remember when people here didn't want Chip Kelly?

[OttoinGrotto]

I actually think we did very well in hindsight. Who were the coaches/coordinators being discussed at the time as a number of posters mentioned above... Skip Holtz (failed at USF), Mike Locksley (failed at New Mexico), Truner Gill (failed at Kansas), Whipple (?), Kelly (proven to be an elite level coach), anyone im leaving out? While we didn't hit the grand slam in Kelly (who knows if we could have even procured him) we had the next best succesful transition/option with out question. We did well considering the options and I certiantly do not regret the choice.

Fair post, good thoughts. Can't argue with that. Will be interesting to see how Holtz and Gill fair in their new HC gigs. Gill seems to fit Liberty well and had a pretty good year last year. Sometimes I think a person can be a good or bad coach, but depending on the place and time that might get obscured a bit.

 

[OttoinGrotto]

LOL

the bills might've made the playoffs if the bills didn't suck last year

Come on, man. Don't you know? The Bills didn't suck last year. Stevie Johnson and the QB situation sucked last year.

 

[Millhouse]

I'm just glad we didn't get Randy Edsall. I think everyone can agree on that.

i'm heartbroken i lost all my photoshops. stupid imageshack

 

[upperdeck]

You didn't read the article.

It's not about what he did - but how he's doing it. Making the playoffs helped, but the X's and O's were better than everyone else - as well as the sports science stuff. Based on the article, I don't see a hot seat in two years - but a "beware of other franchises poaching him" ...

The NFC EAST is thus:

1. Eagles

2. Giants
3. Redskins
4. The hollow shell of a dead cow carcass with a burning star crater buried deep in it's horrible heart of darkness cowboys

so when the eagles win 5 game this year does that mean his approach is still correct? His offense has the same issues any other one does. you better have the right pieces.. Look at Oregon last year they lost the QB and struggled and they had above average talent at very other spot. just because he is doing it different doesn't mean its better. Its much easier to look great in College if you are well organized and 80% of the teams struggle with consistency.
they won 10 games last year

Manning sucked
they beat Dallas without a QB, just to get into the playoffs
they beat GB without a QB
they beat Detroit in a blizzard with one good quarter running because you couldnt throw

lose one game and no playoffs. 50% of the time they score 24 pts or less. they won because the D played well not because he did great things on offense. they only allowed 24 pts twice the last 12 games.

 

[Frozen]

im glad we cant pull up old posts from TOS.. Im pretty sure I was all in for Locksley and was livid when we didnt get him

oops

I was 110% for Locksley.

 

[OttoinGrotto]

so when the eagles win 5 game this year does that mean his approach is still correct? His offense has the same issues any other one does. you better have the right pieces.. Look at Oregon last year they lost the QB and struggled and they had above average talent at very other spot. just because he is doing it different doesn't mean its better. Its much easier to look great in College if you are well organized and 80% of the teams struggle with consistency.
they won 10 games last year

Manning sucked
they beat Dallas without a QB, just to get into the playoffs
they beat GB without a QB
they beat Detroit in a blizzard with one good quarter running because you couldnt throw

lose one game and no playoffs. 50% of the time they score 24 pts or less. they won because the D played well not because he did great things on offense. they only allowed 24 pts twice the last 12 games.

His approach is correct, and the results just validated it is all.

This is like Boeheim and the zone. Something goes wrong and everyone points at the zone. But nobody looks at all the crappy teams that play man because that's the norm and then point to playing man as the problem.

 

[thorpedo]

and it's a good thing we got a guy with strong ties to SU who wouldn't use the job as a stepping stone to the NFL

Wacka wacka! I get it.

 

[TheCusian]

so when the eagles win 5 game this year does that mean his approach is still correct? His offense has the same issues any other one does. you better have the right pieces.. Look at Oregon last year they lost the QB and struggled and they had above average talent at very other spot. just because he is doing it different doesn't mean its better. Its much easier to look great in College if you are well organized and 80% of the teams struggle with consistency.
they won 10 games last year

Manning sucked
they beat Dallas without a QB, just to get into the playoffs
they beat GB without a QB
they beat Detroit in a blizzard with one good quarter running because you couldnt throw

lose one game and no playoffs. 50% of the time they score 24 pts or less. they won because the D played well not because he did great things on offense. they only allowed 24 pts twice the last 12 games.

