Doug Plank is on the score

[AZ54]

Babich was the head coach at North Dakota State from 1997-2002 so he does have more experience than Plank.

 

I mentioned Tice because I had argued in another post that anyone wanting Plank as DC should have no issues with Marinelli as DC or Tice as OC.

 

Peace

 

Not true because experience isn't the only factor in choosing a coach, what they did with that experience is relavant. While I'm ok with Tice as our Oline coach I think the frat house aspect he put in the Vikings locker room is not something I want with our young core of skill players. With regards to Marinelli I think his indecisiveness about being a DC is also something we don't need. I tend to agree with Nfol ( ) I think for success we need to get someone outside our current organization with a different perspective.

 

We aren't likely to get a high profile DC or OC for this job unless they are a future HC candidate who could takeover and JA or Philips give them the indication they'd get a shot at it. Seeing as that doesn't appear to be our M.O. it's clear we going with a guy who gets his first shot.

[nfoligno]

Didn't know that about Babich. Still make the same arguments though. Babich has not shown a knowledge beyond the cover two. When our D struggled, he didn't show an ability to adapt.

 

As for Marinelli, even beyond the cover two aspect, here is my key issue at this point. Marinelli flat said he didn't want to do it. Lets say Lovie is able to pursuade him to accept the position. Do we really want a guy to run our defense, who didn't want the job. Each level up for coaches comes w/ a far greater level of committment, particularly in regard to time and energy. If a guy didn't want the job, is he really the guy we want for it.

 

As for Tice, he is an experienced coach, but not an experienced playcaller. As I understand it, he has never been an OC and never been a playcaller. I think I have been consistent in that any candidates I have looked at, key for me has been experience as a playcaller. If a guy has coaches for decades, but not been a game day playcaller, I have not been in favor of that candidate. Even though Tice has been a HC, he has not been a playcaller, and thus not high on my list.

 

Babich was the head coach at North Dakota State from 1997-2002 so he does have more experience than Plank.

 

I mentioned Tice because I had argued in another post that anyone wanting Plank as DC should have no issues with Marinelli as DC or Tice as OC.

 

Peace

 

[Connorbear]

Didn't know that about Babich. Still make the same arguments though. Babich has not shown a knowledge beyond the cover two. When our D struggled, he didn't show an ability to adapt.

 

As for Marinelli, even beyond the cover two aspect, here is my key issue at this point. Marinelli flat said he didn't want to do it. Lets say Lovie is able to pursuade him to accept the position. Do we really want a guy to run our defense, who didn't want the job. Each level up for coaches comes w/ a far greater level of committment, particularly in regard to time and energy. If a guy didn't want the job, is he really the guy we want for it.

 

As for Tice, he is an experienced coach, but not an experienced playcaller. As I understand it, he has never been an OC and never been a playcaller. I think I have been consistent in that any candidates I have looked at, key for me has been experience as a playcaller. If a guy has coaches for decades, but not been a game day playcaller, I have not been in favor of that candidate. Even though Tice has been a HC, he has not been a playcaller, and thus not high on my list.

How do we know what defense Babich ran at North Dakota (we didn't even know he was head coach)? When has Plank ever shown knowledge beyond the cover 2? He was the assistant defensive backs coach at NY and Atlanta. He was like Gill Byrd now on the Bears and their is no way I would promote Byrd to DC. I would be willing to promote him to DB coach and then see how he does. Same with Plank.

 

Peace

[nfoligno]

With Plank, I'll admit bias. Not just because he was a player on that great team, but also because of what several other players he played w/ under Buddy have done since becoming coaches. It's a pretty solid looking group. Frazier, Rivera and Singletary have all earned high respect in coaching. I simply believe it very possible Plank could join this group.

 

That isn't to say all who were on that team and tried to coached hit high levels. Dent is one that comes to mind as someone who just didn't seem to translate super well to a coaching career, but I have also heard that was a bit expected, as many just didn't think he had the coaching skills. Plank though does seem to have the coaching skills.

 

I guess I would simply prefer to go outside the box at this point, and would not mind at all doing so w/ a Bear Great of old. While he may be unproven, so long as we are basically talking about a group of other unprovens, I would simply side w/ him. Further still, w/ Marinelli and Hoke, I just don't care for the idea of promoting/rewarding those who have done nothing to deserve it. Neither our DL nor DBs played well last year, and I just question promoting the coach of either of those units.

