You know, there was a time when I would have disagreed with this, but I think this team has shown a real lack of discipline recently. I still think Lovie's a good head coach, and the players clearly want to play for him: there was a survey of NFL players last year, and Lovie was like #2 among coaches that players would like to play for.

 

But I wonder if he's hard enough on his guys. We had a lot more guys playing up to their potential when Ron Rivera was here. Rivera's had some ups and downs as DC in San Diego, but he's definitely a hardass when it comes to motivating his players. I wonder if we really needed a DC who the players were afraid of, to go along with the HC that they love playing for.

 

I'm not going to join the Fire Lovie crowd, but I would love it if the front office brought in an outside DC to work with him. He's done enough as a head coach to warrant keeping him for that alone, but it's pretty clear that the team was better when there was an independent-minded coordinator working on the defense with him.

I wonder WHY he was #2 among coaches that players would like to play for. Does that mean he would be a better coach than Cowher,Billicheck, or the last 10 coaches that won Super Bowls?I want a coach that pleases the fans,orginization,and players. Not one that the players would more like to play for,do you know what I mean?

I wonder WHY he was #2 among coaches that players would like to play for. Does that mean he would be a better coach than Cowher,Billicheck, or the last 10 coaches that won Super Bowls?I want a coach that pleases the fans,orginization,and players. Not one that the players would more like to play for,do you know what I mean?

 

Honestly, I think it probably means that they're happier playing for him or they feel like they're treated better. Coughlin was really low on that list, if I remember, and this was when the Giants were coming off a Super Bowl, so I don't think winning a Super Bowl necessarily meant that guys wanted to play for you.

 

I just think it should be a two-headed monster: have a head coach who the guys want to play well for, and a coordinator who can stamp enough discipline into them that they actually WILL play well. I don't want to make another tired Ditka/Buddy Ryan comparison, but there's clearly some value to having a coach and a DC who aren't exactly one and the same. Some good cop/bad cop might get our defense to play up to its potential.

Honestly, I think it probably means that they're happier playing for him or they feel like they're treated better. Coughlin was really low on that list, if I remember, and this was when the Giants were coming off a Super Bowl, so I don't think winning a Super Bowl necessarily meant that guys wanted to play for you.

 

I just think it should be a two-headed monster: have a head coach who the guys want to play well for, and a coordinator who can stamp enough discipline into them that they actually WILL play well. I don't want to make another tired Ditka/Buddy Ryan comparison, but there's clearly some value to having a coach and a DC who aren't exactly one and the same. Some good cop/bad cop might get our defense to play up to its potential.

I don' care who these millionare players like to play for, because they like him more. I want my nonmillionare ass fan to have winning teams.

I don' care who these millionare players like to play for, because they like him more. I want my nonmillionare ass fan to have winning teams.

Ha ha ha, fair enough. I'm sure there are guys who don't have fun playing for Bill Belichick, but I've never heard a Pats fan complain about it.