Want Munchak back yet?

He calls out the players after every game. Isn't that what you all wanted? It sure seemed like it. Munch benched guys left and right and that wasn't considered showing accountability so why does Whiz benching guys mean any more than that?
Even if tomorrow he woke up and did everything you want (take responsibility for the losses and bench whoever you deem to be the problem) would the team all of a sudden be a contender? No, it wouldn't. Know why? Because we just don't have the talent on this roster to consistently compete with the best teams in the league and haven't for a while. Good coaches can cover up holes here and there but there is only so much a coach can do.

 

5 games... seriously...

 

Don't get me wrong I'm not running Whiz out of town. In fact I'll probably be more patient than most around here. I can't honestly fault the man for losing with an under-talented team when I pretty much gave Munch a pass because his team was also low on talent.

I also don't want Munch back and think Whiz will turn it around. My main point is that until we get legit-top level talent on this team we'll continue to suck regardless of whose in charge.

 

Nobody is debating that. Your point I responded to was that somehow there is more accountability in the system with Whiz than there was with Munchak. My response was that I haven't seen more accountability with Whiz yet.

He (and/or Horton) kept Ayers out because he wasn't performing. Brown was in the dog house for a while but his play did improve until he was injured. That is accountability. He keeps playing Levitre- that isn't accountability. He doesn't own up that his decision was a bad choice- instead states it was the players who didn't execute. He's responsible for their execution and the ability to select plays he knows they can execute. His failure to acknowledge suggests he has a double standard of accountability.

We share a common gripe about our talent level. That is on Ruston Webster, our scouts and coaching if they are involved in FA selection and drafting. Which I agree, has nothing to do with accountability for player execution.

 

Fair enough.

 

I will concede we might have been better off this season with Munch. Can't believe I'm saying that but Whis hasn't exactly set the world on fire.

But long-term Munch was not the answer and we all know it. And our idiot FO didn't just want to let him finish out the final year of his contract, they wanted to EXTEND the scrub. That's the problem.

Munch had to go. Get over it already. Maybe Whis works out. Maybe he doesn't. But either way it doesn't make Munch any better or worse of a coach. He is what he is. And there's a reason he's back to being a position coach right now.

 

Whiz is a way better then coach then Munch. The difference is Whiz plays to win and Munch played not to lose. Whiz play calling is very aggressive. The issue is we don't have the players right now for it. Throw him on the Packers or the Broncos, he will be viewed as great. People complaing about that 4th-1, that was a great call. Whiz knew our defence was getting picked apart.

The scenario on that is:

1) Punt the ball, browns burn whole clock get TD
2) Convert the 4th, we burn most of clock or all with possible score
3) We miss the convert Browns have 40 yards to go we most likely get ball back to go for FG

He made the right choice.

 

i don't disagree with that at all.

I do think Whis messed up trusting CBJ behind our interior OL to get it done.