 

One last point. Marinelli and Hoke have been around a long time, and by and large, I think they are pretty well known. Plank on the other hand is an unknown. Similar to when we hired Rivera, it is possible we could find a diamond in the rough. Rivera went from, I think, being an assistant position coach to DC for us, and I would argue that worked out well. I would simply have no problem giving the same opportunity to Plank.

 

 

 

How do we know what defense Babich ran at North Dakota (we didn't even know he was head coach)? When has Plank ever shown knowledge beyond the cover 2? He was the assistant defensive backs coach at NY and Atlanta. He was like Gill Byrd now on the Bears and their is no way I would promote Byrd to DC. I would be will to promote him to DB coach and then see how he does. Same with Plank.

 

Peace

 

[Connorbear]

With Plank, I'll admit bias. Not just because he was a player on that great team, but also because of what several other players he played w/ under Buddy have done since becoming coaches. It's a pretty solid looking group. Frazier, Rivera and Singletary have all earned high respect in coaching. I simply believe it very possible Plank could join this group.

 

That isn't to say all who were on that team and tried to coached hit high levels. Dent is one that comes to mind as someone who just didn't seem to translate super well to a coaching career, but I have also heard that was a bit expected, as many just didn't think he had the coaching skills. Plank though does seem to have the coaching skills.

 

I guess I would simply prefer to go outside the box at this point, and would not mind at all doing so w/ a Bear Great of old. While he may be unproven, so long as we are basically talking about a group of other unprovens, I would simply side w/ him. Further still, w/ Marinelli and Hoke, I just don't care for the idea of promoting/rewarding those who have done nothing to deserve it. Neither our DL nor DBs played well last year, and I just question promoting the coach of either of those units.

 

One last point. Marinelli and Hoke have been around a long time, and by and large, I think they are pretty well known. Plank on the other hand is an unknown. Similar to when we hired Rivera, it is possible we could find a diamond in the rough. Rivera went from, I think, being an assistant position coach to DC for us, and I would argue that worked out well. I would simply have no problem giving the same opportunity to Plank.

Rivera was the Linebacker coach at Philly.

 

I get the Plank love. I get the whole from the Buddy Ryan tree idea. I am simply saying I believe he needs more time to develop. I would love to see on our coaching staff as the DB coach and then, in a few years, DC. I simply see no way this will happen with Lovie as head coach.

 

Peace

[nfoligno]

Do you think Plank is less experienced than Rivera was?

 

Rivera was a LB coach w/ Phily for some years, and a quality control guy for us for a few years prior. Still don't really know what the hell a quality control coordinator is.

 

Plank was a DC in the Arena league for 3 years. Then he was a HC in the Arena league for 3 years, and won the coach of the year award in two of those years. He was then an assistant DB coach for Atlant and NYJs.

 

You think Rivera was more experienced than Plank? I think it may come down to how you view his coaching time in the Arena league. To me, coaching in the arena league is not that different (in a lesser/greater manner) than being a college coach. Yes, it is different, but is it that much for coaches? I understand if we are talking about players, and I understand many rules are different, but the same could be said of college. At the end of the day, he still proved capable of coaching men to play football.

 

Tell me. If Plank was an OC for 3 year and then the HC for 3 year of a college, would that make a difference to you?

 

 

 

Rivera was the Linebacker coach at Philly.

 

I get the Plank love. I get the whole from the Buddy Ryan tree idea. I am simply saying I believe he needs more time to develop. I would love to see on our coaching staff as the DB coach and then, in a few years, DC. I simply see no way this will happen with Lovie as head coach.

 

Peace

 

[Connorbear]

Do you think Plank is less experienced than Rivera was?

 

Rivera was a LB coach w/ Phily for some years, and a quality control guy for us for a few years prior. Still don't really know what the hell a quality control coordinator is.

 

Plank was a DC in the Arena league for 3 years. Then he was a HC in the Arena league for 3 years, and won the coach of the year award in two of those years. He was then an assistant DB coach for Atlant and NYJs.

