Walt Harris to the Pro Bowl

[Beemnseven]

Originally Posted by 12thMan

Well, we can't say Harris wasn't really that solid can we? The reason I say that is because our secondary has played the same exact way without Harris, while Harris himself has gone on and redeemed himself with another team.

I maintain, we have coaching issues and until we realize that, Nate Clements or Ronnie Lott, for that matter, 'aint going to make that much of a difference.

I'm sure I cursed Harris' name a few times in '05, but he did have the 4th down stop in Dallas that preserved the "Ring of Shame" game.

But what Marius said earlier is exactly right: Call it bad luck, hindsight, crystal ball, whatever -- the bottom line is that this front office made the call and it was the wrong one. One of many, as we've seen.

But I disagree that the problem is coaching. Defensive coaching in '04 was fantastic with the #3 overall ranking. But players like Daniels, Griffin, Salave'a, get a year or two older, lose a step and no one is groomed to replace them. You lose Antonio Pierce and get guys like Mike Barrow and Warrick Holdman. Those aren't bad coaching moves - they're bad personnel decisions. Granted, the system apparently allows the coaches to make many if not most of those choices, but it's not a "coaching problem" in general.

[FRPLG]

Originally Posted by Beemnseven

Call it bad luck, hindsight, crystal ball, whatever -- the bottom line is that this front office made the call and it was the wrong one. One of many, as we've seen.

I don't see how it was 'wrong'. It turned out that Harris was better(that's even debateable) than we thought but those thoughts were based on emperical evidence.

Maybe it is the definition of 'wrong' that needs discussion.

Does 'wrong' mean they made a decision that in hindsight they clearly should not have made based on the then available information or does it simply mean that the results turn out against what you banked on.

To me if a decision was made based on good info that even now we can look at and think was correct then a decision is not 'wrong'. The the results were just bad.