Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Why was jim johnson always above CRITICISM? Everyone still would blame Andy Reid or Donovan Mcnabb after any regular season or playoff loss
People blamed McNabb instead of blaming Andy Reid. Sure, others might blame McNabb instead of the defense but a lot of people who blamed McNabb either lumped the easiest people to blame together (like the whole "Eddie Jordan/Ed Stefanski/Ed Snyder/Iguodala/Brand are responsible for every Sixers loss" crowd or the "It's Howard and Ibanez's fault" crowd or the "Stefanski/Iguodala/Brand and Ed Snider are to blame" crowd.. etc etc) or just found a single scapegoat.
Jim Johnson wasn't above criticism but he was the reason for Reid's high winning percentage.
It really annoys me when people try to say the entire area blamed McNabb or blame Iguodala or blame Howard/Ibanez when in reality it's a minority of people.
who replaces reid??? that would be better question few coaches have his resume.
when we hired reid he didn't have any head coaching experience on his resume.
It's great that he's had success in the past, but we're not talking about the past, we're talking about the future and Andy Reid who has never won a championship and who's chances of winning one in the future are growing slimmer and slimmer is no longer a fit for this team. A change needs to be made.
We should hire the best man for the job, not the person with the most impressive resume. The person with the most impressive resume out there is likely Joe Gibbs, do you want him to be coach?
In Jackson's defense, he was a warrior in 2009 when he first came out. He let the praise of people who don't even represent true Philly fans (the media and swagger-jockers) make his head big and forgot that nobody wanted to take a chance on him and he had to prove that he could go across the middle and be a WR at his height and build. Victorino did the same thing.
Iverson and Jackson are exactly alike in every way except for that Iverson's probably a lot tougher, as I said already. Iverson played hard the way streetballers do (as in, not on defense except to get steals) and he most certainly did not carry that team. He's the reason they lost the Finals. George Lynch (their best defender) didn't play in that series in case you forgot. And he would've been lucky to win 35 games without them. That's why they were a great team, one that he most certainly did not carry. And please don't try to tell me that McKie sucked.
I completely agree.
The Superbowl was Reid's fault. He couldn't get the damn plays in to McNabb. His team played with no sense of urgency whatsoever. He, yet again, couldn't adapt to the other coach's gameplan.
Honestly I think McNabb has more talent than Brady. Brady's just much more skilled and refined. McNabb still sees the field like a point guard and Brady is all QB.
First of all, most of Philadelphia has never hated McNabb. A portion of people from the area have. That's all.
You need to go beyond the numbers and watch some tape sometime. McNabb is one of the best QBs we've ever had and it has nothing to do with numbers. He never played like crap until later in his career. He threw bullet passes from across his body after scrambling. That was what he was known for for years here, in case you forgot. He was also one of the best at sensing the rush, avoiding it, and continuing the play (another thing he was known for). He threw a great deep and intermediate ball, too, just not a great short ball. A good coach would've been intelligent enough to use him based on his strengths. Reid didn't. Reid called boneheaded, predictable plays and it shot McNabb in the foot, like he's done to all of his QBs. He is not a West Coast QB.
The teams that beat McNabb a) pressed his receivers, b) showed him defenses he had never seen before, c) took advantage of a predictable offense, d) hit him, a lot, no matter how dirty they were, and e) took advantage of his inability to beat the Cover 2 defense later in his career after it had been made apparent. What really hurt him was when teams stopped believing he was going to throw when he scrambled and this made his pump-fake ineffective thus making it easier to stay home and tackle him.
As far as the defense in the SuperBowl.. they gashed the hell out of us with their tight ends and with their running backs because we clearly had no linebackers who could cover the way Carlos Emmons could and because yet again the Eagles couldn't stop the run consistently enough. Our pass defense wasn't great either.
The Eagles lost the SuperBowl the same way they lost every game they've ever lost under Reid. You can try to scapegoat McNabb all you like but it was a combination of the same things that it always is.
Eagles stuff I agree, but in the NBA unless the Sixers defense could of held teams to under 70 pts a game they most certainly wouldn't of won 35 without Iverson maybe 25. They needed each other to get as far as they did, but thats why a poor shooter like Iverson (what was he? 41% field goal percentage?) won the MVP!!!!!!!
Eagles stuff I agree, but in the NBA unless the Sixers defense could of held teams to under 70 pts a game they most certainly wouldn't of won 35 without Iverson maybe 25. They needed each other to get as far as they did, but thats why a poor shooter like Iverson (what was he? 41% field goal percentage?) won the MVP!!!!!!!
