The definition of "Falling up" - Greg Schiano named DC for the New England Patriots
As reported by Jim McBride. Wow. He needs to go buy lottery tickets NOW.
BREAKING: #Patriots will officially name Greg Schiano as their defensive coordinator, a league source confirmed. https://t.co/0RjKI6mu1Y
— Jim McBride (@globejimmcbride) February 6, 2019
February 6th, 2019 at 12:41 PM ^
I would laugh if it were any other team, but the Patriots seemingly can do no wrong.
Helps that he'll have Bill looking over his shoulder.
February 6th, 2019 at 12:46 PM ^
True. But how do you go from not being good enough to be Ryan Day's DC to being the preferred DC choice of Bill Belichick?
Given that the only Patriots Defensive Coordinator to NOT get a HC job in the NFL in the past 20 years was Dean Peas I think it's safe to say Greg will be back soon as well.
February 6th, 2019 at 1:01 PM ^
That's probably the point. Belichick needs someone who has a decent understanding of football defenses and how they're supposed to work, but not someone who is so uber talented that they become too big of a personality on the staff. His DC's are probably mostly there to fill a spot and help out with the stuff that Bill is too busy for/doesn't want to do.
February 6th, 2019 at 1:35 PM ^
Guys like Belichick (or Nick Saban) seem to make the coaches around them perform better than the actually are (ahem...Matt Patricia). Belichick is the greatest NFL coach of all time. Perhaps the greatest professional sports coach of all time (maybe Scotty Bowman and Alex Furguson are in the conversation). For an assistant to be successful at New England he needs to be technically proficient, work hard and follow the plan.
Maybe that's why Belichick's assistants have a hard time on their own.
February 6th, 2019 at 1:39 PM ^
You passed on Phil Jackson for... Alex Ferguson? Don't get me wrong, he was a great manager, but I don't think we're in GOAT territory with him. He didn't exactly light the Champions League on fire, and generally fielded the best roster in the Premiership for most of his wins.
February 6th, 2019 at 2:00 PM ^
Phil Jackson won 10 rings with bums? Oh thats right he had some of the greatest players to ever play the game.
February 6th, 2019 at 2:45 PM ^
This is a lazy take. He got more out of superstar talent than anyone else. He was a master at managing personalities.
Did MJ ever get a ring without Phil Jackson?
Did Pippen?
Did Kobe?
No.
The only superstar that Phil Jackson coached that got a ring with someone else was Shaq and he did with Pat Riley and DWade.
Phil Jackson won 11 rings. The most all time. Almost every coach that has won championships has had some of the greatest players to ever play the game because the NBA is such a star driven league. Steve Kerr right now has Curry and Durrant to go along with 3 other allstars. Pop had Duncan and Robinson, to go along with allstars Parker, Ginobili, and Kawhi Lenoard (later on). Pat Riley had Shaq and DWade in Miami and the showtime Lakers in LA. The list goes on an on. You match a couple of star players with a good coach and you win titles. Jackson has just won more than anyone else.
The 2004 Pistons title is one of the few exceptions. Making it all the more awesome!
February 6th, 2019 at 3:43 PM ^
Cmon. Michael Jordan did not need Phil Jackson. Phil...and Tex get credit for sure but almost any Coach worth a shit was putting a ring on with that team.
February 6th, 2019 at 4:18 PM ^
But we aren't talking about a ring, we are talking about six rings. MJ played the majority of his career without Phil Jackson but never won a ring without him. MJ probably would have won a couple regardless, but the question is do you think he would have gotten to six?
February 6th, 2019 at 6:26 PM ^
Like Doug Collins?
February 6th, 2019 at 8:54 PM ^
....and what has phil done lately....wait for it....NOTHING! He is sparky anderson!
February 7th, 2019 at 1:26 AM ^
Glen Rice won a championship with and without Phil Jackson. Ive never seen players more unconcerned to win it all than after Rice won it in LA. I never wondered what was more fun after that season, college or pro.
February 8th, 2019 at 11:12 AM ^
I know this thread has moved well past this, but I hate this argument. Look at the Bulls after Jordan first retires. Win almost the same amount of games, get to the ECF, and miss the finals because of a horrible call . . . with a team full of scrubs. Jackson is a good coach.
February 6th, 2019 at 2:10 PM ^
Did Phil Jackson ever win a championship with a less talented team?
