Pete Carroll-what went wrong?

[upstater1]

As Parcells used to say, you are what your record says you are...
bottom line is : a 5-11 team is a 5-11 team.

Again, if Grier wasn't the problem, it's not like the talent pool was that dfferent from 1999 to 2000. Carrol went 8-8, Belichick 5-11.

Also, when Carroll took over, he went 10-6 with a team that was 11-5 with Parcells the year before.

I'm not saying Carroll is a great caoch, a coach as good as Parcells or Belichick, but given the same core of players he didn't do much worse. Therefore, he isn't the main reason the team got so bad in 2000.

You're forgetting the fact that Belichick cut and slashed half the roster in 2000 and instead went with old men "hold the fort" guys and undrafted free agents.

Let me just give one example of the kind of cutting Belichick did that year. He cut Greg Spires because Spires didn't fit into his system, and Spires went on to near Pro-Bowl status at Tampa Bay.

 

[upstater1]

Speaking of Carroll's assistants...

Ernie Zampesie was Switzer's OC here in Dallas(was pretty much forced on him by Jerry after Jimmy left). And having lived in New Orleans for many years, I was familiar with Steve Sidwell as Jim Mora Sr's DC.

What were your opinions on Zampesie? Here in Dallas-he ran the vertical passing game, which was quite different from Norv Turner's system. Eventually, even Aikman, Emmitt, and Michael got frustrated with it.(red zone O suffered tremendously)

What were your opinions on Sidwell? He ran a very stout D for the Saints(having the "Dome Patrol" of Pat Swilling/Vaugh Johnson/Sam Milles/Rickey Jackson helped alot too)-their D was overlooked b/c the national sports media et al always focused on their pathetic O that weighed this team down.

Zampese Bad
Sidwell Good

 

[RDS11]

You're forgetting the fact that Belichick cut and slashed half the roster in 2000 and instead went with old men "hold the fort" guys and undrafted free agents.

That's my point exactly...Carroll was stuck with a roster that wasn't any good, the proof being that Belichick cut half of it.

Getting good players was Grier's job, not Carroll's.

As for Spires, he was a very good 4-3 end. Under a 3-4 defense, he would have had to be converted to OLB, but I don't think he had Adelius Thomas type speed. But Spires was the rare exceptions. Most cut were overpriced average players or over the hill players, like Coates and Armstrong, that the Pats had not been able to replace under Grier. I see the same thing happening with the Chargers : Tomlinson is not the same player he used to be, but nobody has the guts to bench him and put Sproles or a more productice back at his place. It already has cost them Turner...

 

[upstater1]

That's my point exactly...Carroll was stuck with a roster that wasn't any good, the proof being that Belichick cut half of it.

Getting good players was Grier's job, not Carroll's.

As for Spires, he was a very good 4-3 end. Under a 3-4 defense, he would have had to be converted to OLB, but I don't think he had Adelius Thomas type speed. But Spires was the rare exceptions. Most cut were overpriced average players or over the hill players, like Coates and Armstrong, that the Pats had not been able to replace under Grier. I see the same thing happening with the Chargers : Tomlinson is not the same player he used to be, but nobody has the guts to bench him and put Sproles or a more productice back at his place. It already has cost them Turner...

Well Coates did go on to have a pretty good year for the Ravens.

I do remember Grier's drafts to be pretty bad, and yes they were. But when you look at the list again, they weren't as bad as we remember. He brought in 3 solid players a year, guys like Glenn, Milloy, Bruschi, Edwards, etc. Compare them to Pioli's drafts.

The real problem is that the GM and Coach were not exactly working in tandem. Perhaps only Katzenmoyer was a player that Carroll really wanted.

 

[RDS11]

If I remember correctly, Tebucky Jones was probably more of a Carroll pick. At the time, Carroll was excited with the multiple possibilities for this 6'2'' super athlete. Carroll being an ex-defensive back coach, it was a great challenge for him to convert Jones, who had played only 1 year at safety, from safety to corner. Didn't work too well...

