It might also sound pleasant to people's ears that with a new hire the GM will most often be on the hunt for players that fit. It will be highly unlikely after the hire that Thompson is going to hear " oh, yeah, all these guys are perfect for what I want to do and we won't need anybody."

Regardless of who it is there will almost have to be some new blood brought in player-wise.

"warhawk" wrote:

It might also sound pleasant to people's ears that with a new hire the GM will most often be on the hunt for players that fit. It will be highly unlikely after the hire that Thompson is going to hear " oh, yeah, all these guys are perfect for what I want to do and we won't need anybody."

Regardless of who it is there will almost have to be some new blood brought in player-wise.

"warhawk" wrote:

Mike Nolan the DC... his yearly alignments.. see a single coordinator can run both systems effectively.

1993 3-4 NYG
1994 4-3
1995 4-3
1996 4-3
1997- 4-3 WASH
1998 4-3
2002 3-4 BAL
2003 3-4
2004 3-4

"pack93z" wrote:

"pack93z" wrote:

It would seem to me that Nolan actually knows how to do three things, not two, which just might be ideal for us. One- He knows how to run the 4-3. Two- He knows how to run the 3-4. Three- He knows how to transition smoothly from the 4-3 to the 3-4, and has experience in the advantages and pitfalls of making the transition, in that he knows both so well. When you take into account our existing personnel, this makes me lean strongly towards Nolan. I'm thinking that his experience in the transition is just as likely to make him stay in a 4-3 as transition out of it, and further that like a fine wine, the move might not occur until it is "time", or perhaps not at all, contrasted with a pure 3-4 "guy" that might make the transition regardless of the fit of the personnel involved. As an aside, we know (apparently, due to an under the bus toss) Moss didn't like the "Bates" system, but do we know what he does like? Does he? (ok, a mini-editorial, there)

"dfosterf" wrote: