Tom Coughlin's problem: he's too nice.

[JMFP2]

He turned over a new leaf, and it helped him reconcile with Strahan, and in turn guided the team to the Super Bowl.

But Strahan is retired now, AP too, and this team doesn't have the players with the leadership qualities needed to police their own attitudes.

Rolle might be the exception, but I doubt his teammates take him seriously, and his play doesn't back up his message.

I think Coughlin has just been too easy on these guys since they won the SB, and this also goes for his coordinators.

Does anyone think for a minute that Parcells would have put up with what he saw on the field, and from his coordinators, v. the Redkins?

[Ruttiger711]

[quote user="JMFP2"]He turned over a new leaf, and it helped him reconcile with Strahan, and in turn guided the team to the Super Bowl. But Strahan is retired now, AP too, and this team doesn't have the players with the leadership qualities needed to police their own attitudes. Rolle might be the exception, but I doubt his teammates take him seriously, and his play doesn't back up his message. I think Coughlin has just been too easy on these guys since they won the SB, and this also goes for his coordinators. Does anyone think for a minute that Parcells would have put up with what he saw on the field, and from his coordinators, v. the Redkins?[/quote]</P>


</P>


Is this true? I could swear I've read other posters write that Coughlin managed to change for the superbowl run but he's "reverted to his old ways" and thats why no big FA's want to play here. </P>


So is it a "player's coach" that we want or is it a hard-***?</P>

[NYSPORTS]

Do you realize how much this roster has turned over since the Superbowl?

[yoeddy]

[quote user="Ruttiger711"]

[quote user="JMFP2"]He turned over a new leaf, and it helped him reconcile with Strahan, and in turn guided the team to the Super Bowl. But Strahan is retired now, AP too, and this team doesn't have the players with the leadership qualities needed to police their own attitudes. Rolle might be the exception, but I doubt his teammates take him seriously, and his play doesn't back up his message. I think Coughlin has just been too easy on these guys since they won the SB, and this also goes for his coordinators. Does anyone think for a minute that Parcells would have put up with what he saw on the field, and from his coordinators, v. the Redkins?[/quote]</P>


*</P>


Is this true?* I could swear I've read other posters write that Coughlin managed to change for the superbowl run but he's "reverted to his old ways" and thats why no big FA's want to play here.* </P>


So is it a "player's coach" that we want or is it a hard-***?</P>[/quote]

No big FAs want to play here because Reese isn't willing to pay them big money...

[burier]

Dude he went right back to his old ways after he got his new contract. He just brought the players council back this year after dismantling it on 09 because he knew he had to produce this season.

He's just run his course. Being a hardass is cool as long as your winning. If you're not the players tune stuff out pretty quick. We're losers for 3 years running.

[RoanokeFan]

[quote user="Ruttiger711"]

[quote user="JMFP2"]He turned over a new leaf, and it helped him reconcile with Strahan, and in turn guided the team to the Super Bowl. But Strahan is retired now, AP too, and this team doesn't have the players with the leadership qualities needed to police their own attitudes. Rolle might be the exception, but I doubt his teammates take him seriously, and his play doesn't back up his message. I think Coughlin has just been too easy on these guys since they won the SB, and this also goes for his coordinators. Does anyone think for a minute that Parcells would have put up with what he saw on the field, and from his coordinators, v. the Redkins?[/quote]</p>


</p>


Is this true? I could swear I've read other posters write that Coughlin managed to change for the superbowl run but he's "reverted to his old ways" <font color="#0000FF">and thats why no big FA's want to play here. </font></p>


So is it a "player's coach" that we want or is it a hard-***?</p>[/quote]

This is the drum beat of the "Haters Inc." Coughlin is to blame for everything up to and including genital herpes to some fans. They point to past comments of Tiki Barber and Plaxico Burress to buttress up their position. They will even go so far as to add Strahan, Phillips, and Rolle to the list but all three of them have said most recently that TC is a good coach. Strahan admits he hated TC until he finally understood what his philosophy is. Rolle was a FA so how did he not want to "play for Coughlin."

Fans are very passionate and let their emotional get in the way of logic at times.

[RoanokeFan]

[quote user="Ruttiger711"]

[quote user="JMFP2"]He turned over a new leaf, and it helped him reconcile with Strahan, and in turn guided the team to the Super Bowl. But Strahan is retired now, AP too, and this team doesn't have the players with the leadership qualities needed to police their own attitudes. Rolle might be the exception, but I doubt his teammates take him seriously, and his play doesn't back up his message. I think Coughlin has just been too easy on these guys since they won the SB, and this also goes for his coordinators. Does anyone think for a minute that Parcells would have put up with what he saw on the field, and from his coordinators, v. the Redkins?[/quote]</p>


</p>


Is this true? I could swear I've read other posters write that Coughlin managed to change for the superbowl run but he's "reverted to his old ways" <font color="#0000FF">and thats why no big FA's want to play here. </font></p>


So is it a "player's coach" that we want or is it a hard-***?</p>[/quote]

This is the drum beat of the "Haters Inc." Coughlin is to blame for everything up to and including genital herpes to some fans. They point to past comments of Tiki Barber and Plaxico Burress to buttress up their position. They will even go so far as to add Strahan, Phillips, and Rolle to the list but all three of them have said most recently that TC is a good coach. Strahan admits he hated TC until he finally understood what his philosophy is. Rolle was a FA so how did he not want to "play for Coughlin."

Fans are very passionate and let their emotional get in the way of logic at times.

Players' coaches and hard line coaches get results. Ryan and Coughlin are about as far apart as could be on the coaching style spectrum. Which one's team is blazing a trail at the moment?

[RoanokeFan]

[quote user="yoeddy"][quote user="Ruttiger711"]

[quote user="JMFP2"]He turned over a new leaf, and it helped him reconcile with Strahan, and in turn guided the team to the Super Bowl. But Strahan is retired now, AP too, and this team doesn't have the players with the leadership qualities needed to police their own attitudes. Rolle might be the exception, but I doubt his teammates take him seriously, and his play doesn't back up his message. I think Coughlin has just been too easy on these guys since they won the SB, and this also goes for his coordinators. Does anyone think for a minute that Parcells would have put up with what he saw on the field, and from his coordinators, v. the Redkins?[/quote]</p>


</p>


Is this true? I could swear I've read other posters write that Coughlin managed to change for the superbowl run but he's "reverted to his old ways" and thats why no big FA's want to play here. </p>


So is it a "player's coach" that we want or is it a hard-***?</p>[/quote]

No big FAs want to play here because Reese isn't willing to pay them big money...[/quote]

That's really not true. The GIANTS philosophy is to build from withing and via the draft. They just don't believe it's wise to take on "someone else's headache" as George Young said many years ago. That sentiment is still alive today in the FO.

[burier]

[quote user="RoanokeFan"][quote user="yoeddy"][quote user="Ruttiger711"]

[quote user="JMFP2"]He turned over a new leaf, and it helped him reconcile with Strahan, and in turn guided the team to the Super Bowl. But Strahan is retired now, AP too, and this team doesn't have the players with the leadership qualities needed to police their own attitudes. Rolle might be the exception, but I doubt his teammates take him seriously, and his play doesn't back up his message. I think Coughlin has just been too easy on these guys since they won the SB, and this also goes for his coordinators. Does anyone think for a minute that Parcells would have put up with what he saw on the field, and from his coordinators, v. the Redkins?[/quote]</p>


*</p>


Is this true?* I could swear I've read other posters write that Coughlin managed to change for the superbowl run but he's "reverted to his old ways" and thats why no big FA's want to play here.* </p>


So is it a "player's coach" that we want or is it a hard-***?</p>[/quote]

No big FAs want to play here because Reese isn't willing to pay them big money...[/quote]

That's really not true.* The GIANTS philosophy is to build from withing and via the draft.* They just don't believe it's wise to take on "someone else's headache" as George Young said many years ago.* That sentiment is still alive today in the FO.
[/quote]

If ownership cares about the team and the fans then Coughlin will be fired baring some resurgence by the Giants. We win these next two games and then do something in the playoffs.

It doesn't matter whos fault it is. 7 of the 8 years he's been here we've won 0 playoffs games. Something isn't working

[threenout]

Just as we cleaned house with Shockey and Burress it's time to do the same with Rolle, Ross, Canty, Grant.............

This is not what the NY Giants are all about. They currently are an embarrassment across the board.

A good portion of them really don't care about their performance from week to week.

Clean house entirely.