I think defensive players love Crennel. The defense is excellent most years too. They don't have to play with a giant hole that is never fixed (like the OL)
Ok I may be willing to give you that, even though the defense still has to "put up" with a HC. But there are some offensive guys on the original list I posted. Here are others (not including CJ Fiedo since he recently retired); Ryan Griffin, Joe Webb, Brandon Weeden (numerous times), Alfred Blue, Shane Lechler (offensive weapon?), Bruce Ellington, Greg Mancz, Seantrel Henderson, etc. These guys must be insane to work for such a blow-hard. Or maybe they can handle a guy that is going to get in your face or tell you what you're doing wrong without being pampered. Again, the winning aspect has a lot to do with how tolerable that becomes. Hopefully with health and luck that portion of it will change this season.
And no one said they were. Thus why most players haven't turned on O'Brien. But coaches that create a fun atmosphere generally have more leeway when things go wrong than the ones that suck at managing people. BoB and Belichick have less margin for error than other coaches for that reason - they will lose the locker room more quickly. Indeed - your response is a perfect example.
It's very common for players to not enjoy playing football for certain coaches, and it happens across all levels of the sport. It doesn't impact winning/losing. It might impact recruiting/retaining players at the college level. It's likely a consideration in pro free agency, but not a dealbreaking factor. Kubiak has been known as being soft in practice. His team won a Superbowl with defense. Brooks plays offense.
I'm assuming it came up because of that former Patriots guy that talked about how he hated being in NE a few weeks ago and how not-fun it was. I imagine more and more players will be asked about that kind of stuff this summer.
Everyone's experience is different. Of course some guys like O'Brien. All I'm saying is the type of experience with a coach is important. You made it sound like these players HAVE to suck it up and deal with a boss they don't get along with. Like they didn't have any alternatives. That is not the case. They can leave. And Brooks is speaking about HIS experience. Everyone responds to different types of coaching styles but the key is you have to be "happy" and different things make people happy. Like he said, if a player isn't happy he's going to hate coming in everyday to put the work in. Are we sure Bill O'Brien is hard-nose styled? I hear him yelling and cussing a lot but it also sounds like he is easy going with the players. I mean he gives them a day off from practice after a win. He is on the player's side with the anthem issue. He lets the stars pretty much do what they want (can't forget the Watt-cat). In fact if anything I would say the bigger the star you are, the better treatment you can expect from him. That's just my outside-looking-in view.
Cowturd: [...] Lane Johnson, twice busted for PED use, on a Super Bowl winning team this year is now an expert on how to win long term in the NFL. Once again bagging on the Patriots. "All these guys talking about "I'll take the rings." OK. You can have your rings. You can also have ****ing 15 miserable years." [...] Lane Johnson, you just won a Super Bowl. You know, ONE! Guy in New England, 18 years of great. Suddenly fun guy is lecturing disciplined guy. Eagles remind me of the Seahawks. What happened to their window? It closed fast. I'm sorry fun guy but because you won a championship, you don't get to lecture disciplined 15-18 years of success guy. Fun guy Pete Carroll's window is closing. Sorry Philadelphia if I don't buy into your - fun way, not about rings, having a good time is more important - sorry if I don't buy into that running the league the next 20 years.
Orrrrrrrr he was treated miserably. Orrrrrrrr he has a mental health issue and if treated properly could have stayed and helped the team better than, I don't know, Sua Filo.
No one can possibly take this comment seriously. This entire statement is more extrapolation, both implying that players have reason to turn on O'Brien as well as stating why that hasn't occurred. There's no reason to believe any of this. It's quite possible, even likely, that the players "haven't turned on O'Brien" because they simply have no reason to. Even Duane Brown, who has taken every opportunity to trash the team, said that he liked, and had no beef with, the coaching staff including the head coach. No evidence to support this either...and you've falsely equated a "non-fun atmosphere" with "suck at managing people". Also, two times in recent history the Texans have had surprisingly bad seasons. Only one of those seasons was it clear that the coach had lost the locker room. It wasn't O'Brien's team, it was a famously "player's coach" team. It's no surprise you'd assert this. Too bad the facts aren't on your side. All we have here is one ex-player who doesn't like the coach and a number of "fans" running with their narratives, including you.
Brooks may be a pu$$y, but he's also one of the best offensive linemen in the league and a super bowl champ.
I'll take that p***y on this team instead of Su'a filo! That's Texans fans for you, can't stand people dissing their **** coach.
Orrrrrrr he's just being a big b****. Either way who cares what he thinks when he's already gone. Talent wise I agree he would have been a better keep than Filo but to baby someone that wants to have fun and be loose all the damn time, who cares. Yes, his team just won one. Belichick has won several. With several different players. He's pointing out that the entire coaching tree has issues towards players because there's a No Fun Zone in effect while they're being coached. This isn't as direct as a shot that you guys are making it out to be at BoB. He's criticizing the all work and no play make Jack a dull boy style these coaches have towards the game as a whole.
