If Nick loses these next two games - i want him gone.  We do not need any more "coaches on the rise" 

At this point i would bring in Billicheck 

6 hours ago, NOTW said:

So from all that, you did cite one thing you think he does well: teaching and developing players.

I get what you're saying about people changing their argument. I personally haven't though. I have no problem with Nick being a CEO Head coach. But whether the HC calls the plays or not, the HC is in fact responsible for literally everything that happens. Last year he didn't do anything to fix the offense. On defense, his only change was absolutely horrible: moving from DeSai to Patricia. His game decisions have been questionable and at times cost them games, as in the Falcons game on Monday.

So him not calling plays is supposed to free him up for game management, which he's failing at and needs to improve.

Moore deserves criticism as well. But I also said in the offseason to expect it to take 3-4 weeks into the season to see how the team performs with the new coordinators and scheme.

Nick's decision to not play staters in preseason has once again caused rust and lack of preparation. Last year he said he realized that was a mistake and that he should probably play starters in preseason...then he made that same mistake again this year.

Fangio was supposed to bring consistency but his defense sucks. At least Moore's offense is showing something and I feel more confident in the offense improving. Defense is part talent and part coaching. Offense has the talent. I've said repeatedly Moore deserves blame as well, so does Hurts. Everyone is responsible.

But to your point of saying people are just calling him a cheerleader, well part of that is guys joking or venting. It begs the question: what does he actually do? Wait to call timeout and wait until 4th down to tell Moore to go for it or not and...what else?

If any aspect of the team is not performing, the head coach should do something about it. The HC and Coordinator share blame.

I mean if you want me to be completely honest, for people who mostly deal in evidence, Sirianni is a really similar situation to dealing with a devil's proof. One of Sirianni's best attributes early in his tenure was his willingness to be accepting that other people in the building may be a better choice for certain things, and to adjust accordingly. We've had several coaches this millennium that wouldn't do that, usually to their downfall. Unfortunately, there wasn't really anyone to do that with last season.

The issue that brings up, however, is because he's not overly clear about who does one thing, or another thing, and the Eagles media coverage during offseason and installs being dismal compared to in the Lehigh era, you really can't tell what parts are his doing and what aren't. Now me personally, I don't think this is a problem and think that's normal - I think level headed fans know that a lot of games are won and lost on Tuesday-Saturday, not Sunday, and most of those aspects aren't visible, only the results of them are.

However, when narrative comes into play, it becomes a real problem. Consider Sirianni, and Gardner-Johnson. They've, so far, been treated as opposites by the fanbase. Gardner-Johnson, when lacking evidence, receives praise by default. Sirianni, when lacking evidence, receives criticism by default. With the traditional egomaniac head coach model, the one positive that does give them is no one is confused as to what is and is not their job. This is really important for fans who think that they have very put together opinions (but often don't) rather than simply being able to say 'I am unsure, honestly.'

When you call plays, what you do is directly showcased in front of everyone. When you don't call plays, for most of what a (head coach, coordinator) does, you can only understand the effects tangentially. 

As for the Fangio thing. Yeah. I think it's important to remember that all our successful head coaches of the millennium only had to ever think about one side of the ball. Andy didn't think about the defense, Doug never had to either because he was "gifted" (I use this term loosely) Schwartz from Howie. Nick has sadly not been granted (read: Doug) the same situation.



 

33 minutes ago, AmericanEagle77 said:

I mean if you want me to be completely honest, for people who mostly deal in evidence, Sirianni is a really similar situation to dealing with a devil's proof. One of Sirianni's best attributes early in his tenure was his willingness to be accepting that other people in the building may be a better choice for certain things, and to adjust accordingly. We've had several coaches this millennium that wouldn't do that, usually to their downfall. Unfortunately, there wasn't really anyone to do that with last season.

The issue that brings up, however, is because he's not overly clear about who does one thing, or another thing, and the Eagles media coverage during offseason and installs being dismal compared to in the Lehigh era, you really can't tell what parts are his doing and what aren't. Now me personally, I don't think this is a problem and think that's normal - I think level headed fans know that a lot of games are won and lost on Tuesday-Saturday, not Sunday, and most of those aspects aren't visible, only the results of them are.

