Photo

BSL: Is Jim Hostler even qualified...


  • Please log in to reply
65 replies to this topic

#1 BSLMikeRandall

BSLMikeRandall

    Sr. Ravens Analyst

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 19,040 posts

Posted 26 January 2014 - 03:57 PM

http://baltimorespor...ll-nfl-offense/

 

Digging deep into Hostler's past. What, if anything, qualifies him to install and run an NFL offense?

 

EDIT: I know he won't be "installing" a brand new offense. I mean that from a game plan perspective. 


  • BSLChrisStoner, MKlein76, McNulty and 1 other like this
@BSLMikeRandall

#2 Dupin

Dupin

    HOF

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,639 posts

Posted 26 January 2014 - 04:14 PM

Good read, I forgot he was Smith's QB coach before becoming the OC.  Considering what's become of Smith, it's safe to say his tenure in SF is a bigger black mark than I previously thought.  Maybe if it was just the one bad year as an OC you could say that conclusions can't be drawn from that, but his track record is one of mediocrity if we're being kind.  I was surprised Hostler wasn't fired, so him being one of the finalists for the OC job is just baffling to me.  When the complaint over his tenure here is that our receivers can't get consistently open, shouldn't he bear a lot of the responsibility for that?  The scheme and OCs have also been culpable for sure, but I don't really understand what exactly Hostler has going for him.


  • BSLChrisStoner and BSLMikeRandall like this

#3 BSLMikeRandall

BSLMikeRandall

    Sr. Ravens Analyst

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 19,040 posts

Posted 26 January 2014 - 04:20 PM

Good read, I forgot he was Smith's QB coach before becoming the OC.  Considering what's become of Smith, it's safe to say his tenure in SF is a bigger black mark than I previously thought.  Maybe if it was just the one bad year as an OC you could say that conclusions can't be drawn from that, but his track record is one of mediocrity if we're being kind.  I was surprised Hostler wasn't fired, so him being one of the finalists for the OC job is just baffling to me.  When the complaint over his tenure here is that our receivers can't get consistently open, shouldn't he bear a lot of the responsibility for that?  The scheme and OCs have also been culpable for sure, but I don't really understand what exactly Hostler has going for him.

Thank you.

 

Definitely agree with that (in bold)


@BSLMikeRandall

#4 jasterps

jasterps
  • Members
  • 297 posts

Posted 26 January 2014 - 04:23 PM

Hostler's a good friend of Harbs. I don't think this is anything close to a football decision. We all know he's not qualified. My biggest point is this: how can anyone argue that this ISN'T a big downgrade from Cam Cameron? Who knows how it will turn out, but, at this point, it's definitely a move backwards.


  • BSLMikeRandall likes this

#5 BSLMikeRandall

BSLMikeRandall

    Sr. Ravens Analyst

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 19,040 posts

Posted 26 January 2014 - 04:35 PM

Hostler's a good friend of Harbs. I don't think this is anything close to a football decision. We all know he's not qualified. My biggest point is this: how can anyone argue that this ISN'T a big downgrade from Cam Cameron? Who knows how it will turn out, but, at this point, it's definitely a move backwards.

That's the thing. Everything should be a football decision. If it's not best for the team, it's a poor decision. 


@BSLMikeRandall

#6 jasterps

jasterps
  • Members
  • 297 posts

Posted 26 January 2014 - 04:38 PM

That's the thing. Everything should be a football decision. If it's not best for the team, it's a poor decision. 

 

Yes.

 

 Michael Silver ‏@MikeSilver

How can this be a choice? Check their records RT @RapSheet #Ravens to decide Monday. It’s Kyle Shanahan vs in-house candidate Jim Hostler



#7 JohnnyK27

JohnnyK27

    Banned

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2,905 posts
  • LocationWestminster

Posted 26 January 2014 - 04:46 PM

http://baltimorespor...ll-nfl-offense/
 
Digging deep into Hostler's past. What, if anything, qualifies him to install and run an NFL offense?
 
EDIT: I know he won't be "installing" a brand new offense. I mean that from a game plan perspective. 


In a word NO!

