Well hell then, after he came to Dallas and sat under Wison's tutelage again he improved enough to get a starting job again. Is that what you are saying? You can't have it both ways. He was either developed well in his early career or he wasn't good enough to hold the jobs he was given. You now seem to think that Denver and Chicago made a mistake. That would indicate he was developed well.
The very willingness to be this person says it all about Wilson.
Orton under Wade Wilson played poorly. Orton after Wade Wilson left Chicago played well. Just like Alex Smith played better when John Harbaugh showed up in San Fran. Orton played better when a passable QB coach showed up. IDGAF if Orton was or wasn't given a starting position. The fact that Tebow was drafted by, and named the starter of, a team that Orton was benched on is an indictment of the team. Same with Chicago trading for Cutler.
Playing more conservative when we're winning, not going all out to make the play when he needs to take care of the football. You know that's what I meant. That's why I referenced the Detroit, NYJ and Green Bay games earlier.
I'll respond to this twice since I don't think people read posts that aren't directed towards them. If Garrett was responsible for Romo, what about getting the backups ready to play? Did Weeden look well coached against AZ?
Your examples are not compelling. Orton was a young player under Wilson. He was bound to get better and did. Aikman was on his last legs and it wouldnt matter who the coach was Aikman was going to play his way.. He ws developed beyond needing anyone. You say Romo has regressed under Wilson but the stats will dispute that. Romo has gotten better with time and an improved OL. Without a coach it would have happened. These are interesting thoughts but really don't directly indicate anything that says Wilson is the catylist to it.
Yes he has been in the league a long time and doesn't have a sterling resume. That's exactly my point. He is apparently good enough to stay employeed but not an over achiver. That says he is average at best and somewhat invisable but it doesn't say he is a bad coach. He is one of dozens who are experienced enough to stay employed. The entire work force has mediorce employees but they aren't bad. There just average or mediorce. That is the most I can say about him. In my view thats about all anyone can say about him.
I don't credit Wilson either. That isn't the issue. It's not how good Wilson is rather is he a bad coach? It's prima faca that he is at least average by virtue of being able to stay in the league this long. The description or label he gets by posters on this site is that he is bad. I can only conclude that he is at least good enough to get by. That doesn't make him bad in my view rather he is someone that just fades into the background, hence he is an invisible coach to most but at least he is apparently acceptable by his peers.
When you have 32 jobs in the NFL and hundreds of people in the college ranks that want that job, sticking with a coach that AT BEST can be considered mediocre is stupid. You should always be looking to improve your coaching staff the way you should always be looking to improve your roster.
May well be stupid but that is a debate about management. My issue is simply that I am not convinced Wilson is a bad coach. I only see evidence thst he is likely an average middle of the road coach.
By your standard there is no such thing as evidence that someone is a bad coach because we can always "not know" whether it's his fault or the players' fault that he isn't getting results. By the same token we don't know if any coaches are good because they could be just benefiting from great talent.
By my standard I observe that Wilson has lasted this long in the league. He must be a reasonable coach otherwise if he were a bad coach he wouldn't have lasted this long. That's what I offer as my evidence. If he was detrimental to a team or their QBs it would get around and he couldn't get a job. He obviously does enough to stay in the system. That much is conclusive.
Same argument can used against him. 15 years in the league and never a sniff of a promotion.
Probably waiting on a heavy news cycle day so the attention of reducing the sentence of an alleged horrible human will be minimal.
You are missing the point. I am not holding the guy up as being good. Never have from the start. You make my point by saying he has been in the league for 15 years. He is apparently acceptable but that's all I am saying about the guy. You seem to think I am endorsing him.