Coates was 2nd string with the Ravens (to Sharpe). I think he had 10 catchs for the entire season. But he won a Super Bowl...the Ravens offense was terrible that year, they went 4 games without scoring a TD. I wouldn't say he had a great year, being a backup on a bad offensive squad. He retired after the Super Bowl.

Armstrong was re-signed during training camp since nobody could do better, but the offensive line in 2000 was terrible. Remember Grant Williams ?

As for the 1996 draft, I'm not ready to give all the credit to Grier. At the time, I'm pretty sure the draft board had been built with some input from Parcells. Allright, Parcells didn't like the Glenn pick and left the room afterward, but if we look at it objectively, nobbody outside of Parcells was able to get something out of Glenn. He was uncoachable under Belichick and Holmgren too. Marvin Harrison was drafted 10 slots later, Moulds was also available then, so if Grier really thought the Pats needed a receiver, why not trade down ?

Chris Canty might have been one of the worst pick ever. At Troy Brown retirement press conference, he mentioned that Carroll had to ask him and Zolak to go easy at Canty in practices so his confidence wouldn't be shattered.

Robert Edwards was a great pick, but again it was done only because Grier had given multi-million contracts to Lane and Rucci and unable to match the Jets offer to Martin. Better management and they would have kept Martin and used the pick for something they really needed, like a tackle or a guard.

Again, I'm not saying that Carroll is a great coach, but the main reason for the Pats downfall was Grier. Grier also destroyed a few Texans drafts in their early years.

 

[upstater1]

Remember Grant Williams ?

As for the 1996 draft, I'm not ready to give all the credit to Grier. At the time, I'm pretty sure the draft board had been built with some input from Parcells. Allright, Parcells didn't like the Glenn pick and left the room afterward, but if we look at it objectively, nobbody outside of Parcells was able to get something out of Glenn. He was uncoachable under Belichick and Holmgren too. Marvin Harrison was drafted 10 slots later, Moulds was also available then, so if Grier really thought the Pats needed a receiver, why not trade down ?

Chris Canty might have been one of the worst pick ever. At Troy Brown retirement press conference, he mentioned that Carroll had to ask him and Zolak to go easy at Canty in practices so his confidence wouldn't be shattered.

Robert Edwards was a great pick, but again it was done only because Grier had given multi-million contracts to Lane and Rucci and unable to match the Jets offer to Martin. Better management and they would have kept Martin and used the pick for something they really needed, like a tackle or a guard.

Again, I'm not saying that Carroll is a great coach, but the main reason for the Pats downfall was Grier. Grier also destroyed a few Texans drafts in their early years.

"Remember Grant Williams?" Sure do, he had a key block in the Super Bowl that lead the way to Patriots victory. Long live Grant Williams!!

I already wrote in this thread that Glenn was clearly the best WR in college that year, and Harrison was second. So, you pass up on a once in a blue moon talent, for more questionable receivers. That's not so smart. Would Glenn and Peyton Manning have been a good combination? I just think sometimes a player's situation is more important than where a player gets drafted. Harrison certainly has as many character issues as Glenn does, judging by recent evidence, but under a disciplinarian, Glenn performed pretty well.

You seem to have completely ignored what I wrote about the Curtis Martin situation. You completely ignored the poison pill part of the contract.

 

[tombonneau]

I wouldn't count Carroll out of the NFL forever - some people learn from their mistakes, not many but a few really do.

Limited by never having met SoCal Pete, my vibe is that not only did/does he want to be friendly with his players, he also seeks some of the spotlight himself. Remember his kooky "I'm feeling dangerous" remarks? Of course, every single NFL coach wants to be in the spotlight to some degree. Like becoming President, you need to have a pretty big ego to be certain you can run an NFL team. So smiling Pete was hardly unusual in his hubris. What strikes me about him is that he is so natural, so easy about being out front. Carroll just has a gene, apparently free of nearly all pretense, that says, "you're the man." Like Brady, he was born to hold the reins. Unlike Brady, PC lacked the native awareness to realize how his behavior - natural to Pete but a tad condescending to his players - both endeared and insulted the mega-egos residing in an NFL locker room.

Pete's NFL guys liked him but eventually didn't believe or respect, plain and simple. Not very different than the relationship between some kids and parents - and that often leads to trouble.