 

You think Rivera was more experienced than Plank? I think it may come down to how you view his coaching time in the Arena league. To me, coaching in the arena league is not that different (in a lesser/greater manner) than being a college coach. Yes, it is different, but is it that much for coaches? I understand if we are talking about players, and I understand many rules are different, but the same could be said of college. At the end of the day, he still proved capable of coaching men to play football.

 

Tell me. If Plank was an OC for 3 year and then the HC for 3 year of a college, would that make a difference to you?

I do not want a college coach that does not have NFL experience. Same with AFL. I simply think Plank needs a couple years as DB coach before he is a DC. Just my opinion.

 

Peace

[AZ54]

Rivera was the Linebacker coach at Philly.

 

I get the Plank love. I get the whole from the Buddy Ryan tree idea. I am simply saying I believe he needs more time to develop. I would love to see on our coaching staff as the DB coach and then, in a few years, DC. I simply see no way this will happen with Lovie as head coach.

 

Peace

 

 

I understand your questions on Plank's experience but I don't understand why you feel we shouldn't even interview the guy. Even if he's not your leading candidate going in I think a willingness to look at someone different is a good thing for Lovie to do. Maybe he doesn't hire the guy but sometimes you get that different perspective in interviews and it opens your eyes to see things a bit differently among your candidates. Sometimes you end up hiring that long shot (at least it's happened to me).

[ChileBear]

I understand your questions on Plank's experience but I don't understand why you feel we shouldn't even interview the guy. Even if he's not your leading candidate going in I think a willingness to look at someone different is a good thing for Lovie to do. Maybe he doesn't hire the guy but sometimes you get that different perspective in interviews and it opens your eyes to see things a bit differently among your candidates. Sometimes you end up hiring that long shot (at least it's happened to me).

Yeah, but you're coming from a very different frame of mind. You are open and willing to view personnel based on what they can do. Lovie seems toget a preconception about someone and then it is set in stone--see naming starters without competition; see naming all his ole buds to coaching positions; see having your head up your arse!

I don't have any faith that there will be any change in their approach.

[Lucky Luciano]

With Plank, I'll admit bias. Not just because he was a player on that great team, but also because of what several other players he played w/ under Buddy have done since becoming coaches. It's a pretty solid looking group. Frazier, Rivera and Singletary have all earned high respect in coaching. I simply believe it very possible Plank could join this group.

 

i am sure this is what you were referring to but just to clarify a bit of history:

 

plank's career lasted from 1975 through 1982 so not involved realistically with the superbowl team. a fair to good team during his era but not great. you are correct though that he was a buddy ryan coached player and was one of the most feared hard hitting safeties in the entire nfl during the 70's.

 

this was doug plank during his career... super hard hitting safety who led with his helmet a lot and played like a madman. he would literally try to run through a player and put a hurt on them. plank hit like a ton of bricks but did not wrap up the player or was a very good tackler. they usually fell over at impact but if not they went by him and this is where gary fencik came in as a perfect compliment to plank. fencik was one of the best open field tacklers (and blitzers also) i have ever seen play. if plank didn't knock em down fencik would make the sure tackle. it was a fantastic combo to watch.

 

as far as rivera and buddy ryan... rivera was a rookie in '85. buddy had not much use for rookies and if i remember right rivera hated buddy ryan and mentioned this later in his career and coaching life. how much he learned about coaching from buddy in that one season i don't know but it was a pretty short time and if he did learn a lot ryan must have really put a lasting impression on him.

 

most of rivera's career came under tobin who was maybe the luckiest knucklehead to ever fall into a good thing and not completely destroy it (although he tried). he will always be fondly remembered by me for trying to take an attack defense that was the best in the nfl and turn them into a "read and react" defense. wat an idiot.

[nfoligno]

Okay, I understand. You want an experienced NFL coach. Question, and this is not really so much specifically about Plank. Do you need to have a NFL experienced defensive coordinator, or are you open to promoting a position coach. I know Plank was not even fully a position coach. As I said, this question is not about Plank. Just curious what your parameters are?

 

For me, I am a little more flexible for our defensive coordinator position. One the defensive side, we have a defensive background head coach, and whose system we will run. We also have loads of experience at DB, LB and DL coaches, w/ two of those men having held DC and HC positions. So, w/ so much experience on the defensive staff, not to mention the DC will be running the HC's scheme, I am not as adamant about having to have a new DC with loads of experience.

