Mike Singletary and player character issues

by Fooch on Apr 16, 2009 1:00 PM PDT in News Comment 39 comments

We've got plenty of discussion available throughout the front page on the 2009 schedule release. We'll also have some more discussion in the coming days. However, I wanted to take a look at a another topic while I can still remember it. It's mostly draft-related, but can very easily be applied to any current NFL players.

I'm talking about the "contribution" Mike Singletary makes when it comes to players with "character concerns." I was primarily inspired by Tim Kawakami's column a few days ago titled "49ers draft: Singletary won't shy away from risky personalities." Additionally, there has been a lot of discussion about the various intangibles Mike Singletary brings to the table as head coach.

Since that Kawakami article, there has been a lot of discussion about Andre Smith and his agent issues, among other things. Smith has had a lot of problems going back to his final days at Alabama (let's be honest, he's no longer part of Alabama). It seems like there's a good chance he'll be gone before the 49ers pick. However, if he is there, I know a lot of folks here would love for the 49ers to jump all over him.

There are always character concerns in the draft, but for some of us, they might not be so big with a guy like Singletary in charge. So, I ask you, given that you can't really measure this kind of asset, does Mike Singletary bring something in terms of his attitude that most NFL coaches simply don't have? Or is this all fluff?

We'll certainly get a chance to assess this with DB Jimmy Williams. He's had some issues in the past and I'd imagine will bring a challenge to Singletary. He's shown he won't take any crap (see Davis, Vernon), but was that just something that happened at the right place at the right time?

I certainly don't see Mike Singletary as a phony in any sense of the word. He's an intense individual and he won't take crap from players. But in a league of millionaires, how long can that work? Will we see a revolt of players, or is a new kind of "players' coach?" I'd lean towards the latter given his playing experience, but I've certainly been wrong before. Any thoughts on the subject?

0 recs | Comment 39 comments | Share

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

GOOD TO GO

I think players will respect anything he has to say. He has proven he is not all talk with his coaching last year and his own play in the NFL. I think players will know its his way or the highway. Money doesn’t talk to Singletary actions do and no matter how much these gusy think thier worth they will have to prove it.

by IRISHNINERSAVAGE on Apr 16, 2009 1:17 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

Respect

A lot if not all the players respect him. He played from 1981-1992 so i’m sure a lot of the players grew up watching him or watch him while they were in high school (if my math is correct). But with others coaches (Nolan) players don’t have the same level of respect. Some players probably think “why should I play for some new coach who hasn’t been a head coach?” Singletary is a motivator and a Hall of Famer so listen to him because he was a successful player and he motivates them. He also evaluates players differently from a Mike Nolan. Singletary probably has a better view of potential than Nolan. Singletary can control a team while Nolan can just tell them what to do (Big difference).

49ers WILL make the playoffs this year.

by iaalexeeff on Apr 16, 2009 1:17 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

Respect is predicated on what he brings as a Head Coach...

Not as a former player. Sooner or later, if the team doesn’t win, players tune the HC out.

Well, we're waiting....

by drummer on Apr 16, 2009 2:06 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Exactly.

You can be the most hardnosed person on the field. However, if you fail to lead your team to victory, people (including players) will eventually realize you’re nothing more than just a dictator/discipliner, and not really much of a coach.

by sfgfan on Apr 16, 2009 2:32 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

That article by Kawakami was pretty baseless. He used two players the 49ers didn’t have any interest in (Vick, TO) as examples that they would draft a player with character concerns, Just because they didn’t immediately shoot down the idea of signing them. Kawakami was grasping for material that day.

As for Andre Smith, I still believe he’s in for a fall. Maybe not an epic fall, but teams a lot will pass on him. It’s one thing for scouts to like a player, but it’s another thing for a GM and owner to pull the trigger on a guy when so much is at stake. And when you consider while most scouts seem to like him, they say he’s a better fit at RT. Is he SO good that a RT with bigtime red flags is still going in the top 10?

by briandean on Apr 16, 2009 1:22 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

Kawakami was grasping for material that day.