#8 BSLGabeFerguson

BSLGabeFerguson

    Ravens Analyst

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,065 posts
  • LocationCity of Angels

Posted 26 January 2014 - 04:48 PM

That's the thing. Everything should be a football decision. If it's not best for the team, it's a poor decision.


I don't mean to be rude, but why is this even a discussion? I mean seriously, who are we to cast judgement about this. I'm all for listening to people's opinions but when it gets to the point where there is a narrative about Harbaugh not doing what is best for the team you are losing me. You may not agree with the decision and there may even be dissenters within the organization but I guarantee there are sound football reasons whatever the decision is.
@gabefergy

#9 jasterps

jasterps
  • Members
  • 297 posts

Posted 26 January 2014 - 04:53 PM

I don't mean to be rude, but why is this even a discussion? I mean seriously, who are we to cast judgement about this. I'm all for listening to people's opinions but when it gets to the point where there is a narrative about Harbaugh not doing what is best for the team you are losing me. You may not agree with the decision and there may even be dissenters within the organization but I guarantee there are sound football reasons whatever the decision is.

 

I think the argument is that his loyalty to his guys -- his friends -- is clouding his judgment. He wants continuity, obviously. But at what point is he being too loyal where he is passing up better candidates? I think this is clearly that point. If you want to make the best football decision, you go get Norv (who is also AC, just as Hostler has always been). The guy didn't even get an interview here - seemed like zero interest. 



#10 BSLMikeRandall

BSLMikeRandall

    Sr. Ravens Analyst

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 19,040 posts

Posted 26 January 2014 - 05:02 PM

I don't mean to be rude, but why is this even a discussion? I mean seriously, who are we to cast judgement about this. I'm all for listening to people's opinions but when it gets to the point where there is a narrative about Harbaugh not doing what is best for the team you are losing me. You may not agree with the decision and there may even be dissenters within the organization but I guarantee there are sound football reasons whatever the decision is.

Sure. We don't get to sit in the interview room. We don't hear everything spelled out for us. But If you go by what we can see, their resumes and past successes, It's pretty obvious who the choice is. Maybe if this is the choice, Harbs will tell us why. Maybe we'll learn something we don't know that we like about Hostler. But If the reason simply continuity, then I'll be furious. 


  • jasterps likes this
@BSLMikeRandall

#11 BSLGabeFerguson

BSLGabeFerguson

    Ravens Analyst

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,065 posts
  • LocationCity of Angels

Posted 26 January 2014 - 05:05 PM

I think the argument is that his loyalty to his guys -- his friends -- is clouding his judgment. He wants continuity, obviously. But at what point is he being too loyal where he is passing up better candidates? I think this is clearly that point. If you want to make the best football decision, you go get Norv (who is also AC, just as Hostler has always been). The guy didn't even get an interview here - seemed like zero interest.


I understand that, but there is a flip side to the same argument. Why bring in someone new who is basically going to run the same or similar system, just for the sake of change? Change doesn't always mean good. I understand that it seems like it would after this past season, but I also remember a pretty efficient offense in last seasons playoffs. Was that a fluke or was it a function of well designed and executed offense?

IMO what changed the most from 2012 to 2013 was the personnel. With Hostler you have a guy who already has good working relationships with the players and staff. He has intimate knowledge of the playbook and what has worked and what hasn't. I think that has some value.
@gabefergy

#12 BSLGabeFerguson

BSLGabeFerguson

    Ravens Analyst

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,065 posts
  • LocationCity of Angels

Posted 26 January 2014 - 05:10 PM

Sure. We don't get to sit in the interview room. We don't hear everything spelled out for us. But If you go by what we can see, their resumes and past successes, It's pretty obvious who the choice is. Maybe if this is the choice, Harbs will tell us why. Maybe we'll learn something we don't know that we like about Hostler. But If the reason simply continuity, then I'll be furious.


I would say wait and see what the results look like before being upset about it. From what I have gleaned from the situation, this decision is not completely up to Harbaugh. If Hostler does get the job, that means he was good enough to overcome whatever questions there were about him internally suggesting Ozzie and SB are on board with the hire.
  • jkough1 likes this
@gabefergy

#13 jkough1

jkough1

    HOF

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,238 posts

Posted 26 January 2014 - 05:10 PM

I think the argument is that his loyalty to his guys -- his friends -- is clouding his judgment. He wants continuity, obviously. But at what point is he being too loyal where he is passing up better candidates? I think this is clearly that point. If you want to make the best football decision, you go get Norv (who is also AC, just as Hostler has always been). The guy didn't even get an interview here - seemed like zero interest. 

