Has there been a "great" coach who is clearly conservative?

[Sammy Watkins' Rib]

It was a long time ago now but my gut tells me Belicheck probably did not allow for his offensive coordinator to be as aggressive today as they were back when they won their original three super bowls. Brady wasn't the same QB that he has grown to be now. In this case, a Tiger can actually change it's stripes when it comes to coaching philosophy. McDermott could change as Allen gets better and as both gain more experience individually. I mean how many years total has McDaniels been OC there in New England now too? That helps a lot as well I'm sure. 

[Reks Ryan]

Don Shula, until he had Marino.   
 

I would make the argument that if he had been more conservative and had a better running game w Marino they would’ve been more successful and maybe won a SB together.   Shula won 2 SBs and an NFL championship as a conservative coach.  But never won a ring w Marino winging it all over the field.
 

 

[GunnerBill]

On 12/22/2019 at 2:35 AM, bills11 said:

The only conservative great coach I can think of would be from soccer Jose Mourinho ..I agree with your premise though ..Sean needs to add aggressiveness to his repertoire Everytime we get ahead we basically go into clock wasting mode up 17-13 the gameplan needed more aggressiveness not conservative clock management .

 

There are plenty of very successful conservative soccer coaches. 

 

I don't happen to think McDermott is that conservative to be honest. 

[Kelly the Dog]

1 hour ago, dave mcbride said:

Being conservative means at least in part being a slave to routine and highly averse to variety/novelty. Lombardi was the equivalent of someone who ate excellent pancakes for breakfast, a very good cheeseburger for lunch, and a nicely cooked piece of steak and mashed potatoes for dinner (followed by a bowl of solid vanilla ice cream) every day at the same times for seven straight years. No Thai or Ethiopian food for him. 

He lived in Green Bay, Wisconsin! The closest Thai and Ethiopian food was in Thailand and Ethiopia!

[Solomon Grundy]

On December 21, 2019 at 9:40 PM, Kelly the Dog said:

The guy that pressured and blitzed every play? 

He had Lawrence Taylor. Taylor was the best at his position pressuring QBs. Blitzing wasn't necessary. Didn't see Parcells blitzing his DBs much

On December 22, 2019 at 4:38 PM, Kelly the Dog said:

Levy of the full time no huddle attack offense. That's another great one. Hilarious. 

You can thank Ted Marchibroda for the offensive method

[jkx2]

On 12/21/2019 at 9:32 PM, Kelly the Dog said:

Neither of those were. Staubach was one of the most revolutionary QBs. Bob Hayes was the opposite. 

 

Knox was not an overly conservative coach. On either side of the ball. When he had Ferguson and Cribbs here we were not conservative. 

 

 

Chuck's nickname was "Ground  Chuck" for God's sakes.

Edited December 28, 2019 by jkx2

[Call_Of_Ktulu]

I think the offense is playing conservative.

 

1. Because Allen is still very young and so much personal on the offense side of the ball is new.

 

2. Our defense is a top 3 unit and McD is leaning on them to carry the team. 

[MJS]

15 hours ago, Kelly the Dog said:

I understand and concede the point.

 

I remember that team as rolling up points and killing people. But I was young.

 

It depends on your definition of conservative though. When you are running the ball down a team's throat and they cannot stop you, and you roll up points and win games and championships with an attacking defense led by Ray Nitchske I just don't call that being "conservative." Just running is not being conservative when it is working and you are dominating. If it WASNT working and you were running all the time then yes, that would be overly conservative.

That is where I stand. Saban and Marv were better overall than Knox, who was consistently a very good and not great coach, IMO. I did love the 1980-81 Knox coached Bills though as a team.

You seem to be saying that anything that works is aggressive and anything that doesn't work is conservative.

[MJS]

12 hours ago, billsfan89 said:

I find the Patriots under Billy B to be mostly conservative. They tend to play in a way that is super disciplined and philosophically designed to limit mistakes and capitalize on their opponents mistakes. Yes they take some chances here and there like any coach but overall I think they mostly play to force you to lose the game. Marty Schotenheimer was a coach who had a lot of regular season success playing a conservative type of game. Bill Cowher was also a very conservative coach who let his ground game and defense win a lot of games who won a lot and did win a Super Bowl. 

 

I think there are actually a lot of "great" conservative coaches. But we tend to attribute aggressiveness in coaching to winning when in the end selected moments of aggression are outliers as opposed to the coaches general nature. 

