Mariucci Rumors True?

I'm not nearly as patient as Dave. Gayskin's "jokes" got old around the time I turned twelve.  If you want to make fun of us, that's fine.  Want to make jokes at our expense? Fine.  Just make sure the jokes are, you know, FUNNY.  Grow up. 

OK, Gayskin.  I was really patient.  I can take a joke as well as the next guy, and I enjoyed it for awhile.  But we try to keep it clean and family oriented here.  I probably let you go too far as it was.  In any case, all clean comments, even ones made entirely in jest like yours, are welcome.  But keep it clean. Thanks.

-DW

Comment removed due to profanity.

I'll also point out that if you look purely at numbers, Joe Gibbs in his second term did worse than either Coach A or Coach B. So looking only at numbers doesn't capture the whole story.  If you look at the numbers, last year we were 9-7 and barely getting into the playoffs at all (which we were one and done).  That's all true as far as it goes, but I don't think that's how I'll remember last season. There's more to the story.

You also need to remember that Mooch started with a San Francisco team that was at the bottom of the NFL. They were TERRIBLE and they had huge salary cap problems.  He guided them out of that and kept winning playoff games even through what amounted to a coup in the front office as Eddie DeBartelo went down in flames after that River Boat fiasco.   Now, he also had trouble dealing with problem players (TO anyone?) and I think that's on him, but I don't think we have any primadonna players on our team so it should be a non-factor.  Also, as you pointed out, he doesn't have the stench of the Giants on him.

I like Mooch, too, but I have to ask myself this question: does my liking him matter more than his coaching ability.  Take a look at this:

Coach A- all-time record 58-53-1, 3 ten win seasons, 3 playoff seasons and 2-3 in the playoffs, twice coach of the year and one Super Bowl appearence.

Coach B- all-time record 72-67, 4 ten win seasons, 4 playoff appearences and 3-4 in the playoffs, no Super Bowls.

Caoch A is Fassel.  Is there really a major difference between the two?  Admittedly, if you are willing to give Mooch the pass for Detroit, he comes out a little better because his San Fran record is 57-39 which is pretty darn good.  But other than the fact that Mariucci is more eloquent, a little less stone-faced, and doesn't have the stink of the Giants and the Ravens on him, I'm not sure it matters.

Either way, I'm starting to warm up to Meeks or the ten year old genius in New England, but I'm less upset by either Fassel or Mooch than I'd have been a week or two ago.

-DW

I kind of like Mooch, especially compared to Fassel.  But Mooch was able to lead San Francisco to several playoff games despite an incompetent front office that was fractured, disorganized, and pulling all sorts of political bullshit.  Sound familiar?  I'll give him a pass in Detroit; nobody can overcome Matt Millen, offensive genius.

I can't say I'm happy about this, but at this point, someone has to get picked so they can move on to the real football matters. Mooch is as good as any out there, which isn't all that great. I'm still surprised at no Russ Grimm.