Does Munch Have The Guts To Fire an Old Friend? (OL)

Discussion in 'Tennessee Titans and NFL Talk' started by The Hammer, Oct 14, 2013.

  1. JCBRAVE

    JCBRAVE Tweet me @JCBRAVE

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2009
    Messages:
    45,329
    You think he would quit if forced to fire his BFF? Thats loyalty to a fault right there.
    #71
  2. The Hammer

    The Hammer Straight Ridah

    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2012
    Messages:
    16,393
    It is uncomfortable when dealing with a friend who is a subordinate. Fisher had a problem with it too.
    #72
  3. The Hammer

    The Hammer Straight Ridah

    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2012
    Messages:
    16,393
    If Bruce is as good a friend then he would fall on the sword and resign after seeing the writing on the wall.
    #73
    • High Five High Five x 1
  4. Riverman

    Riverman That may be....

    Joined:
    May 2, 2005
    Messages:
    8,653
    Not to turn this into a line item debate, but you were the one faulting Levitre in prior messages.

    Again, as mentioned before, it isn't my problem to fix. Matthews and Munchak by sequence, are responsible for that. Does firing Matthews right now turn things around this season? Probably not because there likely isn't a suitable replacement available. I don't know- I'm not in the business nor would I pretend to be. It is reasonable (albeit frustrating) for Munchak to stick with Matthews and either "hope" a dramatic improvement in the OL occurs. There just hasn't been any evidence in Matthews tenure here as OL coach that that is a likely scenario. And it is my impression that our playoff hopes are pinned to some form of improvement in our O's ability to run the ball and score. I don't see that happening without some improvement in the OL performance.

    Munchak and Matthews were both certainly "loyal" to Amano far longer than they should have been. Personal oyalty can sometimes be a detriment when you put above accountability.
    So if you are OK with giving Matthews a pass on being responsible for the quality of the OL's play then we can disagree. Munchak appears to share the same sentiment. It has been my experience that little change for the positive occurs without accountability. And I haven't seen much evidence that anybody, much less Munchak, is interested in holding coache accountable for their units performance.

    The end sum is the same. If the line doesn't improve, they are both gone.
    #74
    • High Five High Five x 1
  5. SawdustMan

    SawdustMan Pro Bowler Tip Jar Donor

    Joined:
    Sep 20, 2009
    Messages:
    12,414
    I agree. But is that really a quality you want from your head coach?

    OL is hands down THE most underperforming unit on this entire team. They're holding us back and costing us wins, point blank. I've kind of gotten on board with Munch this season. But if he'd rather spare the feelings of a personal friend instead of doing what's best for the TEAM then he can get GTFO.

    I get where you're coming from.... that Bruce isn't instructing his players to whiff on blocks and get blown up, but I'm with Riverman in that there eventually HAS to be some accountability somewhere. You can't just sit around saying "Well, we just are executing" week in and week out. And Bruce is the "boss" of the OL. So at the end of the day the responsibility falls on his shoulders.

    It would be different if this were an anomaly. But the OL has been straight garbage ever since Munch moved to HC and Bruce took over. I honestly can't think of a single saving grace/positive thing to say about his tenure here. His name and his personal relationship with our HC are the biggest reasons he still has a job right now. That's pathetic. And it's not just Munch/Matthews. It's been a deeply rooted problem with this franchise ever since they've been here. And I think it's a contributing reason as to why we constantly wallow in mediocrity.
    #75
  6. SawdustMan

    SawdustMan Pro Bowler Tip Jar Donor

    Joined:
    Sep 20, 2009
    Messages:
    12,414
    This is actually what I think will happen. I think there will be a "mutual parting of ways" or something. Fine by me so long as he's gone.
    #76
    • High Five High Five x 1
  7. JCBRAVE

    JCBRAVE Tweet me @JCBRAVE

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2009
    Messages:
    45,329
    Brunch Sunday morning in April will be awkward for Mrs. Matthews and Mrs. Munchak if Mike fires Bruce.
    #77
  8. TitanJeff

    TitanJeff Kahuna Grande Staff

    Joined:
    May 24, 2002
    Messages:
    23,319
    You don't bring up CJ and his 3.1 ypc avg. and inability to break a tackle. You don't bring up Loggains and his inability to call a play on first down most of us don't see coming. These things directly impact the success of the OL too.

    We've played six games. Stewart has been hurt for most of them. Warmack is gaining experience. If "chemistry" isn't overrated, then that has to improve with each game. Turner has to get better or Schwenke has to get a shot.

    I also think Greene is going to go a long was toward exposing the real issues in the run game.

    Heads will roll, no doubt.

    But let's hold all position coaches to the same standard. Crooms isn't getting much out of CJ. I don't see him taking any heat. Britt has been a train wreck but Jefferson gets praise because we've seen two TDs by Hunter. Regone really hasn't produced much from the QB position except for three quarters this season.

    The offense, OVERALL, has stunk. For those who think it's because of coaching, then there are others who deserve as much blame as Bruce.
    #78
  9. TitanJeff

    TitanJeff Kahuna Grande Staff

    Joined:
    May 24, 2002
    Messages:
    23,319
    I expect a head coach to be smart enough to know the REAL reasons for the performance of his players. He's fired an OC. He knew the players had lost faith. If he felt the OLs play was directly related to something Bruce wasn't doing properly, he'd already been gone, IMO.

    Firing Bruce doesn't make Turner a better player. It doesn't give Warmack experience.

    And it's possible that firing Bruce could actually have a negative effect.

    Correct. The OL has sucked because of the players on the OL. We're on the third complete change with the interior OL since he arrived.

    Look, we all understand each other here. You guys blame Bruce for the following:

    Roos being in decline. It happens though he's still playing fairly well.
    Levitre somehow not playing up to his contract.
    Turner being backup material only.
    Warmack being a rookie with only six games under his belt.
    Stewart being also in decline and his injury further slowing him down.

    I say everything which is occurring on the field is due to the players NOT following coaching OR because they simply don't have the talent/skills/experience which coaching can't overcome. I also put a lot of the outcome on Loggains and CJ.

    So I'll depart this topic and let you guys Bruce bash if it makes you feel better. After 16 games, I think it'll be obvious what needs to happens.
    #79
  10. JCBRAVE

    JCBRAVE Tweet me @JCBRAVE

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2009
    Messages:
    45,329
    I watched Andy levitre go try cut blocking a DT, the DT watched him fall to his feet and CJ ran right into the guys arms. THATs NOT on Bruce, other things are on him IMO, but its not all the OL coach
    #80