Jim Thomas tweet

[-X-]

Everybody redirect your less than veiled animosities, or I will be forced to present the full breadth of my wrath.

Or I'll get Walter to do it.

 

[Memento]

It's a shame that the first thing people think when they see/hear about a guy like Bowles is "Rooney Rule." I think that's the very antithesis of what they were trying to achieve with that rule, and I don't know why, but it bothers me that he could be written off BECAUSE of that rule. For instance, who knows if a guy like Tomlin would have even been brought in to Pittsburgh were it not for that rule. They had Whisenhunt on staff already if I'm not mistaken.

And to think the Dolphins passed on BOTH of them in 2007. :omg:

Fisher is the guy they want. Like it or not the Rooney Rule is very much in play with this. Were it Dennis Green, no. Bowles, yes.

We all know it's in play Sherlock, it's a rule.

Way off topic, but did you guys know that Holmes never actually said those words in any of the books Sir Arthur Conan Doyle wrote about Holmes and Watson?

Anyway, I like Angry Ram's suggestion about Zimmer. I like it a lot. I like Bowles too, but not as much as Zimmer.

 

[Anonymous]

It's a shame that the first thing people think when they see/hear about a guy like Bowles is "Rooney Rule." I think that's the very antithesis of what they were trying to achieve with that rule, and I don't know why, but it bothers me that he could be written off BECAUSE of that rule. For instance, who knows if a guy like Tomlin would have even been brought in to Pittsburgh were it not for that rule. They had Whisenhunt on staff already if I'm not mistaken.

And to think the Dolphins passed on BOTH of them in 2007. :omg:

Fisher is the guy they want. Like it or not the Rooney Rule is very much in play with this. Were it Dennis Green, no. Bowles, yes.

We all know it's in play Sherlock, it's a rule.

Way off topic, but did you guys know that Holmes never actually said those words in any of the books Sir Arthur Conan Doyle wrote about Holmes and Watson?

Anyway, I like Angry Ram's suggestion about Zimmer. I like it a lot. I like Bowles too, but not as much as Zimmer.

I didn't know that. BTW I really liked the latest Sherlock Holmes movie. I haven't seen the first one yet.

 

[-X-]

I didn't know that. BTW I really liked the latest Sherlock Holmes movie. I haven't seen the first one yet.

The first one was really good. Especially the second time.

 

[DR RAM]

It's a shame that the first thing people think when they see/hear about a guy like Bowles is "Rooney Rule." I think that's the very antithesis of what they were trying to achieve with that rule, and I don't know why, but it bothers me that he could be written off BECAUSE of that rule. For instance, who knows if a guy like Tomlin would have even been brought in to Pittsburgh were it not for that rule. They had Whisenhunt on staff already if I'm not mistaken.

And to think the Dolphins passed on BOTH of them in 2007. :omg:

Fisher is the guy they want. Like it or not the Rooney Rule is very much in play with this. Were it Dennis Green, no. Bowles, yes.

We all know it's in play Sherlock, it's a rule.

Way off topic, but did you guys know that Holmes never actually said those words in any of the books Sir Arthur Conan Doyle wrote about Holmes and Watson?

Anyway, I like Angry Ram's suggestion about Zimmer. I like it a lot. I like Bowles too, but not as much as Zimmer.

Not off topic, it started with a tweet, then a twit (clearly me), and along the way some real discussion, some useful, some not. Do you think it's interesting that so far, no offensive minded coaching prospects have been mentioned? If you think of GB and NO, two of the most powerful offenses, those head coaches call the plays.

 

[DR RAM]

I didn't know that. BTW I really liked the latest Sherlock Holmes movie. I haven't seen the first one yet.

The first one was really good. Especially the second time.

I thought the second one was good, but I haven't seen it yet. I plan to watch it 4 1/2 times. The first one sucked, I only watched it 2/3 of a time. So that equals 6.

 

[Memento]

It's a shame that the first thing people think when they see/hear about a guy like Bowles is "Rooney Rule." I think that's the very antithesis of what they were trying to achieve with that rule, and I don't know why, but it bothers me that he could be written off BECAUSE of that rule. For instance, who knows if a guy like Tomlin would have even been brought in to Pittsburgh were it not for that rule. They had Whisenhunt on staff already if I'm not mistaken.

And to think the Dolphins passed on BOTH of them in 2007. :omg:

Fisher is the guy they want. Like it or not the Rooney Rule is very much in play with this. Were it Dennis Green, no. Bowles, yes.

We all know it's in play Sherlock, it's a rule.

Way off topic, but did you guys know that Holmes never actually said those words in any of the books Sir Arthur Conan Doyle wrote about Holmes and Watson?

Anyway, I like Angry Ram's suggestion about Zimmer. I like it a lot. I like Bowles too, but not as much as Zimmer.