Could be. Injuries always play a weird role. You need a QB for any system.

Manning did suck.
So you're saying Romo would have made the difference in an important, end of season make or break game.
Thems the breaks.
Hate having one of the best RB in the NFL. Wish we could be mediocre to make things more fair.

In the article - the writer talks about the overall team O and D. He's not just a O coach. His overall plan as HC is for both O and D to be great.

Lastly - the Eagles will win more than 5 games on the back of McCoy alone.

 

[IthacaBarrel]

so when the eagles win 5 game this year does that mean his approach is still correct? His offense has the same issues any other one does. you better have the right pieces.. Look at Oregon last year they lost the QB and struggled and they had above average talent at very other spot. just because he is doing it different doesn't mean its better. Its much easier to look great in College if you are well organized and 80% of the teams struggle with consistency.
they won 10 games last year

Manning sucked
they beat Dallas without a QB, just to get into the playoffs
they beat GB without a QB
they beat Detroit in a blizzard with one good quarter running because you couldnt throw

lose one game and no playoffs. 50% of the time they score 24 pts or less. they won because the D played well not because he did great things on offense. they only allowed 24 pts twice the last 12 games.

So you are saying Eagles only win 5 this year? Interesting

 

[rrlbees]

im glad we cant pull up old posts from TOS.. Im pretty sure I was all in for Locksley and was livid when we didnt get him oops

Kudos for manning up. Some in this thread mocking others comments back then are also glad old posts can't be pulled up to reveal who they wanted and why.

 

[upperdeck]

I saw they will be close to 5 than 10.

 

[Millhouse]

Kudos for manning up. Some in this thread mocking others comments back then are also glad old posts can't be pulled up to reveal who they wanted and why.

your choice says hi

 

[rrlbees]

your choice says hi

That was my choice and #2 was Skippy.

 

[CIL]

I loved Locksley and Holtz. Ugh. However, Locksley going to NM was plain stupid on his part. He absolutely kills VA/MD/DC recruitng. Terrible fit IMO.

 

[ssbriefcase]

And I wouldn't be so fast to dismiss Gill at Kansas either, it's freakin' Kansas and he got 1 year there?? There's a much more prominent coach there now (supposedly), who can't win shyt...

 

[texasorange]

I wanted Hank Stram.

 

[MSOrange]

And I wouldn't be so fast to dismiss Gill at Kansas either, it's freakin' Kansas and he got 1 year there?? There's a much more prominent coach there now (supposedly), who can't win shyt...

He actually got 2 years at Kansas. He went 3-9 and 2-10. I live in Kansas and trust me, it was bad - GRob bad. It was probably ever worse. I know it's hard to win in football at Kansas but they weren't even competitive in his second year: 66-24 to Georgia Tech, 70-28 to Oklahoma State, 47-17 to Oklahoma, 59-21 to Kansas State, 43-0 to Texas and 61-7 to Texas A&M. He's probably a better coach than that, but I wouldn't want a team I cheered for to give him another chance.

 

[ssbriefcase]

He actually got 2 years at Kansas. He went 3-9 and 2-10. I live in Kansas and trust me, it was bad - GRob bad. It was probably ever worse. I know it's hard to win in football at Kansas but they weren't even competitive in his second year: 66-24 to Georgia Tech, 70-28 to Oklahoma State, 47-17 to Oklahoma, 59-21 to Kansas State, 43-0 to Texas and 61-7 to Texas A&M. He's probably a better coach than that, but I wouldn't want a team I cheered for to give him another chance.

Makes sense then. Wow I forgot about those crazy lopsided losses. Although living in Colorado, I do remember ku beating cu.

 

[Chip]

Kudos for manning up. Some in this thread mocking others comments back then are also glad old posts can't be pulled up to reveal who they wanted and why.

