Where did Pete go wrong?

jeremiah

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 3, 2013
Messages
763
Reaction score
257
Great question, I think we all have wondered that exactly as you have. I hope there's a documentary someday about precisely this. But, if I had to venture a guess, I'd say he got comfortable, maybe a little cocky, and started making bad decisions on players, coaches and philosophy. And, inadvertently enabled a narcissistic, primadonna QB who tried derailing the team for his own accomplishments and accolades.
He should have stayed in his zone. Being the DC and hiring an OC he could trust totally. He stepped into an area that was above his level. He didn't seem to have the feel for Offense, and clock management was an eternal problem.
 

JayhawkMike

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 11, 2016
Messages
2,068
Reaction score
789
There are a couple of different ways to take this thread, but since Pete was generally successful for the entirety of his career here I interpreted as to 'Why did Pete get fired when he wanted to stay?' and my answer was simple:

He fired Ken Norton Jr. for Clint Hurtt to chase the Fangio defensive hotness.

Now, I think there were some non-performance related reasons why Pete's gone now: He's old and there were just a lot of attractive head coaching candidates coming onto the market that I think both Schneider and Jody didn't want to lose out on the chance to get them, but this 2 year failure of a defense is the one thing that Pete had control of that I believe sealed his ouster.
ONE playoff win in SEVEN years? Sounds like failure to me.
 

xray

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 19, 2018
Messages
9,523
Reaction score
1,583
Location
AZ
He tried to wear too many ' hats ' ; and failed .
Some folks can't chew gum and do other things at the same time . :)
 

Sgt. Largent

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 1, 2012
Messages
25,560
Reaction score
7,610
Pete didn't do the one thing to himself that he preaches to his coaches and players every Monday morning................tell the truth.

Pete was not honest with himself about his deficiencies when it came to hiring coordinators. Around 2015 the light bulb should have gone on that he no longer had his finger on the pulse on the current state of the game. He couldn't give up the power of scheme and playcalling to coaches outside his own tree where he could continue to control the narratives, schemes and decision making.

IMO in the end, that was his downfall. He should have had the humility to give up more control on both sides of the ball finding more innovative current coaches. But he didn't, he just kept running it back with his own yes men coordinators hoping it'd get better.

It didn't.
 

hoxrox

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 5, 2009
Messages
3,299
Reaction score
1,972
Pete didn't do the one thing to himself that he preaches to his coaches and players every Monday morning................tell the truth.

Pete was not honest with himself about his deficiencies when it came to hiring coordinators. Around 2015 the light bulb should have gone on that he no longer had his finger on the pulse on the current state of the game. He couldn't give up the power of scheme and playcalling to coaches outside his own tree where he could continue to control the narratives, schemes and decision making.

IMO in the end, that was his downfall. He should have had the humility to give up more control on both sides of the ball finding more innovative current coaches. But he didn't, he just kept running it back with his own yes men coordinators hoping it'd get better.

It didn't.
I saw it differently.

He tried to keep up with the times by hiring Waldron to bring in a McVay style offense. Waldron just didn't do a good enough job of implementing this offense, consistently.

He tried to keep up with the times by allowing Hurtt to bring in a Fangio style defense. Hurtt failed miserably at installing and implementing this Fangio defense.

So it wasn't for lack for trying. He knew he had to adapt to the modern NFL.

His issue wasn't control over coordinators. It was not hiring competent coordinators in the first place.

His "You be You" approach applied not only to players, but coaches as well.

He should have 1) tried to make it work with what he knew best OR 2) hired the best in the business to get it done.

He didn't do either.
 

Glasgow Seahawk

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 5, 2013
Messages
1,633
Reaction score
186
Jimmy Graham trade was the start of the decline. Grabbed a player that most of our team viewed as 'soft' and traded Max Unger who we've still never really replaced. Once we let Russ cook then tried to row that back, the offense seems to have lost it's identity. I get why they wanted to Let Russ Cook after the play off loss to the Cowboys when we were far too conservative and trying to force the run too much but it's not looked right since identity wise once teams started taking the deep ball away from Wilson.

Can't really put my finger on where it went wrong on defense but it's not been elite since DQ left.
 

Sgt. Largent

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 1, 2012
Messages
25,560
Reaction score
7,610
I saw it differently.

He tried to keep up with the times by hiring Waldron to bring in a McVay style offense. Waldron just didn't do a good enough job of implementing this offense, consistently.

He tried to keep up with the times by allowing Hurtt to bring in a Fangio style defense. Hurtt failed miserably at installing and implementing this Fangio defense.

So it wasn't for lack for trying. He knew he had to adapt to the modern NFL.

His issue wasn't control over coordinators. It was not hiring competent coordinators in the first place.

His "You be You" approach applied not only to players, but coaches as well.

He should have 1) tried to make it work with what he knew best OR 2) hired the best in the business to get it done.

He didn't do either.

I feel like we're using different verbiage to say the same thing.

Knowing you need to change, but not changing correctly is the same thing to me...........and I'd still argue who he hired was not done in the necessary autonomous way they needed to be hired. Pete still had total control, especially when it came to in-game adjustments and decision making.