At USC, Pete can be the Easy Big Cheese and no players call him on it because most all of them are just happy to have been chosen by Pete to play at one of the all-time football factories and by a now very successful coach. Pete's chillin' with the dudes and they say 'so what' if he's getting all the mike time - he is the BEST college coach after all. And instead of being irritated by that (like NFL dudes would be) most of his players are eternally grateful they got close to him.

Most of us have known a guy like Pete: magnetic, intelligent, and fun to be with. If you can just ignore his ego - Pete does, why can't you?

What will be interesting if/when Carroll returns to the NFL, his persona will be vastly different than the player-friendly-DC-who-might-not-be-cut-out-to-be-a-head-coach guy who he was with the Jets and Pats.

Carroll would be returning to the NFL after a decade or so heading up one of the best programs in college football, a prominent and well-respected national figure and about as close to a household name as a college coach can be.

Would this coach command a different level of respect from players than the one at the Jets and Pats? It would be interesting to see ...

 

[AzPatsFan]

That's my point exactly...Carroll was stuck with a roster that wasn't any good, the proof being that Belichick cut half of it.

Getting good players was Grier's job, not Carroll's.

As for Spires, he was a very good 4-3 end. Under a 3-4 defense, he would have had to be converted to OLB, but I don't think he had Adelius Thomas type speed. But Spires was the rare exceptions. Most cut were overpriced average players or over the hill players, like Coates and Armstrong, that the Pats had not been able to replace under Grier. I see the same thing happening with the Chargers : Tomlinson is not the same player he used to be, but nobody has the guts to bench him and put Sproles or a more productice back at his place. It already has cost them Turner...

The numbnuts in San Diego kept the great oldster with the Reputation, LT, whose best days were already in the record books. And let the upcoming guy, Turner, go for naught. The results are obvious. They made a mistake.

Does that have implications here in NE?

 

[RDS11]

You seem to have completely ignored what I wrote about the Curtis Martin situation. You completely ignored the poison pill part of the contract.

No, I don't. But again, this is not Carroll's fault. If Grier had done if job right, Martin would have been either franchised or signed earlier. When you lose your best player on offense (sorry Drew) the GM should be held responsible.

You said that Grier's draft had minor impact on Carroll, only on Belichick. I don't entirely agree, but part of it is true at least for the first year. However, as I said, given about the same roster, Carroll did about the same thing as Parcells. He went 10-6 with a team that was 11-5 the year before. And he might have reached the AFC Championship if Martin, Coates and Glenn had not been injuted for or during the game in Pittsburgh.

Since players reach free agency after 4 years in the league, basically teams have a 4 year window to build or rebuild their team thru the draft before having to resign those draft choices. So the weak 1997 draft had a major impact on Carroll in his last year, as those players were either improductive or were not able to challenge veterans for playing time.

Over the years, as the level of talent eroded, the Pats record went from 10-6 to 9-7 to 8-8. I don't see any major dropoff, and knowing Grier did nothing to add any new talent or build on the 1996 foundation you can't expect the Pats to go anywhere but down. Looking at the 1999 roster, I don't see a 8-8 as a proof of incompetence.

As for the 1996 draft, Glenn was not the clear cut number 2 (Keyshawn was number 1). Most had Harrison as the number 2 wr. Both Glenn and Harrison had character issues. But 1996 was the year of the wideout (6 were drafted in the top 40 I think), so if Grier wasn't able to work the board then it's another proof he wasn't the right person for the job.

You also have to credit the superb 2000 draft to Grier. Pioli and that time was not in charge, Grier was (and was fired soon after).

 

[upstater1]

No, I don't. But again, this is not Carroll's fault. If Grier had done if job right, Martin would have been either franchised or signed earlier. When you lose your best player on offense (sorry Drew) the GM should be held responsible.

You said that Grier's draft had minor impact on Carroll, only on Belichick. I don't entirely agree, but part of it is true at least for the first year. However, as I said, given about the same roster, Carroll did about the same thing as Parcells. He went 10-6 with a team that was 11-5 the year before. And he might have reached the AFC Championship if Martin, Coates and Glenn had not been injuted for or during the game in Pittsburgh.