 

This is where you lose me.  You think Norv is the best option.  To use Mike Randall's question, who are you to tell us who's best to set a gameplan?  What's your football resume?  How much do you know about Joe?  Or Norv?  Or their potential relationship?  Or about what Joe has promised if Hostler is the new coach?  I mean seriously, how qualified are you to say anything about this?  Based on my assumptions from reading your posts and looking at your BSL profile I can say I'm not all that thrilled with your background.  (See how that works).  

 

How qualified is Hostler to make and install a game plan.  A lot.   How much better would someone else be?  Now that's a fair question.  But is he qualified?  This guy has coached in the NFL since 2003.  He knows more about football than any of us.  And he's forgotten more since I started this post than I know.  

 

People will seriously be furious?  I think the problems with this team are really clear.  And any football mind will sit down and tell you how to fix it.  Furious?  Let Hostler try and make some changes.  If we're still Alaska Alaska.  And the run game is still in shambles from the ZBC then you can be pissed.  But until we see what Hostler wants to do with all that, it's nothing but a bunch of fans spouting passion from an area that they can't make a meaningful assessment.  

 

You know what I'm more furious about, I'm furious that Caldwell took Austin.  You want to talk about a crappy coaching move.  Caldwell came in here, stole a good coach from our tree and just walked with him.  In the long run of this team, that's going to be a much bigger loss IMO than if we go with Hostler or Shanahan.  Austin was probably the next internal DC for us and we lost him.  Maybe that's why you don't hire the next Caldwell, ie. Norv or Kubiak.  Because as soon as they get to be a HC again they'll steal your talent and leave you on the side of the curb.  



#14 jasterps

jasterps
  • Members
  • 297 posts

Posted 26 January 2014 - 05:31 PM

You know what I'm more furious about, I'm furious that Caldwell took Austin.  You want to talk about a crappy coaching move.  Caldwell came in here, stole a good coach from our tree and just walked with him.  In the long run of this team, that's going to be a much bigger loss IMO than if we go with Hostler or Shanahan.  Austin was probably the next internal DC for us and we lost him.  Maybe that's why you don't hire the next Caldwell, ie. Norv or Kubiak.  Because as soon as they get to be a HC again they'll steal your talent and leave you on the side of the curb.  

 

Well my theory is that it didn't matter to Harbs that he lost TA to Detroit (they could of blocked it if they wanted to), because that just means he'll get to promote his boy Spags to DB coach. We'll see.



#15 BSLMikeRandall

BSLMikeRandall

    Sr. Ravens Analyst

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 19,040 posts

Posted 26 January 2014 - 05:33 PM

People will seriously be furious?  I think the problems with this team are really clear.  And any football mind will sit down and tell you how to fix it.  Furious?  Let Hostler try and make some changes.  If we're still Alaska Alaska.  And the run game is still in shambles from the ZBC then you can be pissed.  But until we see what Hostler wants to do with all that, it's nothing but a bunch of fans spouting passion from an area that they can't make a meaningful assessment.  

 

You know what I'm more furious about, I'm furious that Caldwell took Austin.  You want to talk about a crappy coaching move.  Caldwell came in here, stole a good coach from our tree and just walked with him.  In the long run of this team, that's going to be a much bigger loss IMO than if we go with Hostler or Shanahan.  Austin was probably the next internal DC for us and we lost him.  Maybe that's why you don't hire the next Caldwell, ie. Norv or Kubiak.  Because as soon as they get to be a HC again they'll steal your talent and leave you on the side of the curb.  

All I'm getting at is Shanahan has been a successful OC, and Hostler hasn't. Yeah, we can wait and see. But if we just wait and see, then why are so many people up in arms about what the Orioles are doing, or not doing is more like it. Wait and see. Maybe they will win 100 games and maybe David Lough is an All-Star. 

