In the Chargers-Ravens game, we dominated the first half, however, coach Marty Schottenheimer choked (as usual) during the second half.
I understand he wants to protect our new QB, Phil Rivers but playing this conservatively is hurting the team! What gives?
2006-10-01 15:53:54 · 8 answers · asked by chrstnwrtr 7 in Sports ➔ Football (American)
Don't even get me started. There's conservative, and then there's Martyball. Martyball stopped winning games years ago. When the hell is Schottenheimer gonna learn that against good teams you have to let your offense go out there and deliver the knockout blow. He called that game like he didn't want to win. I agree that Dielman was the guy who lost the game, but it never should have come to that. That game shouldn't have been close, the Chargers were the better team offensively and defensively. Schotty is gone after this season, mark my words.
BTW I just gotta say Tomlinson is amazing for getting 97 yards against that run defense when they knew the run was coming all day long.
2006-10-01 20:52:24 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
Conservative ball playing is what made two of the winningest coaches in NFL history: Tom Landry of the Dallas Cowboys and the coach of the Miami Dolphins, whose name escapes me now, who took the Dolphins of 1974, I believe, to the last perfect season the NFL has ever seen. It may be boring sometimes, but in the long run, it turns out some very strong champions. And wins and losses are the product of much more than the head coaches oftentimes, but Marty Schottenheimer's one of the best coaches there ever has been, whether people like him or not. God Bless you.
2006-10-01 23:07:55 · answer #2 · answered by ? 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Good coaches change, bad coaches don't. In many ways, Schottenheimer is simply not a good coach. He can take a team with 4-12 talent and make them 10-6. He can take a team with 14-2 talent...and make them 10-6.
His awful strategies have cost his team playoff games in 85, 86, 88, 90, 95, and 97 (look em up). You would think a guy with so many years and so many hollow, meaningless victories coupled with so many agonizing defeats would figure it out. He never, ever will.
Schottenheimer will never change no matter how many games he mangles with his pathetic offensive choke philosophy.
2006-10-01 23:24:03 · answer #3 · answered by redrum5785 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
You're asking the wrong guy here. I am a life long Chiefs fan and a season ticket holder for twenty years.
We had some really good seasons with Marty callin the shots but we never got a ring despite having a couple of teams that were worthy.
(The Chiefs ranked 3rd in the NFL in wins in the 90's)
2006-10-01 23:26:25 · answer #4 · answered by -:¦:-SKY-:¦:- 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Shottenheimer plays the statistics to his advantage. Over time he will collect more wins than losses, but at the cost of not being able to manage a championship season. It's simply too risky for him to take a lot of dangerous, but potentially game saving chances. Sure, if he were less conservative, he might win a big game here and there, and maybe catch a few breaks that would get him a Super Bowl ring. Statistically, however, he risks losing and you wouldn't want to see him tarnish that nice regular season win/loss record would you?
2006-10-01 23:08:52 · answer #5 · answered by yurmasture 1 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Chris Dielman's penalties were a big factor, so was the poor special teams performances (fumbled hold and bad snap). Marty's a good coach, don't hate.
2006-10-01 22:56:16 · answer #6 · answered by Andy T 4 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Yeah, everyone in KC's glad he's gone, although we haven;t done much better in the standings since. At least things aren't nearly as boring anymore.
2006-10-01 23:01:51 · answer #7 · answered by spongeworthy_us 6 · 0⤊ 1⤋
CHIEFS RULE THE WEST!
2006-10-02 01:34:19 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