I'll agree with that. I just don't like to hear people say that Iverson carried that team because he needed them as much as they needed him. He just was the last piece to put the team over the top (which is funny considering he was actually the first piece.. but what I mean is he was the scorer who complimented the complete team that was around him). They had players who could score on that team too. McKie was the second best player on that team and Eric Snow had a pretty reliable jump shot to about 15 feet. Raja Bell was a pretty solid player too. Obviously they wouldn't have won much of anything without him but that's the way the team was set up. In case you forgot, Iverson was incapable of playing with other scorers.
It's not the same as when LeBron James took a team of basically scrubs to the 06-07 Finals. At least the Sixers were a solid team that all fulfilled the roles that were expected of them to perfection.
I'll agree with that. I just don't like to hear people say that Iverson carried that team because he needed them as much as they needed him. He just was the last piece to put the team over the top (which is funny considering he was actually the first piece.. but what I mean is he was the scorer who complimented the complete team that was around him). They had players who could score on that team too. McKie was the second best player on that team and Eric Snow had a pretty reliable jump shot to about 15 feet. Raja Bell was a pretty solid player too. Obviously they wouldn't have won much of anything without him but that's the way the team was set up. In case you forgot, Iverson was incapable of playing with other scorers.
It's not the same as when LeBron James took a team of basically scrubs to the 06-07 Finals. At least the Sixers were a solid team that all fulfilled the roles that were expected of them to perfection.
I think Raja Bell ended up to be a pretty good player, and yea Lebron did take scrubs (far worse than the sixers) to the finals. If Lebron gets a killer instinct like Kobe, Miami will even better this year. I'm not sure if the Lakers get D. Howard if thats enough to beat Miami.
I'll agree with that. I just don't like to hear people say that Iverson carried that team because he needed them as much as they needed him. He just was the last piece to put the team over the top (which is funny considering he was actually the first piece.. but what I mean is he was the scorer who complimented the complete team that was around him). They had players who could score on that team too. McKie was the second best player on that team and Eric Snow had a pretty reliable jump shot to about 15 feet. Raja Bell was a pretty solid player too. Obviously they wouldn't have won much of anything without him but that's the way the team was set up. In case you forgot, Iverson was incapable of playing with other scorers.
It's not the same as when LeBron James took a team of basically scrubs to the 06-07 Finals. At least the Sixers were a solid team that all fulfilled the roles that were expected of them to perfection.
It's sort of absurd the lengths you will go to, just to discredit Allen Iverson. Raja Bell was a pretty solid player? Maybe a couple of years later when he was with the suns. NOT IN THE 2001 NBA FINALS! Are you kidding me? Bell was a no one on that team. He played 30 mins all damn year. He didn't even play in the first series. He scored 34 points over the course of the entire 2001 playoffs. He barely averaged over 2 points a game! Allen Iverson on the other hand scored 723 points, or about 33 a game!
Raja Bell was a pretty solid player what are you talking about? Just proves the lengths you'll go to discredit AI, acting like Raja Bell was any good.
Other than AI, here are the 5 players who got the most time on the court in the 2001 playoffs:
Mutumbo
McKie
Tyron Hill
Eric Snow
Jumaine Jones
That's right the fifth player on that list is Jumaine FREAKING Jones. He played 447 minutes in the playoffs! To compare on Lebron's 2007 Finals team the 5th person in minutes behind Lebron was Anderson Varejao, who coincidentally also played exactly 447 minutes. Varejao is not good, but he's better than Jones!
What role was Jumaine Jones out there on the court filling to "perfection"? Was it the "being below average in every conceivable skill" role? The man played 8 years for 6 different teams, he's the very definition of a scrub.
McKie played great in those playoffs. Hill was a beast on Defense, and Mutumbo... although his skill set was VERY limited, did what was asked of him. Snow was also decent (although it's ridiculous you'd call his jump shot from any range, anything other than terrible). They were a good team. They played well together. Iverson was certainly not without his faults and this team was designed perfectly to cover them up.
The fact of the matter is though Iverson was so head and shoulders better than anyone on that team that it's absurd. He was INCREDIBLE in those playoffs. Without Iverson that team would have been in the lottery. Instead they made it to the NBA finals.
