:thumb:

 

I think longevity is what Tomlin lacks more than anything at this point. If he stays in Pitt for another decade with the same results, he'll be there.

 

Two guys, Jeff Fisher and Andy Reid, I believe are great coaches, but the lack of a Super Bowl win eliminates them from being the best.

 

This is a tough question. Belichick has a great resume.

 

Parcells has a good argument with his success with multiple teams.

 

No one has mentioned Tony Dungy, but I think he has a great case. He took over a perennial loser in Tampa and made the playoffs 4 of 6 seasons. And the team won a Super Bowl the year after he left (I suppose that can be used to argue for or against him). But, he won with a conservative offense and a great defense in Tampa. Then he goes to Indy, never misses the playoffs, wins a Super Bowl and does it with a completely different team...high powered offense and questionable defense. I think being able to adjust to your talent is always the sign of a great coach.

 

Parcells won a Super Bowl with Jeff Hostetler at QB. Gruden won with Brad Johnson. The QB's for the other coaches...Brady, Roethlisberger, Favre, Manning, Elway. Does that factor in?

 

All good points, but I think Reid and Fisher are at my top for their longevity, and now Reid is doing it with Michael Vick. If being a great coach means you have to have won it all, then Calipari is not a great coach. Sorry UK fans, I couldn't resist.

All good points, but I think Reid and Fisher are at my top for their longevity, and now Reid is doing it with Michael Vick. If being a great coach means you have to have won it all, then Calipari is not a great coach. Sorry UK fans, I couldn't resist.

 

I've never heard anyone claim Coach Cal is a great coach. Great recruiter, sure, but never great coach.

 

I think for you to be under serious consideration for greatest of anything in sports you have to have won. It comes with the title of greatness IMO.

I've never heard anyone claim Coach Cal is a great coach. Great recruiter, sure, but never great coach.

 

I think for you to be under serious consideration for greatest of anything in sports you have to have won. It comes with the title of greatness IMO.

 

I get what you are saying, but then all it takes for Cal to turn into a great coach or Fisher or Reid is one crown....So in Cal's case one of those great recruiting classes cashing in or for Reid or Fisher to have that magical team then transforms them in your mind to a great coach? Is Coughlin with the Giants a great coach then? He won it all. Marv Levy went to 4 striaght Super Bowls and never won-is he off of your list? Bud Wilkinson? Sean Payton better than Chuck Knox? Just asking.....

Why did Belichek struggle so badly in Cleveland? Aren't there other factors that go into making a good NFL coach? Good GM, good scouting/drafting, good ownership, etc................

 

He actually didn't do that bad in Cleveland. He took over a team that had went 3-13 the season before he got there and went 6-10, 7-9, 7-9 as he turned a lot of the roster over. He broke through with an 11-5 record in 1994 and had them off to a 3-1 start in 1995 before Modell's announcement of the pending move to Baltimore torpedoed the season and they finished 5-11. I think he's the best in the business.

All good points, but I think Reid and Fisher are at my top for their longevity, and now Reid is doing it with Michael Vick. If being a great coach means you have to have won it all, then Calipari is not a great coach. Sorry UK fans, I couldn't resist.

I thought this was about the NFL.

Darth Hoody is on a pedestal by himself I believe.

 

Dungy, Cowher, and Parcells would be on my level 2.

 

Sean Payton, Dungy, Gruden, Fischer and Reid are up there as well though. I'm not a big fan of Holmgren, he's an above average coach but I'd take these guys over him without hesitation. I think Harbaugh will be up there eventually, as well as maybe Smith in ATL.

I've never heard anyone claim Coach Cal is a great coach. Great recruiter, sure, but never great coach.

 

I think for you to be under serious consideration for greatest of anything in sports you have to have won. It comes with the title of greatness IMO.

 

I'm not saying Fisher and Reid aren't great...and for the record, I think Cal is a great coach. But, none of them would warrant consideration to be #1 on my list because none have won a championship.

