(09-21-2020, 05:02 PM)Newton Wrote: While I agree when you look at the entirety of caldwell’s record, there is no way you can claim he is a top GM, let’s not discount the possibility he may have learned a lot over the last 8 years. How many of you would say you were as good at your job day one as you were 5-10 years in?

So are you willing bet he has learned and extend him next season if we end up 5-11  or 6-10 this year?  Are you willing to reward an 8 year winning percentage of .321?  I am not willing to make that bet.  I'd cut both Morrone and him loose and start fresh for what would appear to be an attractive job for a GM given the number of draft picks they would have to work with.  It is the only reasonable decision at that point.

---

(09-21-2020, 05:01 PM)SamusAranX Wrote:

(09-21-2020, 04:48 PM)NeptuneBeachBum Wrote: The part I did not comprehend is how you assume Fournette was Coughlin's pick.  That is pure speculation and a defense for Caldwell when neither you, nor I, have any real idea.  Unlike you, I am not numb about it, and I believe Caldwell is THE problem.  Other than that, we're on the same page.

Circumstantial evidence to me points to Fournette as Coughlin influenced. your mileage may vary of course.

Yeah... we do not see this the same way.  But that is fine.  What is clear and objective though is a career record of 36-76 under Caldwell's leadership.  Even worse than Gene Smith's record. That cannot be disputed.

---