Just seeing Gus Bradley's name (with his 7-26 HC record)  in there among all those head coaches who have been to a Super Bowl blows my mind and I am unable to answer at this time.

 

I might try again later.

 

That was good !!

---

He asks why you left stopped at 96, which conveniently would have meant a coach with only 8 wins his first two years would be included. 

 

And your response is "What about Bradley makes you think he's the next great coach of this era?".

Well, that's analytics, isn't it?

---

Never argue with idiots. They drag you down to their level and beat you with experience.

Cherry picking is only using data in favor of an argument.  I gave the whole body of work for the last 19 years and asked a simple question in light of the data.  Maybe you could offer something more than a negative opinion.

Why 19 years?  Why not 50 years?  That's a "whole body of work" for the NFL.  Not just the years you've been alive.

---

Never argue with idiots. They drag you down to their level and beat you with experience.

Did you know Chuck Noll was 6-22 his first two years?

 

And yet in the initial post you ask Does anyone genuinely believe that Bradley will become the one guy in history that can truly have this bad of a career start and then lead a team to the Super Bowl?

 

When in fact he would not be the "one guy in history" as you put it.

 

Or maybe you don't know what history means either.

 

Well maybe instead of being argumentative you could offer something to the discussion here?  Your offering of Chuck Noll is classic cherry picking or anecdotal evidence by the way.

 

Now, are you saying you believe that Bradley is the next Chuck Noll?

---

Why 19 years?  Why not 50 years?  That's a "whole body of work" for the NFL.  Not just the years you've been alive.

 

Not sure what's up with all the hate here but knock yourself out.

---

Well maybe instead of being argumentative you could offer something to the discussion here?  Your offering of Chuck Noll is classic cherry picking or anecdotal evidence by the way.

 

Now, are you saying you believe that Bradley is the next Chuck Noll?

 

Pointing out that Chuck Noll won 6 games his first two years isn't cherry picking, it's proving your premise as wrong.

---

Not sure what's up with all the hate here but knock yourself out.

 

Why so sensitive?

---

Did you know Chuck Noll was 6-22 his first two years?

 

And yet in the initial post you ask Does anyone genuinely believe that Bradley will become the one guy in history that can truly have this bad of a career start and then lead a team to the Super Bowl?

 

When in fact he would not be the "one guy in history" as you put it.

 

Or maybe you don't know what history means either.

 

Give it a few more years ...... I'm seeing the following.....

 

Bortles = Bradshaw

A. Robinson = Stallworth

Hurns = Swann

Yeldon = Franco Harris

Wis = Mike Webster

Fowler= Mean Joe Greene

Poz = Lambert

Telvin Smith = Jack Ham

Cyprien = Donnie Shell

House = Mel Blount

---

Why so sensitive?

 

You're clearly an apologist with an agenda incapable of an objective discussion.  Thanks for nothing.

---

You're a clear apologist with an agenda incapable of an objective discussion.  Thanks for nothing.

 

How? You threw out a flawed premise and were easily proven wrong. 

---

How? You threw out a flawed premise and were easily proven wrong. 

 

So I'm not Elias, sue me.  You're intelligent enough to understand my point.  And have yet to answer whether or not you believe Bradley can be added to the list of Super Bowl coaches.

---

I smell burnt toast in here. someone turn on a fan. Funny thing about analytics, there are no absolutes and rarely can be counted on. Especially when dealing with a process that has so many different moving and ever changing parts.

 

To your point, yes I personally believe that Gus can coach a team to a super bowl victory. Every one of those coaches on that list super bowl victories came from having teams that had the player talent to win it, plain and simple. Players win games,

---

Looking to troll? Don't bother, we supply our own.

 

 

I smell burnt toast in here. someone turn on a fan. Funny thing about analytics, there are no absolutes and rarely can be counted on. Especially when dealing with a process that has so many different moving and ever changing parts.

 

To your point, yes I personally believe that Gus can coach a team to a super bowl victory. Every one of those coaches on that list super bowl victories came from having teams that had the player talent to win it, plain and simple. Players win games,

 

Thank you for at least answering the question at hand lol. :thumbsup:

---

The head coach thing is overrated. Look at the GM. How many guys are the teams hitting in the draft and FA.


People say they want to fire Gus and that we have no talent. You cannot have it both ways

---

The head coach thing is overrated. Look at the GM. How many guys are the teams hitting in the draft and FA.


People say they want to fire Gus and that we have no talent. You cannot have it both ways

This exactly, the teams talent level is not high enough to win many games at this point. I don't give a damn who's coaching them. I do believe that some of the young acquisitions will develop into those types of players. Once they do Gus is going to look a lot better. This team has to stop the churn in our staffing. You will never develop a winning team with ever changing schemes and philosophies..

---

Looking to troll? Don't bother, we supply our own.

 

 

The head coach thing is overrated. Look at the GM. How many guys are the teams hitting in the draft and FA.


People say they want to fire Gus and that we have no talent. You cannot have it both ways. Now if we had legit talent and we still loss then we have a coaching problem, but Caldwell is just barely getting base hits. We have no homeruns aside from maybe Linder and McCray.

---

 

<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="Solid Snake" data-cid="543409" data-time="1442324718">
The head coach thing is overrated. Look at the GM. How many guys are the teams hitting in the draft and FA.


People say they want to fire Gus and that we have no talent. You cannot have it both ways. Now if we had legit talent and we still loss then we have a coaching problem, but Caldwell is just barely getting base hits. We have no homeruns aside from maybe Linder and McCray.

 


</blockquote>
I get your point and agree the hits are on the low side but you have to count Marks, Davis, FA's  Odrick and Brown

---

You're clearly an apologist with an agenda incapable of an objective discussion.  Thanks for nothing.

Questioning your logic makes him an apologist?  Are you going to report him for that?  Or do you reserve that for people who question your perspective?

---

Never argue with idiots. They drag you down to their level and beat you with experience.

Not sure what's up with all the hate here but knock yourself out.

Hate?  Because I made an assumption that you're only picking a select number of years because that's your historical perspective?  Really?  That's hate?  Methinks some of you have some pretty thin skin if you find that hateful.  Clearly your generation is a sensitive bunch.

---

Never argue with idiots. They drag you down to their level and beat you with experience.

I feel for Gus. He's trying to catch sushi grade tuna in a toilet called Everstank.

---

I ain't no monkey... I'm an ape.