I get what you are saying, but then all it takes for Cal to turn into a great coach or Fisher or Reid is one crown....So in Cal's case one of those great recruiting classes cashing in or for Reid or Fisher to have that magical team then transforms them in your mind to a great coach? Is Coughlin with the Giants a great coach then? He won it all. Marv Levy went to 4 striaght Super Bowls and never won-is he off of your list? Bud Wilkinson? Sean Payton better than Chuck Knox? Just asking.....

 

I can't answer for UKMF, but I don't have a problem with calling them great...it's calling them the greatest or the best that I cannot do.

Why did Belichek struggle so badly in Cleveland? Aren't there other factors that go into making a good NFL coach? Good GM, good scouting/drafting, good ownership, etc................

 

A good coach get's better. He obviously is not the same coach now as he was then. He question who is the best coach now? There is no doubt he is for whatever the reasons may be.

While I know there's a big-time Tony Dungy love-fest among popular opinion, I would argue he shouldn't even be in this conversation. His teams consistently underperformed in the playoffs, primarily because of the lack of adjustments made by the coaching staff in preparing for the playoffs. His teams would come into the playoffs and change next to nothing from the regular season, and subsequently get beat early.

 

He (and Peyton) should be thanking his lucky stars he's even got a SB ring thanks to the good fortune of drawing the awful Bears/Rex Grossman as an opponent in the big game. I have little doubt the Saints would've beaten them had they gotten past the Bears.

While I know there's a big-time Tony Dungy love-fest among popular opinion, I would argue he shouldn't even be in this conversation. His teams consistently underperformed in the playoffs, primarily because of the lack of adjustments made by the coaching staff in preparing for the playoffs. His teams would come into the playoffs and change next to nothing from the regular season, and subsequently get beat early.

 

He (and Peyton) should be thanking his lucky stars he's even got a SB ring thanks to the good fortune of drawing the awful Bears/Rex Grossman as an opponent in the big game. I have little doubt the Saints would've beaten them had they gotten past the Bears.

I wholeheartedly agree with everything in this post. Though I will also admit I just flat out don't like either (Dungy or Manning) one of them.

I wholeheartedly agree with everything in this post. Though I will also admit I just flat out don't like either (Dungy or Manning) one of them.

 

I think we may be the only 3 on this site that don't have a crush on Peyton. :lol: I really don't have a problem with Dungy, he seems like a legitimately good guy, but he's not my favorite either.

I'm not saying Fisher and Reid aren't great...and for the record, I think Cal is a great coach. But, none of them would warrant consideration to be #1 on my list because none have won a championship.

Reid is definitely NOT on my list of "great" coaches. Anyone that inept at clock management cannot receive that label from me.

I think we may be the only 3 on this site that don't have a crush on Peyton. :lol: I really don't have a problem with Dungy, he seems like a legitimately good guy, but he's not my favorite either.

He's holier-than-thou crap and willingness to always "offer" himself as a mentor (especially when not asked) grates at me beyond belief. Frankly I wish he would get another coaching job so I'd hear a lot less of what his opinions are on things.

While I know there's a big-time Tony Dungy love-fest among popular opinion, I would argue he shouldn't even be in this conversation. His teams consistently underperformed in the playoffs, primarily because of the lack of adjustments made by the coaching staff in preparing for the playoffs. His teams would come into the playoffs and change next to nothing from the regular season, and subsequently get beat early.

 

He (and Peyton) should be thanking his lucky stars he's even got a SB ring thanks to the good fortune of drawing the awful Bears/Rex Grossman as an opponent in the big game. I have little doubt the Saints would've beaten them had they gotten past the Bears.

 

I think that's a fair criticism.

 

 

'02 = 41-0 loss to the Jets, disaster

'03 and '04 = they lost to a New England team that was better than them

'05 = lost to a Pittsburgh team they should have beat

'06 = won the Super Bowl

'07 and '08 = back-to-back losses to San Diego

 

Only '03 and '04 did they lose to a better team, IMO. Only in '06 with the win over New England did they beat a team they shouldn't have. JMO

 

 

How does Bill Cowher's resume differ significantly from Tony Dungy?