 

Offense is another matter. We have an experienced OL coach. We kept our WR coach, but he has never been higher than WR coach in the NFL, and came to us from college. And it isn't like the new OC will get much help from the HC. We need an OC with prior playcalling experience. I would take a college level OC (major program) over an NFL position coach w/o playcalling experience, but even that is not my preference. We need someone who has (a) developed game plans and ( been a game day playcaller, and done this at the NFL. Further, this coach's past experience should have proved a fair level of success.

 

 

I do not want a college coach that does not have NFL experience. Same with AFL. I simply think Plank needs a couple years as DB coach before he is a DC. Just my opinion.

 

Peace

 

[nfoligno]

i am sure this is what you were referring to but just to clarify a bit of history:

 

plank's career lasted from 1975 through 1982 so not involved realistically with the superbowl team. a fair to good team during his era but not great. you are correct though that he was a buddy ryan coached player and was one of the most feared hard hitting safeties in the entire nfl during the 70's.

 

Did I say he was part of the SB team? Maybe I did, but yes, I know better. He did play under Ryan though, and it was more being part of that system I was talking about.

 

this was doug plank during his career... super hard hitting safety who led with his helmet a lot and played like a madman. he would literally try to run through a player and put a hurt on them. plank hit like a ton of bricks but did not wrap up the player or was a very good tackler. they usually fell over at impact but if not they went by him and this is where gary fencik came in as a perfect compliment to plank. fencik was one of the best open field tacklers (and blitzers also) i have ever seen play. if plank didn't knock em down fencik would make the sure tackle. it was a fantastic combo to watch.

 

What I loved the most about the duo was the high/low aspect. Fencik would go low, wrapping up for the sure tackle. At the same time, Plank came in high and deliverd a jarring blow. As hard as Plank's hits were, they were even more effective by the fact the ball carriers legs were held in position by Fencik. A tackle by either would have been bad enough for the ball carrier, but how often these two seemed to hit carriers at the same time was simply scary.

 

as far as rivera and buddy ryan... rivera was a rookie in '85. buddy had not much use for rookies and if i remember right rivera hated buddy ryan and mentioned this later in his career and coaching life. how much he learned about coaching from buddy in that one season i don't know but it was a pretty short time and if he did learn a lot ryan must have really put a lasting impression on him.

 

To me, the bigger key was who he played w/. As genius as Buddy was, I have always given top credit to Singletary. Even Ryan used to say that if it were not for Singletary, that defense likely would not have been so effective. Your right that Rivera does not often give Buddy a ton of credit for his development, but I have often heard him talk about how Singletary was a teacher, and who he learned so much from.

 

most of rivera's career came under tobin who was maybe the luckiest knucklehead to ever fall into a good thing and not completely destroy it (although he tried). he will always be fondly remembered by me for trying to take an attack defense that was the best in the nfl and turn them into a "read and react" defense. wat an idiot.

 

Luckiest coach to me is Barry Switzer, who took over a SB champion team in Dallas. His first year w/ the team, he basically sat back, changed little to nothing, and earned a SB ring. Under Switzer, Dallas won a SB the first year, but the team went downhill from there. He lucked into a vastly talented group year one, but showed his true ability thereafter.

 

No real argument about Tobin though. I have often heard players talk about how he so changed the mind set of one of the most feared defenses ever. Frankly, it is sort of why I have never liked Lovie or his defense. There simply is not enough attack in it. Even in our SB year, I personally felt that Rivera tried to make it a more attacking D, while Lovie preferred the more bend/don't break style hoping for turnovers. I will never forget the AZ game when, then rookie Matt Lienart, just lit up our D in the first half as we played off the LOS and expected the rook to make mistakes. Instead, Matty shredded our group. After halftime, I saw a very different D. WRs were pressed at the LOS, and we seemed to blitz on every down. Suddenly, Leinart was under a constant rush and their RB was stuffed at the LOS, if not in the backfield. I have always felt that game an example of the two different styles of our HC (1st half) and DC (2nd half). Lovie wanted us to play back and try for turnovers. Rivera more had the mentality from Remember the Titans, when the coach said he didn't want them to gain a single yard.