Brian Schottenheimer

[TheLegendOfBoom]

Who could have been hired to make some of you happy? Seriously.

I agree it would have been fun to roll the dice on an up-and-coming position coach, but that's no guarantee of success.

Experienced, winning coaches don't drop from trees and wait around for job offers. And they don't make lateral moves. If you ever thought a HC cadidate like Josh McDaniels, or even DeFilipo, were going to fill this post, you were never going to be happy.

Todd Haley is now available.

He won't be available for much longer.

 

[WmHBonney]

Can we go get Todd Haley???

Yet another name that would have been a better choice.

It's just great that we rushed out and grabbed BS before anyone else did. I hear that he was in huge demand.

 

[chris98251]

The problem with logic is that we have to use the data.

The data says that Brian isn't that great of a hire.

Apparently his greatest accomplishment is not completely being terrible with supposedly terrible offensive personnel.

But no real successes.


We can extrapolate and make a suggestion that with better personnel he MIGHT be better. But then again, we supposedly have some terrible offensive personnel too.

This is a hire that will likely end up being exactly what it seems.

Generally, with a few fantastic exceptions, people are what their record says they are.

Bevel was exactly the same guy that Minnesota warned us about. Harvin was too. They didn't change because they played for a different team. They brought the same strengths and weaknesses with them.

Lynch was very different. That gamble worked. But it misses a lot more than it hits. And this team LOVES to bring on people that they feel can succeed here but that failed to succeed somewhere else.

The fact the Rams fans are chortling over this supposed pick makes me worried. But maybe this will be the exception that proves the rule? Doubtful but if we are stuck with it then hope is what we got.

I would rather bring in someone rising with potential and the ability to contribute new ideas/tactics than a nobody with a mediocre resume that hasn't really done much anywhere he landed. But we might apparently be stuck with him.

Nothing about this selection screams SuperBowl or even, ready to get past the Wildcard round (assuming we make the playoffs again). More like 'Tread water so people don't stop watching or blow off renewing season tickets'. But the joke is the NFL also stands for Not For Long, so Win Forever wasn't likely to last anyway.

You can use that logic for not bringing in Pete Carroll also, failed in the NFL, went to the College game and had his pick of talent in the Nation and won with it.

Chemistry of a collective group of people many times shines brighter then the one individual, that's what we have to hope happens here going forward.

Old groups message went stale as the promotions happened and things were not quite the same after each one. Pete is hitting the full reset button here I think. Hard to catch lighting in a bottle once, doing it twice at least you know it can be done.

There is a major difference here -- Pete Carroll found success in college, and in the NFL was a well respected DC and DB coach. He had built one of the strongest programs in the nation at the collegiate level, and even brought home a few national championships.

Brian Schottenheimer on the other hand has not shown us even a modicum of success in the NFL, or the collegiate game. He is nothing more than a "yes man" which concerns me greatly, as Pete Carroll is an awful offensive mind. He can identify talent on offense, but his ideas are an old relic from the past. Furthermore, Schottenheimers playbooks are very complex, and often time confuse his players. He also has a tendency to try to attack opponents strengths to "catch them off guard" or use players that are bad at a certain task to do the same thing. We hired an even worse version of Bevell.

How many wins as a DC and DB coach did he have in the NFL ? Josh McDaniel's is suppose to be a great offensive talent as OC, how well did his stint in Denver go?

Dick Jauron was a good DC as well, how well did his stints as HC go, respected but does that translate to Wins?

 

[TheLegendOfBoom]

Haley would have been a great choice!

But Schottenheimer?!?!

Haley is proven!

Hawks need reassurance on offense with proven credentials, a guy with some fire and some edge to him (Haley), not some "Yes" man, like Schottenheimer.

 

[Spin Doctor]

The problem with logic is that we have to use the data.

The data says that Brian isn't that great of a hire.

Apparently his greatest accomplishment is not completely being terrible with supposedly terrible offensive personnel.

But no real successes.


We can extrapolate and make a suggestion that with better personnel he MIGHT be better. But then again, we supposedly have some terrible offensive personnel too.

This is a hire that will likely end up being exactly what it seems.

Generally, with a few fantastic exceptions, people are what their record says they are.

Bevel was exactly the same guy that Minnesota warned us about. Harvin was too. They didn't change because they played for a different team. They brought the same strengths and weaknesses with them.

