Tony Dungy resigning as Head Coach of Indy

[GlassHalfFull]

linky (http://msn.foxsports.com/nfl/story/9067132/Sources:-Colts-coach-Dungy-is-stepping-down)

Tony Dungy is stepping down as head coach of the Colts -- at least that's what he's telling those inside the team headquarters, sources told FOXSports.com.

While the team has scheduled a 5 p.m. press conference, Dungy is walking around the team's complex saying goodbye to players and team employees and informing them that the transition should be a smooth one for new coach Jim Caldwell.

According to one source, Dungy explained that he has talked it over with his family and they believed this was the proper time to step down, while the Colts nucleus was still intact.

Dungy is perhaps the most respected head coach among peers and players of this era. He won a Super Bowl a couple of years ago and at that time many thought he would step down. Last year these same sentiments were predicted but he decided instead to pick his predecessor and stay on for one more year.

Dungy will not enter his eighth season with the team and finishes with a record of 92-33 and can boast that he made the postseason all seven years with the club.

[moestavern19]

A ridiculously good coach and a great person.

I have nothing but respect for Coach Dungy.

[SwoLy-D]

GlassHalfEmpty for Indianapolis. :(

[KingCheetah]

They should just make Manning a player coach -- that's basically what he is now.

[Blake]

Well, he's been talking about it for a couple of years

Class act and a great coach

[Brando2101]

I think he deserves some credit for that Tampa team that won the superbowl right after he left.

[pirc1]

They should just make Manning a player coach -- that's basically what he is now.

Can he handle defense? ;)

[pirc1]

Well, he's been talking about it for a couple of years

Class act and a great coach

Yes, injuries have really messd up the colts the last two years. Good luck to you Tony what ever you are going to do.

[rrj_gamz]

Who cares...

[Steve_Francis_rules]

Who cares...

If you don't care, you don't have to post.

I'm a big Dungy fan. I've always liked the guy.

[SwoLy-D]

I was discussing this with a coworker. Basically, what I mentioned to him is that the defense has been exposed during the last few years as a run-friendly opponent. If it is in decline due to what Dungy has done, it is the perfect time for him to step down or "resign" or "retire", but I bet he will come back to coach somewhere else, as he is definitely young. For the Colts, their offense is awesome, but their defense is not. It WAS time for him to step down way before.

:o At least he won a Super Bowl, which is what has eluded most of the better coaches nowadays.

I hate to say a coach was GREAT only because he has GREAT players. See: Phil Jackson with Bulls and Lakers.

[KingCheetah]

Can he handle defense? ;)

Probably.

[A_3PO]

Great guy! I'm glad he's leaving on his own terms. More coaches should do that. Instead, they hang on until forced out. But Tony Dungy has other things in life that are more important to him than football.

I'm proud he coached my hometown team for so long and lead them to a Super Bowl win.

[Chuck 4]

Great guy. Hope he stays in the business somehow. Be it an announcer or analyst or whatever.

[pgabriel]

I hate to say a coach was GREAT only because he has GREAT players. See: Phil Jackson with Bulls and Lakers.


His defense in Indy is built on speed, the offense getting a lead and putting presure on an opposing qb when they had to pass. the problem with the phil jackson critique is the same in the case of phil jackson

we know, any coach couldn't get them to the superbowl because there was another coach who had the same team and didn't. secondly, you need to look up what manning did in those playoffs in 06/07, not pretty and it was the defense that carried them

lastly, he turned the bucs around, and was a few plays away from beating one of the best offenses in league history in 99/00 from getting them there. so its not like he only had success with peyton.

I hate to say it, but you're wrong. well I didn't hate to

[moestavern19]

Getting within a blown call of the Super Bowl with Shaun King as your QB is pretty damn impressive to say the least.

[LFE171]

Who cares...

It concerns the AFC south, which affects our texans (and you titans fans). This shifts the power around BIG time in our super tough division, so yeah, I'd say alot of us DO care.

[SwoLy-D]

I hate to say it, but you're wrong. well I didn't hate to:confused: What am I wrong about?

[pgabriel]

:confused: What am I wrong about?


that he's only great because he had great players

[SwoLy-D]

that he's only great because he had great playersWell, if it sounded like that, I didn't mean to. Notice that my first post has a " :( " for Indianapolis. I thought I wouldn't have to make it clear that I said he's a good coach and person for that city.