When is that tool ever NOT grasping desperately for material or fabricating/stretching reports to fit his argument?

by sfgfan on Apr 16, 2009 2:32 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Even if he's...

… the elite-est RT that ever did RT, he shouldn’t be worth a #10 pick. A RT, at the very most, would be value in the later part of the first round. I think the 49ers giving up so much to move up and take Staley a couple years ago forced him to be a LT (which, thankfully, is what they saw him as). If they trade down to the later part of the first, I’d be all for taking Smith to be a RT. Where exactly do I think he’d be worth it? Maybe into the 20s? Question is, is there a team out there that (1) believes enough that he’s a left tackle to take him before then or (2) is silly enough to think that a RT is worth a high first round pick? That’s left to be seen.

Other than Monroe or J.Smith, I hope the 49ers don’t consider a tackle at #10. (Yes, I know this basically means “no tackle at #10 please.”)

by sfgfan on Apr 16, 2009 2:36 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

As a fan

As a fan it’s way more fun to root for good guys than bad guys with very few exceptions. Rooting for Montana and Rice and Young and Rice was different than rooting for Young and TO, especially after the Dallas stepping on the star game, because suddenly we were seen as cocky, and after that a part of me wanted to see TO fail, or let’s just say the other SF WRs step up. So first of all, for people like me, a fan since 1979, it’s more fun to have a team of good guys, second of all, I don’t see bad guys as a rule being better players tan good guys AND even when they are the end up hurting the team. . . . Raiders, Bengals — bad guys, last place. . . TO — great player, toxic to the team, even with Tuna or Andy Reid as the HC. Plus the players become fractured as a group rather than wnating to give it up for the team, all because they see the me first thing going on with the TOs of the world. . . . Then there’s the issue of trying to re-sign a bad dude who is becoming great. He’s unhappy, wants more than anyone else who plays that position, it’s all about me. So he signs with someone else at the peak of his career because he’s built up too much bad blood with the team he’s with. . . . So you have him, and teach him for a few years than he’s gone, or you get him as a free agent and he comes in and ruins the team chemisrty while maybe at best getting you to the first round of the playoffs, then he’s gone. … There are WAY too many negatives to the bad dude syndrom. Find me players one notch down from great who are basically good guys but who are willing to work as part of a team. In the draft and in free agency I think you have to stay away from anyone who could turn out to be toxic, no matter how well he plays.

by Since79 on Apr 16, 2009 2:51 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

I'll tell you what.............

If this is just a smoke screen that will fade over time, the reason why he was hired will have been a PT Barnum sales job.

Fact is he isn’t an X’s and O’s guy which scares the living hell out of me, so what will he have brought to the table besides a damn wolf ticket?

This is the exact reason why I didn’t want him to be the head coach. If all Sing can bring to the table is Ra Ra and fluff, the Niners will have been hood winked but yet again.

Winning definitely requires everyone to be on the same page with the same philosophy working to a common goal is important. I think Sing’s chances for success is good with this aspect of his job. However, without the talent or proper schemes (X’s and O’s) to maximize the talent to carry out the “mission,” the results of competing consistently for a Superbowl is a nothing more than a smoking mirror.

THINK ABOUT IT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

by Italia1970 on Apr 16, 2009 2:54 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

So touched...

… by Fooch that you stuttered.

by sfgfan on Apr 17, 2009 8:51 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Yeah

It was the middle of the night and I accidentally double-clicked the enter key.
There’s nothing like the feeling of seeing your incomplete post posted not once but twice, there for all to see.

by GeoMak on Apr 17, 2009 9:21 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Seriously.

It’s one of those “DOH!” moments.

by sfgfan on Apr 17, 2009 9:24 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Disagree.

Before writing off Singletary as a bad coach, how about letting his coordinators, you know, do their jobs? I know it’d be extremely ideal to have a head coach who is strong in offense of defense (or even both, if you’re looking for Utopia here), but I don’t think it’s a necessity.

As long as he picks good guys to be his right and left hand men, Singletary can succeed being just the CEO or manager of those two guys and, more importantly, his players. A head coach doesn’t have to call plays to be elite. There are plenty of good coaches in the NFL’s storied history that didn’t call plays.