Lynch was very different. That gamble worked. But it misses a lot more than it hits. And this team LOVES to bring on people that they feel can succeed here but that failed to succeed somewhere else.

The fact the Rams fans are chortling over this supposed pick makes me worried. But maybe this will be the exception that proves the rule? Doubtful but if we are stuck with it then hope is what we got.

I would rather bring in someone rising with potential and the ability to contribute new ideas/tactics than a nobody with a mediocre resume that hasn't really done much anywhere he landed. But we might apparently be stuck with him.

Nothing about this selection screams SuperBowl or even, ready to get past the Wildcard round (assuming we make the playoffs again). More like 'Tread water so people don't stop watching or blow off renewing season tickets'. But the joke is the NFL also stands for Not For Long, so Win Forever wasn't likely to last anyway.

You can use that logic for not bringing in Pete Carroll also, failed in the NFL, went to the College game and had his pick of talent in the Nation and won with it.

Chemistry of a collective group of people many times shines brighter then the one individual, that's what we have to hope happens here going forward.

Old groups message went stale as the promotions happened and things were not quite the same after each one. Pete is hitting the full reset button here I think. Hard to catch lighting in a bottle once, doing it twice at least you know it can be done.

There is a major difference here -- Pete Carroll found success in college, and in the NFL was a well respected DC and DB coach. He had built one of the strongest programs in the nation at the collegiate level, and even brought home a few national championships.

Brian Schottenheimer on the other hand has not shown us even a modicum of success in the NFL, or the collegiate game. He is nothing more than a "yes man" which concerns me greatly, as Pete Carroll is an awful offensive mind. He can identify talent on offense, but his ideas are an old relic from the past. Furthermore, Schottenheimers playbooks are very complex, and often time confuse his players. He also has a tendency to try to attack opponents strengths to "catch them off guard" or use players that are bad at a certain task to do the same thing. We hired an even worse version of Bevell.

How many wins as a DC and DB coach did he have in the NFL ? Josh McDaniel's is suppose to be a great offensive talent as OC, how well did his stint in Denver go?

Dick Jauron was a good DC as well, how well did his stints as HC go, respected but does that translate to Wins?

Who, Carroll? Quite a bit as a DC, and DB coach. That is why he got two head coaching opportunities before coaching the USC Trojans. He was at the helm of some good defenses in NY, and San Francisco. Carroll had a great track record as a positional coach, and defensive coordinator. Moreover, Carroll also built one of the most successful NCAA teams at the time. He brought home, what? Two national championships? Carroll had to prove himself before he got his first, second, and third shot in the NFL.

McDaniels is an awful comparison. He had a big track record of success as OC, LOOONG before he got his HC job. We're talking about Schottenheimers merits as an offensive coordinator, not headcoach. They are two, completely different skill sets. Not really an apples to apples comparison. Some guys are great coordinators, but awful as HC's. Dick LaBeau, and yes, McDaniels past comes to mind. Likewise, other guys are better off just staying as positional coaches, Schottenheimer is one of those people. He has proven to be bad at this job three times, and not just in the NFL either. He did an awful job as OC for the Georgia Bulldogs. Don't just take my word for it: https://www.dawgnation.com/football/tea ... oordinator

We replaced Bevell with a dud. I'm already missing the guy, I've seen him in action, and the more I dig into his performance, or lack thereof the more I'm dumbfounded at this decision.

 

[getnasty]

Can we go get Todd Haley???

Yet another name that would have been a better choice.

It's just great that we rushed out and grabbed BS before anyone else did. I hear that he was in huge demand.

That like saying circus peanuts were in high demand at the candy store.

 

[NJlargent]

It’s disappointing that we grabbed BS so quickly. Seems like a knee jerk reaction. Similar feeling to when we grabbed sowell, webb, joeckel and tobin despite everyone else thinking they stunk. I am also disappointed that BS is the best we can do at OC. With Wilson at QB you would assume that this gig would be more attractive to other candidates. 5 years ago they would be lined up trying to get this gig.

 

[TwistedHusky]

If Brian is the OC, and it sure looks like it, the question to ask is why this selection was made?

Is it because the team believes we can get better results from the selection and because it will shore up some specific weaknesses?

Sure, then we have to give it a chance.

