Did anyone see Trestman's quotes this week

[DABEARSDABOMB]

Specifically the one where he mentioned that during the bye week the coaches and him analyzed practice film and decided and told the team that they practiced hard and blah blah blah and that everyone was working hard to fix the problem and we'd get through it.

 

 

Are you really kidding me. You decided you were going to tell the team, don't worry, I looked at our practice tape and decided that we are all practicing hard and blah blah blah and that all of the coaches are putting in the time, etc. No wonder he is losing the clubhouse. I wouldn't have been able to keep a straight face if that was one of the key message points after the break.

 

You'd think it would go, we analyzed a lot of things and have a plan. While we think we are working hard, we know we need to fix the following and have ideas of how to fix it and it can be done. If you want past examples, look at teams X and Y (NY Giants who won a superbowl, etc). Talent is here but we need to do the following, be more disicplined, protect the football, blah blah blah and here is how we are going to do it and we are all going to recommit to it, etc.

[madlithuanian]

That's his MO. Keep calm.

 

If we beat GB or at least don't embarrass ourselves, then it could be considered that it worked. If not, then those tactics will be heavily questioned.

 

Specifically the one where he mentioned that during the bye week the coaches and him analyzed practice film and decided and told the team that they practiced hard and blah blah blah and that everyone was working hard to fix the problem and we'd get through it.

 

 

Are you really kidding me. You decided you were going to tell the team, don't worry, I looked at our practice tape and decided that we are all practicing hard and blah blah blah and that all of the coaches are putting in the time, etc. No wonder he is losing the clubhouse. I wouldn't have been able to keep a straight face if that was one of the key message points after the break.

 

You'd think it would go, we analyzed a lot of things and have a plan. While we think we are working hard, we know we need to fix the following and have ideas of how to fix it and it can be done. If you want past examples, look at teams X and Y (NY Giants who won a superbowl, etc). Talent is here but we need to do the following, be more disicplined, protect the football, blah blah blah and here is how we are going to do it and we are all going to recommit to it, etc.

 

[CrackerDog]

I think he just needs to lose his shit and punch a locker or two.

[Chitownhustla]

I think he just needs to lose his shit and punch a locker or two.

 

 

If he doesn't want to, I will volunteer to go in the locker room and lose my shit!!! I will tear that locker room up!!!!!!

[Daventry]

If he doesn't want to, I will volunteer to go in the locker room and lose my shit!!! I will tear that locker room up!!!!!!

 

 

There we go....

[Daventry]

If he doesn't want to, I will volunteer to go in the locker room and lose my shit!!! I will tear that locker room up!!!!!!

 

 

Time to lose it...Ditka style...time to kick some A££.

[DABEARSDABOMB]

I think he just needs to lose his shit and punch a locker or two.

I want to point out. I don't care how loud our coaches scream or how calm our coaches are. I just found it laughable that he legimately thought he needed to tell the team that its okay, i evaluated all the film and we practiced hard. I just don't think that is a key message. I think the message we keep sending is things aren't as bad as they appear. That may be fine and dandy but we have done a lot of things to lead to this point in the season and a lot of them need to be corrected.

 

I just don't see Trestman as a leader or at least not one that can lead and be the head coach of an NFL team. I hope I am wrong.

 

PS: I am dead serious. I just want best coach; quiet and even keeled or ticked all the time, I don't really care, just be good and win.

[madlithuanian]

Agreed.

 

However, given that the last 3 HC's were mild mannered resulting in no championships, it's easy to understand or want something different. And given the only one that won it, was a hot head...puts more emphasis on possibly going that route again.

 

Of course, logic dictates that it doesn't matter. For every firey champ coach, there's a Landry... The key, as you say, is just get one that is good and wins. Many people here embraced every single last one with open arms...only until it looked like they wouldn't deliver, did we sour on them. Trestman is no exception...

 

I want to point out. I don't care how loud our coaches scream or how calm our coaches are. I just found it laughable that he legimately thought he needed to tell the team that its okay, i evaluated all the film and we practiced hard. I just don't think that is a key message. I think the message we keep sending is things aren't as bad as they appear. That may be fine and dandy but we have done a lot of things to lead to this point in the season and a lot of them need to be corrected.

 

I just don't see Trestman as a leader or at least not one that can lead and be the head coach of an NFL team. I hope I am wrong.

 

PS: I am dead serious. I just want best coach; quiet and even keeled or ticked all the time, I don't really care, just be good and win.

 

[Chitownhustla]

I want to point out. I don't care how loud our coaches scream or how calm our coaches are. I just found it laughable that he legimately thought he needed to tell the team that its okay, i evaluated all the film and we practiced hard. I just don't think that is a key message. I think the message we keep sending is things aren't as bad as they appear. That may be fine and dandy but we have done a lot of things to lead to this point in the season and a lot of them need to be corrected.