I can't even remember who I wanted. I think I wanted pretty much anyone, up to and including domestic pets. I mean, it had to be better.

Locksley - Don't think I loved him as a choice, but there are worse coach's wives to look at.
Gill - Made Buffalo competitive and given it's only down the road a couple hours, seemed sensible.
Holtz - I know I was hoping for him at least at one point.
Addazzio - Would have worked for me.
Edsall - Selfish gay dancing aside, I would have taken him as coach.
Chip Kelly - I never considered him as a serious candidate, never thought we had a snowball's chance. But yeah, that wouldn't have sucked.

I remember scratching my head a little bit about Marrone when it was announced, but I also remember that Go and Zak were big fans of his, so it couldn't be all bad.

In retrospect, given where the program was when he was hired, he was the perfect choice. Which is why we were all so upset when he left. Doubt he planned it this way but it turns out his DC might be the perfect choice for where the program was when Marrone left. Shafer still has some work to do to really prove that, but an easy guy to root for.

 

[CanadianSU]

Once Marrone left, I reallllllllllyy wanted Diaco.

Glad we have Shafe for sure

 

[GoSU96]

that was funny

http://grantland.com/features/chip-kelly-philadelphia-eagles-nfl-influence/

No.

 

[GoSU96]

I can't even remember who I wanted. I think I wanted pretty much anyone, up to and including domestic pets. I mean, it had to be better.

Locksley - Don't think I loved him as a choice, but there are worse coach's wives to look at.
Gill - Made Buffalo competitive and given it's only down the road a couple hours, seemed sensible.
Holtz - I know I was hoping for him at least at one point.
Addazzio - Would have worked for me.
Edsall - Selfish gay dancing aside, I would have taken him as coach.
Chip Kelly - I never considered him as a serious candidate, never thought we had a snowball's chance. But yeah, that wouldn't have sucked.

I remember scratching my head a little bit about Marrone when it was announced, but I also remember that Go and Zak were big fans of his, so it couldn't be all bad.

In retrospect, given where the program was when he was hired, he was the perfect choice. Which is why we were all so upset when he left. Doubt he planned it this way but it turns out his DC might be the perfect choice for where the program was when Marrone left. Shafer still has some work to do to really prove that, but an easy guy to root for.

IB was in on Marrone as well. I don't remember what Zak thought.

It has all worked out for the best to this point. The reason I thought Marrone was the best fit was because of the job that needed to be done. I think it took a guy who knew this school, and what it took to get it going really well, because he was in on the ground floor of Mac's rebuild, and someone who was emotionally invested, and not just doing a job, to turn the program around. Rahme thought it was close to unrecoverable when Robinson got canned.

He did a good job with his hires, and getting guys to come here was not easy. He had unemployed guys decline interviews here. Shafer was exactly what was needed as the DC and so far he has done a good job of taking the program where it was and improving the talent base.

 

[djorange1989]

Even if Oregon hadn't locked up Kelly he had better options than SU. We were the worst program in the BCS when Robinson got canned. No way Kelly was ever coming here. Anyone who didn't want him was nuts but it was a moot point

 

[Phillymoose]

I saw they will be close to 5 than 10.

The NFC East ain't what it used to be. The Eagles will be a better team than last year - but what that translates to in W/L's is anyone's guess.

10-6 is mine.

 

[Millhouse]

IB was in on Marrone as well. I don't remember what Zak thought.

It has all worked out for the best to this point. The reason I thought Marrone was the best fit was because of the job that needed to be done. I think it took a guy who knew this school, and what it took to get it going really well, because he was in on the ground floor of Mac's rebuild, and someone who was emotionally invested, and not just doing a job, to turn the program around. Rahme thought it was close to unrecoverable when Robinson got canned.

He did a good job with his hires, and getting guys to come here was not easy. He had unemployed guys decline interviews here. Shafer was exactly what was needed as the DC and so far he has done a good job of taking the program where it was and improving the talent base.

Zakk was talking up Marrone way back in 1999. I don't know why i remember that. Was marrone at tulane or something back then? I just remember thinking "Who?"