Sherman coming back for interview number 2
- Thread starter football karma
- Start date
TheCardFan
Things have changed.
First thought Mr 3 post...your a troll. Thought?
I say no thought
- Joined
- May 14, 2002
- Posts
- 87,508
- Reaction score
- 38,757
You do know I was using
Sorry yes I got that, I was reinforcing what you said.
JeffGollin
ASFN Icon
It isn't on the Sporting News site. It isn't on the ESPN site. It isn't on the NFL.com site. It isn't on the Official cardinal site. And it hasn't been announced on KTAR.
Yet.
Will someone please hack the Cards website or something?
lobo
ASFN Lifer
doubt it.....that his demand will be for the most money...we will never know tho'
lobo
ASFN Lifer
i think i finally figured out why we have a number of people really opposed to his being hired...he has proven that he can't get a playoff team to a super bowl....let's remember a few things kids...the only guy on the street to the best of my knowledge is a guy who would illicit similar "ugh" by a number of us.....jim fassel...who by the way i wouldn't mind as an OC regardless of who came in.
a number of years from now..let's remember to look back and see how many games, regardless of where they wind up, how many of the candidates have a .600+ winning percentage over 5/6 years.
a number of years from now..let's remember to look back and see how many games, regardless of where they wind up, how many of the candidates have a .600+ winning percentage over 5/6 years.
kerouac9
Klowned by Keim
Don't forget, lobo. Fassel actually did get a playoff team to a Super Bowl. Sherman just never really beat a good playoff team, and his leadership and decisions on the field were so superior that no one here remembers any of them despite the fact that the Packers were constantly on TV during the Sherman Era.
- Joined
- May 14, 2002
- Posts
- 87,508
- Reaction score
- 38,757
That was because they were winning games.
Just so we're clear here, before the Packers fired Sherman, Brett Favre said he might be more inclined to return if they kept Sherman as coach. They fired Sherman and then everyone started saying unless they hire a coach Brett likes, he's going to retire. So they spent that entire offseason completely held hostage by Favre nobody knew if he was retiring or not.
That was the 2nd consecutive offseason they were in that situation, the prior one it was a different reason, Favre had a very difficult year with his dad passing away, and Sherman excused him from the June Minicamp when Favre said he wanted to be there, because he wanted to make sure Favre was ready to go when real camp opened later, and it gave him time to work with Aaron Rodgers. That was the public comment, the rumor then of course was that Favre wanted to retire and the Packers were desperately trying to keep him from doing so until Rodgers was ready to take over. That's another big reason the 2005 Pack was so bad, Favre had such an abnormal offseason overcoming his dad's death and not knowing if he wanted to play or not.
They started off 1-6 and when rumors swirled that SHerman's job was in jeopardy Favre came right out and said he was more likely to return next year if Sherman was the coach.
i'm pretty much on record as saying I don't like what Favre has done in recent years I think he put his own personal issues ahead of the team and left them hanging on what the hell to do. But he was the figurehead of that team and he very clearly said he wanted Sherman to remain the coach. So the idea that Packers players couldn't wait to get rid of Sherman isn't entirely true, since the guy that had all the power, wanted him to stay.
kerouac9
Klowned by Keim
There's tons of reasons that players don't want their coaches to leave. Denny Green got a ringing endorsement from the current roster everywhere but on the field. That's not very convincing to me.
Great coaches consistently win in the playoffs. They make it to Conference Championship games. They get first-round byes. They don't beat Steve Mariucci and hope that Hasselback throws it directly to the opposition two plays into overtime.
Sherman = Denny Green without all the ass-grabbing. It's easy to win a ton of games with a Hall of Fame QB and then fall short in the playoffs. Just ask Mike Shanahan.
Great coaches consistently win in the playoffs. They make it to Conference Championship games. They get first-round byes. They don't beat Steve Mariucci and hope that Hasselback throws it directly to the opposition two plays into overtime.
Sherman = Denny Green without all the ass-grabbing. It's easy to win a ton of games with a Hall of Fame QB and then fall short in the playoffs. Just ask Mike Shanahan.
