“The only Super Bowl victory came after an incredible run in the playoffs, on the road, and a fortunate turn of events in the AFC Divisional game in Cincinnati (thank you, Kimo Von Oelhoffen!).”
C’mon! He tripped!
Oh, and a good comparison to Cowher is John Madden. Also, 1-6 in AFC championships. One super bowl. No HOF until a long career as an announcer and a video game that made him a household name. He was never a HOF coach when his career ended.
Fat bastard.
It’s a little misleading to chalk up #1 to a “dropped pass.” It was a last play hail mary to the end zone, the type of pass that’s completed *maybe *5% of the time.
Likewise, crediting #2 to “a fortunate turn of events” is inaccurate, since the game was only in danger of going into overtime because of two much more unfortunate events (Bettis’ crazy fumble at the 1 as the Steelers were mostly running out the clock, and the ridiculous overturned interception). Also, that was the divisional round, not the Championship Game.
Why? Because he was 2-4 in Championship Games (he actually went to 6, not 7)? He was also 10-5 in the rest of the playoffs, and were those not big games? Because he lost four of the games at home? I don’t really see the relevance. Three of the games were very close affairs which could have gone either way. The 41-27 loss to New England in '04 was a game against a dynastic franchise in which Cowher’s rookie QB turned back into a pumpkin and threw 3 interceptions. Three of the four losses were against the eventual Super Bowl champions.
More fundamentally, it just seems like cherry-picking to support a pre-conceived notion: “Let’s see, he’s .500 or better in Wild Card, Divisional, and Super Bowl games . . . but he’s only 2-4 in Conference Championship games! Ah-ha, he’s a failure as a big game coach!”
Sometimes elite teams lose to other elite teams. It doesn’t mean their coach is a choker, it just means that the other team was a little better that day. To call a guy who coached a lot of playoff games (21) and won most of them (including a Super Bowl) a “failure as a big game coach” is pretty silly.
I think Bill Cowher was both a very good coach and a very lucky one. Lucky in that he worked for an organization that’s not quick to make big changes. A lot of teams wouldn’t have kept him around for so long (ask Marty Schottenheimer what usually happens to coaches who make the playoffs consistently without winning “the big one”).
In his defense, however, I think you’ll find that MOST great coaches have poor records in the postseason. Don Shula and Tom Landry coached over 20 years, and each had “only” two Super Bowls to show for it. Both were playoff losers countless times, and Super Bowl losers more than once. Are they not legitimate Hall of Famers?
I hate this notion that if someone doesn’t win “The Big One”, they’re a bad player/coach/whatever. The raw chances of being on one of those teams that does win is relatively small, even if you are immensely talented, you still have to go against other teams that are as talented as you/have someone as talented as you.
Andy Reid.
So he has a clock management issue. Clearly, Andy Reid is a very good coach.
As a Bears fan, a franchise that could and should be looking for a big name coaching hire in this offseason, I’ve given Bill Cowher and the other talked about candidates a ton of thought. The fact that I’m not rabidly frothing over his hiring really tells you something about his rating in my book.
His credentials are pretty strong as noted in this thread. While there is a little bit of merit to the claim that he’s lost so many big games, I think the fact that he’s been to so many playoffs and that his teams almost always seemed to win the games they were expected to win is a big credit. I find little to criticize with his postseason performance. I can’t really think of many occasions where I felt like the Steelers choked, in all the playoff losses that spring to mind I think I had them as the underdog going in. More than anything I think of the Steelers as an incredibly lucky team that stole way more games than they should have, but Cowher isn’t a choker.
Still, I can’t figure out exactly what the guy does well. I can’t hang my hat on one thing that he’d improve immediately if he came to the Bears. The Steelers always manage to have good personnel but I don’t really credit Cowher with that. He’s not really responsible for great defensive or offensive systems. He’s not a great QB developer. He’s not a innovative play caller.
It seems to me that his only great attribute is motivation and attitude. His teams always played fast, angry, a little dirty and aggressively. They never played scared and they never seemed outmatched, but it all seemed to rely on bravado and great physical conditioning. Those are good things, but again I can’t help but wonder if that’s more a credit to the scouting department and intangible but well channeled Steelers tradition.
Cowher on the Bears actually scares me to death. He seems like a guy angling for complete control and he looks to me like a guy who’d hang himself with too much rope. He’ll demand a ton of money and he’ll no longer want to work within a apparently rigid structure like Pittsburgh, the very structure which seems to be the root of their success. I have no confidence that he’d be able to reel in Cutler or create a running game from scratch. I’m not sure that a complete defensive overhaul to a 3-4 scheme without Dick LeBeau is a good idea. Will he completely kill our one reliable strength in Special Teams?
Now, I think I’d prefer Cowher over Shanahan. I think I’d prefer him over Gruden. It’s probably be a toss up between him and Holmgren, but the more I consider it the more I’d rather hire a elite GM and try and get a rookie HC like Heimerdinger.
Wait, what’s that? That’s Charley Casserley’s music!!
