(06-12-2020, 10:32 AM)Kane Wrote:

(06-11-2020, 08:38 PM)D-Money Wrote: 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.

Actually it was clearly insinuated that Coughlin was the reason we were good in 2017 when the statement reads "The one year we were good was when Coughlin showed up" or something to that effect.

Wins and losses fall on more than the quality of the roster. The Gus Bradley years severely underperformed, imo. Injuries, poor coaching, roster quality... lots goes into wins and losses.
The whole jab at me knowing Caldwell personally is childish, especially considering multiple times I've said he hasn't been good enough and we should have moved on already. So clearly, I'm no apologist for Caldwell. I just call out bull hyperbole when I see it. Caldwell hasn't been the worst GM in the NFL during his tenure. He hasn't been the worst GM we've had. He actually had the roster going in the right direction before Coughlin showed up. There was a lot of optimism outside of the QB position.

To answer the question of the thread "is he THAT bad" no. Not as bad as everyone likes to make it out to be. He's actually done a lot of good. He's also made some boneheaded moves. You can look at the record in a vacuum if you wish, but dude isn't on the field. He isn't coaching the roster. He isn't designing the schemes. Once Coughlin was here, he wasn't even making the draft selections and contract extensions alone. That stuff falls on Coughlin who had FINAL say over the roster.


And I've never tried to give Caldwell all the credit for anything. Just think people who seem to worship Coughlin are idiots. There's more evidence that Coughlin actually made this team worse. And people who get emotionally hyperbolic about Caldwell are silly. There's more evidence that the roster was heading in the right direction before Coughlin showed up. Khan made a decision that Coughlin needed to come in to oversee football operations. In doing so they made big money FA splashes, extended the wrong guys, picked a RB early in the first, a role player DL in the first the next year, and alienated at least 2 star players.
I call a spade a spade every time.

I can only respond this last time because it is clear you are not understanding what I am saying. There is no way you are calling a spade a spade with all the speculation and the things you heard and may have feel went on, nothing for sure. Until Caldwell or Coughlin or Kahn comes out and confirms it is all speculation.

The only reason why Caldwell is considered a bad GM is because of his results. The record under him being a GM and the fact that all of the supposedly good talent he drafted, either left, want to leave or are not as good as we first thought. No matter how much of an [BLEEP] Coughlin is, the year he came year we got better, whether by accident or based on the talent Caldwell accumulated, it still happened with Coughlin got here. GM is supposed to handle everything and get rid of the necessary personnel causing issues or not performing. If you can make the determination of what needs to be done, then he should not be a GM, just a scout. Just saying Caldwell is decent talent evaluator but not a good GM

Just look at what I am saying clearly and think about it.

---