But, if this this is just change being made to address fan unrest and try to stem the growing apathy at the unpalatable offense? Then it will become obvious very quickly, as we continue to try to shove square pegs in round holes.

We will see.

I am disappointed that we did not take a bigger chance on someone with a strong background in great offenses that is rising, say from the college ranks or one of the better offenses.

This selection feels more like change for the sake of change, and not really change to address the problem.

And the problem is not really the inability to run the ball, though that is A big problem.

The problem is that with the aging of the defense, and the lack of great playmakers on the defense (or the aging of those playmakers so they can no longer make the impact they once had) - this team is going to have to win with offense instead of defense. That is where we have our advantages, but that is where we are not taking advantage of them.

Does bringing an average OC in really give you the ability to do this? I doubt it, since coaching and the strength of the coordinators is often a massive factor in the success of an offense or defense. But we are going to find out.

 

[mistaowen]

Ultimately, Pete wants to run the ball and wants his vision in place. It's proven to work, just look at this years playoffs. It travels well and they actually have a franchise QB here to hit the big plays. He's brought in a guy who has proven to stick to the running game.

I don't even necessarily think there's a big difference between him and Bevell, this comes down to a new OL coach implementing better blocking and having one guy run the show. I like what I've seen from people reviewing the Giants run game under him (pass blocking has been a plus too), teams can't pin their ears back knowing a run is coming. Get some creativity in the run game and suddenly Russell doesn't have 3rd and 10 every single drive. I'd say this is the most talented roster BS has inherited, so I am hopeful.

 

[Sgt. Largent]

I don't even necessarily think there's a big difference between him and Bevell, this comes down to a new OL coach implementing better blocking and having one guy run the show. I like what I've seen from people reviewing the Giants run game under him (pass blocking has been a plus too), teams can't pin their ears back knowing a run is coming. Get some creativity in the run game and suddenly Russell doesn't have 3rd and 10 every single drive. I'd say this is the most talented roster BS has inherited, so I am hopeful.

There isn't a big difference between him and Bevell because Pete won't allow there to be.

What Pete's trying to fix is the dysfunctional scheme/playcalling battle that was going on between Bevell and Cable.

So while we probably won't see any drastic scheme or playcalling changes, what we SHOULD see out of Schottenheimer and Solari is a more unified front in fixing the run game, and hopefully that leads to a more successful consistently balanced offense in general.

 

[original poster]

^Absolutely.

Having Solari and Schottenheimer working in harmony will work wonders for the offense.

 

[TwistedHusky]

Maybe.

But this looks more like Pete trying to force an outdated offensive philosophy on a team that does not have the personnel to execute it.

 

[Seymour]

Maybe.

But this looks more like Pete trying to force an outdated offensive philosophy on a team that does not have the personnel to execute it.

Flip side of that coin is that the main culprit for not having the personnel (Cable blowing draft and FA assets) is now gone. So the odds they can get there should go up. Even if Schotty and Bev are a wash, we still get better and lose the dysfunction between dual coordinators (run / pass).

Other than that, I agree that Pete will still force his vision regardless of the indications of strength or weakness.

 

[Sgt. Largent]

Maybe.

But this looks more like Pete trying to force an outdated offensive philosophy on a team that does not have the personnel to execute it.

You're right, it all matters...........coaching, scheme and personnel.

From what we've seen with the coaching turnover, I think we're also going to see the biggest turnover of the roster since year #1.

As far as "outdated philosophy?" This is football, nasty defense and running the ball successfully will ALWAYS work. EVERY team in the top 10 of rushing this year were playoff teams.

Pounding the rock has always worked, and will always work. THAT'S what Pete is trying to fix.

 

[original poster]

Maybe.

But this looks more like Pete trying to force an outdated offensive philosophy on a team that does not have the personnel to execute it.

You're right, it all matters...........coaching, scheme and personnel.

From what we've seen with the coaching turnover, I think we're also going to see the biggest turnover of the roster since year #1.

As far as "outdated philosophy?" This is football, nasty defense and running the ball successfully will ALWAYS work. EVERY team in the top 10 of rushing this year were playoff teams.

Pounding the rock has always worked, and will always work. THAT'S what Pete is trying to fix.

So do I (regarding the roster turnover). Think there was over 200 transactions in year 1, don't expect anywhere near that amount, but definitely see a huge roster churn built around Wilson and Wagner.