Just to clarify, I was making the comparison between him and other coaches who boast of having great records and championships due to their coaching, when it's really the players. One can't argue that he's a good coach or a bad coach. We all know that. And, yes, I need to look up what Manning did in those seasons when they were close to the Super Bowl or in it.

I meant to say that I hate it when others don't take a team from the ground up, build it, and have success by just joining a team with a great player. Such is the case with Jackson. When has he taken a bad team like, oh, say the Clippers or Timberwolves and made them better?

I never said Dungy wasn't a good coach or meant to insinuate that. Dungy knows how to coach.

[rockbox]

The only coaches that has a history of building teams from scratch is Parcells and Bilichick. Parcells does it with different teams while Bilichick somehow stays successful regardless of who he has. Every year, something happens or a player leaves NE, and you say to yourself, 'they are screwed now'. Every year they still are in the thick of it. Look at Cassell and Brady. These guys had no record of success. Cassell hadn't even started a game since highschool, and they went 11-5.

[pgabriel]

The only coaches that has a history of building teams from scratch is Parcells and Bilichick.


Billichick actually inherited alot and I think billichick has done a great job don't get me wrong. but one of the reasons that that new england has remained successful is a core group has remained with him, particularly on his defense and of course brady.

secondly, um if by history you mean last ten years? Ever heard of guys named bill walsh, or jimmy johnson. even a guy like holmgren, or what about Vermeil who built a champion and then another really good KC team.

[fmullegun]

Billichick actually inherited alot and I think billichick has done a great job don't get me wrong. but one of the reasons that that new england has remained successful is a core group has remained with him, particularly on his defense and of course brady.

secondly, um if by history you mean last ten years? Ever heard of guys named bill walsh, or jimmy johnson. even a guy like holmgren, or what about Vermeil who built a champion and then another really good KC team.
i think he meant doing it over and over again which is a parcells domain.

[pgabriel]

i think he meant doing it over and over again which is a parcells domain.

yeah, I still disagree with billichick, he has had the same nucleus. I think vermeil and holmgren hold up to parcells, and if championships aren't a requirement, jeff fisher has done well with two different eras with the titans, although they choked saturday.

[redefined]

I bet he's just taking this year off to spend more time with his family, who reside in Tampa. He'll be coaching the Bucs in 2010.

[SuperBeeKay]

Billichick actually inherited alot and I think billichick has done a great job don't get me wrong. but one of the reasons that that new england has remained successful is a core group has remained with him, particularly on his defense and of course brady.

Did you not see the entire ****ing 2008 season? Just in case you missed all 16 games, they played those games with Cassel.

[Legend Killer]

Good for the Texans because they dont have to worry about getting out coached twice a year.

Bad for the NFL because they are losing a heck of a coach but an even better person

[A_3PO]

Getting within a blown call of the Super Bowl with Shaun King as your QB is pretty damn impressive to say the least.
Thanks, I couldn't remember his name. That was a tough loss. I was pulling hard for the Bucs to win.

[rockbox]

i think he meant doing it over and over again which is a parcells domain.

That's exactly what I meant. I did forget Vermeil though. Holmgren didn't really light it up in his first years in Seattle and Jimmy Johnson stunk it up in Miami.


There aren't very many coaches that have proven that they bring winning with them. There are only a handful, so I think the criticism against Dungy having great teams to coach is misguided. If we were to use that standard, there would be only be a handful of coaches that people would consider being good.

OT: What's crazy is how many coaches in the league are somehow connected to Walsh and Parcells.

[pgabriel]

Did you not see the entire ****ing 2008 season? Just in case you missed all 16 games, they played those games with Cassel.


and they didn't make the playoffs ( I know they went 11-5), but I still think as good as billichick has been, he gets too much credit

A) He isn't the personnel guy which is really what you need. as we see in Dallas, you can't even just go out and spend money on a bunch of names, peronnel in the NFL is probably more important than even baseball and basketball although its important in all sports.

B) Billichick actually had a stop in another spot where he probably didn't get the personnel support he has in NE, and he was turrble and hurbble as barkley would say

[plutoblue11]

I was discussing this with a coworker. Basically, what I mentioned to him is that the defense has been exposed during the last few years as a run-friendly opponent. If it is in decline due to what Dungy has done, it is the perfect time for him to step down or "resign" or "retire", but I bet he will come back to coach somewhere else, as he is definitely young. For the Colts, their offense is awesome, but their defense is not. It WAS time for him to step down way before.