Since players reach free agency after 4 years in the league, basically teams have a 4 year window to build or rebuild their team thru the draft before having to resign those draft choices. So the weak 1997 draft had a major impact on Carroll in his last year, as those players were either improductive or were not able to challenge veterans for playing time.

Over the years, as the level of talent eroded, the Pats record went from 10-6 to 9-7 to 8-8. I don't see any major dropoff, and knowing Grier did nothing to add any new talent or build on the 1996 foundation you can't expect the Pats to go anywhere but down. Looking at the 1999 roster, I don't see a 8-8 as a proof of incompetence.

As for the 1996 draft, Glenn was not the clear cut number 2 (Keyshawn was number 1). Most had Harrison as the number 2 wr. Both Glenn and Harrison had character issues. But 1996 was the year of the wideout (6 were drafted in the top 40 I think), so if Grier wasn't able to work the board then it's another proof he wasn't the right person for the job.

You also have to credit the superb 2000 draft to Grier. Pioli and that time was not in charge, Grier was (and was fired soon after).

The rules of the CBA were a bit different back in 1997. The transition tag gave the team of record a huge advantage in terms of multiple draft picks. If New England had franchised Martin while having the other possibilities at its disposal, that would have been an example of dumb-thinking.

I never thought anyone blamed Grier for losing Martin until I read your post. The poison pill was incredibly onerous.

 

[RDS11]

I never thought anyone blamed Grier for losing Martin until I read your post. The poison pill was incredibly onerous.

You're kidding, right ?

They lost their best player and the GM is not to blame ? If the situation had been handled prior to Martin reaching free agency, this poison pill deal would have never been offered. Martin should have been Grier's priority, not Lane and Rucci...

It's mismanagement, plain and simple...Grier thought nobody would sign a restricted free agent and surrender 2 draft picks, so he wasn't in a hurry to get a deal done with Martin. Those kind of mistakes plagued the Pats during Grier's tenure.

 

[upstater1]

You're kidding, right ?

They lost their best player and the GM is not to blame ? If the situation had been handled prior to Martin reaching free agency, this poison pill deal would have never been offered. Martin should have been Grier's priority, not Lane and Rucci...

It's mismanagement, plain and simple...Grier thought nobody would sign a restricted free agent and surrender 2 draft picks, so he wasn't in a hurry to get a deal done with Martin. Those kind of mistakes plagued the Pats during Grier's tenure.

Wrong.

Martin was in his third year, up until that point you signed your restricted free agent. You had the right of first refusal. The poison pill took that away and it was banned for long afterward.

Your argument here essentially is making the point that the Patriots should have signed Wilfork last year, or Samuel three years ago.

Same situation.

But the team knows they have certain measures they can take to make sure they don't lose a player. Restricted free agency is one. A team gives your player a contract, you match it. Simple as that, and the Patriots planned to do that. It was a smart plan. No different than what the Patriots have done in using the franchise tag, and in fact, the Patriots current front office uses the franchise tag more often than most.

If it weren't for Bill Parcells completely circumventing the CBA with that poison pill, Martin would have remained a Patriot.

 

[upstater1]

Mark Sanchez NFL Press Conference - Rivals.com Video

Pete Carroll has a lot of gumption to publicly say his player is not ready for the NFL.

 

[Wretch]

Mark Sanchez NFL Press Conference - Rivals.com Video

Pete Carroll has a lot of gumption to publicly say his player is not ready for the NFL.

All Carroll said was that statistically early entry QBs haven't worked out, and that he disagreed with Sanchez's decision, and that he respects and supports Sanchez regardless. He isn't saying anything that isn't true.

Would you rather that he publicly say Sanchez is ready and then tell NFL people privately that he isn't? That is much worse in my mind than saying a player should stay in school.

Either way people can put a negative spin on it. At least this way he has been honest through out the process.

 

[upstater1]

All Carroll said was that statistically early entry QBs haven't worked out, and that he disagreed with Sanchez's decision, and that he respects and supports Sanchez regardless. He isn't saying anything that isn't true.