 

I just don't see Trestman as a leader or at least not one that can lead and be the head coach of an NFL team. I hope I am wrong.

 

PS: I am dead serious. I just want best coach; quiet and even keeled or ticked all the time, I don't really care, just be good and win.

 

I don't care if he is mild mannered or freak out style like Ditka.....I do think that inside closed doors a mild manner coach prolly could benefit from showing some type of emotion.

 

 

Not all players will react to freak outs just the same as some players will react to a good freak out by a coach.

 

I have played for many different style of coaches. Highschool, CMU and ISU in college.

 

Highschool my coaches were pretty mild mannered, HC would freak out tho. He freaked out at the right time to get the reaction he wanted.

CMU- mostly mild mannered, never really saw a freak out. Brian Kelly took over after my coaches were fired. He is a freak out type of coach and he got results

ISU- I had some fiery coaches that knew when to be calm and when to get amped up- went to the Semi Finals with this coaching staff.

 

 

 

I truly hope Trestman is not in over his head. If he is then this train is only going to derail even more and we will be back to square one with our beloved Bears.

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Alaskan Grizzly]

 

"Everyone relax K-E-E-P C-A-L-M. Mmkay? "

[madlithuanian]

Remain calm..

 

All is well...

 

 

 

"Everyone relax K-E-E-P C-A-L-M. Mmkay? "

 

[DABEARSDABOMB]

Agreed.

 

However, given that the last 3 HC's were mild mannered resulting in no championships, it's easy to understand or want something different. And given the only one that won it, was a hot head...puts more emphasis on possibly going that route again.

 

Of course, logic dictates that it doesn't matter. For every firey champ coach, there's a Landry... The key, as you say, is just get one that is good and wins. Many people here embraced every single last one with open arms...only until it looked like they wouldn't deliver, did we sour on them. Trestman is no exception...

Tresty is probably the quickest thought but I think that has a lot to do with the fact that of all of them, he had probably the most pathetic track record from the standpoint that most of his recent successes in a league that mattered were over a decade ago. Lovie was a good candidate, Wanny was a legendary coordinator and well thought of, Jauron was pretty well respected (albeit we all thought we were hiring someone else). Trestman was totally out of left field and at the time there was Andy Reid, Chip Kelly, Mike McCoy, and Bruce Arians...all guys with a recent track record of success.

[Alaskan Grizzly]

Agreed.

 

However, given that the last 3 HC's were mild mannered resulting in no championships, it's easy to understand or want something different. And given the only one that won it, was a hot head...puts more emphasis on possibly going that route again.

 

Of course, logic dictates that it doesn't matter. For every firey champ coach, there's a Landry... The key, as you say, is just get one that is good and wins. Many people here embraced every single last one with open arms...only until it looked like they wouldn't deliver, did we sour on them. Trestman is no exception...

 

Being of a miltary background I prefer the hotheads. Results are more instantaneous. Although I don't necessarily like the 'touchy feely' (or less animated) approach there are those that have succeeded. Landry was one. So too was Dungy and to some extent Belichick.

 

But more firebrands seem to get results: Cowher, Ditka, Coughlin, Jimmy Johnson, Parcells, Peyton, Gruden, and Walsh to name a few.

[Connorbear]

Being of a miltary background I prefer the hotheads. Results are more instantaneous. Although I don't necessarily like the 'touchy feely' (or less animated) approach there are those that have succeeded. Landry was one. So too was Dungy and to some extent Belichick.

 

But more firebrands seem to get results: Cowher, Ditka, Coughlin, Jimmy Johnson, Parcells, Peyton, Gruden, and Walsh to name a few.

 

Ditka won 1 Superbowl with the talent to win 3. He had the most experienced coaching staff in the league when they won. I would not use him as an example of a successful coach.

 

Peace

[Alaskan Grizzly]

Ditka won 1 Superbowl with the talent to win 3. He had the most experienced coaching staff in the league when they won. I would not use him as an example of a successful coach.

 

Peace

 

So where does one define a "successful" coach? In the 'modern era' of football there have only been 48 Super Bowls of which have been won by 30 coaches. Of course there are oodles of others that haven't even gotten that far. How about those that have been there multiple times only to lose? Marv Levy? He made four consecutive appearances but won none of them. Is that a conviction of his ability as a coach or his players? Or how about Dan Reeves? He made four appearances with two separate teams and lost all four. Or how about Don Shula's 3-2 record in the Super Bowls?

 

Just because coaches like George Seifert and Barry Switzer won a Super Bowl, doesn't mean they were great coaches. They inherited a great team from a previous coach.

 

Ditka was there to build the team to where it ended up. Yes he had a good staff but that goes to his "coaching" ability. What caused he and his team to not win anymore Super Bowls was more his stubbornness than his lack of coaching ability.

