Is Mike Martz a good coach?
 

Every game I see him coach, I think, "that man is a bad coach."

But I wish that my Saints had the success over the past few seasons that the Rams have had.

I'm confused.

No.

He may very well be a good offensive co-ordinator, though.

I wouldn't think he's even worth that.

He's an excellent QB/WR coach.

I think, at minimum, that Martz is the worst coach I have ever seen in terms of clock and timeout management.

I think his comment a few years ago that they don't mind turnovers because they'll score so much more by taking more chances did nothing to help his image.

That's about as nice as I can be. I don't think there's another coach in the NFL that i expect to blow games like I do with martz.

No.

Yup.

I agree with all of you.

Which leads to what I think my real question is: How do the Rams keep getting to the playoffs?

Pure talent on offense is my guess.

Bad coach, great coordinator.

he's an idiot. I can only dream of the bad coaching decisions a Vikings/Rams game would bring.

Helps when the rest of your conference foes doesn't come out to play either.

if you ask Mike Martz who the best coach is, he will tell you he is the best :)

Interesting. The main thing people seem to have a comment about is his timeout/clock management decisions. I'm curious, not being particularly familiar with Martz, do these screw ups really offset any other positives Martz brings to the table? Or is this area the one that exemplifies all the negatives? Could the fact that these types of decisions are the ones that are the most obvious, and under the most scrutiny be a large reason Martz is seen as a bad coach? Or perhaps it's that he has never improved in this area, and still makes the same mistakes over and over again that have earned him this title? I'm just trying to figure out why inability to manage the clock makes one a bad coach, when there are so many other aspects of being a coach.

I think of Mark Richt at the University [sic] of Georgia. His first year there were several games where his clock management was called into question. It was a black mark on a rather solid year. Since then he has demonstrated that he learned from those mistakes and got better. I believe he is generally viewed as a very good coach. Would Martz have a better reputation if he had simply worked on and improved this aspect of his coaching?

I think another major criticism of Martz is that he has a pretty large tendency to ignore glaring matchup and gameplan advantages in favor of doing what he wants to do (passing!).

In the few games I see each year, he generally does make a few mystifying decisions.

Partially, yes. It would indicate that Martz realizes he has flaws as a coach and was working to fix them. It's indictive of the bigger problem with Martz. He's very unflexible. He doesn't realize his coaching has flaws and even when he should be adapting his gameplan for a team with a different defensive style, he'll still do what he wants.

Not only that but he can't recognize when his defense may need some help and run a different offense to consume time. Some games need to be a grind it game some don't.

Martz just says f-it. We wing it and what happens, happens. Very amateurish.

IMO he's not a very good head coach. They're a team of 'what if's' and I think if Vermeil had stuck around they would have had a few more legitimate chances at winning the superbowl.

He may have helped revitalize Vermeil's offense in the early Rams days, but i'm not sure I would even consider him a good OC. Too many times I've seen him completely abandon the run game when they desparately could have used some balance and/or clock management. And this is 2-3 years ago when Marshall was still running well.

As for why he keeps making the playoffs .... how many teams who get to feast on Arizona, SF, and Seattle twice a year wouldn't make the playoffs. Just beating those teams gives you six wins and they only needed eight to make the playoffs.

may have. Vermeil has gone to KC and their offense is now just as good as the Rams, maybe even better. I would say that offensive system is more of a product of Vermeil than Martz and over time it has gotten worse with Martz because he refuses to run

They've also had some extremely good teams in his tenure. The 2000 and 2001 teams were both very good, the 2001 team might be the best team to have not won a SB.

However, he has made some bonehead decisions. In the SB the Pats won, why not give the ball to Faulk? Why not cut down the number of turnovers, etc? That said, part of the reason for his time management blunders is because of the way he calls in plays. If the QB goes to the line, and Martz sees something he likes in the D, he will call in a new play then. That is why they burn a lot of time outs.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!!!

3 reasons:

1. Seattle Seahawks
2. Arizona Cardinals
3. San Francisco 49ers

Mike Martz is the worst head coach in football.

I can tell you this...he's one HELL of a bad spokesperson.

You know those jackasses who have never completed any project, built anything on their own or learned anything in their careers but bullshit and kissed ass enough to make it to the top? Sure you do, every office has one.

Just so happens, so do the St. Louis Rams.

The answer to the main question is NO.

He does make a lot of terrible decisions as a head coach. He is a great offensive mind, though, if he could shield his ego from getting in the way. The Rams have the most complex offense in the NFL.

I think he's a good coach, but terrible on the sidelines during games. He's perfect as an offensive coordinator who does his work during practice.

I would say "no" as well, but he has been getting the job done for us. Most of this team was built by Charlie Army and Dick Vermeil... but his draft picks are starting to pick it up after a really S L O W start to their careers.

I don't think we can fully access his coaching style for a few more seasons, although if he makes it into the Super Bowl again this year, I'll have to change that "no" into a "yes".

