Should Mike Shanahan be fired?

[punch it in]

Originally Posted by NC_Skins

I think a lot of your facts are mixed up.

1) They made the playoffs in their 3rd year but had a lesser win % than Mike did his first two.

2) Culpepper wasn't there for much of that. He started 5 games in 2009. Stafford started 10 games in that same year. Also, Culpepper wasn't even on the team in 2010. Shaun Hill played most of 2010 when Stafford was injured. So your claim he did it much with Culpepper isn't correct whatsoever. Hell, even the claim he did it without MUCH of Stafford is false. Stafford played in 29 games out of 48 games during that span.


3) A turn around isn't having a good year and turning around and crapping the bed. They are currently 3-4. Does that sound like a team that has "turned it around"? They haven't even gotten to the core of their conference games yet, and and lost the 2 they have played. STill have GB to play twice, chicago once more and Vikings 1 more time. You think they come close to that 10-6 record of last year? Hell no.



If you think Jim Schartz has turned the Lions around, do you also think Tony Sparano turned Miami around?...lol After all they went 11-5 after the team won 1 game the year prior. Apparently this is your idea of turning it around.

When teams when consistently and are in the playoffs more often than not, then that would be what we call "turning it around". Other than that, it's fools gold.

All i had to read was the part about culpepper. Check my mixed up facts again and you will notice an etc after culpeppers name. Etc as in others.
Also JS had 16 wins during years two and three combined. More than MS has total so far. And JS inherited arguably thee worst team ever. They were 0-16 the year before. The year they beat us was JS first year. The year before we i believe we beat them. If not we would have.
If we win four more games this year their win totals will be equal for their first three years.
You think playing 29 out of 48 games without ur number one pick at QB isnt playing alot without him???? 40% missed games isnt alot to you? Wow. You are cloudy and confused bro. Not me.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[NC_Skins]

Originally Posted by punch it in

All i had to read was the part about culpepper. Check my mixed up facts again and you will notice an etc after culpeppers name. Etc as in others.
Also JS had 16 wins during years two and three combined. More than MS has total so far. And JS inherited arguably thee worst team ever. They were 0-16 the year before. The year they beat us was JS first year. The year before we i believe we beat them. If not we would have.
If we win four more games this year their win totals will be equal for their first three years.
You think playing 29 out of 48 games without ur number one pick at QB isnt playing alot without him???? 40% missed games isnt alot to you? Wow. You are cloudy and confused bro. Not me.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Considering they won 2 games the year Culpepper was there, he didn't win ANY with Culpepper. Again with your facts. Even with Shaun Hill, he went a measley 6-10. Improvement eh?...lol

Also, last time I checked, 60% > 40%. When you say he did much of it without Stafford, it's pretty apparent you are saying he turned the tide with a shit QB for a majority of that time. Fact is, he was 2-11 and 6-10. The 3rd year he was 10-6 with Stafford. Those 2 years aren't near as bad as Mikes. Also, what is your excuse for his 3-4 season this year? What happend to that "turn around" in Detroit?


Is that what you want? Have one good year than go back to being shit again? Really? Is that your idea of a turn around? Still didn't get your answer on Tony Sparano. Think he turned the Dolphins around?