I’m not saying Singletary will definitely succeed, but please let his coordinators (especially Raye, since he’s the biggest question mark) play out before writing him off.

by sfgfan on Apr 16, 2009 3:24 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Hold the phone

I NEVER wrote anyone off-I am stating facts.

Fact is he has never been a head coach.

Fact is his strong suite isn’t scheming or X’s and O’s.

Fact also is a great motivator with an excellent OC and DC can be a winning combo.

Winning definitely requires EVERYONE to be on the same page (players, coaches, front office) with the same philosophy working to a common goal is important. I DON’T THINK YOU OR ANYONE WOULD DISAGREE WITH THAT.

Also, without the talent AND proper schemes brought to the table by whoever, (I could care less who has the schemes (X’s and O’s) as long as it translates to wins) to maximize the talent AND carry out the "mission," the results of competing consistently for a Superbowl is a nothing more than a smoking mirror. I DON’T THINK YOU OR ANYONE WOULD DISAGREE WITH THAT EITHER.

THINK ABOUT IT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

by Italia1970 on Apr 16, 2009 3:53 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

ORLY?

So how should this be interpreted?

This is the exact reason why I didn’t want him to be the head coach.

You don’t NOT want someone to be your head coach when you think they can succeed. By not wanting him, you believed he will fail, or at least had a VERY high probability of doing so.

Your whole reply basically backtracks on your original post. First you say you didn’t like Singletary being the head coach primarily because he’s not much of an X’s and O’s guy. Now you say you don’t care who the X’s and O’s guy.

by sfgfan on Apr 16, 2009 4:39 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Italia

Everybody (Vince Lombardi, Bill Walsh, Bill Parcells) had that label once (never been a HC before). That means almost nothing.

There are a ton of guys who have been HC’s before (Scott Linehan, Cam Cameron, Wade Phillips, Norv Turner, etc. etc, etc). Do you want those guys as your HC?

As I have explained before in an effort to ease the angst of those like you. Mike Singletary was the key member and the leader of the most complex defense in NFL history, the 46 defense.

He wasn’t just a dumb jock on that defense. He watched almost as much film as the coaches. He was the QB of that defense, often calling out the opponents plays before the ball was snapped. He was responsible for making defensive audibles. He went up against the real WCO of Walsh, Montana and Rice

He was there for the revolutionary WCO and the revolutionary 46 defense. I’m pretty sure that he’s seen and understood any wrinkles in schemes since that time.

Yeah, he was never a coordinator. That said, he knows his X’s and O’s. Relax.

Like sfgfan says, as long as he picks good coordinators, everything will be fine.

by GeoMak on Apr 17, 2009 9:32 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

-1

Despite the use of so many exclamation points I totally disagree with this stance.

Singletary has a vision that might not start with X’s and O’s but it sure affects the X’s and O’s. There are parts of the game he focuses on and they’re proven winning beliefs, such as it’s important to win the turnover battle. Singletary wants a physical, run-first team that can beat another team up. He wants to have balance between running and passing, but leaning towards the run. The passing game will probably be more control oriented rather than focusing on trying to get the big play. He wants to run a 3-4 defense that has an active pass rush and plays a fairly simplistic scheme. He wants to control the line of scrimmage and have the stronger guys in the trenches…

I’ve heard from many football people that being the HC is like being a CEO, whereas being a coordinator is more like being a VP with a specific area of focus. As long as Singletary has good VPs and can get the guys to play hard and together, I think the team will do great!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

by Neon on Apr 16, 2009 3:27 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

This.

Basically what I said (at least the last part of your comment), but a little more understandable.

It seems that Italia1970 is mistaking the fact that he isn’t an X’s and O’s guy (at least he hasn’t shown to be in coaching) with him not having a purpose or direction at all. Singletary seems to have a vision/direction, and he’s, hopefully, pushing his team toward that.

by sfgfan on Apr 16, 2009 3:33 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

I agree. Also, Coach Sing is a leader.

He was a leader when he played and since then. Just ask Willis. Even as the head coach last year he would stop and tell someone what they did not do right and how to do it right. Funny how Franklin and others got much better once Sing took over.