Todd

If he makes it to the Super Bowl this year I'll have to change my pants. :p

Nah there was some guy who coached the Giants shortly after Parcells. He couldn't buy a clue about when to call a timeout. It is a shame I can't remember his name, and am too lazy to find it. He had no credentials when he got the job, and if he lasted more than a year he didn't deserve to.

If he wins the Super Bowl, I'll change your pants.


Todd

I looked it up. Ray Handley? I have no recollection of this guy.

Most Giants fans have the same response.

The guy looked like a dork as well.

Poor Ray Handley, he just wasn't made for coaching in the NFL. Think of Rich Kotite and then multiply the awfullness 25 times.

Yes I think Handley was the worst coach, certainly the worst sideline coach, I can recall at the NFL level. He just didn't have what it takes to be "the Guy". It was painful to watch him, and I wasn't even a Giants fan.

I don't know...Handley was bad, but he only had 2 years to display his awefulness. Kotite had probably the 3 worst years in the history of football. Who loses their last 7 games with one team and then goes 4-28 with his new, relatively talented team?

Wow..I feel really, like old. It wasn't THAT long ago. 14-15 years maybe. Guess we have a lot of young'uns comin onboard.

The NY Post headline when Handley got fired "End of an Error"

Pure Genius. Not quite "snatchmo" but genius in its own right.

Best Post quote I can remember...1994

"Clang, clang, clang went the title." Anyone have any guesses on what it is?

How many times have the Chiefs been to the super bowl in Vermeil's tenure?

This helps shed some light on the situation:

http://www.sportspickle.com/features...005-martz.html

Marc Bulger has been doing pretty well this year on my FF team. I don't care if he wants to pass all the time.

I think you'll see this year, the bottom is going to fall out.
I see them with a losing record this year.

It's defense that wins championships anyways. Albeit very boring
to watch the New England Patriots, they are "kick-ass defense, everyone
is responsible for their position" winners.
I'd rather the Rams be known as that kind of team.

First, Vermeil had a terrible offense in St. Louis prior to Martz coming to town (although that might have been a reflection of Tony Banks as well). He came to town and they won a Super Bowl. However, Vermeil had the final say on a lot of calls, so I think he was a good brake on Martz. Still, back in those days, the Rams would line up and knock you off the ball, look at the 2001 NFC Championship against the Eagles, the Rams in the second half just kept giving the ball to Faulk and won.

That would never happen now though.

I think their defense was seriously underrated as well in their Super Bowl year.

Heavens yes. It was #6 in the league that year!

That's not giving Al Saunders, the Offensive Coordinator in KC, any credit, tho. That said, one could make the argument that if you give anyone this offensive line, Tony Gonzalez, Priest Holmes, Tony Richardson, and Trent Green, they could make anyone look good.

And if you want to see how much difference the offensive line makes, just look at what has happened at the start of this year- 200 yards on the ground in game 1 with bazillion time Pro Bowler Willie Roaf in there, not much since.

SI

Funny you say that, but is it the system or the players? Most people think it's the system in New England (ala the Brady-Manning discussion last week); why wouldn't it be it in KC? Gonzalez was the only star there before Dick.

And now it all comes together.

I was very happy to see this thread. Why? I hate Mike Martz.

Mike Martz sux!

I had posted in another thread about Martz. Pro Football Prospectus had a long article on Martz. It talked about how he was the only coach to get more wins from his team than "expected" every year for a five year period.

Also pointed out a stat that just boggled my mind. (and this one isn't an opinion, it was a real stat) From 1972 through last year Mike Martz was the best coach in the NFL at winning a game when he had a lead at any point in the fourth quarter. He wins over 90% of the time in those situations.

Now, it can be pointed out that he blows a lot of teams out, but I went back and looked and he's had more than his fair share of 7 point or less games. The stat is really remarkable. Point blank, if Martz gets a lead in the fourth, he closes the deal more often than Bill Belicek.

Obviously, you have to get a lead through three quarters for all of that to matter, but it's still an odd stat that I found very surprising.

And no, I don't want Martz coaching my football team. It's just numbers that were hard to look away from.

Single most acceptable response to this really simple question.

That's key!

You say that like Holmes and Green had success pre-Vermeil...

I remember Holmes had a 1000 yard year in Baltimore and then something happened the next year and he lost out to Lewis- injury, I think. KC picked him up on the cheap and he became the best TD machine in the league for a couple of years.

Green still doesn't get mentioned as an elite QB so let's not go nuts like he's being compared to Peyton or something. Judging by the "fourth best QB" thread, he hangs out around 8th and always gets that damning-with-faint-praise "he's the most underrated QB in the NFL". He had a nice half year in Washington (I remember because he saved my fantasy team's ass that year) and had some really nice numbers in St Louis and was primed to be their QB and not Warner until he got a season-ending injury in the preseason.

My point being, the signs were there that they had talent before but it wasn't really tapped until they got there and the Chiefs benefited by grabbing them both off of injuries. And I'll still contend that they're as much a product of the offensive line than anything- put them behind an average one and their numbers look slightly above but much more in line with average.

SI