Getting to the playoffs two consecutive years

[mickeef2]

I know that getting to (and getting slaughtered in) a Super Bowl is cited by Jim Fassel supporters as evidence of his superiority when compared to Tom Coughlin. Fassel never went to the playoffs two years in a row, though. Does that make them even now?

[Lughead]

I know that getting to (and getting slaughtered in) a Super Bowl is cited by Jim Fassel supporters as evidence of his superiority when compared to Tom Coughlin. Fassel never went to the playoffs two years in a row, though. Does that make them even now?

 

No fassel at least got them to the SB even if they were not in the playoffs 2 years n a row . if coughlin takes them to 2 straight playoff years and dont go to the SB ( 1 and outs) he is still less then Fassel come back with the meter in a couple weeks and see where the needle is

 

Now I am not a Fassel supporter or a Coughlin supporter . I am a supporter of getting squandered Opportunities fixed and having the right leader with the right situation is all I want to support.

[Nas]

I know that getting to (and getting slaughtered in) a Super Bowl is cited by Jim Fassel supporters as evidence of his superiority when compared to Tom Coughlin. Fassel never went to the playoffs two years in a row, though. Does that make them even now?

 

No because Fassel didn't have half the talen Coughlin has. Unless of course you count coaching staff whicn hone we know John Fox was a great DC.

[boohyah]

Mickeef, who would have beaten Baltimore the year they won the superbowl?

 

You know the answer is no-one.

 

 

Coughlin has the best team in the NFL with Jacksonville, no-one is supposed to touch them on their way to the superbowl versus the Rams, and Coughlin gets outcoached at home against the Titans and Jeff Fisher.

 

Although it's not totally convincing evidence Fassel was the better coach, I think there's more evidence that he was a better coach than Coughlin than the other way around. Plus it was 7 years before Fassel lost the team, you could say it took Tom all of 2 1/2.

[boohyah]

No because Fassel didn't have half the talen Coughlin has. Unless of course you count coaching staff whicn hone we know John Fox was a great DC.

 

 

Being a good head coach also means picking good assistants and although fassel's promoting Johnnie Lynn and his failure to get a decent special teams coach in, overall hsi staff picks have been much better.

[mickeef2]

Mickeef, who would have beaten Baltimore the year they won the superbowl?

 

You know the answer is no-one.

Coughlin has the best team in the NFL with Jacksonville, no-one is supposed to touch them on their way to the superbowl versus the Rams, and Coughlin gets outcoached at home against the Titans and Jeff Fisher.

 

Although it's not totally convincing evidence Fassel was the better coach, I think there's more evidence that he was a better coach than Coughlin than the other way around. Plus it was 7 years before Fassel lost the team, you could say it took Tom all of 2 1/2.

 

Trust me- my point is not that Coughlin is better. He's horrible. But Fassel was equally horrible. Don't forget he created most of the culture that's destroyed this franchise.

[fringe]

While neither is a 'complete' head coach, I give the nod to Fassel so far. He created an offense from a barren wasteland. He did what he was hired to do. Coughlin was hired to bring discipline and curb injuries. He's done neither.

[fishgutmartyr]

Fassel's first 3 years: 25-22-1

Coughlin's first 3 years: 25-23

 

Fassel's playoff record in that time: 0-1

Coughlin's record: either 0-2 or 1-2. Yay.

 

Make the argument that Fassel did this with less talent on injured reserve, and I'll make the argument that Coughlin's embarrassing playoff losses weren't as embarrassing as the Minnesota loss. I don't know about you, but I don't really feel like defending either of these jackasses.

 

Or are we going to say that the tie is statistically significant?

 

But I'm willing to concede that they both sucked in their own, special way. Is this argument really worth having?

[Plow]

fassel's team in the playoffs actually upset somebody who was favored. Remember when we beat the Vikings 41-0 in the NFC Conference Championship.

 

The whole point in all of this is to make the playoffs, but what you do there is even more important. If Coughlin's team shocks a few teams here in the playoffs then he could be better, but until he does that he cant be considered better. Fassel's team actually did something. Going to the Super Bowl is pretty good. You'll always remember when your team went to the super bowl.

[xxi-xxv]

The 2000 Giants could have been led to the playoffs by a blind man. The NFC in 2000 makes this years NFC look like the old beasts of the 80's.

[fishgutmartyr]

fassel's team in the playoffs actually upset somebody who was favored. Remember when we beat the Vikings 41-0 in the NFC Conference Championship.

 

The whole point in all of this is to make the playoffs, but what you do there is even more important. If Coughlin's team shocks a few teams here in the playoffs then he could be better, but until he does that he cant be considered better. Fassel's team actually did something. Going to the Super Bowl is pretty good. You'll always remember when your team went to the super bowl.

He didn't do that in his first 3 years, either. Three years: 1 playoff game--the loss against Minnesota in '97. You want to see what happens in Coughlin's fourth to keep things equal? I don't.

