4428Re: [patriotzip] Re: Pats on NFL Network
- Jun 16, 2004
> Winning percentage is one factor to use in evaluating a coach, but itAnd I agree with this thinking 100%. But you have to understand that had
> doesn't really tell the whole story. You have to look at what he
> inherited. Parcells built a solid team, that went 11-5, and went to
> the SB. If I remember correctly, Carroll's teams went 10-6, 9-7, 8-8.
Grier been a better drafter/GM, Carroll might have had a little bit better
room for success. The 1997 team was much better defensively than the 1996
team, and cannot be blamed for losing 7-6 at Pittsburgh in the playoffs.
After that it was a combination of injuries, lousy drafts and a GM which
undercut his coach big time. True, Carroll was a softie whose style is a
much better fit for USC. But he was a terrific defensive mind who, if given
a decent GM, might have had better success as Patriot head coach.
Going further, the 1997 team finished a heck of a lot better than the 1996
team. They pretty much put the clamps on every offense they faced down the
stretch, and it was not a defender that threw that insult of a pass to Kevin
Henry nor tried to block Mike Vrabel but failed. Carroll and Steve Sidwell
worked incredibly well together in 1997, and had both the Fish and Steelers
stopped cold late in the season.
That said, I think we can agree that things eventually turned out for the
- << Previous post in topic Next post in topic >>