Results 25 to 36 of 63
Thread: John Harbaugh
-
Re: John Harbaugh
I don't understand why people want to separate coaches from their players.
If your players stink, the coach is going to stink. If he has great players, he is going to win...and in particularly, a QB. There is no coincidence that no coach has won multiple Super Bowls with different QB's other than Gibbs.
There is no great or good coach that didn't have great or good players who were team leaders.Although Walsh's system of offense can compensate for lack of talent; however, defense is a different story. According to Walsh, talent on defense was essential and could not be compensated for. What did Walsh do in 1981? He acquired physical and talented players on defense.
-
04-21-2014, 01:12 PM #26Four-eyed Raven
- Join Date
- Jun 2008
- Location
- Balt-Wash corridor
- Posts
- 24,650
Re: John Harbaugh
-
Re: John Harbaugh
I spent a better part of four years on John Harbaugh, pointing out his flaws, which all coaches and people have. In the end, John proved me wrong and I let everyone on here and him know it.
That being said, he won a Super Bowl. Do I think Ray Lewis had a large hand in why they won? Of course! I think the team simply played better and harder when he was around, no doubt.
Yet, how many Super Bowls does Bill Walsh win without Joe Montana? How many Super Bowls does Bill Belicheck win without Tom Brady? So it is a push.
What is interesting to me, with Kubiak on board and John's experience the last six years, where does he go from here? We have a franchise QB and on paper look nice all over the team and have in my opinion, the best general manager in the NFL. It is a good time to be a Raven's fan and a great time to be John Harbaugh as he can now really cement a legacy as not just a good coach, but a great coach.
I argue, what happens, hypothetically were John to win two more Super Bowls with this team before he hung it up? You would have to argue him among the great coaches of all time. Just a thought.
-
-
Re: John Harbaugh
We like to complain here about Pees a lot, and while his defenses weren't as good as Rex's or Paganos' they weren't terrible barring 2012(in which most of the starters were less than 100%, had missed extensive time, and were aged) this year his defenses kept the team in games for extended periods of time, such as Pittsburgh, Green Bay, Minnesota, Buffalo,and Chicago. Point being Pees won't get fired until the situation arises where it is necessary.
-
04-21-2014, 01:53 PM #30Legendary RSR Poster
- Join Date
- Aug 2007
- Location
- Houston, TX Y'all
- Posts
- 34,414
-
04-21-2014, 02:55 PM #31Veteran Poster
- Join Date
- Nov 2013
- Posts
- 2,762
Re: John Harbaugh
And what if we go 8-8 and 7-9 the next few years? Then Harbaugh will be revealed to have been a mediocre coach who found himself in a great situation for a number of years before he got exposed.
I hope he is a great coach, but I'm open to the possibility that he isn't.
-
04-21-2014, 03:03 PM #32Veteran Poster
- Join Date
- Nov 2013
- Posts
- 2,762
Re: John Harbaugh
Just for fun, here are the regular season DVOA rankings from Football Outsiders of the Ravens in the Harbaugh era.
2008: 27.6%, 2nd
2009: 29.1%, 1st
2010: 21.7%, 5th
2011: 14.5%, 7th
2012: 9.8%, 8th
2013: -6.7, 23rd
I'm no statistician, but that's not a good trend. 5 consecutive years where our per-play efficiency has declined. I hope that the Ravens rebound but it's also possible we've reached the end of an era. Look at the Steelers, they were good every year like us until a couple years ago.
-
Re: John Harbaugh
Question...do you want to win, or do you just want to win the way you want to win?
I personally don't give a damn about DVA, OVA or whatever...we won a freaking Super Bowl 2 years ago, and should have at least been in one 3 years ago with those declining numbers.
Meanwhile, with all those great defensive years, we never approached the success we've had the last 6 years other than one year, 2000. From 1999-2007, we had all those years of being in the top 2 in dominating defenses...yet only made one AFC Championship and 4 playoff seasons.
We've blown that away in just the last six years...winning 10+ games 4 out of those 6 years, 5 years in the playoffs, 3 trips to the AFC Championship game and a Super Bowl win.
Yet people want to complain just because the defense isn't as good (BTW, I'd argue that the talent not being as good has helped to lead to the decline just as much as coaching)...even as we win playoff games.
I don't get it. Harbaugh isn't perfect by any stretch...and I'm not saying he should be considered the top coach in the league by any stretch, but the guy is a good coach by any measurable and definitely is by the most important one...wins.Although Walsh's system of offense can compensate for lack of talent; however, defense is a different story. According to Walsh, talent on defense was essential and could not be compensated for. What did Walsh do in 1981? He acquired physical and talented players on defense.
-
04-21-2014, 03:40 PM #34Four-eyed Raven
- Join Date
- Jun 2008
- Location
- Balt-Wash corridor
- Posts
- 24,650
Re: John Harbaugh
Doesn't even need that much. Five more years like Harbaugh's first five, and he's in the Hall of Fame as a coach. Not on the bubble, pretty much automatically. That's why I don't get the overall blasting of Harbaugh's: particularly the garbage that Preston writes. Harbaugh has been on a Hall of Fame trajectory as a coach. So how does it make sense to belittle him?
That said: I don't think it's likely that Harbaugh actually WILL have as much success in the next 5 years as in his first. The 2008-12 Ravens were incredibly successful. We've lost some Hall-of-Famers off our D from that period to this, and that has to make a difference. But I still think we'll be a good team, with multiple playoff appearances.
-
04-21-2014, 03:44 PM #35
Re: John Harbaugh
Why would someone suggest that his success over the past six years has just been due to him having lucked into a great stable of players, but then NOT assume that some 8-8 and 7-9 years were due to having a mediocre stable of players? Am I understanding this right? If you win, the HC has nothing to do with it, but if you lose, it's all his fault?
Belichick has had several years of 5 and 6 wins. Landry had 9 season of .500 or below. Parcells had 6. And given that it's harder than ever now to keep core players together for long periods, I truly can't imagine this ridiculous standard.
If he has two more years as you describe, then he will ONLY have a .600 win percentage, ONLY have made the playoffs in five of eight years, and ONLY have one Super Bowl ring. That will still make him one of the best coaches in the league."Chin up, chest out."
-
04-21-2014, 08:40 PM #36
Bookmarks