Originally Posted by Mr teX
the "spark" argument is so overplayed. It'd be 1 thing if this team was playing well in every other facet of this game & just needed something to jump start the offense. That's not the case with this team.
predictable & unimaginative playcalling
o-line isn't playing well at all
offense overall stagnates in the red zone
We don't create TO's
pass rush is anemic
defense on the whole can't keep anyone out of the red zone
penalties...too many at inappropriate times
Special teams are a joke
& all that isn't even mentioning the slug of a head coach we have.
A spark can definitely help with 2 of those things...maybe it can mask another. The rest are overall problems that don't project to be helped by a spark.'
Lastly, a "spark" is just that. A spark....as in temporary. We don't need a spark we need a permanent flame...a good head coach is usually the guy that keeps that flame permanently burning within his team.
I think the spark metaphore is pretty good, noone assure you that a spark could generate a roaring fire, but still you have to start from something.
maybe the team is bad just because players are bad, or maybe the team have good elements but they need something to get them to play at the level they're capable of.