Maybe. And he should get a ton of credit for getting the most out of the teams he did coach in a very ego driven world. Very few people could do what he did.
But he wasn't exactly leading the Clippers for 15 some odd years either.
February 6th, 2019 at 2:23 PM ^
I could have coached the Bulls to at least one championship.
February 6th, 2019 at 3:54 PM ^
We can say that he never proved himself to be a turnaround guy - he never inherited a 15-win team and then took it to the heights. I even suspect he wouldn't be that good at handling a young, struggling roster.
But he was incredibly good at taking talented teams and getting them to play together and reach their potential. Eleven championships in 20 years is nuts.
February 6th, 2019 at 2:32 PM ^
Well, if fielding the best roster is a negative then Jackson, with Jordan and Bryant, must be ruled out immediately. I posit that basketball is the most easily effected by the presence of transcendent talent. LeBron, Jordan and Kobe, with a decent supporting cast, wind up in the finals almost all the time. Football and Futbol are, IMHO, highly dependent on a vision, a plan and the assembly of an entire roster consistent with the plan. So what I am saying is that a pro basketball coach lucky enough to have a LeBron or Jordan will, unless he is a complete idiot or egomaniac, achieve fantastic results. And when LeBron and Jordan leave, the gravy train goes with them.
February 6th, 2019 at 2:07 PM ^
Belichick's guys have a hard time on their own for a variety of reasons. But the biggest is that most of them only know ONE way to do things: the Patriots / Belichick way. That's fine and dandy when the head coach is in COMPLETE charge of the organization but that is very rare at the NFL level. Most of these guys have to answer to or at least acknowledge GM's and other player personnel people within their organizations. And all organizations, even in the copycat NFL, have different ways of doing business and different cultures. You can't just go into say, Detroit, and start being a bull in a china shop, and state we're going to do it MY way. Too many other people in the Lions' organization don't have a vested interest in that.
It's much easier to "change the culture" in college when the header is really in charge of it all and can much more easily replace the players who don't "buy in."
I think a Belichick assistant would be a fantastic hire for an expansion franchise that wouldn't have to deal with any current culture issues and could build it up from scratch.
February 6th, 2019 at 2:44 PM ^
Ever wonder if Belichick worried about getting buy in? He walked in, said we're doing it my way, and then did it his way. If you didn't like it tough shit. And if you want just one reason the Lions have sucked forever is your comment "Too many other people in the Lions organization don't have a vested interest in that."
February 6th, 2019 at 3:31 PM ^
Belichick probably didn't get full buy in Day 1 in NE. He was a failed head coach in Cleveland getting a second chance. But Kraft bought into him and his vision quickly and what helped solidify that organization was winning 3 Super Bowls in 4 years in the early 00s. At that point the organization began to built around him and the guys he developed as coaches in-house.
February 7th, 2019 at 7:30 PM ^
I couldn’t agree more with your assessment. Executing the plan flawlessly is different than developing the plan.
February 6th, 2019 at 1:18 PM ^
maybe Day is total bozo
February 6th, 2019 at 1:22 PM ^
I think Unicycle might be on to something here.
The thing with being a DC in New England is that Bill Belichick is the brilliant mind that makes the train run. In Schiano he gets a guy who knows defense, who has significant experience in the league... and who can work well without a net while still allowing Belichick to be "the man."
It seems like this is a play for stability at the position, so that Bill doesn't have to teach the whole program to a new guy every year or two.
Being a DC at OSU under an offensive coach means running the whole show yourself (and recruiting, and working with guys that have strict time limitations compared to the NFL). Being a DC at New England means that you are closer to a right-hand-man to the HC, implementing the diabolical schemes the HC devises, while chipping in some of your own knowledge and experience.
That's just my guess.
February 6th, 2019 at 2:25 PM ^
The dynamics for Schiano at OSU changed a lot.
Rather than working for his self proclaimed best friend, he finds himself working for a new boss. Schiano is older than Day, been at OSU longer and has experience as a HC in CFB which Day does not. Schiano was actively trying for a HC job too. It sounds like it could be uncomfortable for both of them.
I'm ignoring the rumors that Meyer was also look to replace Schiano. Cycling through coordinators appears to be part of his coaching philosophy and that need not apply to Day.
NE is a much better fit. Whether he can meet Belichick's standards for the job remains to be seen.
