(06-11-2020, 03:35 PM)Kane Wrote:

(06-11-2020, 03:15 PM)D-Money Wrote: This is the issue. All we are basing this on is that Caldwell was here for a certain number or years, for those years the team was bad. One year 2017, when Coughlin gets here,  a former Super Bowl winning coach and was the coach when we were good. The one year we turn it around and are good. Coughlin is gone again and we suck again. 

No one is saying that it is guaranteed that Coughlin made us good for 2017. We are saying that no matter what different circumstances that have happened that year and allowed us to be good, it def wasn't just Caldwell that did it. 

Just really understand, Caldwell is a GM, he has picked some good players and some have fallen into his lap but overall with not being able to retain that talent and missing on different picks at key positions at the same time keeping coaches who are no good, plus our overall losing record under him, He is a bad GM, he may be an ok scout or college talent evaluator. 

Stop making things more complicated by coming up with things we don't know for sure about and what may have happened behind closed doors.
JUST LOOk AT THE RESULTS and THE CURRENT STATE OF THE FRANCHISE SINCE HE HAS BECOME GM

Per the bold: We sucked the very next year and Coughlin was still here. For 2 more seasons essentially.
Had Coughlin never showed up perhaps we end up with CMC instead of Fournette.
Perhaps we move on from Bortles instead of extending him.
Perhaps we pay Ramsey and Yan early and the defense remains elite for years.
Without Coughlin, we're probably still good in 2017 honestly.

You can capitalize words all you want. It doesn't change what I was arguing. 2017 wasn't good because of Coughlin. It was a roster mostly built by the GM Caldwell, with an easy schedule, a terrible AFCS, and a little bit of luck.
The roster was mostly made before Coughlin. It's in its current state mostly because of Coughlin. There's no two ways around it. It's only complicated for simple people who feel the need to bang the keyboard angrily that they aren't right.

Like I said, Caldwell hasn't been great. And we should have moved on multiple times now.
But trying to credit Coughlin with 2017 is asinine to say the least.
But one could look at the current roster and cap situation and certainly give a lot of that credit to Coughlin.

I'm convinced you are paying attention to only what you want to see. If you look at my following statement, I said clearly no one is saying that Coughlin is the reason we were good in 2017.  I'm saying Caldwell shouldn't get credit for the 2017 year alone because he has had 7 years and has not duplicated the success of the one season.  And you keep saying perhaps or maybe....
why do you keep trying to add things we will never really know for sure or understand. 

Look at the facts and what we can see. 7 years as a GM and out of those 7 years, 1 was successful. The successful year was only when someone else was put in charge. You either don't want to understand or have to be someone knows Caldwell personally. 

If you had a job for 7 years and only had 1 good year when they hired someone to oversee you're job and that person has a known track record of having success there, would you take the credit for the 1 year? Or would it be questionable overall? 

What is reason for the thread, is Caldwell really that bad? Yes he is based on his results! Is 1 and 6 a good record to you? 

Does Coughlin deserves all the credit for 2017? No but Caldwell damn sure doesn't deserve all either.

---