Not off topic, it started with a tweet, then a twit (clearly me), and along the way some real discussion, some useful, some not. Do you think it's interesting that so far, no offensive minded coaching prospects have been mentioned? If you think of GB and NO, two of the most powerful offenses, those head coaches call the plays.

I think it's pretty interesting, but there hasn't really been that many offensive minded head coaches out there in recent years. Guys like Spags, Tomlin, Frazier, Ryan, Rivera, Morris, and Schwartz were all defensive-minded head coaches. The only purely offensive head coaching prospects I can think of are McDaniels, Garrett, Haley, Shurmur, and Sparano.

To be on/off topic, I liked the second Sherlock Holmes movie, and I loved the second. I particularly like how the directors portrayed Watson as he was in the books - an excellent shot, a successful doctor, and a good detective in his own right (although definitely not on the same level as Holmes).

 

[DR RAM]

It's a shame that the first thing people think when they see/hear about a guy like Bowles is "Rooney Rule." I think that's the very antithesis of what they were trying to achieve with that rule, and I don't know why, but it bothers me that he could be written off BECAUSE of that rule. For instance, who knows if a guy like Tomlin would have even been brought in to Pittsburgh were it not for that rule. They had Whisenhunt on staff already if I'm not mistaken.

And to think the Dolphins passed on BOTH of them in 2007. :omg:

Fisher is the guy they want. Like it or not the Rooney Rule is very much in play with this. Were it Dennis Green, no. Bowles, yes.

We all know it's in play Sherlock, it's a rule.

Way off topic, but did you guys know that Holmes never actually said those words in any of the books Sir Arthur Conan Doyle wrote about Holmes and Watson?

Anyway, I like Angry Ram's suggestion about Zimmer. I like it a lot. I like Bowles too, but not as much as Zimmer.

Not off topic, it started with a tweet, then a twit (clearly me), and along the way some real discussion, some useful, some not. Do you think it's interesting that so far, no offensive minded coaching prospects have been mentioned? If you think of GB and NO, two of the most powerful offenses, those head coaches call the plays.

I think it's pretty interesting, but there hasn't really been that many offensive minded head coaches out there in recent years. Guys like Spags, Tomlin, Frazier, Ryan, Rivera, Morris, and Schwartz were all defensive-minded head coaches. The only purely offensive head coaching prospects I can think of are McDaniels, Garrett, Haley, Shurmur, and Sparano.

To be on/off topic, I liked the second Sherlock Holmes movie, and I loved the second. I particularly like how the directors portrayed Watson as he was in the books - an excellent shot, a successful doctor, and a good detective in his own right (although definitely not on the same level as Holmes).

You forgot Linehan. And now we all know why there are no hot offensive minded coordinators. There has to be a few out there though.

 

[Memento]

You forgot Linehan. And now we all know why there are no hot offensive minded coordinators. There has to be a few out there though.

You're absolutely right about Linehan, but I was thinking about recent years (2008 and beyond) more than anything.

 

[Lesson]

[quote="DR RAM"
You forgot Linehan. And now we all know why there are no hot offensive minded coordinators. There has to be a few out there though.[/quote]

Whisenhut, Munchak.

Mularkey and Chudzinski are two guys to keep in mind.

 

[DR RAM]

[quote="DR RAM"
You forgot Linehan. And now we all know why there are no hot offensive minded coordinators. There has to be a few out there though.

Whisenhut, Munchak.

Mularkey and Chudzinski are two guys to keep in mind.

Not big on Mularkey. Chudzinski is interesting and scary. He's done a hell of a job, but he certainly seems to over-utilize some players. I think you found him Lesson.

 

[JdashSTL]

I think it's pretty interesting, but there hasn't really been that many offensive minded head coaches out there in recent years. Guys like Spags, Tomlin, Frazier, Ryan, Rivera, Morris, and Schwartz were all defensive-minded head coaches. The only purely offensive head coaching prospects I can think of are McDaniels, Garrett, Haley, Shurmur, and Sparano.

Hue Jackson and Chan Gailey are one of the few ones in recent years. Chudzinski and Mularkey are being linked to the Jags HC opening. Im sure the Packers offensive staff will start churning out HC candidates soon (OC Joe Philbin is scheduled to interview with the Chiefs). I have yet to hear about any names out of New Orleans being mentioned as HC candidates.

 

[Ram Quixote]

I didn't know that. BTW I really liked the latest Sherlock Holmes movie. I haven't seen the first one yet.

The first one was really good. Especially the second time.

Both movies are good. The second is better, IMO.

More on topic (kind of), there's a line by Holmes in the first movie that made me think of sports talk in general:

"It's a huge mistake to theorize before one has data. Inevitably, one begins to twist facts to suit theories instead of theories to suit facts."