There are 96 users in the forums

Remember
Not a member? Register Now!

Do you agree with McCloughan's "Bigger is Better" draft philosophy?

The proof is in the pudding in terms of McCloughan's approach.

McCloughan and Nolan took over a 2-14 franchise in 2005 and went about rebuilding it using the "bigger is better" approach. 5 seasons later, Mc is still looking for his first winning season.

By contrast, Sean Payton took over a 3-13 team in 2006. In that same year, he went 10-6 with a team built around speed, the big play and one of the shortest QBs in the game, and is now a Super Bowl champion.

Now, that doesn't mean the "bigger is better" philosophy can't work (look at Pitt and the Giants), but specifically, McCloughan's way of going about it has failed miserably.

[ Edited by GhostofFredDean74 on Mar 1, 2010 at 22:28:53 ]
  • Kolohe
  • Hall of Fame
  • Posts: 30,907
Originally posted by GhostofFredDean74:
The proof is in the pudding in terms of McCloughan's approach.

McCloughan and Nolan took over a 2-14 franchise in 2005 and went about rebuilding it using the "bigger is better" approach. 5 seasons later, Mc is still looking for his first winning season.

By contrast, Sean Payton took over a 3-13 team in 2006. In that same year, he went 10-6 with a team built around speed, the big play and one of the shortest QBs in the game, and is now a Super Bowl champion.

Now, that doesn't mean the "bigger is better" philosophy can't work (look at Pitt and the Giants), but specifically, McCloughan's way of going about it has failed miserably.

Couldn't have said it better Ghost!!!

Take a football player any day over measurable's!!!!
  • Kolohe
  • Hall of Fame
  • Posts: 30,907
for the merge.
Originally posted by GhostofFredDean74:
The proof is in the pudding in terms of McCloughan's approach.

McCloughan and Nolan took over a 2-14 franchise in 2005 and went about rebuilding it using the "bigger is better" approach. 5 seasons later, Mc is still looking for his first winning season.

By contrast, Sean Payton took over a 3-13 team in 2006. In that same year, he went 10-6 with a team built around speed, the big play and one of the shortest QBs in the game, and is now a Super Bowl champion.

Now, that doesn't mean the "bigger is better" philosophy can't work (look at Pitt and the Giants), but specifically, McCloughan's way of going about it has failed miserably.


EXCELLENT POST!
it could be a bluff! why show your hand? why give clues?
Originally posted by wailers15:
it could be a bluff! why show your hand? why give clues?

j/k
  • TX9R
  • Veteran
  • Posts: 8,022
For the most part, yes. Ron Wolf and Parcells have the same philosophy and they are 2 of the consistently best ever, so let's not rush to blame the philosophy. Let's not forget McC has made exceptions, notably B Williams. That didn't work out but shows he's not as stubborn as some of you make him out to be.
Now there are exceptions but for the most part few and far between. And while talented it's true these smaller guys get hurt more and have shorter careers. As explosive as D Jackson is how many games has he missed in his 2 short years?
I agree that you do need big players, but it's certainly not a bad thing to have smaller guys if they are explosive playmakers.

The one thing I don't agree with is McCloughan saying that if you make one exception then you have a team of exceptions. I think that's bulls**t.
Originally posted by PA9erFaithful:
I agree that you do need big players, but it's certainly not a bad thing to have smaller guys if they are explosive playmakers.

The one thing I don't agree with is McCloughan saying that if you make one exception then you have a team of exceptions. I think that's bulls**t.

It's worse than bulls**t...it's downright stupid on his part.
McNolan and McCloughan have taken guys who were not big for their position, just not in the first 2 rounds.

It seems that Scotty's criteria for high-round picks is skewed more heavily toward size, and appropriately so, since a team's high picks are expected to have longer careers than low level picks. Plus the money is much bigger for the high picks, so that is not the place for risk-taking.

I also believe that Scotty interprets this philosophy as "big enough", as opposed to simply the biggest. I would hope that he approachs speed and quickness in the same way (quick enough, not necessarily the quickest).

It's hard to argue with Ron Wolf's draft philosophy. The results speak for themselves. So, yes, I support Scotty's philosophy, when applied through Round 3 picks. After that, I might be willing to take a chance on a medical or size risk, if the trade-offs were compelling.

On the other hand, Jacksonville for years went for the biggest player at most positions and McNolan admittedly had "Jacksonville Envy". How many Super Bowls have the Jaguars won??? So, taking this notion to the extreme, does not seem to pay-off.



[ Edited by jimbagg on Mar 2, 2010 at 10:57:59 ]
Originally posted by jimbagg:
McNolan and McCloughan have taken guys who were not big for their position, just not in the first 2 rounds.

It seems that Scotty's criteria for high-round picks is skewed more heavily toward size, and appropriately so, since a team's high picks are expected to have longer careers than low level picks. Plus the money is much bigger for the high picks, so that is not the place for risk-taking.

I also believe that Scotty interprets this philosophy as "big enough", as opposed to simply the biggest. I would hope that he approachs speed and quickness in the same way (quick enough, not necessarily the quickest).

It's hard to argue with Ron Wolf's draft philosophy. The results speak for themselves. So, yes, I support Scotty's philosophy, when applied through Round 3 picks. After that, I might be willing to take a chance on a medical or size risk, if the trade-offs were compelling.

On the other hand, Jacksonville for years went for the biggest player at most positions and McNolan admittedly had "Jacksonville Envy". How many Super Bowls have the Jaguars won??? So, taking this notion to the extreme, does not seem to pay-off.


Well said, jimb!!!
I think it's unfair to pin our lack of success on Scotty Mac's draft philosophy when it pretty much boils down to mediocre to bad QB/OL play, and a lack of continuity at the OC position. Then again, it is his fault that we took Smith over Rodgers and our OL is in bad shape, but I don't think either of those are related to the whole bigger is better philosophy.
Originally posted by GhostofFredDean74:
The proof is in the pudding in terms of McCloughan's approach.

McCloughan and Nolan took over a 2-14 franchise in 2005 and went about rebuilding it using the "bigger is better" approach. 5 seasons later, Mc is still looking for his first winning season.

By contrast, Sean Payton took over a 3-13 team in 2006. In that same year, he went 10-6 with a team built around speed, the big play and one of the shortest QBs in the game, and is now a Super Bowl champion.

Now, that doesn't mean the "bigger is better" philosophy can't work (look at Pitt and the Giants), but specifically, McCloughan's way of going about it has failed miserably.

His quote is to be a year in year out contender. NO went 8-8 last season.......
Originally posted by WINiner:
Originally posted by GhostofFredDean74:
The proof is in the pudding in terms of McCloughan's approach.

McCloughan and Nolan took over a 2-14 franchise in 2005 and went about rebuilding it using the "bigger is better" approach. 5 seasons later, Mc is still looking for his first winning season.

By contrast, Sean Payton took over a 3-13 team in 2006. In that same year, he went 10-6 with a team built around speed, the big play and one of the shortest QBs in the game, and is now a Super Bowl champion.

Now, that doesn't mean the "bigger is better" philosophy can't work (look at Pitt and the Giants), but specifically, McCloughan's way of going about it has failed miserably.

His quote is to be a year in year out contender. NO went 8-8 last season.......

...and NO won it all this year. I seriously don't get your point.
Great post jimbagg.

-9fA
Search Podcast Draft Forum Commentary News Shop Home