[Connorbear]

So where does one define a "successful" coach? In the 'modern era' of football there have only been 48 Super Bowls of which have been won by 30 coaches. Of course there are oodles of others that haven't even gotten that far. How about those that have been there multiple times only to lose? Marv Levy? He made four consecutive appearances but won none of them. Is that a conviction of his ability as a coach or his players? Or how about Dan Reeves? He made four appearances with two separate teams and lost all four. Or how about Don Shula's 3-2 record in the Super Bowls?

 

Just because coaches like George Seifert and Barry Switzer won a Super Bowl, doesn't mean they were great coaches. They inherited a great team from a previous coach.

 

Ditka was there to build the team to where it ended up. Yes he had a good staff but that goes to his "coaching" ability. What caused he and his team to not win anymore Super Bowls was more his stubbornness than his lack of coaching ability.

 

I'm fairly sure Ditka didn't hire his staff. It was put in place for him because Halas knew he would need the support

 

I'd take Dan Reeves or Marv Levy over Ditka any day.

 

Peace

[Mongo3451]

I'm fairly sure Ditka didn't hire his staff. It was put in place for him because Halas knew he would need the support

 

I'd take Dan Reeves or Marv Levy over Ditka any day.

 

Peace

Yes about Ditka's staff. He had zero control over Buddy Ryan and hated it.

 

To the other point; you are correct. They were better coaches. But, for the theater, memories and history of the period, I wouldn't change a thing regarding Ditka. He will always be "da coach".

[AZ54]

I'll disagree on the firebrand approach in one aspect. Firebrands do work but they often just bring short term results, at least if that is the main approach. As others have said, I don't think it's essential in the head coach. What is important to me is that the HC builds a staff with diversity. Not the usual stuff you're thinking. Rather diversity in terms of coaching style.

 

We know Trestman wants all of his coaches to focus on sound fundamentals. Fair enough but I don't want a coaching staff of 10 Trestman's because it's guaranteed to fail. Nor do I want to see a staff of 10 Ditka's or Belichiks. You need a mix and styles and personalities even if they all have fundamentals as their main approach to learning the game.

 

Trestman knows he's not a firebrand. I think hiring guys like Pasqualoni, Herring shows that he realizes he needs guys who are. Kromer is not a quiet guy when he's coaching, he has a definite edge to him. Lovie managed this in a similar manner where Marinelli had the edge and Lovie could sit back and be the sounding board to listen to players issues. If it's the HC whose pushing buttons then it'll be the position coach who is the sounding board.

 

I think we have a good mix of styles on board so I don't think style in itself is an issue. Competency…that's a valid question at this point.

[Lucky Luciano]

I'll disagree on the firebrand approach in one aspect. Firebrands do work but they often just bring short term results, at least if that is the main approach. As others have said, I don't think it's essential in the head coach. What is important to me is that the HC builds a staff with diversity. Not the usual stuff you're thinking. Rather diversity in terms of coaching style.

 

We know Trestman wants all of his coaches to focus on sound fundamentals. Fair enough but I don't want a coaching staff of 10 Trestman's because it's guaranteed to fail. Nor do I want to see a staff of 10 Ditka's or Belichiks. You need a mix and styles and personalities even if they all have fundamentals as their main approach to learning the game.

 

Trestman knows he's not a firebrand. I think hiring guys like Pasqualoni, Herring shows that he realizes he needs guys who are. Kromer is not a quiet guy when he's coaching, he has a definite edge to him. Lovie managed this in a similar manner where Marinelli had the edge and Lovie could sit back and be the sounding board to listen to players issues. If it's the HC whose pushing buttons then it'll be the position coach who is the sounding board.

 

I think we have a good mix of styles on board so I don't think style in itself is an issue. Competency…that's a valid question at this point.

 

very interesting post. i don't believe i have ever looked at it in that way before. good job.

 

i agree on the short term for a firebrand type of coach.

 

ditka got away with it early as he had some truly strong willed players on the offensive side of the ball already in place (mcmahon, payton and some others) and had ryan on the defensive side, another firebrand type of coach, who offset it and basically divided the team in two parts. once ryan was gone (and mcmahon was constantly injured and payton retired) the tactic stopped working as ditka didn't have the offensive chops he believed he had and became a serious detriment to the team as a whole on both sides of the ball.

 

to me another example could be used in coughlin. he was a nutbag psycho at jacksonville where it worked for a time but he could not sustain it and lost the team. after he went to the giants he brought that with him but after a season or two in NY he mellowed out his act and had more success.

[madlithuanian]

Agreed...

 

Ditka will not go up in the pantheon of great coaches. But, he won. And did it in such a way that he will never be forgotten. He is almost more of an icon. Tack in his HoF career as a TE, a TV personality...it's all part of the whole thing.

 

I always like Levy. Reeves...I had my issues with.

 

Yes about Ditka's staff. He had zero control over Buddy Ryan and hated it.

 

To the other point; you are correct. They were better coaches. But, for the theater, memories and history of the period, I wouldn't change a thing regarding Ditka. He will always be "da coach".