If you think that the sixers supporting cast was demonstrably better than Lebron's 2007 cast you're crazy. I'd rather have the sixers supporting cast, don't get me wrong, but lets not act as though they were any sort of dream team.
Lebron's performance in 2007 was slightly more dominating than Iverson in 2001, but not by much. Iverson scored 220 more points, took more free throws, made a higher percentage of them, also had a much higher 3 point percentage. He also had more steals than Lebron by about 20 and despite all the talk about how terrible Iverson is at sharing the the ball he had 134 assists, only 25 less than Lebron.
Are you kidding me right now? Discredit Iverson? Why would I feel the need to discredit Iverson? He was what he was, nothing more, nothing less.
No, Bell was pretty solid as a young guy too. LOL you're trying to come at me with stats? Basketball is not measured in stats and never has been.
Varaejo is the most overrated player in all of basketball. See, unlike LeBron's team, the Sixers could ALL play defense and rebound and ALL of them filled a role.
Oh, okay.. so being a journeyman makes you a scrub huh? You seriously do not know a thing about basketball. Funny how you didn't even acknowledge Lynch, one of the best defenders of his generations and a stud at UNC.
Eric Snow's jump shot was definitely reliable. Reliable does not mean automatic. It means he made it more often than not.
So in other words.. you just said exactly what I did. Huh?
Not even remotely. Iverson did the same things he always had. The only difference is that they played him off the ball, the way he should be played. He was definitely not amazing. He was Iverson. He cost them those Finals by not playing the way he should've. Oh, and Iverson was most definitely not head and shoulders above McKie.
The 2001 Sixers were clearly much better than the 06-07 Cavs. It's not even close. Every player filled a role, and the reason (seems I have to point this out yet again) that there wasn't more "talent" on the team was because Iverson was incapable of playing with other talent.
No... do not ever compare Iverson at any point to LeBron in 2007. That was one of the most dominant performances in playoff history, especially Game 5 against Detroit. LeBron was the Cavs; Iverson was not the Sixers.
You statheads are ridiculous, I swear. Iverson had so many assists because he hogged the ball and only passed when somebody was going to score. That's the same reason Rondo has so many in Boston. LeBron is one of the most unselfish players in the league and has been since his rookie year. He plays the game the right way and always has. He didn't score as many points (seriously, you're comparing shooting percentages of an athletic forward who is 6'8 and built like a lineman to a skinny, quick, scoring guard?) because of his unselfishness and because he played with selfish idiots. Not only that, Mike Brown took the ball out of his hands for the 2007 Finals and put it into the hands of the scrubs around him, which is why they lost. I've been cursing Mike Brown ever since.
So should Cavs fans, because LeBron would've never left if he had won a ring in Cleveland.
The real question is why do you feel the need to discredit the rest of the Sixers and the coach who was the only reason they even went anywhere?
Are you kidding me right now? Discredit Iverson? Why would I feel the need to discredit Iverson? He was what he was, nothing more, nothing less.
No, Bell was pretty solid as a young guy too. LOL you're trying to come at me with stats? Basketball is not measured in stats and never has been.
Varaejo is the most overrated player in all of basketball. See, unlike LeBron's team, the Sixers could ALL play defense and rebound and ALL of them filled a role.
Oh, okay.. so being a journeyman makes you a scrub huh? You seriously do not know a thing about basketball. Funny how you didn't even acknowledge Lynch, one of the best defenders of his generations and a stud at UNC.
Eric Snow's jump shot was definitely reliable. Reliable does not mean automatic. It means he made it more often than not.
So in other words.. you just said exactly what I did. Huh?
Not even remotely. Iverson did the same things he always had. The only difference is that they played him off the ball, the way he should be played. He was definitely not amazing. He was Iverson. He cost them those Finals by not playing the way he should've. Oh, and Iverson was most definitely not head and shoulders above McKie.
The 2001 Sixers were clearly much better than the 06-07 Cavs. It's not even close. Every player filled a role, and the reason (seems I have to point this out yet again) that there wasn't more "talent" on the team was because Iverson was incapable of playing with other talent.
No... do not ever compare Iverson at any point to LeBron in 2007. That was one of the most dominant performances in playoff history, especially Game 5 against Detroit. LeBron was the Cavs; Iverson was not the Sixers.