Plus Belichick is a defensive minded coach. I've noticed on offense they usually take what the defense gives them and take what points are there. If that means kicking a bunch of field goals, they'll do that. They go for it on fourth down or take shots down the field when most teams would. Nothing has ever been all that innovative. They just execute better than everyone else and play disciplined football. Seems like a conservative approach on offense to me.

[Rochesterfan]

On 12/22/2019 at 7:13 PM, BringBackOrton said:

@Kelly the Dog‘s premise is that passing is aggressive but also running is aggressive if you’re Lombardi. Going for the kill throwing deep is aggressive but playing for overtime isn’t conservative if you’re good.

 

Time to end the topic when the guy who set the discussion can’t even keep straight his own parameters.

 

Totally agree - He calls McDermott conservative with no real definition, but then argues with no good reason why others are not.

 

It is a poorly thought out premise with no basis in reality.   McDermott is not overly conservative or aggressive by any measure.  He goes for it on 4th down as much or more than others.  He tries for TDs rather than FGs as shown by their Redzone TD percents and going for it on the goal line.  His run to pass ratio does not lean overly conservative and we have had games where the team starts out with 10-15 passes right from the get go.  Definitely not conservative.

 

His defense is a zone based defense meaning he wants to flood zones, but he mixes up the defenses and attacks and blitzes in a normal way.  It is not overly conservative - nor is it super aggressive.

 

The biggest thing to me is how we completely miss the changes in his coaching and people are still basis things off his first year.  McDermott started off with a weak team and was much more conservative.  He had a bad QB in Taylor that he did not trust and did not instill confidence in the passing game.  He kicked lots of FGs and punted on almost all 4th downs.  It lead to blowouts, but he understood the team was weak and even when getting blown out he stayed conservative.  Now he is a totally different coach.  He trusts JA more and has been rewarded more - so he goes for more 4th downs and punts less.  He passes more and has one of the better Red Zone scoring teams.  He has 2 WRs that are putting up career years.

 

Do not make up your mind on whether McDermott is conservative or not - he is evolving as his players grow and change.  My guess is if the offense gets 1-2 more players this off-season and are a bit more explosive- he becomes more aggressive.

 

Now do I believe he is going to be Doug Pederson level aggressive - Nope, but everything points to him continuing to move above the middle of the pack as the team becomes better.

 

Now the final thing on this thread - many types of coaches win Super Bowls and sometimes they are conservative and sometimes aggressive, but the problem is that successful coaches that are conservative- do not get labeled that way.  Lombardi was ultra conservative at the end of the conservative era, but it worked for his team.  Marv - even with the no huddle- was super conservative.  The offensive philosophy does not change his coaching style.  Doug Pederson is super aggressive, but it backfires on him on several occasions, but was enough to win at the biggest time.  BB - like McDermott - falls squarely in the middle and was more aggressive at times and has been more conservative at other times.  There is no one right way - you need to have the proper feel of your team and push the right buttons at the right time.

[oldmanfan]

Classic thread.  Ask a leading question, get numerous answers showing why you might be wrong, then either refuse to accept the answer or change the question.

[NewEra]

On 12/21/2019 at 6:19 PM, ScottLaw said:

I hate everyone and have hated everyone since everyone had arrived. Hate.  Everyone.

Fixed.

[NewEra]

On 12/22/2019 at 5:52 PM, jrober38 said:

My biggest issue with McDermott is he so clearly takes his foot off the gas once we get a lead. 

 

I get that he's a defensive guy, and he trusts his D, but our play calling is clearly different when we have a lead in the second half. 

The world must be coming to an end!!  I agree with something you said.

 

to me, this is McDs most conservative area. I think he can be aggressive at times (going for it on 4th) more so than bills coaches of the past.  He had been bringing the blitz recently (prior to the pat game).  I feel that he has gotten more aggressive based on his personnel and will continue to as our personnel improves.  
 

I’d almost rather be losing by less than a TD than leading by less than a TD at the end of the game.  With a lead in the 4th, from my recollection, it’s either always run run pass punt or run run run punt.  We had one game (forget the opponent) where we were able to get some first downs to secure the lead and the win.  
 

That’s really the only problem I have with McD being conservative.

 

[Kelly the Dog]

10 hours ago, MJS said:

You seem to be saying that anything that works is aggressive and anything that doesn't work is conservative.

Not at all. I am saying that if you have a dominant mauling offense that piles up points and defenses cannot stop you that is not conservative just because you don't throw it all over the field, especially combined with an attacking defense.

[Kelly the Dog]

5 hours ago, Rochesterfan said:

 

Totally agree - He calls McDermott conservative with no real definition, but then argues with no good reason why others are not.