:o At least he won a Super Bowl, which is what has eluded most of the better coaches nowadays.

I hate to say a coach was GREAT only because he has GREAT players. See: Phil Jackson with Bulls and Lakers.


Totally disagree, when Phil Jackson can help turnaround a franchise, like the Tampa Bay Buccaneers, without having the greatest players ever on his roster. Then, maybe, but Dungy has done very well with his teams. He made the Bucs a very competitive, consistent playoff team from a franchise that had only made the playoffs. He took the Bucs to more playoff appearance in his 5 seasons alone than in Tampa's previous 20 years.

Later, he came in built a decent defense (often times ranked in top 10, surprisingly) for a great offensive team that never had one. Also, Dungy built this (slightly underrated) defense to fit the personality of the offense and did with draft picks and lowly FAs.






http://www.pro-football-reference.com/teams/clt/

[plutoblue11]

The only coaches that has a history of building teams from scratch is Parcells and Bilichick. Parcells does it with different teams while Bilichick somehow stays successful regardless of who he has. Every year, something happens or a player leaves NE, and you say to yourself, 'they are screwed now'. Every year they still are in the thick of it. Look at Cassell and Brady. These guys had no record of success. Cassell hadn't even started a game since highschool, and they went 11-5.

No Jimmy Johnson or Joe Gibbs.

Even, Bill Walsh, George Allen, Vince Lombardi, and to a smaller extent Dan Reeves and Marty Schottenheimer.

Belichick has only built one great set of teams in NWE, he has yet to prove he could do it with another franchise. Being somewhat of disappointmnet in Cleveland.

[rockbox]

and they didn't make the playoffs ( I know they went 11-5), but I still think as good as billichick has been, he gets too much credit

A) He isn't the personnel guy which is really what you need. as we see in Dallas, you can't even just go out and spend money on a bunch of names, peronnel in the NFL is probably more important than even baseball and basketball although its important in all sports.

B) Billichick actually had a stop in another spot where he probably didn't get the personnel support he has in NE, and he was turrble and hurbble as barkley would say


A. I'm not going to even argue with you about this since personnel is probably the least important compare to the NBA and MLB. Doc Rivers isn't a coaching genius and in baseball its all about the money.

B. Bilichick took the Browns to a 11-5 record and the playoffs in his third season, so he wasn't that horrible.

Again I'm not trying to argue with you on points. I'm just saying that there are only a handful of coaches that have proven to bring winning with them no matter where they are. In the last 20 years, I can only point to Parcell, Vermeil, Marty Schottenheimer, Dan Reeves and Bilichick(which we have shown is debateable). Holmgren sucked for a long time in Seattle. He did not make the playoffs until his fifth year there, and didn't win a playoff game until his seventh. Holmgren success came and went with the health of Shaun Alexander.

[MONON]

Good luck TD! Hate to loose a class act!

[david_rocket]

I think bellichick, has proven to be a great coach, he constantly loses coordinators, but they fail in other team (Charlie Weiss and Romeo Crennel) and now Denver hired Josh McDaniels

Tony Dung is a great person, I wish him good luck

[pgabriel]

A. I'm not going to even argue with you about this since personnel is probably the least important compare to the NBA and MLB. Doc Rivers isn't a coaching genius and in baseball its all about the money.

that's ridiculous, first of all what I mean is that you have to build teams through the draft and scouting and not being able to go and sign big names, exactly the opposite of what boston did. so you would be completely backwards on that, ask the texans

B. Bilichick took the Browns to a 11-5 record and the playoffs in his third season, so he wasn't that horrible.

bellichick had one winning year out of five there

Again I'm not trying to argue with you on points. I'm just saying that there are only a handful of coaches that have proven to bring winning with them no matter where they are. In the last 20 years, I can only point to Parcell, Vermeil, Marty Schottenheimer, Dan Reeves and Bilichick(which we have shown is debateable). Holmgren sucked for a long time in Seattle. He did not make the playoffs until his fifth year there, and didn't win a playoff game until his seventh. Holmgren success came and went with the health of Shaun Alexander.

if you want to give belichick credit for one good cleveland year, you have to give holmgren alot more credit for what he did in Seattle. And secondly, Seattle was a loser franchise, like the Bucs. you're all over the board, you don't want to give dungy or holmgren credit, who did it with two different teams, but you want to give bellichick credit for one good Cleveland season and his time with the Pats. You're right, you're not arguing on points, you're being completely random.