However, when narrative comes into play, it becomes a real problem. Consider Sirianni, and Gardner-Johnson. They've, so far, been treated as opposites by the fanbase. Gardner-Johnson, when lacking evidence, receives praise by default. Sirianni, when lacking evidence, receives criticism by default. With the traditional egomaniac head coach model, the one positive that does give them is no one is confused as to what is and is not their job. This is really important for fans who think that they have very put together opinions (but often don't) rather than simply being able to say 'I am unsure, honestly.'

When you call plays, what you do is directly showcased in front of everyone. When you don't call plays, for most of what a (head coach, coordinator) does, you can only understand the effects tangentially. 

As for the Fangio thing. Yeah. I think it's important to remember that all our successful head coaches of the millennium only had to ever think about one side of the ball. Andy didn't think about the defense, Doug never had to either because he was "gifted" (I use this term loosely) Schwartz from Howie. Nick has sadly not been granted (read: Doug) the same situation.



 

 

2 hours ago, EazyEaglez said:

Reid did move up from near the end of the draft to take Mahomes when so many others passed on him. Say what you want about McNabb, but Donovan was by far the best quarterback taken in that draft. Let’s not forget Reid drafted the only quarterback ever to win the Eagles a SB as well. I think Andy knows a thing or two about quarterbacks. 

I don't doubt that he knows a thing or two, I'm just saying he would've been in a different scenario and who knows if the team would've needed a QB. 

3 hours ago, SinCityEaglesFan2 said:

If Nick loses these next two games - i want him gone.  We do not need any more "coaches on the rise" 

At this point i would bring in Billicheck 

Sadly if you want the Eagles to drop the finesse bias, your only real option are people who are very established. You'd need someone more like Vrabel or Belichick yeah.

I don't want a disgruntled team, so pass on Belichick.  Vrabel hasn't done anything to warrant wanting him either. 54% win pct over the current coach sitting at 66%.  Fans are funny.  I'm all for re-evaluating whether Nick should be the coach after the season, but right now you'd be pretty stupid to fire him.

If we get embarassed in the next two games and the defense has the same lazy performance i would say some changes would have to be made. I dont know if firing Siriani would fix the defense though.

Can’t see fangio being sacking half way through the season but honestly Sirianni would thrown anyone under the bus to keep his job. 
 

 

3 hours ago, rrfierce said:

Can’t see fangio being sacking half way through the season but honestly Sirianni would thrown anyone under the bus to keep his job. 
 

 

Don't forget how Reid threw Juan Castillo under the bus.

2 hours ago, Procus said:

Don't forget how Reid threw Juan Castillo under the bus.

Castillo was a long time OL coach serving in his very first stint as a defensive coach (that never should have happened).  Fangio is a looooong time DC.  Huge difference.  

12 hours ago, time2rock said:

Castillo was a long time OL coach serving in his very first stint as a defensive coach (that never should have happened).  Fangio is a looooong time DC.  Huge difference.  

IIRC, Spags was available at the time.  For the life of me, I'll never figure out why AR didn't hire him from the getgo

Siri is terrible at late game management.  4th and 1 at the 20 with less than 15 seconds left and you are scoreless, you need points going into halftime.  Kick the FG.  Even if you get a first down, very small chance of getting a TD and too much can go wrong.

He needs to be fired.

Sirianni was accelerated through the coaching ranks way too fast. He's a WR's coach masquerading as a HC. He didn't earn his stripes. Now he's in way over his head.

13 minutes ago, PoconoDon said:

Sirianni was accelerated through the coaching ranks way too fast. He's a WR's coach masquerading as a HC. He didn't earn his stripes. Now he's in way over his head.

Being aggressive is great.  Being reckless is not.

@AmericanEagle77 Head Coach Siri is to blame for going for it on 4th down twice when he should have kicked the FG. That's not OC Moore.

 

 

 

 

Another brilliant decision by the HC.  He has to show he's smarter than everybody else and it keeps blowing up in his face.  It will likely cost the team the game again.

Congrats to the Birds on a big win.  They won in spite of some bonehead in game decisions by the HC

Wait... we won...

Not taking the points before the half was awful. Going for the 60yd FG was awful.

But we won...

I don't understand football any longer

I think the Siriani hate is overblown. He’s become the target now and I still think that was a good call last week, the execution was just terrible.

Hated the call on 4th and 1 though. Mate no sense with only 1 timeout and 14 seconds left.