Thoughts on Fisher

[Rmfnlt]

Alan professing his love for Mike Martz :

Still, I don't think that says anything about Martz's ability to to see and react to the defensive problems the Rams experienced in 2000. He saw them, couldn't do anything about them until the season ended and when it did, he handled it in an exemplary fashion. Considering the final results, probably better than almost any other HC could have. An almost worst to best performance. I don't see how you could do any better. What ever else you can say about his performance as a HC, in this instance, he was superb.

Yes, totally agree. Hiring Lovie was definitely high up on the list of things Martz did right!! But... wait!!

So... some here who want to defend Martz's terrible drafting record fall back on the possibility that Shaw and Ziggy might have demanded some of those picks be made.

Now... exactly who hired Lovie????

Inquiring minds want to know!!

 

[drasconis]

So, why put the entirety of the blame on Martz as HC? It could have been a myriad of factors, and probably was.

I'm going on about it because: (1) it's what law school teaches you - which you are learning; (2) you're using the method in this thread to try support your position; (3) law school doesn't teach you any of the real history behind the method, it's purpose, why it was originally used, nor it's limits or downside. In short, it's a dialectical technique for achieving a desired answer. Hence, I'm exposing the method before it's allowed to proceed too far down it's path.

But your not answering his question....you are giving a vague response and then trying to deflect by saying his question isn't valid due to the style in which it is stated...

As to your other claims: 1) actually not taught or used much at all anymore (a few older profs try to use it, but even they barely use it), 2) I see a reasonable question by him not sure how else you want the question phrased, 3) your really not exposing anything....you are avoiding, the history behind the method doesn't make it invalid or unusable

btw- is Jrry in law school?????

 

[Alan]

Rmfnlt trying to apportion the blame correctly:
So... some here who want to defend Martz's terrible drafting record fall back on the possibility that Shaw and Ziggy might have demanded some of those picks be made.

Now... exactly who hired Lovie????

Team effort. That way, everybody gets credit.

To be fair to those who defended Martz's drafting abilities , that was only in comparison to his successors who set new standards for incompetence.

Damn Stu for sucking me into this conversation about Martz!

 

[MrMotes]

Still, I don't think that says anything about Martz's ability to to see and react to the defensive problems the Rams experienced in 2000. He saw them, couldn't do anything about them until the season ended and when it did, he handled it in an exemplary fashion. Considering the final results, probably better than almost any other HC could have.

People talk about how long it takes to turn things around but maybe we're spoiled with how fast the offense turned around from '98 to '99 and then the defense from '00 to '01.

Supposedly Martz wanted to fire the defensive staff at the bye week in 2000 but was told that's not how things are done. He did coax Bud Carson out of retirement to try and help.

And you're right, that 2000 offense, before Warner got hurt, was the best thing i've ever seen...

 

[den-the-coach]

Supposedly Martz wanted to fire the defensive staff at the bye week in 2000 but was told that's not how things are done. He did coax Bud Carson out of retirement to try and help.

And you're right, that 2000 offense, before Warner got hurt, was the best thing i've ever seen...

Yes Martz did want to fire the entire defensive staff, but IMHO Martz biggest mistake was allowing Co-Defensive Coordinator John Bunting to walk in favor of LB Coach Mike Haluchak. Once Bunting left, it left the defense totally under Peter Guinta who could not motivate the troops, he designed the defense and Bunting orchestrated it to the players.

Martz almost compounded the issue following the 2000 season because he asked for permission from the Cardinals to hire their defensive coordinator Larry Marmie, but was denied permission..."Thank God." and after being denied then reached out to Tampa Bay LB coach Lovie Smith.

Fast forward to 2004 where Martz got his wish and hired his old friend Larry Marmie to replace Lovie Smith who moved on to be the Head Coach of the Bears and two years later Larry Marmie was able to lead Martz to the unemployment line.

 

[Rmfnlt]

Supposedly Martz wanted to fire the defensive staff at the bye week in 2000 but was told that's not how things are done.

Link?

 

[Rmfnlt]

Yes Martz did want to fire the entire defensive staff, but IMHO Martz biggest mistake was allowing Co-Defensive Coordinator John Bunting to walk in favor of LB Coach Mike Haluchak. Once Bunting left, it left the defense totally under Peter Guinta who could not motivate the troops, he designed the defense and Bunting orchestrated it to the players.

Martz almost compounded the issue following the 2000 season because he asked for permission from the Cardinals to hire their defensive coordinator Larry Marmie, but was denied permission..."Thank God." and after being denied then reached out to Tampa Bay LB coach Lovie Smith.