[Plow]

The 2000 Giants could have been led to the playoffs by a blind man. The NFC in 2000 makes this years NFC look like the old beasts of the 80's.

 

still they were 12-4 and the number 1 seed, regardless how bad the NFC was, they still lived up to expectations.

[RandolphScott]

still they were 12-4 and the number 1 seed, regardless how bad the NFC was, they still lived up to expectations.

 

 

The 2000 Giants were never given those expectations, I never expected them to go 12-4 that year.

[mickeef2]

You'll always remember when your team went to the super bowl.

 

They lost by 30 points. How could I forget?

[Plow]

They lost by 30 points. How could I forget?

 

lol

[RandolphScott]

They lost by 30 points. How could I forget?

 

27, actually.

[fishgutmartyr]

still they were 12-4 and the number 1 seed, regardless how bad the NFC was, they still lived up to expectations.

Yep. They were an awesome team. Out of 8 games against teams with a .500 record or better, they won 4. Three of the victories were divisional. 2 were against Philly.

 

And not one of those 4 losses were by less than 10 points.

 

The other 8 games they won? Other than Jacksonville (7-9), Not one win was against a team that even had 6 wins. Look for yourself:

 

team(number of victories): opponent's record

 

Wins

Arizona (twice): 3-13

Philly (twice):11-5

Atlanta:4-12

Dallas (twice): 5-11

Cleveland:3-13

Washington:8-8

Pittsburgh:9-7

Jacksonville:7-9

 

Losses:

Washington:8-8

Tennessee:13-3

St. Louis: 10-6

Detroit: 9-7

 

That's one murderer's row schedule-wise. You have 9 games with teams at .500 or less, and you are pretty much injury-free the entire season--you damn well better get into the playoffs!

 

So can we stop propping this up as the same coaching brilliance as Parcell's 1990 season, please?

 

And once again, this happened in Fassel's FOURTH YEAR, which with any luck, Coughlin won't have.

[boohyah]

Trust me- my point is not that Coughlin is better. He's horrible. But Fassel was equally horrible. Don't forget he created most of the culture that's destroyed this franchise.

 

 

And Tom said he'd fix it, hell that was his whole MO, and look what's happened, it's a whole lot worse.

[Nas]

I don't think we should be deciding on who's the better (or worse) of the two based on stats. Stats can be deceiving... in the worst way.

 

I like to judge based on my gut. I have to say I have never as terrible about any Giants team like I do about this year's team. Fassel might've not the great savior but that was his first shot at coaching. I don't recall a team come unravelled like this one did. Fassel might've choked on a game here and there.. but he never choked on a season going from 6-2 to finish 8-8... this is a prolonged choke folks. And we have far more talent on this team now that Fassel ever dreamed of having.

 

Remember when our offense would sputter but we knew our D will make the opposing team go 3 and out? When was the last time we felt this way?

[fishgutmartyr]

And Tom said he'd fix it, hell that was his whole MO, and look what's happened, it's a whole lot worse.

 

Here we go in circles again: Why did he have to fix a mess? How did it get there?

 

No shit he failed. I don't want him back, either. But I don't remember Fassel riding out on a chariot.

 

I don't think we should be deciding on who's the better (or worse) of the two based on stats. Stats can be deceiving... in the worst way.

 

I like to judge based on my gut. I have to say I have never as terrible about any Giants team like I do about this year's team. Fassel might've not the great savior but that was his first shot at coaching. I don't recall a team come unravelled like this one did. Fassel might've choked on a game here and there.. but he never choked on a season going from 6-2 to finish 8-8... this is a prolonged choke folks. And we have far more talent on this team now that Fassel ever dreamed of having.

 

Remember when our offense would sputter but we knew our D will make the opposing team go 3 and out? When was the last time we felt this way?

Comparing won-lost records of two coaches at a simlar point in their Giants career is deceiving?

 

Personally, considering Fassel was 7-9 in his 3rd year, and Coughlin was 6-2 midseason, the fact that the records are as close as they are at this point is pretty damning in regard to Coughlin.

 

You don't recall a team unravelling in 2003? I seem to recall a LOT of Superbowl talk before that 4-12 season.

 

I can't believe how desperately you guys want to defend Fassel. It's like you need Coughlin to look worse. Relax. They both weren't very good.

[uconngiants]

it will all depend on if both years they were one game and done

[Nas]

They both suck.

[xxi-xxv]

The bottom line is this. In weighing the 2 you have to consider the careers. WHat TC did in JAX building that team from the ground up is as impressive as it gets. Beating the Broncos on the road in 96 and then losing in NE in the champ game to Parcells was impressive. In comparison what he has done here does not equate to what he did in JAX. As far as him and being outcoached by Fisher, I think its clear 7 years later that Jeff Fisher is one of the top 3 head coaches in all of the NFL. Couglin built the groundwork there and probably fell victim of so many quality teams in the AFC in that 97-00 time period.

