This article was taken from © St. Petersburg Times, published February 4, 2000 by HUBERT MIZELL at mizell@sptimes.com

Couldn't you replace the word Bucs with the word Alabama?


Title: Bucs deserve new offensive leader

"""When a candidate is brought to Tampa, he will be asked about specifics, like getting more consistent production from running backs Warrick Dunn and Mike Alstott. Dungy and McKay will want to know ideas about working with Shaun King, who will be a second-year quarterback.

One thing I always had trouble discerning was Tony's effect, as a quite conservative coach, on the philosophies of Shula. I know Dungy asked Mike for a run-first plan. More ball control than is today's NFL norm. Passing more as a changeup maneuver than a constant diet.

But when it came to the actual run/pass mix, or calling specific plays, or ordering whatever blocking schemes, you can bet Tony left that to his coordinator. With results too steeped in shortfall.

Tampa Bay's coach and GM should be cheered for making a move on Shula that was personally difficult for both, especially Tony.

It would've been a pity to see the Bucs defense grow old and/or become less imposing without having been provided the best possible vehicle for a Super Bowl ride.

If the new Tampa Bay offensive chief can perk up the league's 28th-ranked offense, to even 15th or 20th, the Bucs should make a stout run at Super Bowl XXXV, to be played on their home grass at Raymond James Stadium.

Look how close the Bucs came, despite struggling to score more than two TDs per start. Losing an 11-6 heartbender in St. Louis. In five games this season, Tampa Bay went without an offensive touchdown.

Statistics can lie, but in Shula's case the numbers were lethal. Fourth-worst offense in the league, coming up a touchdown shy of making Super Bowl XXXIV. Just one franchise had a worse passing game.

Too predictable.

Too stoppable.

For four seasons the Bucs were dragged down by offensive deficiencies. This isn't like the Ray Rhodes deal in Green Bay, being bounced after one season.

Shula's ejection is most justified, even if the timing was rather odious. When some of us media people saw Dungy in Atlanta two days before the Super Bowl, I'm convinced he knew. Tony made an uncharacteristic crack about a shortage of mystery with Tampa Bay's offensive schemes.

If that's true, Shula should've been told before flying across five time zones to Honolulu. Thinking as he flew with fellow Tampa Bay coaches, about a few sweet days of Pro Bowl fraternizing, getting some sun and looking forward to the 2000 season with the Bucs.

Dungy epitomizes loyalty to a fault. He now suffers from deep agony. Tony never had fired an assistant. He is in Hawaii, but there is pain in paradise. Dungy might as well be beached in Siberia or purgatory.

Tony can't quit thinking about Mike. Whatever the shortage of Bucs touchdown production, Shula is a good guy who merits the most soulful considerations. Handsome and recently married. His dad is the pro football coach with the most wins. Mike doesn't deserve to be abused. He got a huge chance from Dungy in 1996 and worked extraordinarily hard to make it successful. Shula, we must conclude, was deemed to be in over his head. McKay, then eventually Dungy, did what was necessary.

Dungy embraces all ramifications. Acids torment the stomach of a rare boss in professional sports, one who truly cares. """

Good read, and thanks for the info.

Man, that sound familiar? Great Post. Makes me think

Any one who has been defending Shula at all cost needs to read this artical. I am not for Shula getting fired, but he needs to make changes. Well, I am for Shula getting fired if he is unwilling to make changes.

Ya'll are absolutely right. He;s not ann offensive coordinator. When he hires an offensive coordinator this off-season, please shut up and chill out with this stuff.

quote:

Originally posted by fullmoon_36271:
Ya'll are absolutely right. He;s not ann offensive coordinator. When he hires an offensive coordinator this off-season, please shut up and chill out with this stuff.

But he has already said he will not do that right? I thought someone posted that he wasn't going to relinquish that role.

Also, did anyone catch his weekly press conference today at lunch on Jox 690. Mike just doesn't sound like he has it all together anymore. The press conference ended with a question about his offense being broken basically referring to the tuscaloosa News article and Mike pretty much didn't know what to say other than he hadn't read teh article?

I think the hour glass was started today at that press conference and so it begins...........

Even more evidence to ponder:

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/football/nfl/news/2000/02/03/shula_fired_ap/

No matter who Shula hires, SHULA will still have the final say Saturdays on the field.

He's too stubborn to do otherwise.

I love the Shula history lesson. Oh what. Oh Dungy was let go too. O h, what's that. Why was he let go? MAYBE IT WAS BECAUSE AFTER SHULA WAS FIRED THE TEAM BROUGHT IN A BETTER QB AND A "BETTER" OC AND MANAGED TO GAIN 300 MORE YRDS THE NEXT YEAR AND THE NEXT YEAR after Shula. So Im wondering what exactly you are trying to prove. In order for you to make a point you would actually have to show some kind of improvement after Shula was let go. Good points fellow. Ya'll dug that deep about how bad thaqt offense was. Scroll to the next years stats.

I'm for beatin the h*** outta these so called fans who wanna do nothing but cause trouble all the time. Go pull for Auburn, you already act like them. Whinin' about everything, did it ever occur to anyone that maybe just maybe this team is just average? Maybe, just maybe, the teams that beat us are better than us right now. Get over it. NO ONE WINS EVERY FREAKIN" GAME EVERY YEAR!!!!!!

Toliver2, we could all do without the UAB Blazer alma mater in this chat room.

"Moral Victories make us proud"

Give me a break, you are talking about Alabama. Alabama is not a moral win school. What Tampa Bay did after Shula left was WIN a superbowl.

What is your next question?

BS4UOFA.... they did when a superbowl. Remind me again. Was it because their defense became even more dominant? Yes. Because their offense still stunk to high hell. The same way it was when Shula was there. Look at the stats my man. The defense improved. The offense didn't.

quote:

Originally posted by fullmoon_36271:
BS4UOFA.... they did when a superbowl. Remind me again. Was it because their defense became even more dominant? Yes. Because their offense still stunk to high hell. The same way it was when Shula was there. Look at the stats my man. The defense improved. The offense didn't.

I'm not gonna step into this discussion because I cant bring anything to the table, except for disgust over Shula. I will let fullmoon know that Tampa Bay beat the dog crap out of the Raiders that game. They scored 52 points. The offense was workin' fine, to me. I dont think the Bucs scored 52 points the 4 years Shula was there.

OK gordonfann24, the year Shula was fired they went to the conference championship and lost to the greatest show on turf who went on to win the superbowl. The two years after Shula was fired tampa bay's record was progressively worse than Shula's last year. The offense #'s looked almost the same. As for your superbowl defense, do you remember who built that raiders team? Gruden. Do you remember who Tampa Bay stole away from the Raiders to coach that SuperBowl team? Gruden. Before you post know your history. BTW it was 48 pts against the raiders. 25 touchdowns during regular season his final year at Tampa. Lil more than 48 pts.

This message has been edited. Last edited by: Fullmoon,

ummm...ok. Settle down down ol' buddy. I clearly stated I wasnt gonna get involved but that Tampa Bay scored 52, but you corrected me with 48. I was just mentioning the score, and it was after Shula left. Easy there, fella.