- Joined
- May 14, 2002
- Posts
- 87,508
- Reaction score
- 38,757
But you said Packers players couldn't wait to see Sherman leave. I'm saying that wasn't the case with Favre.
Luck happens all the time, Romo fumbling the hold, the Bengals blowing the extra point attempt, Anderson missing the FG against Atlanta in 99 costing Denny his first chance at a Superbowl, the Tuck Rule etc. In general teams that win Superbowls get some luck along the way.
kerouac9
Klowned by Keim
1. Where did I say that the Packers players couldn't wait to see Sherman leave?
2. I agree that luck happens all the time, and sometimes you make your own luck. But 2-4 in the playoffs and getting basically blown out of the building every time doesn't seem like luck to me.
2. I agree that luck happens all the time, and sometimes you make your own luck. But 2-4 in the playoffs and getting basically blown out of the building every time doesn't seem like luck to me.
Zeno
Ancient
They lost one game on a 4th and 26 call to Philly in Philly. I don't think they got blown out in that one.
One that I do recall as being a blowout was against the Rams, when Favre threw like 5 INTs. I guess you could say Sherman shouldn't have put his hall of fame QB in situations where he'd throw so many INTs but come on...
- Joined
- May 14, 2002
- Posts
- 87,508
- Reaction score
- 38,757
Maybe I'm confusing you but I thought you said the Packers couldnt' wait to run him out of town. Might have been someone else I'm on too many threads right now to remember.
kerouac9
Klowned by Keim
Didn't they lose to the Falcons 27-7? They ended the first half down 17-0. That was 2003. The year before, the Packers actually blew the game after surrendering a 13-6 halftime lead. Ahman Green scored 2 TDs before Shaun Alexander threw the game into overtime and Harris returned the INT from Hasselback. I guess that's the luck that Russ was talking about. In 2004, the Packers lost another playoff game at home to Denny Green's Vikings, who jumped out to a 17-0 lead in the first quarter before allowing junk TDs on the way to a 31-17 win. They buried the Lambeau Mystique after that game in a solemn ceremony outside the stadium.
- Joined
- May 14, 2002
- Posts
- 87,508
- Reaction score
- 38,757
Tice was the coach not Green. Favre threw 4 picks, Vikings led 17-0 after 3 possessions, green bay cut it to 24-17 with almost 14 minutes left in the game.
The first 2 Td's were all on the offense, then Favre threw pick #1 setting up a FG. So it's 17-0. They cut it to 17-10, block a FG, first play back from his own 12 Favre throws a pick.2 plays later Vikings make it 24-10. They cut it to 24-17 when Vikings scored a TD. Favre killed 4 drives with picks.
Not sure what else you do there the guy is a HOF Qb you sort of have to hope he doesn't keep throwing picks?
The Atlanta loss, Favre threw 2 picks and lost a fumble. Tyrone Williams fumbled a punt, Longwell missed 2 FG's and they had a punt blocked. The last 3 drives ended in fumble, INT, fumble, the first drive of the game Favre threw a pick on the 3rd play of the game already down 7-0.
Outside of the blocked punt I'm not sure you can really say Sherman lost that game as much as say Favre did?
Favre gives and takes away, always has, he's won enough to be a lock HOF but he didn't play well in any of the GB losses under Sherman in the playoffs.
kerouac9
Klowned by Keim
So Sherman was unable to control his high-profile quarterback, or that he's only responsible for wins, and Favre is responsible for the losses? Ahman Green rushed for 158 yards in the loss to the Eagles (I think). Maybe we shouldn't credit Sherman for that, either?
I have no idea how to interpret these posts, Russ. Do you like Sherman, or find his record intriguing, or what? His record is intriguing, but from what I remember of his years with the Packers, once the game starts, he's kind of an empty sweater-and-khakis.
I have no idea how to interpret these posts, Russ. Do you like Sherman, or find his record intriguing, or what? His record is intriguing, but from what I remember of his years with the Packers, once the game starts, he's kind of an empty sweater-and-khakis.