Waldron was the 1st sign Pete knew he had to change, but it was too little too late and he still had control. IMO Waldron was as hamstrung by Pete as the rest of Pete's coordinators. I doubt if Waldron had control of the offense, he would have spent two high picks on RB's. That was Pete.
 

pittpnthrs

Well-known member
Joined
May 19, 2017
Messages
5,339
Reaction score
1,857
I saw it differently.

He tried to keep up with the times by hiring Waldron to bring in a McVay style offense. Waldron just didn't do a good enough job of implementing this offense, consistently.

He tried to keep up with the times by allowing Hurtt to bring in a Fangio style defense. Hurtt failed miserably at installing and implementing this Fangio defense.

So it wasn't for lack for trying. He knew he had to adapt to the modern NFL.

His issue wasn't control over coordinators. It was not hiring competent coordinators in the first place.

His "You be You" approach applied not only to players, but coaches as well.

He should have 1) tried to make it work with what he knew best OR 2) hired the best in the business to get it done.

He didn't do either.

I disagree with a lot of this, but not all. I think he begrudgingly hired Waldron for a couple different reasons. He hired him because I think Russ wanted him, he came from the Rams which should have helped in beating them at some point (it didn't), and Pete was starting to panic and feel the pressure of a league changing and him not really understanding it.

The problem I feel is that Pete couldn't resist from meddling with everything. Waldron brought innovation but Pete wanted it to work within the framework of his own philosophy. I've said it a million times, but if you watch or remember Waldron's first game against Indy a few years back, the offense looked stunning with all the motion and misdirection. The next game and games going forward, it was gone. It was reeled in for some reason and I don't blame that on Waldron. He was handicapped at that point.

As for the defense, the coordinators were terrible choices, but at some point, the defensive minded head coach should step in and do something about it. With years of terrible drafts and not playing to the strengths of the players on the field, it was a recipe for disaster. Pete's philosophy of a 'bend but don't break' defense was not working because there wasn't talent to succeed that way. There needed to be more attacking and taking chances and putting players into positions to succeed. Pete never grasped that his way was not the right way. He also lost track of the ever changing league. It was a clear shot to the arm he lost the plot when Carlos Dunlap had to finally tell his own coaches they weren't using him correctly. They finally relented and Dunlap had a great and productive rest of the season. Players shouldn't have to point things out to the coaches.
 

Jac

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 18, 2009
Messages
1,286
Reaction score
687
The problem I feel is that Pete couldn't resist from meddling with everything. Waldron brought innovation but Pete wanted it to work within the framework of his own philosophy. I've said it a million times, but if you watch or remember Waldron's first game against Indy a few years back, the offense looked stunning with all the motion and misdirection. The next game and games going forward, it was gone. It was reeled in for some reason and I don't blame that on Waldron. He was handicapped at that point.

As for the defense, the coordinators were terrible choices, but at some point, the defensive minded head coach should step in and do something about it. With years of terrible drafts and not playing to the strengths of the players on the field, it was a recipe for disaster. Pete's philosophy of a 'bend but don't break' defense was not working because there wasn't talent to succeed that way. There needed to be more attacking and taking chances and putting players into positions to succeed. Pete never grasped that his way was not the right way. He also lost track of the ever changing league. It was a clear shot to the arm he lost the plot when Carlos Dunlap had to finally tell his own coaches they weren't using him correctly. They finally relented and Dunlap had a great and productive rest of the season. Players shouldn't have to point things out to the coaches.
It'll be interesting to see what Waldron looks like in Chicago. If he turns that offense around and they look modern, that's going to speak volumes about his time here.

The defense was the most unforgivable part of the equation. So much was invested into it, and it went from mediocre to bad over the last number of years (with no turnaround in sight).
 

hoxrox

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 5, 2009
Messages
3,299
Reaction score
1,972
The problem I feel is that Pete couldn't resist from meddling with everything. Waldron brought innovation but Pete wanted it to work within the framework of his own philosophy. I've said it a million times, but if you watch or remember Waldron's first game against Indy a few years back, the offense looked stunning with all the motion and misdirection. The next game and games going forward, it was gone. It was reeled in for some reason and I don't blame that on Waldron. He was handicapped at that point.
Yeah I remember that game. It just doesn't make sense on why he would sabotage his own offense after such a successful game. There's no reasoning for this that seems logical.

Maybe he couldn't resist like you said, but that's the exact opposite of what he's talking about in chapter 12 of his Win Forever book.
 

pittpnthrs

Well-known member
Joined
May 19, 2017
Messages
5,339
Reaction score
1,857
Yeah I remember that game. It just doesn't make sense on why he would sabotage his own offense after such a successful game. There's no reasoning for this that seems logical.

Maybe he couldn't resist like you said, but that's the exact opposite of what he's talking about in chapter 12 of his Win Forever book.

Yeah, I don't know either. Maybe he thought it would lead to turnovers eventually or it was a hard way to control the clock or something. Who knows. Or maybe i'm just way off base with my opinion, but something happened.

I never read his book, but is seems interesting. Might pick it up at some point.
 

Latest posts

Top