 

So they are supposed to hire coaches that won't take jobs elsewhere and steal you're coaching staff? So you hire terrible coaches so they can sit around your team for what, six years, since no one else will want them. That's the business. Rex Ryan took his guys, Pagano took his, and it's up to the team to find the next guy. That's the NFL. C'mon man. 


  • jasterps likes this
@BSLMikeRandall

#16 BSLGabeFerguson

BSLGabeFerguson

    Ravens Analyst

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,065 posts
  • LocationCity of Angels

Posted 26 January 2014 - 05:36 PM

Well my theory is that it didn't matter to Harbs that he lost TA to Detroit (they could of blocked it if they wanted to), because that just means he'll get to promote his boy Spags to DB coach. We'll see.

It's pretty dirty to block a coach from taking an upwards move.


  • BSLMikeRandall likes this
@gabefergy

#17 jasterps

jasterps
  • Members
  • 297 posts

Posted 26 January 2014 - 05:39 PM

People will seriously be furious?  I think the problems with this team are really clear.  And any football mind will sit down and tell you how to fix it.  Furious?  Let Hostler try and make some changes.  If we're still Alaska Alaska.  And the run game is still in shambles from the ZBC then you can be pissed.  But until we see what Hostler wants to do with all that, it's nothing but a bunch of fans spouting passion from an area that they can't make a meaningful assessment.  

 

Why are you insinuating that I can be pissed only if it's same-old, same-old? I'll be pissed right away as soon as he is hired as OC for all the negatives he has going against him as previously discussed. That doesn't mean I won't want him to succeed -- I do. And it doesn't mean he won't succeed -- he could. As Mike Randall said, this is a reactionary business. I'm not in wait & see mode. I'm reacting to the move we're likely to make tomorrow - and based off all the negatives (as well as a couple positives like continuity & his relationship with Joe), I don't like it.


  • BSLMikeRandall likes this

#18 jasterps

jasterps
  • Members
  • 297 posts

Posted 26 January 2014 - 05:42 PM

It's pretty dirty to block a coach from taking an upwards move.

 

The Ravens have done it before. They did it with Rex Ryan when he was a D-Line coach & thought of as a future DC for us. I'm pretty sure Miller or someone else reported that we blocked Pagano from taking DL coach Brooks to be his DC in Indy.  Other teams have done it & do it (Bills haven't even yet agreed to allow their LB coach to go be Pettine's DC & they have til Monday to do it). If he's your future DC & he means a lot to you (especially when your current DC is 65 years old), you block it.



#19 BSLGabeFerguson

BSLGabeFerguson

    Ravens Analyst

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,065 posts
  • LocationCity of Angels

Posted 26 January 2014 - 05:46 PM

Why are you insinuating that I can be pissed only if it's same-old, same-old? I'll be pissed right away as soon as he is hired as OC for all the negatives he has going against him as previously discussed. That doesn't mean I won't want him to succeed -- I do. And it doesn't mean he won't succeed -- he could. As Mike Randall said, this is a reactionary business. I'm not in wait & see mode. I'm reacting to the move we're likely to make tomorrow - and based off all the negatives (as well as a couple positives like continuity & his relationship with Joe), I don't like it.

What are all these negatives? He had one poor season as an OC 7 years ago on a team that was a complete mess? Granted, it's not something you look at as a positive, but Shanahan had a pretty awful couple years in DC as well until he got some talent to work with.


@gabefergy

#20 BSLGabeFerguson

BSLGabeFerguson

    Ravens Analyst

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,065 posts
  • LocationCity of Angels

Posted 26 January 2014 - 05:50 PM

The Ravens have done it before. They did it with Rex Ryan when he was a D-Line coach & thought of as a future DC for us. I'm pretty sure Miller or someone else reported that we blocked Pagano from taking DL coach Brooks to be his DC in Indy.  Other teams have done it & do it (Bills haven't even yet agreed to allow their LB coach to go be Pettine's DC & they have til Monday to do it). If he's your future DC & he means a lot to you (especially when your current DC is 65 years old), you block it.

Well, maybe there is a difference because Austin already had a relationship with Caldwell dating to their time at PSU. Besides, who is to say Austin was the DC in waiting here? I think Wink Martindale would be the next man up.


  • 1970 likes this
@gabefergy




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

Partners