 

In comparison what Fassel did here with a poor roster in 97 and a SB run in 2000 was also impressive. His work with Kerry COllins is probably why he should be coaching somewhere in the league and his track record as a QB coach is quite impressive.

 

I think what they both have fallen victim to is a roster littered with big mouths who think they run the show

[boohyah]

Here we go in circles again: Why did he have to fix a mess? How did it get there?

 

No shit he failed. I don't want him back, either. But I don't remember Fassel riding out on a chariot.

Comparing won-lost records of two coaches at a simlar point in their Giants career is deceiving?

 

Personally, considering Fassel was 7-9 in his 3rd year, and Coughlin was 6-2 midseason, the fact that the records are as close as they are at this point is pretty damning in regard to Coughlin.

 

You don't recall a team unravelling in 2003? I seem to recall a LOT of Superbowl talk before that 4-12 season.

 

I can't believe how desperately you guys want to defend Fassel. It's like you need Coughlin to look worse. Relax. They both weren't very good.

 

Fish, if you check any of my posts on the older boards. I never agreed with Coughlin coming in and I made my points based on his career with the Jags, not the Giants. All Tom is doing now is making me look correct and believe, in terms of the Giants winning, I would love to be wrong about him.

 

As for Fassel, I will defend him because whether you like it or not, he never had the talent that Coughlin has now, he never had the club invest "at the level as they have with Coughlin" in free agency. Yes the last season with Fassel expectations were high and it was disappointing, but for all the injuries the Giants had last year, it was way worse in 2003 and he ended up the season with fucking Jesse Palmer at QB. At least he manned up to it before the season was over and simply put all Tom does is blame someone else. He had seven years as a coach, do you think Tom will be here 7?, do you think he'll be here 3?

 

I'm not sure why guys can't defend fassel, I mean seriously, do you think if fassel was in charge these last 3 years it would have been worse??

[xxi-xxv]

Fish, if you check any of my posts on the older boards. I never agreed with Coughlin coming in and I made my points based on his career with the Jags, not the Giants. All Tom is doing now is making me look correct and believe, in terms of the Giants winning, I would love to be wrong about him.

 

As for Fassel, I will defend him because whether you like it or not, he never had the talent that Coughlin has now, he never had the club invest "at the level as they have with Coughlin" in free agency. Yes the last season with Fassel expectations were high and it was disappointing, but for all the injuries the Giants had last year, it was way worse in 2003 and he ended up the season with fucking Jesse Palmer at QB. At least he manned up to it before the season was over and simply put all Tom does is blame someone else. He had seven years as a coach, do you think Tom will be here 7?, do you think he'll be here 3?

 

I'm not sure why guys can't defend fassel, I mean seriously, do you think if fassel was in charge these last 3 years it would have been worse??

 

Fassel pulled the play calling from Sean Payton in mid 2002 and that too would qualify as blaming somone else as Coughlin has.

 

As far as the core of this team its relatively the same group that Fassel had. Yes they have some big ticket additions like Pierce and Plax, but they also had Michael Barrow back in the day who IMO is on par or better than Pierce. Is ELI at year 3 a better QB than KC was when he was here? Has the Kareem MCkeenzie signing been any more inspiring on the field then what Lomas Brown or Glenn Parker were in 2000? Was a healthy Shuan Williams an equal safety to what we have back there now? Jason Sehorn circa 1997-00 was not better than the shit we trot out there now? Jessie Armstead at OLB? NUFF said on that one.

 

Although Tom Coughlins career with the Jags fizzled out, what he did there from 95-00 was very impressive. He ran the ENTIRE show there, found very good players in the exapansion draft(Brunnell, MCCardell, Smith) and drafted quite well. In fact many of the core players on the 12-4 2005 team were TC draft picks, including Fred Taylor and many of the starters on a physical, fast defense. I think you are really underestimating what he did there in terms of building that thing from the ground up. WHere Tom was unlucky with was that his team was placed in the AFC, had they been an NFC team in that same time span things might have been even better. His talent evaluation is quite good and I do not think its any coincidence that they are many more productive players on the roster now over the past 3 drafts then there had been over the previous three.

 

WHat these two are both guity of is running an undisciplined team. Going back as far as 1997 when I sat in my seats during the playoff game and watched this team fight one another in the tunnel at halftime, they have been as undisciplined as any. They have big mouths, they talk a HUGE game and many of them have been on hand for 4 of the most inconcieveable losses in franchise history(playoff games in 97 and 02 and reg season home losses in 03 to the Eagles and Boys in UNIMAGINEABLE FASHION!). There are men here that get paid millions that haveactually complained they are worked too hard, the same men who complained the previous coach worked them too lightly.

 

In reality the conclusion I think that everyone can come to is that this group of players have been the same under 2 entirely different style coaches. Maybe no matter what the Giants do and no matter who the coach is its time to back up the truck and start fresh in some spots. Maybe the culture has to be changed and whats the chance a 3rd HC has ay better luck?