February 6th, 2019 at 1:24 PM ^
Coordinating in the NFL is so much different than in college. Were OSU's defensive problems under Schiano the result of a bad gameplan, or simply bad skill development? I honestly don't know but I would imagine this was weighed by Belichick
February 6th, 2019 at 2:32 PM ^
Schiano is a good DC. Ryan Day tried to keep him but he wanted to go back to the NFL. Our problems on defense stemmed from two terrible position coaches that were let go (Davis and Grinch)
February 6th, 2019 at 2:49 PM ^
Because Ryan Day is woefully underqualified to be head coach at OSU and has no idea what he's doing.
February 6th, 2019 at 3:44 PM ^
Same way you go from not being good enough to be Texas Tech's college football head coach but are good enough to be the Arizona Cardinals NFL head coach?
Lot of failing up this offseason.
And in all honesty, I'm not sure how good Belichick's DCs are/need to be. Romeo Crennel was terrible on his own, Matt Patricia oversaw a big decline in the Lions defense. Almost seems like that position is a placeholder while Belichick does everything.
February 6th, 2019 at 12:44 PM ^
belicheck is the real DC.
February 6th, 2019 at 12:45 PM ^
I like Matt Patricia, but does it really matter who Belichick's DC is? We all know who runs that defense.
February 6th, 2019 at 1:15 PM ^
+1 for smart, succinct and insightful comment. We don't often get a "3 for 3" like that...
February 6th, 2019 at 1:41 PM ^
So did you ever get rid of those Aerosmith tickets?
February 6th, 2019 at 1:53 PM ^
I had 34 pairs last time around - where were you?
February 6th, 2019 at 1:17 PM ^
it matters to the DC. Like a previous poster just expressed. It's a pipeline to a head coaching gig Schiano just needs to make the slurpee run in between two a days and he'll be named head of the Panthers in two years.
February 6th, 2019 at 7:33 PM ^
I was wondering if that's part of the reason Belichick hired Schiano. His disastrous tenure in Tampa Bay makes him less likely to get a head coaching gig.
February 6th, 2019 at 12:46 PM ^
Where's the outcry from Pats fans about Schiano looking the other way while at PSU?
February 6th, 2019 at 7:15 PM ^
Boston sports, that bastion of socially-conscious takes.
February 6th, 2019 at 12:47 PM ^
Maybe once Brady retires, the Patriots will finally start to suck again
February 6th, 2019 at 1:16 PM ^
We have some evidence that this won't be the case. The Patriots are 13-6 in meaningful games Brady did not play in (the 2008 lost season and the suspension a few years ago).
They may decline, but as long as that division continues to be a cesspool they will continue to get to the playoffs with Belichick in charge.
February 6th, 2019 at 1:38 PM ^
I think both Brady and Belichick go at the same time.
February 6th, 2019 at 2:13 PM ^
I think Belichick wants to prove he can do it without Brady.
There have always been hints in that organization that, while they believe Brady is excellent, they think they can have great success without him.
February 6th, 2019 at 2:57 PM ^
He has done it without Brady. The Pats won 11 games with Matt Cassell as their starting QB. He took the Browns to the playoff. There's plenty of evidence that he is a great HC. It just happen that Brady came along and both were great on their own.
February 6th, 2019 at 3:29 PM ^
He had some good teams with the Browns, especially in their last year in Cleveland. Would have been interested to see what that team could have done without the announcement of the move to Baltimore upending the entire season.
February 6th, 2019 at 3:34 PM ^
I meant win a Super Bowl. Not win 11 games in a year.
February 6th, 2019 at 5:03 PM ^
Bill Belichick is an all-time great coach, but he ain't winning jack shit once Brady retires.
February 6th, 2019 at 12:47 PM ^
Dynasty:Over
February 6th, 2019 at 1:00 PM ^
Everyone knows Belichick is the DC. The dude is a genius. Entirely new defensive scheme specifically for the Super Bowl. Matt Patricia -- and countless others -- continuously prove it is BB and BB alone on D.
February 6th, 2019 at 1:23 PM ^
In fairness Belichick took some cues from Patricia's handling of the Rams earlier in the year.
Belichick has always done this. Scheme for the opponent. It's his calling card. And it works in the NFL, where you have the resources to do it.
February 6th, 2019 at 1:43 PM ^
If you listen to Belichick's interviews, he's very honest about who he steals his ideas from: everybody. The guy is an incredible coach, but he's no primadonna. In fact, his modest and even shy way with people belies most of the cliches that people throw at him and the Pats. The same with Brady.