Would you rather that he publicly say Sanchez is ready and then tell NFL people privately that he isn't? That is much worse in my mind than saying a player should stay in school.

Either way people can put a negative spin on it. At least this way he has been honest through out the process.

He could just talk about what a good kid Sanchez is, how much he has meant to the team, wish him good luck, etc. No need to say he's not ready.

Carroll, earlier this year, said that Matt Cassell had all the tools, but he didn't start over Leinhart because he lost his composure in the pocket often, so there was a question there. I just think a college coach, of all people, doesn't need to instill doubts about his players. There are plenty of critics out there who will do it for him.

 

[RDS11]

I don't know what you have against Carroll, but numbers don't lie : QBs, with 1st round potential, that are leaving for the NFL early have not worked out as good as seniors. He just said the obvious. Might not be a ringing endorsement for Sanchez, but Carroll was on vacation in Hawaii and cut short his vacations to be by Sanchez's side when he declared for the NFL Draft...what more do you want from the guy ?

Also, with the Patriots team he inherited in 1997 he did about the same, statistics and record wise, than Parcells before him. Look at the stats on profootballreferences.com. He had no control over personnel decision, therefore you can't blame him if the team went bad...he remained the same coach from 1997 thru 1999. And again, if Belichick had to build the team from scratch in 2000, it's certainly not because Grier had left the Pats in a good situation...

Grier was also in charge for the 200 draft. Sure, Belichick and Pioli participated, but it's Grier who had done all the work in order to be ready for that draft since Belichick and Pioli had been in place for less than 3 months at the time. And, strangely enough, our first pick in the 2nd round was a bust. Grier was fired a couple of weeks after that draft, which should give a good idea of what Belichick and Pioli felt about him.

Say what you want about the Martin deal, but no, it wasn't the right way to deal with your best player. It's your best player, you don't wait for other team to dictate his value !!! I wouldn't say that for a guy you can easily replace, a position on which who have starting caliber backups, but in 1997 the backups to Martin were Derick Cullors and Sedrick Shaw (another superb Grier draft pick, 3rd round, by the way). If you remember what REALLY happened, the Pats just had signed up Lane and Rucci and did not have a lot of cap room...with Martin left to sign. The Jets, smelling blood, proposed a deal that the Pats could not match. It's BAD MANAGEMENT !!! And it is certainly not Carroll's fault !

Finally, about the comments on Cassel, I don't get what your point is : he was asked 5 years after the fact why he started Leinhart over Cassel. Carroll might not the the best coach ever, but he had to see something more in Leinhart than in Cassel in order to start. He just explained the reason why...it has nothing to do with his current players or installing doubts. And if Sanchez has doubts about his ability in the NFL following Carroll's comments, what kind of QB will he become after throwing 5 picks in a game ?? Professional athletes have to be stronger mentally than that...

 

[RDS11]

Last thing...the Martin and Samuel situations are not the same by any means. I personally think both were mistakes, but for Martin they are stranded by the cap and couldn't sign him even if they wanted to. For Samuel, it was a business decision.

 

[chris_in_sunnyvale]

Lest we forget Carroll's lack of ability as a game prep coach. In 1999, the Jets lost Testaverde vs. the Pats early in the season. Halfway through, Jets were 2-6, Pats 6-2 (always fast-starters due to talent, despite some tepid-at-best drafts). When the Jets played the Pats a second time, they started Ray Lucas at QB. Against Ernie Zampese's timing offense, Jets' defensive coordinator Bill Belichick had his DBs slam the receivers on the LOS and his LBs blitz Drew "Glacier Feet" Bledsoe up the middle. Bledsoe throws picks, Lucas manages the game, Jets win.

Jets finish season on 6-2 run. Copycat NFL follows that game plan vs. Pats, who go 2-6. Pats finish in 4th place in AFC East, behind the Jets. That's why I figured it was time for PC to leave.

Good post.

The death knell was at Philly in game 14. The Pats had to win that game to keep their playoff hopes alive and the Eagles were poor, so things were set up nicely for the Pats. Not only did the Pats lose badly, but they looked flat from the get-go. It was an inexcusable performance in an already bad string of performances during that 2nd half of the season.

