Professional Football Researchers Association Forum

Not the exact same case but there are similarities. Both were very unassuming types. Quiet and dignified. Respected for the most part but not particularly inspiring

Seifert I thought did a great job seamlessly transitioning the Niners while maintaining their culture of excellence and winning ways. He handled the Montana situation well. Thought it was a bit unfair how he was forced out after a 12-4 season. His tenure in Carolina was middling to begin with and ended disastrously with a 1-15 season

Dungy did a nice job in Tampa, though he walked into it at the absolute perfect time. The team had turned around under Wyche. Plenty of the pieces were already there in Lynch, Sapp, Brooks etc. The team ultimately was not able to take that next step and plateaued. Gruden was brought in to finish the job

He then proceeded to walk into another perfect situation in Indianapolis. I've really always seen him as sort of an inconsequential stand in over there. A respectable guy who won't be a feather ruffler as coach and try to disrupt the Manning/Moore/Polian power structure. Ultimately for that team to only win one Super Bowl has to be looked upon as a bit of a disappointment.

I don't see either as Hall of Fame coaches, but I'm just not understanding what's kept Seifert out and Dungy in.

Dungy's shortcomings were very evident as coach and usually reared their head in the playoffs. He was for the most part a coach carried by his teams rather than a coach that lifts his team. He was never a true program builder. Because he was such a good guy he usually did not get lambasted by the media, but it was always understood when he was coaching that the Hall of Fame is not even on the table. I mean Don Coryell and Chuck Knox are not even in the Hall of Fame (and I'm not arguing that they should be) but who on earth would take Dungy over Coryell or Knox?

sheajets wrote: Dungy did a nice job in Tampa, though he walked into it at the absolute perfect time.

Jim Rome calls it "gravytraining" it. Jimmy Johnson is more mpressive in terms of the 2 ring guys. Took nothing and turned it into something.

Tom Flores is the hard one to figure out. Won it all in 1980, and there were plenty of changes from 1978, but how much was still Madden's team? 1983 is his, though there still was a bit of leftovers...

Shanahan took over a decent team, made it batter.

The 2-ring coaches, hard to separate.

Dungy arguably had a stronger tenure as an assistant coach than Seifert. Dungy gets extra credit for devising the Tampa-2 Defense while Seifert has no innovator credit that I know of. Dungy is seen as the first highly successful African-American head coach, which doesn’t apply to Seifert. Perhaps most importantly, Dungy is perceived to have come into both Tampa Bay and Indy and turned around these franchises, while Seifert is perceived as having been given the reins to an already well-running franchise and proverbially told not to crash and burn, which to his credit, he didn’t.

Also, Dungy has a more impressive regular season W-L record, both more wins and a better win percentage:

Dungy. 139-69 (.668)
Seifert: 114-62 (.648)

I don’t see them as being the same at all, though Dungy isn’t an elite level coach, either, more a good second level HoFer. I’m fine with Dungy being enshrined.

Seifert, like Jimmy Johnson or Buddy Parker, wouldn’t be a bad HoF coaching choice like Tom Flores (and I’m even more on the fence with Mike Shanahan), but I won’t lose sleep if he (or the others) never gets in, either.

bachslunch wrote:Dungy arguably had a stronger tenure as an assistant coach than Seifert. Dungy gets extra credit for devising the Tampa-2 Defense while Seifert has no innovator credit that I know of. Dungy is seen as the first highly successful African-American head coach, which doesn’t apply to Seifert. Perhaps most importantly, Dungy is perceived to have come into both Tampa Bay and Indy and turned around these franchises, while Seifert is perceived as having been given the reins to an already well-running franchise and proverbially told not to crash and burn, which to his credit, he didn’t.

Also, Dungy has a more impressive regular season W-L record, both more wins and a better win percentage:

Dungy. 139-69 (.668)
Seifert: 114-62 (.648)

I don’t see them as being the same at all, though Dungy isn’t an elite level coach, either, more a good second level HoFer. I’m fine with Dungy being enshrined.

Seifert, like Jimmy Johnson or Buddy Parker, wouldn’t be a bad HoF coaching choice like Tom Flores (and I’m even more on the fence with Mike Shanahan), but I won’t lose sleep if he (or the others) never gets in, either.

Cover 2, that's a good point. Forgot about that.

I don't think he turned around two franchises. The Colts had double digit wins in 2 of the 3 seasons before he got there.

sheajets wrote:
Cover 2, that's a good point. Forgot about that.

But it's media hype. Bud Carson had more to do with the "cover-2" that Dungy used. It was called Cover-22 by Carson. Then, Vikings used in in 1980s when Kiffin, Pete Carroll were there. Dungy learned it from Carson, even he does not think he began anything. The name (like West Coast offense) became synonymous with Dungy and it's really a misnomer

JohnTurney wrote:

sheajets wrote:
Cover 2, that's a good point. Forgot about that.

But it's media hype. Bud Carson had more to do with the "cover-2" that Dungy used. It was called Cover-22 by Carson. Then, Vikings used in in 1980s when Kiffin, Pete Carroll were there. Dungy learned it from Carson, even he does not think he began anything. The name (like West Coast offense) became synonymous with Dungy and it's really a misnomer

You may be right, though innovations don’t come out of the blue, either. Dick LeBeau’s vaunted Zone Blitz owes a lot to Bill Arnsparger, for example yet he’s given credit for creating something radically new. Maybe not the same thing, but still.

bachslunch wrote:

JohnTurney wrote:

sheajets wrote:
Cover 2, that's a good point. Forgot about that.