I will take a leader first and that is what Coach Sing is. He has people under him who can do their jobs. He also has Vision and i haven’t seen that since Walsh, maybe a bit with Seifert and Mooch, but players stand up and listen to Sing. Look at what Haralson said about wanting to sign a long term because of Coach Sing and his vision.

"Whether you think you can, or you think you can't, either way, YOU'RE RIGHT !"

by Eastbayjim on Apr 16, 2009 5:11 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Picture a screen with X's and O's lined up

Come off of this X’s and O’s trip, you have no idea how the X’s and O’s of football work, obviously. Where is this snitch with all this footage of Singletary not making adjustments, studying film, and working with his coordinators based on what he’s been watching since Nolan got there and before. They announced Nolan and I thought, “why not Singletary?” I’m sure he has vivid insight on X’s and O’s in the trenches from the offensive side of the ball and defensive. He’s a hall of famer, he has to have knowledge on X’s and O’s, he was a captain on the field, for a defensive team. He seen what blocking schemes and techniques work best. he’s won battles and lost them in the trenches, he’s studied the trenches as a player. The game is won in the trenches ARE YOU GONNA DISAGREE WITH THAT!
Singletary is 0-0 as a HC you have no idea what he’s about when concerning X’s and O’s his first task as HC was to get the team in shape to get on his level. His playing level is high enough for a TEAM to play together and WIN.

Changing playcalling is apart of the X’s ad O’s. If you run these plays using the fullback we can get more fist downs because the playaction will be effective, better pass blocking oppurtunities, plus a rested defense and all of these things make the X’s adn O’s move faster and together. There is no question his input with the defenseive line and offensive line is not apart of this teams preparation. he obviously knows what it takes from that aspect. He pretty much is letting the OC and DC use their scheme and he’s adjusting accordingly. We’re not running the Hybrid 3-4 4-3 crap we are a 3-4 defense, all (site decorum) those x’s are moving again.

Give him some time how can you call yourself a fan and not be excited about his approach. You claim we are low on talent, but how good do you need to be offensively if your QB just makes plays late in the game, your stragedy is to play for first downs instead of Pass,pass, and pass some more. The style of offense he will implement fits more to our personnel than Martz’s, style do you want that idiot to coach??

He made adjustments to the schemes in place as an interim coach(X’s and O’s)

without the talent or proper schemes (X’s and O’s)

Changing which O is behind center doesn’t count. He said Hill is good but not great, don’t agree we need a better qb, sounds like Sing knows he needs a new O behind center. You seem to just be a hater (full of a sour attitude)

by rlott#42 on Apr 16, 2009 8:49 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

TYPO

Changing which O is behind center doesn’t count?? He said Hill is good but not great, don’t you agree we need a new QB??

by rlott#42 on Apr 16, 2009 8:53 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Do you disagree with either statement-yes or no and if no why not

Also, without the talent AND proper schemes brought to the table by whoever, (I could care less who has the schemes (X’s and O’s) as long as it translates to wins) to maximize the talent AND carry out the “mission,” the results of competing consistently for a Superbowl is a nothing more than a smoking mirror. I DON’T THINK YOU OR ANYONE WOULD DISAGREE WITH THAT EITHER.

THINK ABOUT IT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

by Italia1970 on Apr 18, 2009 9:31 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

09 An 11-5 Season!

Coaches like Singletary are not dime in a dozen. We’re lucky to get one. Lets send him good vibes and wish him well. If he pulls it off, we all owe him one!!!!!!!!!

by Niner Power on Apr 16, 2009 3:41 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

He seems to have the respect of the players right now

But thing change quick in this league. Everybody thought Marvin Lewis was a tough players coach who could keep players in line, but we saw how that turned out in Cinncinatti.

I’m willing to give Sing the benefit of the doubt but I hope the Niners don’t start completely ignoring character issues thinking that Singletary will be able control a team full of misfits.

by DiegoAsFan on Apr 16, 2009 4:27 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

But thing change quick in this league.

Exactly. People (fans, players, and media all alike) bought into Nolan early on, too.

