Articles from around the Web
PDF VERSION NOW DISCOUNTED OVER 30%
Click here to buy PDF version.
Click here to buy PDF version
Official Account: @fboutsiders
Scott Kacsmar: @FO_ScottKacsmar
Ben Muth: @FO_WordofMuth
Aaron Schatz: @FO_ASchatz
Vince Verhei: @FO_VVerhei
-- plus --
Bill Connelly: @SBN_BillC
J.J. Cooper: @jjcoop36
Cian Fahey: @Cianaf
Brian Fremeau: @bcfremeau
Tom Gower: @ThomasGower
Andrew Healy: @AndHealy
Rivers McCown: @RiversMcCown
Chad Peltier: @CGPeltier
Matt Waldman: @MattWaldman
Rob Weintraub: @robwein
13 May 2013
Thought I would write a football article about football this week.
Posted by: Mike Tanier on 13 May 2013
6 comments, Last at
14 May 2013, 5:58am by
Eh, it's to say that Tice coached the bunch he was given in Chicago poorly. It also has a pretty good chance of being an errant thing to say. If Long ends up being a good rookie, and Slauson and Bushrod play like they have in the past, a lot of people will say that the Bears o-line is being coached better than it was under Tice. That will also have a pretty good chance of being an errant thing to say.
Strangely, when Mike Tice was coaching the likes of McDaniel, Steussie, Christy, Dixon, Birk, Stringer, Mckinnie, and some pretty unheralded guys who filled spots where needed, he was a pretty darned good o-line coach. I suspect he would have been as well with two decent to good guards and Jeorme Bushrod. No, he did not strive for continuity when supplied talent which could not demonstrate it warranted continuity. I guess Jerry Angelo made Mike Tice incompetent at coaching offensive linemen.
I think the complaints levied at Tice were reasonable. His 2011 was actually pretty good, all things considered; he made the best out of a patchwork line. But in 2012 he really didn't do a good job of adjusting, and in particular the complaint that the Guard position was seen as where you put underperforming tackles was definitely a valid complaint. He may not have had a lot to work with, but he could have done better with what he had.
I also give him partial blame for the acquisition of very little talent last year; I have no doubt Emery asked him some questions about how people were doing/etc. and he probably gave overly optimistic answers. Even a couple more journeyman guards would've helped a ton, but instead we had Carimi and such playing pretty poorly there.
When there is a dearth of talent, you end up putting underperforming players in spots that they are unsuited for. This happens because the players lack talent, but the rules allow the opposition to field 11 players at a time.
I have no idea as to the content of the conversations between Ermey and Tice. I do know that new GMs have a track record of not having any attachment to the coaching staff that the new GM had no hand in hiring.
I suspect the coaching dig was more at Martz and his dream of 7 step drops protected by Jem and the Holograms.
Very much enjoyed the 'little stories', and thank you.
Next time? Bengals' LB situation, SF's changes at DB, whether Mia's re-dos represent real change or just Jeff buying more time?
Good read - solid football insights and an OTL topic treated with thoughtfulness and grace. Contrast that with last week's sanctimony (What's bigger than sancrimony? Sacrosanctimony? Let's go with that) and all but fitting Nolan Nawrocki for a Klan hood, and let's hope that as the season draws near this week's MM is much more the model going forward.
When it comes to No. 1 corners, a familiar name was No. 1 in 2014.
See All XP | NFL XP | College XP
© Football Outsiders, Inc. // Site powered by Stein-Wein // Partner of USA TODAY Sports Digital Properties