 

It is a poorly thought out premise with no basis in reality.   McDermott is not overly conservative or aggressive by any measure.  He goes for it on 4th down as much or more than others.  He tries for TDs rather than FGs as shown by their Redzone TD percents and going for it on the goal line.  His run to pass ratio does not lean overly conservative and we have had games where the team starts out with 10-15 passes right from the get go.  Definitely not conservative.

 

His defense is a zone based defense meaning he wants to flood zones, but he mixes up the defenses and attacks and blitzes in a normal way.  It is not overly conservative - nor is it super aggressive.

 

The biggest thing to me is how we completely miss the changes in his coaching and people are still basis things off his first year.  McDermott started off with a weak team and was much more conservative.  He had a bad QB in Taylor that he did not trust and did not instill confidence in the passing game.  He kicked lots of FGs and punted on almost all 4th downs.  It lead to blowouts, but he understood the team was weak and even when getting blown out he stayed conservative.  Now he is a totally different coach.  He trusts JA more and has been rewarded more - so he goes for more 4th downs and punts less.  He passes more and has one of the better Red Zone scoring teams.  He has 2 WRs that are putting up career years.

 

Do not make up your mind on whether McDermott is conservative or not - he is evolving as his players grow and change.  My guess is if the offense gets 1-2 more players this off-season and are a bit more explosive- he becomes more aggressive.

 

Now do I believe he is going to be Doug Pederson level aggressive - Nope, but everything points to him continuing to move above the middle of the pack as the team becomes better.

 

Now the final thing on this thread - many types of coaches win Super Bowls and sometimes they are conservative and sometimes aggressive, but the problem is that successful coaches that are conservative- do not get labeled that way.  Lombardi was ultra conservative at the end of the conservative era, but it worked for his team.  Marv - even with the no huddle- was super conservative.  The offensive philosophy does not change his coaching style.  Doug Pederson is super aggressive, but it backfires on him on several occasions, but was enough to win at the biggest time.  BB - like McDermott - falls squarely in the middle and was more aggressive at times and has been more conservative at other times.  There is no one right way - you need to have the proper feel of your team and push the right buttons at the right time.

I agree with a lot of this, and earlier I also said it depends on your definition of conservative. Apparently there are a lot more definitions than I imagined.

 

But 1) no conservative coach is always conservative and no aggressive or non-conservative coach is always aggressive, 2) going on fourth and one is not usually even a conservative v. aggressive by nature choice, it is going by the numbers and game specific. McDermott is clearly a conservative coach by nature on offense, defense, timeouts, stepping on the gas and trying to put teams away (which he never does), punting, etc. That's not even in question IMO.

[Big Turk]

Aren't most coaches by nature conservative?

On 12/21/2019 at 9:18 PM, Kelly the Dog said:

I'm trying to think of one. In any sport. 

 

Don't make this a hate McDermott stance or thread. I like him. I'm glad we have him. But it's arguable that his blatant conservative nature holds this team back. 

 

There are no facts. This is ALL opinion. And some of his conservative nature surely helps. We're 10-5 and will likely finish 11-5. 

 

But the object is to win it all. Josh is a unique talent. We need to score more points or there is little chance to win it all and that is the object. 

 

I think he needs to relinquish some of his dearly held nature in order to be great. I don't think you can be great without a killer instinct. 

 

McDermott is conservative? Has any Bills coach ever gone for it on 4th down more than McDermott has in situations where he could have kicked a FG or punted and wasn't facing end of half/game situations?

 

I don't think I could name one.

Don't understand how McDermott gets labelled as conservative when he is actually aggressive.

Edited December 28, 2019 by matter2003

[JAMIEBUF12]

Marty Schottenheimer?

 

[Kelly the Dog]

1 hour ago, JAMIEBUF12 said:

Marty Schottenheimer?

 

He is a good example of what I would call a very good but not great coach, and his conservatism when he got into a big game or the playoffs was his downfall. This is a guy who was fired after a 14-2 season IIRC for being too conservative overall and playing it safe.

[oldmanfan]

4 minutes ago, Kelly the Dog said:

He is a good example of what I would call a very good but not great coach, and his conservatism when he got into a big game or the playoffs was his downfall. This is a guy who was fired after a 14-2 season IIRC for being too conservative overall and playing it safe.

Why don’t you provide us all with an exact definition of the following:

 

1.  Conservative

 

2.  Great

[Big Turk]

51 minutes ago, ScottLaw said:

So if you go for it occasionally on 4th down you are no longer conservative despite what you do over the course of the rest of the games/season?

 

If its to be believed, McDermott allows Daboll to call what he wants on offense without interference which would mean Daboll is the conservative one not McDermott.