Regards,
Chris

 

[upstater1]

I don't know what you have against Carroll, but numbers don't lie : QBs, with 1st round potential, that are leaving for the NFL early have not worked out as good as seniors. He just said the obvious. Might not be a ringing endorsement for Sanchez, but Carroll was on vacation in Hawaii and cut short his vacations to be by Sanchez's side when he declared for the NFL Draft...what more do you want from the guy ?

Also, with the Patriots team he inherited in 1997 he did about the same, statistics and record wise, than Parcells before him. Look at the stats on profootballreferences.com. He had no control over personnel decision, therefore you can't blame him if the team went bad...he remained the same coach from 1997 thru 1999. And again, if Belichick had to build the team from scratch in 2000, it's certainly not because Grier had left the Pats in a good situation...

Grier was also in charge for the 200 draft. Sure, Belichick and Pioli participated, but it's Grier who had done all the work in order to be ready for that draft since Belichick and Pioli had been in place for less than 3 months at the time. And, strangely enough, our first pick in the 2nd round was a bust. Grier was fired a couple of weeks after that draft, which should give a good idea of what Belichick and Pioli felt about him.

Say what you want about the Martin deal, but no, it wasn't the right way to deal with your best player. It's your best player, you don't wait for other team to dictate his value !!! I wouldn't say that for a guy you can easily replace, a position on which who have starting caliber backups, but in 1997 the backups to Martin were Derick Cullors and Sedrick Shaw (another superb Grier draft pick, 3rd round, by the way). If you remember what REALLY happened, the Pats just had signed up Lane and Rucci and did not have a lot of cap room...with Martin left to sign. The Jets, smelling blood, proposed a deal that the Pats could not match. It's BAD MANAGEMENT !!! And it is certainly not Carroll's fault !

Finally, about the comments on Cassel, I don't get what your point is : he was asked 5 years after the fact why he started Leinhart over Cassel. Carroll might not the the best coach ever, but he had to see something more in Leinhart than in Cassel in order to start. He just explained the reason why...it has nothing to do with his current players or installing doubts. And if Sanchez has doubts about his ability in the NFL following Carroll's comments, what kind of QB will he become after throwing 5 picks in a game ?? Professional athletes have to be stronger mentally than that...

How many times do I have to say this?

There was a poison pill in the contract. You contend they didn't have the salary cap to sign him. But, they could have signed him easily to the exact same contract that the Jets signed him to. You do realize that the poison pill made him that much more expensive for the Patriots, don't you? The poison pill was a roster bonus paid immediately. "He received a $7.5 million bonus: a signing bonus of $4.2 million and a $3.3 million roster bonus (the poison pill) received seven days after signing." Plus, the $9 million option year at the back end of the contract wouldn't have been an option if, as required, the Patriots paid his roster bonus.

In other words, the Patriots were on the hook for $12.3 million more than the Jets for a single season. That's what made the deal impossible. Martin would cost more than Tom Brady cost us last year. When you look at the actual contract the Jets paid him, with a $7 million bonus, it wasn't all that much.

Obviously I said everything I need to say about Carroll. Knocking Cassell in public and then saying that Sanchez is not ready, on a day that the kid is trying to live his dream, well, that's not entirely supportive.

Please:

 

[upstater1]

Last thing...the Martin and Samuel situations are not the same by any means. I personally think both were mistakes, but for Martin they are stranded by the cap and couldn't sign him even if they wanted to. For Samuel, it was a business decision.

Every decision is constrained by the cap, but especially so by a poison pill which was made illegal.

The Patriots COULD HAVE signed Martin to the contract the Jets paid him. The poison pill exponentially increased the amount of money the Patriots, in particular, had to pay. The Jets did not have to adhere to the provisions of the poison pill, only the Patriots did.

If poison pills were still legal, someone could offer $30 million a year to, say, a Vikings player when/if that player plays in the Metrodome. Would that mean a mismanagement of the Vikings' salary cap, because they didn't leave $30 million open in space in case of such a scenario, or would it mean that a poison pill was used to snatch a player away?