 

[WindCityHawk]

I feel like we also need to tweak our demands on Schottenheimer as well.

We had the #15 ranked offense (YPG) this year with no real running game. Our QB was our leading rusher. And I believe Chris Carson, who only appeared in 4 games, was still our leading rusher halfway through the season. That's abysmal. And we still won 9 games.

It's true that Schottenheimer may not be great, but we don't need him to be great. We just need him to not actively work against the team (Cable). If we have even a modicum of a running game--like, a RB leading the team in rushing yards--this can be a top ten offense.

 

[mistaowen]

Maybe.

But this looks more like Pete trying to force an outdated offensive philosophy on a team that does not have the personnel to execute it.

You're right, it all matters...........coaching, scheme and personnel.

From what we've seen with the coaching turnover, I think we're also going to see the biggest turnover of the roster since year #1.

As far as "outdated philosophy?" This is football, nasty defense and running the ball successfully will ALWAYS work. EVERY team in the top 10 of rushing this year were playoff teams.

Pounding the rock has always worked, and will always work. THAT'S what Pete is trying to fix.

Yep - plus all the coaching churn is to bring in guys who buy in. It sounds like Pete is taking back control of the defense while Norton Jr will fix the attitude. Pete will handle X's and O's, Ken motivates and gets everyone in line.

Same as the offense. BS is another yes man but it will be with a new OL coach who fits what Pete wants and will gut Cable's design. Watching Cardinals o-line scrubs look competent in the final game of the year accompanied with Duane Brown's steady decline proves this falls on Cable. The running game lacked any creativity and for a team that wants to beat you into submission, that's an issue. I think Pete would be happy running on first and second down (with moderate success) every single drive and hitting two or three big plays when the defense bites. Russell still carried this team with zero offensive identity or run game, getting him a competent rushing attack will only help.

I also agree on roster moves, I think Pete/JS will take a hard look at who is buying in and who isn't.

 

[chris98251]

People say they want a inspiring College Guy that has something new, problem is the good ones such as Peterson are not going to quit a HC job to be a OC in the NFL, most college offense is a form of the spread now, not something that has been really successful in the NFL. There is a reason the running game is coming back into the forefront, speed on defense has caught up to the offense which makes spreads harder to run. Why you counter with a run game that relies on Power.

 

[sdog1981]

I get the team wants to be the power running team that controls the clock and intimidates the other team. However, their are other coaches who can do the same thing. Why not Greg Roman? That guy loves to run the ball and dose a bunch of unique things in the running game. They could have also hired Jim McElwain who was the OC at Alabama during the late 2000's. Both coaches like running the ball. Just seems like a panic hire to me.

 

[mrt144]

There is a major difference here -- Pete Carroll found success in college, and in the NFL was a well respected DC and DB coach. He had built one of the strongest programs in the nation at the collegiate level, and even brought home a few national championships.

Brian Schottenheimer on the other hand has not shown us even a modicum of success in the NFL, or the collegiate game. He is nothing more than a "yes man" which concerns me greatly, as Pete Carroll is an awful offensive mind. He can identify talent on offense, but his ideas are an old relic from the past. Furthermore, Schottenheimers playbooks are very complex, and often time confuse his players. He also has a tendency to try to attack opponents strengths to "catch them off guard" or use players that are bad at a certain task to do the same thing. We hired an even worse version of Bevell.

I have to strongly disagree with this. Brian is a GREAT QB Coach. Look what he did with Drew Brees and Andrew Luck.

As an OC, he hasn't had a fair opportunity due to the bad programs & QBs he was coaching for. His play calling in 2009/10 was excellent, despite having Sanchez at QB.

These "unfair" opportunities seem to follow the man around. Is it the places themselves, or Schottenheimers failure as a coach? There is a bad trend that is going on 10 years now. He has been a coach with the Jets, Rams, and the Georgia Bull Dogs, and in each of these instances his offense has woefully underachieved. Also, your version of what happened in 09/10 was much different than Jets fans:

http://forums.theganggreen.com/threads/ ... mer.89799/

Maybe he keeps taking these opportunities because that is all he can get. He is not a good OC, and quite frankly I think he is a downgrade from Bevell.

Isn't the very definition of a good coach someone who has a bad situation and makes it not so bad?