Emery and Trestman Press Conference 12:30

Lovie Smith did a great job getting the defensive players ready to play. That was his biggest plus. You know that, with some exceptions, that a Lovie Smith defense was going to play at a certain level and that teams would have to work to score. Teams would score on Lovie's D but not in great gobs.

The biggest and best thing Lovie did was expect players to tackle and maintain their assignments. A Lovie Smith team in Chicago was a good tackling, smart team. It helped having a middle linebacker that was among the best in the business at sniffing out plays and putting people in position to make plays. But all of that would mean nothing if the team didn't tackle well or work the ball loose.

Having said that, Lovie needed to go. There is a problem in the NFL where long term coaches become so fond of their players that they keep them around as their ability fades. This is understandable but the great coaches know to get rid of a guy when he starts fading. Bellichick has been good at this, his teams rarely have the same guys on them but they always perform. There are two or three guys that are 'big names' but the rest are just guys filling a role. Even great ones have trouble, look at Dallas in the early 80s. Too many names that had reputions that their play couldn't back up anymore. Firing Tom Landry is like firing the Pope to Dallas fans but it was necessary. The great Dallas Teams of the late 80s early 90s would never have happened if Landry had been around.

JDB_219 said:

You stated earlier that Lovie needed great players to succeed. I showed an example of a great D without a lot of great players. You respond with pro-bowl numbers. I don't think everyone who makes the pro-bowl is great. it means you are good. Lovie isn't a miracle worker but taking Tim Jennings from street to pro-bowl as a veteran is a great example of good coaching. The great players thing is a myth used to poor mouth a very good defensive coach. He was no more dependent on talent that any other successful coach. Talent wins, that is why Barry Switzer has a ring.

Click to expand...

If you want to split hairs between good and great, fine. The fact is that the defense had six pro bowl caliber players, so more than half the players on the D were good to great. I already gave Lovie some credit for Jennings but at the same time you can watch the Seattle game that year and watch how clueless he was, forced to deal with something out of the box and actually think. He is currently taking what was the 21st ranked D last year and making it the 32nd and an absolute laughingstock.

If you like him cool, but 3 out of 9 playoff appearances and the complete inability to adjust is not good. Just bc the current coaching staff is being incompetent doesn't mean Lovie was or is better than he actually is

cd35;1624923[B said:

]If you want to split hairs between good [/B]and great, fine. The fact is that the defense had six pro bowl caliber players, so more than half the players on the D were good to great. I already gave Lovie some credit for Jennings but at the same time you can watch the Seattle game that year and watch how clueless he was, forced to deal with something out of the box and actually think.

Click to expand...

It's not hair splitting to note good vs great. That Seattle game that you obsess over was 17 lousy points before OT. Good teams lose games especially to tricky gameplans.
http://scores.espn.go.com/nfl/recap?gameId=280921017 NE gave up 38 first time they saw the wildcat for example.