You statheads are ridiculous, I swear. Iverson had so many assists because he hogged the ball and only passed when somebody was going to score. That's the same reason Rondo has so many in Boston. LeBron is one of the most unselfish players in the league and has been since his rookie year. He plays the game the right way and always has. He didn't score as many points (seriously, you're comparing shooting percentages of an athletic forward who is 6'8 and built like a lineman to a skinny, quick, scoring guard?) because of his unselfishness and because he played with selfish idiots. Not only that, Mike Brown took the ball out of his hands for the 2007 Finals and put it into the hands of the scrubs around him, which is why they lost. I've been cursing Mike Brown ever since.
So should Cavs fans, because LeBron would've never left if he had won a ring in Cleveland.
The real question is why do you feel the need to discredit the rest of the Sixers and the coach who was the only reason they even went anywhere?
Stats do not tell the whole story. However they tell some of the story, Raja Bell could barely make it onto the court in 2001. When judging players you should use more than stats... however you shouldn't ignore them entirely! The sixers played 105 games in 2001, a total of 5,040 minutes, Raja Bell played in a grand total of 154 of those minutes, or about 3% of the time. The corpse of Wilt Chamberlain played nearly as big of a role in the 2001 sixers season as did Raja Bell. He had one good game against the bucks, other than that he was mostly invisible on that team.
If you actually watched the sixers that year you'd remember that in the Finals, Bell didn't even practice the sixers' plays! Due to somewhat similar physical builds and skill sets (though obviously VASTLY different actual basketball skills) Larry Brown actually Raja Bell learn the lakers plays and imitate Kobe in practice.
And please try to understand that my opinions are not BASED on stats, I watched just about every single game that year, I love basketball, and have played my entire life and continue to play in organized leagues to this day. When I'm making a point though, stats are simply the best way to easily back my points up.
Stats don't tell the whole story, but they tell part of it, and your continued arguments lacking basically any tangible evidence look pretty empty in the absence of stats or any other tangible of evidence(awards or recognition by peers, coaches, media, etc) to to back them up.
For example you call George Lynch one of the best defenders of his generation???? Ridiculous. Total hyperbole, absurd. What backs this up? Your simple opinion? I got news for ya bud, based on some of your other opinions, your opinions don't carry much weight with me(at least as far as sports conversations go). He was never recognized by his peers, coaches or the press for a single defensive award throughout his entire time in the NBA.
And while Defensive win shares is not exactly an exact science, it's the result of years and years of very intelligent people try very hard to express in numerical form how good a player is at playing defense.
the list is littered with hall of famers and players recognized consistently as being among the best defenders in the league. I'll save you some time and inform you that George Lynch is absolutely not among their ranks.
George Lynch was a great college player drafted fairly high that disappointed in the pros before coming to Philly, and finding his niche as a really good role player, who played very well on defense. He was however in no way shape or form among the best defenders of his generation.
Also Jumaine Jones was terrible, and was a scrub. Do you really wish to defend the basketball merits of Jumain Jones? And I said Varejo stunk, but he's A LOT better than Jones, just about anyone is.
And Eric Snow's jump shot is reliable? Eric Snow had a TERRIBLE SHOT. He makes it more often than not? Really? Well despite your dislike of stats sometimes they can be helpful, as in when they can tell you whether or not Eric Snow could make a jump shot more often than not. Let's go check, hmmm... Eric Snow has a career field goal percentage of .424 and hit a peak of .452 in 2002... and considering this factors in layups and the rare dunk, it's very easy to see that Eric Snow DID NOT EVEN COME CLOSE to making his jump shots more often than not.
(for the record just about every player in the history of the NBA did not make jump shots "more often than not" however to say that Snow made them more often than not is particularly egregious).
I'm not trying to discredit the role players on the 2001 sixers team. That was a great team in the sense they played their roles and Larry Brown did an amazing job coaching that year. The thing is though, all of that defensive skill and adhering to their roles and great coaching would have amounted to about 25 wins if Allen Iverson was not on that team. Without all those solid role players and a great coach we know exactly what Allen Iverson would have done, because did exactly this for about a half a dozen years here, which is; win some scoring titles, take teams into the playoffs, and struggle mightily to get deep into any of them.
Without his supporting cast and coach brown, there's no way iverson makes it to the finals in 2001, without iverson though that team is nothing. To say that the supporting cast and the coach is the "only reason the sixers went anywhere" is absurd. Allen Iverson was far and away the biggest and most important reason the 2001 sixers were any good.
Last edited by phillies2011; 12-07-2011 at 10:28 PM..
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
what are you talking about? Just proves the lengths you'll go to discredit AI, acting like Raja Bell was any good.
