"daytripper" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 4 Dec 2007 13:00:29 -0800, "Tom Nakashima"
wrote:


"daytripper" wrote in message
. ..
On Tue, 4 Dec 2007 10:46:38 -0800, "Tom Nakashima"

wrote:

"daytripper" wrote in message
m...
I wasn't a fan of McDaniels last season, wasn't a fan of McDaniels in
the
first half of this season, and I'm *really not* a fan of McDaniels in
the
second half of this season. I've been missing Charlie Weis more and
more...

WHAT? Charlie Weis of Notre Dame?
You've got to be kidding!

No, I'm not kidding. Weis was an excellent offensive coordinator who
made
uncanny mid-game adjustments when the going called for it - something
McDaniels hasn't learned how to do yet. I rarely disagreed with CW's
play
calling, and the Pats won three superbowls with him calling the shots
with
*a lot less player talent* than they had this year...

/daytripper

I guess those uncanny calls didn't work for Notre Dame at least this year.
When the Irish were 1-7, they were ranked 119th in rushing offense, 112th
in passing, and 118th in scoring out of the 119 teams in Division 1-A.
Yup
signs of an excellent offensive coordinator or was Brady Quinn that good
those previous years?

So being the offensive coordinator for three superbowls means nothing to
you?

Why should it mean anything to me?

Doesn't buy him any credibility with you? My, my, my....and tsk tsk.

Not looking to buy credibility, and wouldn't take it if it was free.


There's a world of difference between the offensive coordinator of a pro
ball
team that you helped recruit, and being head coach of a college team full
of
someone else's recruiting efforts.

I'm not denying that there isn't.


It would be more rational to expect he
doesn't get to devote his every waking moment to offensive planning now,
considering all of the other responsibilities on his plate. Or maybe you
don't
realize the scope of his job?

I'm sure "you" realize the scope of his job at Notre Dame, I'll let you
worry
about it. I could care less who coaches the Irish.

You're talking about the Erhardt/Perkins offensive system, which is the
same
offense the Pats use today...nothing really new. What changes are they
calling in offensive plays from the those Super Bowl years? The only
difference I see is the acquisition of Moss, who made a huge difference in
opening up the offense.

Yikes! Is that really all you can see from where you are? Try squinting
;-)

Why should I squint? The Pats have been running the Erhardt/Perkins
offensive system since the Parcell days, that's where Weis learned the
system.

I'm sure all the other new players you missed are heart broken, but
they've
gotten along pretty well anyway.

If they're heart broken, I'm sure they can find a crying towel, but who's
heart broken, they're undefeated.


And I disagree with your assessment of the
"system" in use this season, it's about night-and-day different from last
year
- pretty much due to all those players you missed, along with Moss.

Every NFL team has a "system" , but I thought you knew that.


As Brady says: "My job is easy, I just throw it up there and Randy makes
the play. " Sure makes the Raiders look bad.


Well, the Raiders are still bad, so I guess that theory doesn't work too
well.

Flew over your head; My statement of "Sure makes the Raiders look bad" is
that all they had to do is throw the ball up and Randy would make the play.
Raiders couldn't even do that. They also said Moss was washed up.
So yes I'll stand by my statement; Sure makes the Raiders look bad.


And while the quote is correct, it would be unbelievably simplistic to
believe
that describes the system or the season...But you'd have to actually have
watched all of the games for the last many years to know that...

Wait, you're the one who said you're not a fan of McDaniels, and you've been
missing Charlie Weis. So although the Pats this year have out scored their
opponents by the largest margin in the history of the NFL, makes me wonder
if you have a crying towel by your side when you think of Charlie Weis and
watch the Pats run up the score.
-tom