Why hasn't Dan Reeves gotten any interest from anybody?

[Jeff1220]

You'd think that a coach with 2 Super Bowl teams would have more interest than he's gotten. Do you think the Zocor commercials and his heart are frightening ownership away from him. It would seem that his credentials would be more desirable than those of Green, Coughlin, Fassel, etc. What gives?

[Devin]

Wouldnt mind him to be honest.

[Fat Tony]

He's a classic "Fall Back" candidate.

The off week saw the Bye-week coordinators get interviews, as well as Fassel because there is competition to ge tthese guys.


Reeves isn't going anywhere. They will save him for later

[Mr. Miyagi]

His age. He's turning 60 and some teams don't like to hire old guys unless they're really the cream of the crop, like Vermill and Parcells.

[TedMock]

He got a lot of hype for being the 6th (I think) winningest coach in NFL history when he was fired but what people failed to mention is that he's the 4th losingest coach in history too. I don't know how good he really is. He does have more experience than everyone else but he just doesn't seem to knock your socks off the way Parcells does.

[Ð]

At his age, he doesn't buy green bananas...

[Ebenezer]

Originally posted by Mr. Miyagi
His age. He's turning 60 and some teams don't like to hire old guys unless they're really the cream of the crop, like Vermill and Parcells.

Vermeil is 67...Parcells 62...next argument

He is an old school coach...that is my bet.

[DraftBoy]

Hes a stubborn old man. Hes too conservative. He wouldnt turn the offense loose in ATL with Vick, and thats what got him fired. Hes also a disciplanarian and it can cause his team to turn against him.

[Jeff1220]

Originally posted by Winfield_26
Hes a stubborn old man. Hes too conservative. He wouldnt turn the offense loose in ATL with Vick, and thats what got him fired. Hes also a disciplanarian and it can cause his team to turn against him.

He didn't have Vick to turn loose this year.

He's certainly not Parcells, but Parcells isn't a choice right now. He did take a loser Atlanta team to the Super Bowl after one year.

[Ebenezer]

Originally posted by Jeff1220
He didn't have Vick to turn loose this year.

He's certainly not Parcells, but Parcells isn't a choice right now. He did take a loser Atlanta team to the Super Bowl after one year.

It would have been interesting if they had Vick and had gone 10-6...or better.

[honey]

I don't know why there hasn't been any interest in Dan Reeves around the league. Personally, I haven't liked the guy for YEARS. He got fired from Denver a long time ago, too, when Elway first played for them. He just doesn't impress me at all. :down:

[Mud]

Because he isn't a good coach.

[helmetguy]

He does have the reputation of being a "my way or the highway' type of guy-with players and administrators alike. He might end up being a casualty of the trend against HC with control of all football operations. Unless he is more amenable to cooperatinion, he won't get many calls.

[caveboy]

"He is an old school coach...that is my bet."

"Hes a stubborn old man."

I agree. I think he's an old-school coach that doesn't get it. Vermeil seems to relate better to his players. Reeves had Elway for a long time, but friction between those two got Reeves fired. It took a superstar like Vick to make Reeves turn the team around. We don't have that here. Reeve's defenses are pretty solid, but we need more than that.

[BuffaloRanger]

Caveboy,

He turned the falcons around when Vick was still in High School and went to the SB. Losing Jamal Anderson hurt him then as much almost as much as losing Vick hurt him this year.

PS: Elway was a little ***** anyway. T Davis was the biggest factor in winning those SBs.

[don137]

Maybe I am wrong but I heard he wanted to take a year off...

[Ebenezer]

Originally posted by Mud
Because he isn't a good coach.

200 career wins...what more do you want??

[TedMock]

Reeves scares me. His regular season record as a head coach is 190-165-2. He's 11-9 in the playoffs. So, 201-174-2 overall. Since 1950 no coach has lost more games than Reeves. The closest one was Tom Landry who's regular season record was 250-162-6. I won't compare the two of them because Landry was a great coach with several great teams so it's unfair. I don't think Reeves is a bad coach but I don't think he's any better than any other coach out there either.

[TheGhostofJimKelly]

I thought I had heard that Reeves is going to take at least a year off.

[Historian]

Originally posted by caveboy
[B Reeves had Elway for a long time, but friction between those two got Reeves fired. [/B]

This is a fallacy. I once asked Wade Phillips, while he was Coach of the Bills, about the rift between Reeves and Elway, and his response was that while they didn't always see eye to eye on how to attack a specific defense, on a specific Sunday, they had a genuine admiration for each other's skills. Elway knew Reeves had won a Super Bowl as a Cowboy's player and learned under Landry, and Reeves knew Elway was the special type of QB that comes around once every ten or twenty years or so.

He then stated that in 1989, it was a "varitable lovefest" (his words) when the Broncos re-emerged and went back to the Super Bowl, because they were winning again.

Then he rubbed it in, by reminging me that the 1989 Broncos came in to Rich Stadium on a Monday Night in September, and spanked the Bills at home on national TV. I just replied, "yea, I remember, I was there."

Did they agree on everything? Absolutely not. Did this get him fired? Even Elway publicly denied at that after his dismissal.

[caveboy]

"Did this get him fired? Even Elway publicly denied at that after his dismissal."

Fallacy maybe, but there was a special on about a year ago or more, (I believe it was ESPN), where the topic was coaching changes and star players that have too much influence over them. Elway in that show sure didn't come across like it was a lovefest. He seemed to really prefer playing for Shannahan instead. They implied that when push came to shove, management felt it was better to hang onto Elway over Reeves. Seems if it was such a lovefest, why didn't Reeves stay on?

My point is that Reeves can't seem to win a SB with a great QB OR solid running game. Elway wins one under Shannahan. And IMO, anyone can win with Vick healthy. GW and KG would look like geniuses now if Vick was a Bill.

[Historian]

Originally posted by caveboy
"Did this get him fired? Even Elway publicly denied at that after his dismissal."

Elway in that show sure didn't come across like it was a lovefest. He seemed to really prefer playing for Shannahan instead.

My point is that Reeves can't seem to win a SB with a great QB OR solid running game. Elway wins one under Shannahan. And IMO, anyone can win with Vick healthy. GW and KG would look like geniuses now if Vick was a Bill.

I have had bosses that I prefered working for over others, its simply human nature. You probably have too. The problem with the Broncos of the late 80s, is that they had no running game. They, like the Dolphins, relied too heavily on the arm of their star QB. That's Reeves fault, and probably why he was fired, not because Elway didn't like him. Shanahan gives Elway a 2000 yard back, and lo and behold, then win back to back Lombardis.

Believe me, the reason I asked the question in the first place, is because I was under the same impression as you. It just simply isn't true.

[caveboy]

"Believe me, the reason I asked the question in the first place, is because I was under the same impression as you. It just simply isn't true."

Fair enough. If you got it from Fade, (as much as I disliked his coaching), I'll take his word for it being closer to the situation than me. The public spin I've seen though seemed to contradict that.