scream for a new coach what you are really saying is that a coach who can win with talent, but was given no chance in FA or the draft, should be held accountable for the lack of depth/talent that he had absolutely no control over. THAT is what it's all about, end of story.

Take the playoff teams from this year and last. Now take away any top tier FA's that team has signed over the last several years as well as take away any 1st or 2nd rounders they have acquired over that same time span. Next pretend many of their most talented players missed SIGNIFICANT time due to injuries. Next pretend their two top receivers decided they were Jerry Rice x10 and deserved to be compensated in a fashion that would make Trump look like the poorest man alive. Now (regarding this year) give that team one of the leagues hardest schedules regarding both team strength and scheduling. Now add all of that up and show me how many coaches would have done much more than Gruden has with that mess. You do that and you will have proven your point. Until then why don't you anti's wait until next offseason to do your crying after Gruden finally had something to work with.

Further to the point, this could have been guys added to our offense by simply using our resources better:


WR Colston
LT McNeil
LG James
QB Brees
RB Larry Johnson
RB Stephen Jackson
RB Willie Parker

KR/CB Pacman Jones


Hindsight?  Sure it is, but really only with Colston and Parker who were low round/FA jackpots.  But your point is that it is IMPOSSIBLE to be better on offense or ST because of what Gruden had to work with.  In fact, it was not just possible, but quite easy as half of these guys were heavily mentioned as possiblities on this very board. 

The offense does not have a lot of talent, I will grant you that.  But it doesn't because Gruden and his FO are doing a bad job.

I think the Colston thing is a bit unfair. I mean teams whiffed on him at least 200 times.

McNeil is obvious not unfair and its a monumental whiff- he's Peter King's RoY and everyone's all rookie team whereas Davin ain't to be seen anywhere near those lists.

Jeno James is the answer to what could have been done with the Derrick Deese or Todd Steussie money,

People will say Brees was unreachable but a simple mix of Wyms and Rattay gets you Bress this season so he was apossible.

LJ is also unfair, that trade was during the "take the diapers off" phase. They might should have been better evaluating that but you can sort of forgive. Steve Jax is tough to take and obviously meant we had to go Caddy next year so there is sort of that cascading effect where you might have been able to get Ware or Merriman to fill that pass rusher slot the next year.

Let's keep playing, this is fun. 

Here are more guys we could have had from the 2004 draft, cap room whining not required:

3rd Cooley, Locklear, Schaub, Wharton
4th Wilford, J. Allen
5th M. Turner
6th Olivea
7th Parker

Sure, many of these are 20/20, but again, the point was that Gruden had NO other options but the guys he picked or the FA's he picked up.  Right now the 2004 draft, which has been so key for many teams, is a complete wipe out for the Bucs, and not a McKay pick in sight. 

I disagree that the LJ trade was not one that could have easily been considered.  LJ was at worst a big serviceable 500-700 yard bruiser even back then with a minimal amount of scouting.  With Alstott on the way out, LJ was at least a guy you could project to the Zack Crockett role Gruden had in Oak. 

Idiots.

'Every day above ground is a good day'

I think McNeil is in fact unfair - that is, if the reason the Bucs passed was due to his medical information. If it's because they evaluated him as a poor prospect it's different. But by most accounts he dropped so far because of concerns about his spine.

And since when is Larry Johnson a "Zack Crockett" type of player (even before he became good)? When a HC with Vermeil's resume calls an adult on his team a baby, you avoid trading for him unless you have better information on the guy than the guy who baby-sat him for a few years.

Cooley is an H-back, which we don't really use.  

And Simms had only been in town 1 season. I'm not sure Schaub made a lot of sense at that point.

I'm with Dalbuc on the Steven Jackson pick though - it was a need and he's really a better fit (and better player at this point) than Caddy. We'd probably have DeMarcus Ware solving our passing rush needs right now as well.

Filling the "just above mediocre" niche on the web - http://www.betterthanaveragebucsblog.com/

1.)  McNeil is a very good player.  So if the argument is medical rather than ability, that is even further to the argument of this subpar FO.  The Bucs medical team certainly had access to McNeil just as the Chargers.   A starting LT trumps any OG not named Hannah or Allen, so why SD got him and we didn't shows the lack of competance on our FO.

2.) LJ AT WORST could have filled the Crockett short yardage type role.  If Vermeil is complaining about him, it isn't because he thinks he doesn't have talent, it is because he needs to get his head out of his rear.  Obviously, some coach did that, and the result is a beast.  Could Gruden have gotten the production out of LJ, a players with plenty of Big Ten game tape available?  Who knows, but I am willing to bet a whole lot of money that LJ will retire a more successful player than Colmer.  

3.)  Right, we don't use H-Backs, although we do use pass catching only TE's.  We also don't use the shot gun or a two minute offense, or a screen, or a draw play.  That doesn't mean that a guy like Cooley, or the other OLinemen I mentioned wouldnt have had more value than Cooper.

4.)  You never pass up a QB in the draft even if you have someone as "accomplished" as Simms already on the roster.  

5.)  The Jackson pick may have been as bad an oversight as any I can remember.  We desperately needed a RB, and a guy who could fit the WCO every down back.  We had Jackson land in our laps.  Then we had to make up for it by spending the 5th pick in the draft on a guy who split carries even in college.  Amazing turn of events.  People talk about the 1 and 2 for KW, but we spent two 1's to get a 30 catch injury prone WR and a 3.5 per carry injury prone RB.  

One of which finished runner up to ROY and the other did win ROY. Blaming the FO for injuries a player suffers due to his physical style of play, and an offensive line that couldn't open up a hole for a hybrid Ladanian Sayers, is yet another example of digging deep to find something that just isn't there. Keep it up, you're doing great.

Well, using your numbering scheme:

1) I totally disagree on your reasoning. If the FO passed on McNeil because they thought he couldn't play, then they failed at their expertise - evaluating football players. If they passed because their docs said "this guy has a 10% chance of being out of football completely if he's hit in the back" then that's different, because they aren't qualified to pass a medical judgement. They can overrule that judgement, but they do so at great risk. When the Bucs drafted Keith McCants, Ray Perkins overruled doctors (I believe the same doctors the Bucs use today) who told him that he wouldn't last 4 years in the league with his bad.  There's a reason McNeil, who on talent was judged by most a first rounder, fell. San Diego was willing to take a risk and so far it's worked out.

2) Actually, Vermeil really didn't think he had much talent. It was pretty well-reported that Carl Peterson selected Johnson over the objections of the coaching staff, who wanted a defensive player. We had a short-yardage option in any case - it was Alstott. And you are going to take game tape from college football over pro film and the opinion of Vermeil?

More importantly, if we are comparing the FO's decision in a meaningful way, it wasn't 1,000+ yards LJ versus Chris Colmer, it was a 3rd string running back versus a 3rd round pick.

3) I'll concede that Cooper was no rose, and that just about any pick would have been better than that.

4) Huh? Since when has Schaub become Johnny U? You "never pass up" QBs? We had Brad, Simms, and Griese already on the roster. But we are supposed to drop all other priorities for Schaub? I guess we blew it by passing on Aaron Rodgers as well.

5) Agreed on Jackson, a little harsh on Caddy for my taste.

Filling the "just above mediocre" niche on the web - http://www.betterthanaveragebucsblog.com/