I’m willing to give Sing the benefit of the doubt but I hope the Niners don’t start completely ignoring character issues thinking that Singletary will be able control a team full of misfits.

I hope so, too. He may be a good motivator, but you don’t need to play with cyanide in order to find gold.

by sfgfan on Apr 16, 2009 4:41 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

tough players coach

is somewhat of an oxymoron.

Besides, I never heard of Lewis as really being described as especially tough or as a great leader.

He came to Cincinnati from Baltimore & Washington with a reputation as a great defensive coach thanks to the 2000 Ravens.

by GeoMak on Apr 17, 2009 9:37 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Good

article.

by JohnLewis09 on Apr 16, 2009 4:27 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

Game Recognize Game

I think if there is one thing a player can always recognize…is another baller. There isn’t much that can impress a millionaire, super athletic, super confident, young man. But one of those things is someone who was better than they were at their job. Coach Sing was someone who was not only better, but one of the all time greats, and that counts for something.

Not every player is as motivated as the other, but I think to even get to the NFL, the player has at some point wanted to be good. if they wanted to be good, they can respect how great Sing was. And they’d be willing to listen (for a time) if it meant they could be near anywhere as good as he was when he played.

by RobbieS on Apr 16, 2009 4:35 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

Ifyou have desire to play

He’ll get more from you. He’s a father figure to those with absent fathers at least an image of one. All those knucklehead types know those contracts aren’t guaranteed. Why do you think TO stayed away!!

Mike Sing was the best thing to happen to this franchise since the acquisition of Deion Sanders. Not gonna discuss this much more on posts, a lot of non believers will get to see what it’s like to play for a man they admire. I still remember him in tight pants still looking tough inthe Superbowl Shuffle.

Mike Sing is the man all of you will see

by rlott#42 on Apr 16, 2009 5:07 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

Any player worth having on the team

will ‘buy’ into what Mike Singletary is ‘selling.’

The guys that won’t buy into it aren’t worth having anyway . . . you won’t win with those type of players.

by GeoMak on Apr 16, 2009 5:41 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

Cannot play with them. Cannot win with them. Cannot coach with them. Can’t do it. I want winners.

by Neon on Apr 16, 2009 6:24 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

I always remember an SNL skit when I read your posts...

Michael Jordan talking to the Superfans, and George Wendt tuning him out to the sound in his head of “Ditka…Ditka…Ditka……….”

If you pull a Farley someday and croak, don’t blame us. Blame “Ditka….Ditka…..”

Well, we're waiting....

by drummer on Apr 16, 2009 6:35 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Re:

Right you are, if a player gives Coach Singletary a problem, he will go Vernon Davis on that [site decorum].

Will we see a revolt of players, or is a new kind of “players’ coach?”

I don’t think we will see a revolt. I think players will toe-the-line, but if he starts losing, they will treat him like any other coach I’d think. I mean if Singletary is gonna bust their chops and Singletary makes [site decorum] gameday decisions like Nolan did, then I’m gonna revolt.

When the aliens land and say, "Take me to your leader," I'm taking them to you Fooch!

by jfainsf49 on Apr 16, 2009 10:46 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

Vision/Plan/Leader

Bill Walsh……….2-14 his first season
Chuck Noll………1-13 his first season
Jimmy Johnson……..1-15 his first season

These guys had a vision and a plan and they got their type of players to carry it out.
The players there didn’t get to choose their type of HC.

The inmates definitely didn’t run the asylum with those guys in charge.

If MS & SM have the right kind of vision/plan for the team, then Mike Singletary is the right kind of leader to carry it out and lead the team deep into the playoffs.

If they don’t have the right kind of vision/plan . . . then it really doesn’t matter.

by GeoMak on Apr 17, 2009 3:40 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

character matters

Exhibit 1: Cincinnati Bengals

I expect Coach Singletary is light years ahead of Marvin Lewis in terms of handling problem children, but I don’t think you can have more than one on a team at any given time. If Davis, Vernon is still an issue the Niners should stay clear of other characters, PUHLEEZE.

Truth has a well-known liberal bias.

by dianemarie on Apr 17, 2009 9:30 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs