Tony Dungy VS Jimmy Johnson HOF

[JohnTurney]

I would lean Dungy if choosing between the two, but his candidacy has a couple issues.


I would put Dungy on the level of Siefert, who gets no love. But their records are similar.

Dungy 148-79 for a .652 percentage . . . 1 Super Bowl win
Siefert 124-67 for a .649 percentage 2 Super Bowl wins

Gruden did take Dungy's team to SB win, but Dungy kind of took Mora's tean to Super Bowl win .. .

Innovations" Dungy is credited with tinkering with Carson's cover-2, but there is some debate in the committee as to where Dungy got some of those things, Some think Kiffen taught Dungy when both were in Minny.

Siefert was a good DC before he became head coach, the so-called elephant spot for Haley . . . but not sure how much of an innovation it was. It was a 3-4 defense that had one OLB with a hand in the dirt much of the time, a one-gap type 3-4 . . .

Now, my question is either Siefert or Dungy worthy? well . .. no, IMO.

There are only 25 coaches with more than 1 championship, Johnson is one of those and Switzer gravy-trained his SB off of Johnson's team.

Dungy has a good bit of successful assistant coaching under his belt. He also has 36 more games coached than Seifert, about two seasons worth. Being the first successful coach of color will definitely be seen as a huge plus.

Question: how different are the Tampa-2 and Cover-2? Are the changes modest or more substantial?

Coach TJ would give a better answer, but rather than having 2 deep, 5 short, you have 2 deep, 4 short and a MLB who covers the "hole" between the safeties.
The Tampa-2 is sometimes called the Cover 2-1/2 because of how the middle zone is changed.

Dungy does have a good bit a successful coaching, but so does Siefert, he was 49ers defensive coordinator for three Super Bowl wins, and the 1981 49er defense, with Dean, Lott, Hacksaw was pretty good, got really good in 1984-88.

The difference is Dungy does have 36 more games but Siefert one more ring as HC and 3 more rings as an assistant.

[74_75_78_79_]

My attitude towards Jimmy has changed. I still do consider the #1 reason for the Dallas dynasty being the Herschel trade but not as unanimous. Had the Vikes backed off, Jimmy (being the great de-facto GM/wheeler-dealer/eye-for-talent he was) would have still gotten a good deal from some other team. A significantly lesser Walker trade elsewhere and he still is a success in Big D, at the very least clinching a couple NFCCG berths. And, yes, not long ago I still held the "no-improvement" thing against his tenure in Miami but now I lean much more toward what Veesh and Reaser had to say on this thread. I think the new way to look at it should be asking 'what-if' he was still at helm for '00 & '01 instead of Wanny who actually posted back-to-back 11-5s, winning a playoff game the first of those years and having the same record as SB-champ NE the following year. Good points, Reaser, in comparing Jimmy's Miami time with Flores, Seifert, Shanny, and Gibbs' 2nd tenures. Yes, Parcells less successful his time in Big D as well, but he not being around in '07 to reap what he built could be seen in the same light as Jimmy not being in Miami a couple years more to reap his own bennies. Parcells with both NE & Jets and Holmgren in Seattle are the only two SB-winning HCs who had better later tenures elsewhere. Just about all championships won or SBs made are by way of rebuilding, starting from scratch. It's hard to be a Phil Jackson in this game, hopping onboard a perennial 'good' playoff caliber team and taking them to consistent championship level.

For Jimmy to inherit what he did in Big D, 1-15 year one, still be in the playoff chase very end of second year, make playoffs year three and winning in 1st round on the road, going back-to-back the next two years rounding out five short years in Dallas, off to Miami, keeps them 'good' for a few years while planting the seeds for further improvement that he very likely would have reaped had he stayed! That ought to give him the nod IMO. He stays in Dallas to win a third, even if that third wouldn't be until SBXXX, he's in the Hall already; complete shoe-in/first-ballot if he threepeated in '94. Both he and Dungy should be in the Hall but if someone must enter first, I'd say it be Jimmy.

Dungy vs Seifert? That '80s Niners' D (one of the all-time greats IMO) is criminally historically underrated along with its, also one of the all-time-greats, coordinator. Both Seifert and Dungy are all-time great DCs with Seifert perhaps getting the slighter nod in that category. As a HC, Seifert's got two Rings with one of them ('89), let's face it, that'll always be 'credited' to his predecessor fair or not (fair) while Dungy has just one, but with a nice "what-if he stayed in '09 (vs Saints)" to boot amongst analysts. Dungy would not have ever won it all in Tampa had he stayed, but building MOST of that SB-champ-to-be in that other (non-SB) campaign of his, multiple playoff berths including almost beating Rams in '99 NFCC, is QUITE more than what Seifert did in his at Carolina which will have to give Dungy the nod, with or without that infamous final 1-15 showing. But WITH that 1-15 showing, Seifert's sadly not ever going to get in the Hall.

[Jeremy Crowhurst]

For me, the quick answer is that if you're putting in a coach who has fewer years coaching than anyone else in the Hall so far, then that guy needs to be demonstrably, significantly better than Barry Switzer, and Jimmy just isn't. Barry's 12, 12, 10, 6 and one ring under the salary cap looks pretty similar to Jimmy's 7, 11, 13, 12 and two rings with the 12 picks he got for Herschell.

[Bryan]

Innovations" Dungy is credited with tinkering with Carson's cover-2, but there is some debate in the committee as to where Dungy got some of those things, Some think Kiffen taught Dungy when both were in Minny.

Siefert was a good DC before he became head coach, the so-called elephant spot for Haley . . . but not sure how much of an innovation it was. It was a 3-4 defense that had one OLB with a hand in the dirt much of the time, a one-gap type 3-4 . . .

Siefert was probably the first DC to use wholesale situation-substitution. Lots of rotation in the front seven. I think the 1984 Niners had their own defensive line and the 1980 Chargers defensive line. Don't know if that counts as true strategic innovation or just being spoiled with more than 11 high quality defensive players, but it was something the NFL hadn't really seen prior to Siefert.

[JohnTurney]

Innovations" Dungy is credited with tinkering with Carson's cover-2, but there is some debate in the committee as to where Dungy got some of those things, Some think Kiffen taught Dungy when both were in Minny.

Siefert was a good DC before he became head coach, the so-called elephant spot for Haley . . . but not sure how much of an innovation it was. It was a 3-4 defense that had one OLB with a hand in the dirt much of the time, a one-gap type 3-4 . . .

Siefert was probably the first DC to use wholesale situation-substitution. Lots of rotation in the front seven. I think the 1984 Niners had their own defensive line and the 1980 Chargers defensive line. Don't know if that counts as true strategic innovation or just being spoiled with more than 11 high quality defensive players, but it was something the NFL hadn't really seen prior to Siefert.

I actually think Joe Collier and/or Fritz Shurmur were into that in the late-1970s with the Broncos and Pats. But Siefert did do that, using Dean and Johnson as nickle rushers. But both Collier and Shurmur had "wave" lines that would rotate with starters in addition to having situational subs.

[Veeshik_ya]

Siefert was probably the first DC to use wholesale situation-substitution. Lots of rotation in the front seven. I think the 1984 Niners had their own defensive line and the 1980 Chargers defensive line. Don't know if that counts as true strategic innovation or just being spoiled with more than 11 high quality defensive players, but it was something the NFL hadn't really seen prior to Siefert.

Taking nothing away from Seifert in terms of how he employed what he had, Bill Walsh deserves a bit of credit for for this as overall team manager. His willingness to leave no personnel stone unturned when it came to building a competitive roster resulted in this talent-rich defensive line. It also proved he didn't have the same "coordinator disease" that many coordinators-turned-head coaches have. Here's an offensive guru who knew exactly how important defense was.

[coachtj]

....bill walsh wrote his master's on defensive football. was hired by marv levy at cal in '60 and served as defensive co-ordinator. he also coached the secondary at stanford under john ralston. he understood the game from both the offensive & defensive perspective.

[Veeshik_ya]

....bill walsh wrote his master's on defensive football. was hired by marv levy at cal in '60 and served as defensive co-ordinator. he also coached the secondary at stanford under john ralston. he understood the game from both the offensive & defensive perspective.

Makes sense

[PeterS]

Hate to give Jimmy Johnson credit, but he did lead two pro football teams to championships (Dallas Cowboys and the University of Miami).

[Veeshik_ya]

Let's attack this from another direction.

If someone said to you, "Here's the scenario: worst team in the league, new owner, rookie coach with no NFL experience, and no quarterback. Give me the absolute best (realistic) case scenario you can think of for this coach to accomplish in five years", what would you come back with?

Can anyone honestly say their response would be: draft a future hall of fame QB, put together one of the best O-lines ever, create the blueprint for how future NFL teams approach the draft and the salary cap, get progressively better every year, make the playoffs in year three, and win the Super Bowl in years four and five?

Anyone?

Jeezuz H. Kriste, if there's a best case scenario checklist, Johnson nailed.

That he'll never make the hall of fame is one of the biggest mysteries of my football life. But I'll opine anyway. His aloofness, perceived lack of respect for NFL tradition, and his association with Jones work against him. He also made it look so easy that people sail right over him. It's a shame.