Fast forward to 2004 where Martz got his wish and hired his old friend Larry Marmie to replace Lovie Smith who moved on to be the Head Coach of the Bears and two years later Larry Marmie was able to lead Martz to the unemployment line.

My memory isn't as good as yours... I'd forgotten Martz's initial desire to replace Giunta with MARMIE!

Taken as a whole, it now seems Martz got more lucky than good... meaning that denial by the Cardinals was the best thing that ever happened to Martz.

He intended to take Marmie over Smith... think about that for a second. :eek: alm: :seizure:

 

[Stranger]

But your not answering his question....you are giving a vague response and then trying to deflect by saying his question isn't valid due to the style in which it is stated...

As to your other claims: 1) actually not taught or used much at all anymore (a few older profs try to use it, but even they barely use it), 2) I see a reasonable question by him not sure how else you want the question phrased, 3) your really not exposing anything....you are avoiding, the history behind the method doesn't make it invalid or unusable

btw- is Jrry in law school?????

You think it's reasonable to presume that our 1999 Defense was as good as it was thru "luck"? I just don't see how luck could be consistent over 19 games that season. So yes, I see the question as unreasonable, and a provocation.

 

[drasconis]

You think it's reasonable to presume that our 1999 Defense was as good as it was thru "luck"? I just don't see how luck could be consistent over 19 games that season. So yes, I see the question as unreasonable, and a provocation.

If that is what you see his question as then you really are not reading his entire posts. His point, as I read it, was that it wasn't reasonable to say Martz inherited nothing on D when the previous year (and with a large number of returning players) the D was so good...to ignore those facts pretty much means someone would have to write off what was done the year before...thus his term "luck". He in no way was stating that he believed that the D 1999 was thru "luck"....something you would understand if you read his posts. His question was posed sarcastically to challenge those that disagreed with him to provide more detail, especially considering the defenses 99 showing.

 

[Stranger]

His question was posed sarcastically to challenge those that disagreed with him

Yes, I understood this, and saw it as a ridiculous Socratic provocation.

The larger discussion here is around Martz, and: (i) his success, or lack thereof, after taking on the role of HC; (2) how much he is to be blamed or credited for the team's performance after he took on the role as HC. It's clear to me that: (a) the Rams' performance after the 1999 season is being characterized as trending downward; (b) that Martz as HC is largely responsible for this trend. Both (a) and (b) are unsupportable if one takes into account all of the data from the seasons where Martz was the HC, and also accounts for all of the changes in the Rams' organization.

In reference to the above discussion regarding the Defense, it's being insinuated (or actively claimed) that Martz's is largely or exclusively to blame for the decline in performance during the following season. Given the large quantity of variables that impact a SB Winning team's performance the following season, I find this whole area of discussion ridiculous and unsupportable. So, while on the one hand it is unreasonable to say Martz didn't inherit a top D, it's just as fallacious to claim that that D's downfall can be blamed on the shift from Martz as OC to HC.

 

[Alan]

MrMotes with an interesting rumor:
Supposedly Martz wanted to fire the defensive staff at the bye week in 2000 but was told that's not how things are done. He did coax Bud Carson out of retirement to try and help.

And you're right, that 2000 offense, before Warner got hurt, was the best thing i've ever seen...

That's very interesting. I'd completely forgotten about the Carson hire and didn't even know about martz wanting to fire the defensive staff. Thanks for that!

You know why that offense was so good statistically? It was due in large part because our defense sucked so badly. With a halfway decent defense we would have been cutting our offense back in the latter parts of every game with the usual rushing plays solely designed to take time off the clock. Instead, we were often playing catch up even though we'd already scored 30+ points on the opposition. I loved that season!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[drasconis]

Yes, I understood this, and saw it as a ridiculous Socratic provocation.

The larger discussion here is around Martz, and: (i) his success, or lack thereof, after taking on the role of HC; (2) how much he is to be blamed or credited for the team's performance after he took on the role as HC. It's clear to me that: (a) the Rams' performance after the 1999 season is being characterized as trending downward; (b) that Martz as HC is largely responsible for this trend.