- Joined
- May 14, 2002
- Posts
- 87,508
- Reaction score
- 38,757
I'm saying you're discounting his wins because he inherited Favre and a great team. I'm saying in this day and age no team stays together for 6 years with the current coach doing nothing(Rhodes was between for one year so that team Holmgren built had to last SIX years). He clearly had something to do with those 5 great years.
the playoff losses that paint him as Schottenheimer or green weren't just being too conservative(Marty) or being Green, some of them were due to things beyond his control. nobody can reign in Favre, nobody has ever been able to do it for very long, the fewest INT's he threw in any full season was 13, topped 20 picks 5 times, he throws picks, always has. It wasn't that they weren't prepared, or that the mystique was gone, it was that their offense was built around Favre and when he turns it over in bunches, they're going to lose.
I think people are just saying oh Sherman destroyed the Pack without really checking any details. They had tons of issues beyond his control that year.
with all that they still remained a very competitive football team, they were in games with all their playmakers either injured or struggling, that implies they were pretty well coached. Teams that have talent and lose lots of close games(us this year) aren't well coached. Teams that lack talent and lose lots of close games are probably fairly well coached IMHO.
I have said all along I'd be fine with Chow, fine wtih Sherman, fine with Cameron, fine with Grimm. Not so sure about Whisenhunt and frankly I'm wavering on Grimm I'm not sure the Pittsburgh system will work with the guys we have now, I think we need a more pass oriented offense than they would likely bring?
conraddobler
I want my 2$
- Joined
- Sep 1, 2002
- Posts
- 20,052
- Reaction score
- 237
I think Sherman getting the job is less news than the budding horror that we may be in fact dictating to candidates that we really want to keep some assistants, no I mean really wink wink.
Chow could have blown chunks in the interview or it could simply be that he said .... no on those guys I want my own staff.
It seems that if they retain a good chunk of them that stupidity has struck again.
Sherman isn't even near as bad a hire as DG, Tobin, Mac, Buddy, Joe B, or even Jim Hannifan, in fact Sherman would be the best coach we've ever had.... sad but true.
Cbus cardsfan
Back to Back ASFN FFL Champion
- Joined
- May 14, 2002
- Posts
- 21,461
- Reaction score
- 7,631
K9, you keep ripping on Sherman.I'm with Russ and some others that think his record is pretty good and am fine if he gets hired. Who do you want and why? My first choice has been Grimm then Rivera but Sherman was right there with them.
imaCafan
Next stop, Hall of Fame!
Again, Grimm#1 and Chow #2, and I ain't sure why......
- Joined
- May 14, 2002
- Posts
- 87,508
- Reaction score
- 38,757
He seems to like Cameron who would also be fine with me.
I think the situation here is simple, people that haven't been a HC before look better because they have no failures for people to point out(in the NFL). Cameron's only failure was Indiana and nobody wins there. Whisenhunt and Grimm spotless coaching records.
Chow never got a shot so he must be bad somehow.
I'm just waiting until PFT reports Cameron is hired so I can point out that Brees was a better QB this year AFTER surgery than he was under Cameron last year before surgery.
Cbus cardsfan
Back to Back ASFN FFL Champion
- Joined
- May 14, 2002
- Posts
- 21,461
- Reaction score
- 7,631
He seems to like Cameron who would also be fine with me.
I think the situation here is simple, people that haven't been a HC before look better because they have no failures for people to point out(in the NFL). Cameron's only failure was Indiana and nobody wins there. Whisenhunt and Grimm spotless coaching records.
Chow never got a shot so he must be bad somehow.
I'm just waiting until PFT reports Cameron is hired so I can point out that Brees was a better QB this year AFTER surgery than he was under Cameron last year before surgery.
Do i need to point out that Cameron's recors at Indiana was beyond putrid. Cameron is not one of my top choices either. And you can say, well how can you win at Indiana, but Cameron was beyond bad there. Bill Mallory was very good there at 69-77-3. Terry Hoeppner has them being very competitive and barely missed out on a bowl game in 2 years he is 10-14.Cameron was 18-37 with his best record being 5-6.
