How would you define success for Macdonald’s first season?

[jammerhawk]

Too soon to say.

 

[jeremiah]

This article is from field gulls, but how would you define success?

What would you consider a successful first season for Mike Macdonald?

A new coach comes with new expectations... right?!

www.fieldgulls.com

Lose the rest of the games by 1 point, and get a great draft position.

 

[Palmegranite]

How about a 4 or 5 game winning streak?
That's the type of sign I'm looking for.

 

[Appyhawk]

Game #10 was one of the signs I've been waiting for.

 

[jammerhawk]

Beating the 9ers in Santa Clara

Would be better had they beat the 9ers at home.

 

[pmedic920]

Too soon to say.

WTF?


It’s a simple question “how would you define success”?

How is it “too soon” ?

You saying you want to wait till the season is over, then decide if it was a success or not?

 

[pmedic920]

How about a 4 or 5 game winning streak?
That's the type of sign I'm looking for.

Maybe I misunderstood the ? in the OP.

do you actually need a “sign” to describe success?

Tons of folks need to see this or that, or waiting for “a sign”, how does that contribute to what you would define as a “success”?

 

[Gametime]

I think success can be measured in a few ways but it's harder for a 1st time Head Coach. You have not only the success measured by the changes with the team but the personal learning curve for the coach in simply learning HOW to be a great head coach. A few things that stick out to me are:

1) Culture: I think that's starting to come around but this one takes time and sometimes personnel changes. Culture is built through the wins AND the losses and if they play well against AZ we may be seeing it rounding the corner from culture to identity. Losing 5 of 6 games was a real challenge but they stayed the course I have personally loved Mike's calm and steady demeanor even in a time when it felt like the sky was falling after that loss to LA.

2) Team makeup: I do love the fact that Mike Mac is not "attached" to players like Pete sometimes seemed to be. The drastic overall of the LB core shows that he isn't afraid to pull the trigger and change it up when there are issues and the results last week looked promising! Jobe playing over Brown is another one. I think we saw it even earlier with getting rid of players like Mike Jackson, Taylor etc. It seems like Mike has a do your job kind of mentality where as I feel like Pete would cling far too long to players as "projects" even when it hurt the product on the field.

 

[Palmegranite]

Maybe I misunderstood the ? in the OP.

do you actually need a “sign” to describe success?

Tons of folks need to see this or that, or waiting for “a sign”, how does that contribute to what you would define as a “success”?

Here's an exerpt from the article in the original post:
"This is not a poll for a reason; your version of success may not be rooted in absolutes with wins and losses. General improvement and signs of a team on the rise whether they’re in the playoffs or not may be enough to satisfy you. "

And my post says yes! It's absolutely rooted in wins and losses. That's it.

 

[sutz]

2) Team makeup: I do love the fact that Mike Mac is not "attached" to players like Pete sometimes seemed to be. The drastic overall of the LB core shows that he isn't afraid to pull the trigger and change it up when there are issues and the results last week looked promising! Jobe playing over Brown is another one. I think we saw it even earlier with getting rid of players like Mike Jackson, Taylor etc. It seems like Mike has a do your job kind of mentality where as I feel like Pete would cling far too long to players as "projects" even when it hurt the product on the field.

While I agree in principle, I'm gonna diverge a little and say that we don't really have anbody on the team that are "Mac's guys" yet. Maybe EJIV or the other in-season pickups. Most everybody on the team are from the prior regime other than the rooks they picked up this year, and they are arguably "JS guys." In another season or two, when the team is a bit more hand crafted to MM's standards and desires will we know how much he shows loyalty to "his" guys.

That can be tricky. Personal loyalties run throughout the league. Teams vary on how they pick players and while players will often develop loyalty to the team and coach that drafted them, or actively sought them in FA, some players are more mercenary than others and are more into it for the money rather than love of the game.

Time will tell on this one for me.

 

[Gametime]

While I agree in principle, I'm gonna diverge a little and say that we don't really have anbody on the team that are "Mac's guys" yet. Maybe EJIV or the other in-season pickups. Most everybody on the team are from the prior regime other than the rooks they picked up this year, and they are arguably "JS guys." In another season or two, when the team is a bit more hand crafted to MM's standards and desires will we know how much he shows loyalty to "his" guys.

That can be tricky. Personal loyalties run throughout the league. Teams vary on how they pick players and while players will often develop loyalty to the team and coach that drafted them, or actively sought them in FA, some players are more mercenary than others and are more into it for the money rather than love of the game.

Time will tell on this one for me.

I agree. It's nice to see some changes but there is a long way to go I think in terms of building a team that fits Mike's true vision. It definitely takes time. And Semper Fi!

 

[RiverDog]

If we're looking strictly at W/L record, my expectations were that we'd go 9-8 with a possible wild card entry, and that seems to be right on track.

Just for fun, here's my preseason prediction vs. what our actual results have been so far. I've highlighted those that I was correct on in green, those I was wrong in red:

Broncos W
Pats W
Fins W
Lions L
Giants W
Niners L
Falcons W
Bills L
Rams W
Niners L
Cards W
Jets W
Cards L
Packers L
Vikings L
Bears W
Rams W

After our first 10 games, my preseason prediction had us pegged at 6-4, and as you know, we are at 5-5. That's not too far off. I'm not trying to brag or blow my horn, rather point out how the season has gone pretty much to what one would reasonably expect as I do think that I'm a reasonable person and that I was not alone in my forecast.

 

[Chukarhawk]

I was smoking the hopum and said 10 wins. Feels like were turning the corner on defense though and if that trend continues were going to be ok. If we can win 4 more games, I'll be happy.

 

[RiverDog]

We're getting healthy, too. This week saw the best injury report we've had all season. The only players not on IR that are on the report are TE Brady Russell and WR Laviska Shenault Jr. Macdonald said earlier that Abe Lucas was a full go.

So, I'm sticking by my original prediction. I think we pull out a close one.

 

[Seahawks fan]

8-9 Wins would be a success in my book. I mean it's hard to takeover a team that's struggled the past 4 years or so and the Cap issues we have make it even harder to bring in legit players that are difference makers, and it's very rare a first time head coach has success they first year.. If some fans want to dream about 10 wins that's fine, but it's not happening this year, 7 wins is the floor & 9 is our ceiling in my opinion...