So argue out your points and why you think things are "unsupportable" rather than attack his form of question...it comes across as personal and condescending (not saying you meant it that way) to do so...it appears like rather than participate in the debate you wish to derail it. (or that is how I read it...and, yes, that is a trouble with typed word...the tone doesn't always come through)

The larger discussion here is around Martz, and: (i) his success, or lack thereof, after taking on the role of HC; (2) how much he is to be blamed or credited for the team's performance after he took on the role as HC. It's clear to me that: (a) the Rams' performance after the 1999 season is being characterized as trending downward; (b) that Martz as HC is largely responsible for this trend. Both (a) and (b) are unsupportable if one takes into account all of the data from the seasons where Martz was the HC, and also accounts for all of the changes in the Rams' organization.
In reference to the above discussion regarding the Defense, it's being insinuated (or actively claimed) that Martz's is largely or exclusively to blame for the decline in performance during the following season. Given the large quantity of variables that impact a SB Winning team's performance the following season, I find this whole area of discussion ridiculous and unsupportable. So, while on the one hand it is unreasonable to say Martz didn't inherit a top D, it's just as fallacious to claim that that D's downfall can be blamed on the shift from Martz as OC to HC.

I gotta disagree here.
The team clearly trended downward overall 2000 - they won fewer games and their ranking in D plummeted (now he should get credit for a great recovery in 2001)
I think there is plenty of support for the blame to lay strongly (not exclusively) at Martz's feet (though it may not be his "fault"). From my perspective:
1. as HC (regardless of being new to the job) his staff were his choices - so if the wrong people were kept/hired in coaching positions then that is on him. (His great love of Marmie proves this to me)
2. the obvious focus on the O side of the ball - in player contracts is on him, we know he had input (2 examples come to mind Carter felt spurred when he did not get a shiny new contract post SB/the loss of London) there was some clear resentment on the team
3. as head coach he needs to be aware of players physical status - while he can't be blamed for guys aging, he can be blamed for not handling it properly (or his staff not handling it properly) by either figuring out how to actually get the most from the guys (rotating them to keep them fresh, etc); (note this is similar to the wells issue last year in my mind)
4. his inability to focus outside of O- for example his attention to ST throughout his term was bad...we brought in several well known ST coaches that did well before, horrible here, and great again elsewhere - at least one voice his feeling that he wasn't given the needed support.
5. his lack of reality of the situation - really fire the entire staff after week 2??? seriously, management was right you can't do it...who are you going to hire...what message do you send to coaches around the league. Now if you want to fire the D cord after week 4 fine, but you can't trash the ENTIRE staff...

 

[drasconis]

Yes, I understood this, and saw it as a ridiculous Socratic provocation.

The larger discussion here is around Martz, and: (i) his success, or lack thereof, after taking on the role of HC; (2) how much he is to be blamed or credited for the team's performance after he took on the role as HC. It's clear to me that: (a) the Rams' performance after the 1999 season is being characterized as trending downward; (b) that Martz as HC is largely responsible for this trend. Both (a) and (b) are unsupportable if one takes into account all of the data from the seasons where Martz was the HC, and also accounts for all of the changes in the Rams' organization.

In reference to the above discussion regarding the Defense, it's being insinuated (or actively claimed) that Martz's is largely or exclusively to blame for the decline in performance during the following season. Given the large quantity of variables that impact a SB Winning team's performance the following season, I find this whole area of discussion ridiculous and unsupportable. So, while on the one hand it is unreasonable to say Martz didn't inherit a top D, it's just as fallacious to claim that that D's downfall can be blamed on the shift from Martz as OC to HC.

I also wanted to say (it was to late to edit other post) that I understand your view of it (in general), I admit fully I am very much a "the buck stops here sort". A head coach is the captian of the ship, he is in charge and ultimately everything goes back to him - it may suck, it may not always be fair, but at the end of the day you are given one goal and only one result matters you know it(or you better) and you are paid well for it.

I had someone very successful tell me one time "I try to be understanding and we all know life happens...but ultimately at some point I care "that" it happens and no longer care about "whys".

 

[OC--LeftCoast]

Why didn't it happen in '99 or '01?

Really, who sez it didn't

Lemme get this straight, you're saying a score at breakneck pace offense doesn't tax a defense?

Gonna just have to disagree and side with the ball control sustained drive approach here

We all have opinions

 

[MrMotes]

Really, who sez it didn't

Lemme get this straight, you're saying a score at breakneck pace offense doesn't tax a defense?

Gonna just have to disagree and side with the ball control sustained drive approach here

We all have opinions

Well then what's your explanation for why the 2000 defense gave up so many more points than the '99 or '01 defense?

 

[Corbin]

I don't get what this Martz vs. Fisher debate is.

Mike Martz caused Aliens to use extra fumbles.
Coaches Fisher's stache signals Aliens 2015 IS THE YEAR OF THE RAM!!