I think Cowher is more of a manager of the team. If he went to the Bears I don’t think you would have to worry about going to a 3-4 unless the best defensive co-ordinator Cowher could bring in was a 3-4 guy. The only area he seemed really involved in tactically in Pittsburgh was the fourth quarter offense when holding a lead and the gadget plays he loves so much. He gets quite involved in player development and scouting.
After the Jerry Angelo experience I think I’d be on board with that.
If this analysis is accurate then I’d be for it. Cowher seems like a stubborn guy and considering the success of the Steelers defense it seems hard to believe that he’d be willing to coach a 4-3 team. He did coach the 3-4 in KC afterall, so it’s not like LeBeau had to sell him on the idea and he was brought into Pittsburgh largely because of his belief in that system. I’d be shocked if he didn’t lead a change to the 3-4 and while I am not opposed to running a 3-4 in Chicago, I’d rather not be a late comer making due with ill-fitted talent and a untested DC running it.
Player development and scouting is the one area the Bears desperately need help in so if there’s any merit to him having a deft touch in that arena his stock would skyrocket.
It’s worth nothing that the Bears reportedly reached out to him recently. The team is denying those rumors but they seem pretty legitimate.
ETA: Incidentally, with the growing hard on I’m developing for the idea of Heimerdinger coaching Cutler here I wonder if Cowher would be able to hire him away from Tennessee and if he’d be willing to remain a OC under someone with his creds.
Just my impression from following the team. If I had access to the same blogs and information as I do now in the Tomlin era I would have a much better idea.
I think the main reason for the switch to the 3-4 was personnel. It was easier at the time to get some heavy 3-4 ends than pass-rushing ends and there were 'tweeners available to play LB. He does seem stubborn though and he also seems like the type of guy who would like the versatility of the 3-4 a lot.
I’m more certain of this area. Cowher was definitely not the lead guy in evaluating talent but he does seem to have been good it. One of the things I heard a lot about him from the various reporters’ blogs is that he’s big on bringing in guys who are good players regardless of whether or not they conform to the stereotypes of the position. In other words, Cowher wouldn’t be the guy to pass on Elvis Dumervil just because he isn’t 6’0 tall or draft a guy just because he’s fast. The game tape would be a bigger factor for him. In terms of player development you would often see him on the sidelines talking to the linebackers. That seemed to be his strongest area (aside from the chin of course).
When was there a switch? Haven’t the Steelers pretty much been a 3-4 team forever?
What’s the read on his relationship with his minions? Is he the kind of guy that got devoted loyalty from his assistants and staff? Would you expect a bunch of defections from the Steelers by the position coaches and scouting department should Cowher come calling with new jobs to offer?
They switched in the mid-eighties. I was too young to understand the switch at the time. I remember older fans (OK, my father) being very displeased. Cowher didn’t seem married to that defense when he joined the team but he had so many other things to learn.
The staff seemed pretty loyal but it’s hard to tell what influence came from Cowher and how much was just the Rooney family. Cowher never publicly showed any sense of betrayal when guys left; I liked that about him. It seems like there was a philosophy that a little bit of turnover in the staff leads to new ideas coming in. Thinking back on it the thing I miss the least about Cowher are the cliches he used to use. The players responded though so I guess that’s all that matters.
Actually, I may have been thinking of Wannstedt :o
Yeah, they switched when Greenwood and Greene retired. I thought you were implying that Cowher oversaw a switch in scheme in his tenure. Considering Cowher played in the 3-4 with the Eagles I’d be shocked if he were to ever coach anything but.
That’s the trickiest part about evaluating Cowher. How much of his best attributes are from the Steelers and Rooneys and how much are of his own. How much of the ones from the organization would be be bringing with him?
No, I was just suggesting he wouldn’t switch unless there was a compelling reason to. For the Bears it would be a complete overhaul, doesn’t seem like a very good plan. A similar situation occurred with Tomlin coming to a 3-4 team after coaching 4-3 teams. A lot of people thought he would dump Dick Lebeau and switch the D. I knew I was going to like Tomlin when he said he would be a fool to get rid of Dick Lebeau and that he would get used to the 3-4.
I have to admit though, if I ever knew Cowher played in a 3-4 defense I forgot it a long time ago. I knew he was with the Eagles but don’t remember him as a player at all.
I used to confuse the two, as well…both became head coaches in the early 90s, both had mustaches. They very quickly diverged on actual performance. 
Cowher didn’t play much as far as I know, I think he was pretty much a benchwarmer. But it’s worth noting that he played under the Eagles of the 80s and Marty Schottenheimer in Cleveland, both 3-4 teams and coached under Schottenheimer entirely in a 3-4 scheme. The guy is basically a 3-4 lifer. I’d be shocked if he kept a 4-3 in Chicago regardless of who the coach was. The Tomlin situation is pretty rare in that a HC was brought in while a coordinator was retained, and probably unique to a legend like LeBeau. I’m not sure there’s another guy out there who’d merit the same consideration now that Johnson died.
Obviously. I was agreeing with you. I wish the Bengals had a coach/team that made the AFC Champ game more often.