Why PC didn't do as well with NYJ and NE as SEA

mikeak":124cbw5i said:

1) You don't build a team in one or even two years

2) one of those playoffs seasons was with a 7-9 team. I know they win the playoff game but do you consider that a successful regular season?

3) One-two injuries on key players and the season goes in the tanks sometimes or at least you lose one game that was hugely important for borderline playoff teams

4) PC is on the record saying he spent a lot of time thinking what he would do different in the NFL and that he is now doing that...

Click to expand...

Yeah I do. Seattle had easily from top to bottom a Top 5 worst rosters in the NFL that year. It was a miracle they won 7 games that year, let alone knocking off the defending SB Champs in the playoffs.

After he was fired by the New England Patriots, Carroll read a book by former UCLA basketball coach John Wooden which heavily influenced how he would run his future program at USC: emulating Wooden, Carroll decided to engineer his program in the way that best exemplified his personal philosophy. He decided his philosophy was best summarized as "I'm a competitor".

PC wasn't always a good head coach. His failures in NY and NE played a huge role in his development into the coach he is today. Some of you won't take my paraphrasing of an objective truth about the human nature of developing expertise for it, but maybe you'll take Pete's word for it!

At Pete's prior NFL jobs he was the Head Coach, not the Head Cheese.
At USC he was the Head Cheese.
In Seattle he is the Head Cheese.

BirdsCommaAngry":bnbapub0 said:

After he was fired by the New England Patriots, Carroll read a book by former UCLA basketball coach John Wooden which heavily influenced how he would run his future program at USC: emulating Wooden, Carroll decided to engineer his program in the way that best exemplified his personal philosophy. He decided his philosophy was best summarized as "I'm a competitor".

PC wasn't always a good head coach. His failures in NY and NE played a huge role in his development into the coach he is today. Some of you won't take my paraphrasing of an objective truth about the human nature of developing expertise for it, but maybe you'll take Pete's word for it!

Click to expand...

He was an excellent position coach and DC. He was a so-so head coach who had great potential but didn't really get a chance to develop it while with those two teams.

Prior to this year's draft, he had the same amount of time in NE as he has had here. He had a chance and on a fairly well-built team from Parcells no less. Sure, he didn't have the control we've come to associate with his success back then but there are also coaches, like Holmgren, who have fallen short when wearing both hats. It's still uncertain that PC would have been more or less successful in NE had he had the control he had at USC because that's a subject we can only offer speculation about. What we do know is after being fired by NE, PC made some changes to his philosophy based on influences from John Wooden and those changes became the focal points of his successful teams and organizations at USC and here. To some this might just be a correlation but to me it's an embodiment of human nature playing itself out. Expertise is built more quickly from learning via failing, stumbling, coming up short, and a bunch of other adjectives and phrases I would associate with PCs coaching tenure at NE.

Was PC a so-so head coach before USC because he didn't get the chance or did he not get the chance because before USC he was a so-so head coach? It's the latter and it's been instrumental in him becoming a national champion and successfully returning to the NFL.