But it's media hype. Bud Carson had more to do with the "cover-2" that Dungy used. It was called Cover-22 by Carson. Then, Vikings used in in 1980s when Kiffin, Pete Carroll were there. Dungy learned it from Carson, even he does not think he began anything. The name (like West Coast offense) became synonymous with Dungy and it's really a misnomer

You may be right, though innovations don’t come out of the blue, either. Dick LeBeau’s vaunted Zone Blitz owes a lot to Bill Arnsparger, for example yet he’s given credit for creating something radically new. Maybe not the same thing, but still.

Arnsbarger used elements of the zone blitz as early as 1964-65 and with Kim Bokamper in 1981 or so "Zone to Bo". I think the media says things enough they become true in the minds of us sports fans.

JohnTurney wrote:I think the media says things enough they become true in the minds of us sports fans.

Very true. In baseball as well, where batting average and RBIs are supposedly overridingly meaningful. Also very true in non-sports aspects of life, sad to say.

Which is why it’s always good to question the things you think you know. The media has plenty of good things about it, but like anything else, scrutiny and thinking for oneself based on best available information is necessary.

sheajets wrote:Not the exact same case but there are similarities. Both were very unassuming types. Quiet and dignified. Respected for the most part but not particularly inspiring

Seifert I thought did a great job seamlessly transitioning the Niners while maintaining their culture of excellence and winning ways. He handled the Montana situation well. Thought it was a bit unfair how he was forced out after a 12-4 season. His tenure in Carolina was middling to begin with and ended disastrously with a 1-15 season

Dungy did a nice job in Tampa, though he walked into it at the absolute perfect time. The team had turned around under Wyche. Plenty of the pieces were already there in Lynch, Sapp, Brooks etc. The team ultimately was not able to take that next step and plateaued. Gruden was brought in to finish the job

He then proceeded to walk into another perfect situation in Indianapolis. I've really always seen him as sort of an inconsequential stand in over there. A respectable guy who won't be a feather ruffler as coach and try to disrupt the Manning/Moore/Polian power structure. Ultimately for that team to only win one Super Bowl has to be looked upon as a bit of a disappointment.

I don't see either as Hall of Fame coaches, but I'm just not understanding what's kept Seifert out and Dungy in.

Dungy's shortcomings were very evident as coach and usually reared their head in the playoffs. He was for the most part a coach carried by his teams rather than a coach that lifts his team. He was never a true program builder. Because he was such a good guy he usually did not get lambasted by the media, but it was always understood when he was coaching that the Hall of Fame is not even on the table. I mean Don Coryell and Chuck Knox are not even in the Hall of Fame (and I'm not arguing that they should be) but who on earth would take Dungy over Coryell or Knox?

Tony Dungy completely changed the losing culture in Tampa Bay, and that was a significant accomplishment. After four seasons, Sam Wyche simply wasn't getting the job done, and Dungy played a key role in the development of Lynch, Sapp, Brooks, Barber, etc. into elite players. Dungy walked into a difficult situation in Tampa Bay, it was kind of depressing. The vaunted 1999 Rams barely survived Dungy's Bucs in the NFC TG, and I do think Dungy would have brought home a SB with a little more time. And the 2001 Colts were a losing team, and Dungy made them a perennial contender, and later, a SB champ. George Seifert wasn't in Dungy's league as a HC. Inherited a super team in SF, but when he had to build something in Carolina, it didn't work.

L.C. Greenwood wrote:Tony Dungy completely changed the losing culture in Tampa Bay, and that was a significant accomplishment. After four seasons, Sam Wyche simply wasn't getting the job done, and Dungy played a key role in the development of Lynch, Sapp, Brooks, Barber, etc. into elite players. Dungy walked into a difficult situation in Tampa Bay, it was kind of depressing. The vaunted 1999 Rams barely survived Dungy's Bucs in the NFC TG, and I do think Dungy would have brought home a SB with a little more time. And the 2001 Colts were a losing team, and Dungy made them a perennial contender, and later, a SB champ. George Seifert wasn't in Dungy's league as a HC. Inherited a super team in SF, but when he had to build something in Carolina, it didn't work.

I've always felt the 2002 Bucs were one of those teams who were destined to win the Super Bowl; everything fell in place for them the right way, regardless of whether Dungy or Gruden was the head coach. They had one of the three or four best defenses of any team-season of the decade, a defense who could put points on the board and control a game, and while their offense was middle of the road, Brad Johnson made few mistakes with Keenan McCardell and Keyshawn Johnson around. When they got in the postseason, the defense stepped up, forcing five turnovers of San Francisco in the divisional game in a 31-6 blowout. In the NFC Championship in Philadelphia, the Bucs broke their hex of not being able to win in below-freezing temps, with the 92-yard pick six by Ronde Barber sealing the deal in a 27-10 win over the Eagles. As far as the Super Bowl, I think the Bucs would have won that game if Dungy had been coaching the Bucs and Gruden had been coaching the Raiders, great defense usually defeats great offense.