Navigation: Jump to content areas:


Pro Quality. Fan Perspective.
Login-facebook
Around SBN: Watch Out For Cowboys UDFA Tim Benford

A look at the Chargers in the AJ Smith Era

Aj-smith_mediumIf there's one thing the Chargers haven't lacked for the last few years, it's controversy. Recently, that controversy has centered around General Manager AJ Smith. Fans both love him for building a consistent winner, and loathe him for his perceived faults as a negotiator and, thus far, failure to build a Super Bowl winner.

Thinking about this, I asked myself one question: Just how good have the Chargers been in the AJ Smith era? We think we've had these great teams and should have done something special with them, and blame coaches and the front office when something goes wrong. But how true is this? After the jump, I'll explore the San Diego teams from 2003 - present, as well as other winning teams over that same time period to find out just what the truth really is. For those who are unfamiliar, I'll be using Football Outsiders' DVOA to measure and compare the teams. Explanations of these stats can be found here.

Star-divide

As we know, AJ Smith took over the Chargers in the 2003 off-season, shortly after the death of Chargers GM and longtime mentor John Butler. Even though he was technically in charge during the 2003 draft and subsequent season, it's generally accepted that AJ largely acted according to Butler's plan for the season. So it's not really fair to call 2003 one of AJ's years, but he was the GM and technically it occurred under his watch, so we'll include it in our investigation

Let's start by looking at the overall DVOA numbers for the Chargers, from 2003 to present:

Chargers DVOA
2003 -11.9%
2004 19.1%
2005 23.4%
2006 29.1%
2007 18.4%
2008 17.5%
2009 13.4%
2010 17.6%
Average 15.8%

As a reminder, DVOA is rate stat that measures defense-adjusted value over average ("DVOA"), on a per-play basis. So a positive number is good, and a negative number is bad. Numbers over 10% can be considered "good", over 20% "very good", and over 30% "dominant". I made up these last categories, but they pretty much fit with our subjective perceptions. For example, all the greatest teams of the decade, the 2002 Buccaneers, 2004 Steelers and Patriots, 2005 Colts, and 2007 Patriots have had DVOAs of over 30%.

When we look at the Chargers' numbers over the last eight years, we see a bunch of good teams, one terrible team, and a couple very good teams. The fact of the matter is that the Chargers have never really had a dominant team in the current era. The closest they came was 2006 (14-2!), but even that team wasn't good enough to overcome its own mistakes. Their average, over that entire time period, was about 15.8%.

Let's make a comparison. Here are the overall DVOA numbers from the Colts, Patriots, Steelers, and Eagles in the same time period, with averages at the end:

  Chargers Colts Patriots Steelers Eagles
2003 -11.9% 22.0% 21.8% -1.6% 20.0%
2004 19.1% 28.1% 35.9% 38.1% 23.2%
2005 23.4% 33.6% 9.1% 27.9% -2.8%
2006 29.1% 17.3% 27.1% 10.9% 27.2%
2007 18.4% 30.7% 53.1% 20.0% 13.7%
2008 17.5% 15.3% 11.7% 29.6% 33.5%
2009 13.4% 17.1% 28.3% 16.4% 28.6%
2010 17.6% 3.0% 44.7% 37.3% 22.0%
Average 15.8% 20.9% 29.0% 22.3% 20.68%

 

What's the point of all this? The Chargers just haven't been that good compared to most of these teams. Each one has been on average better over the last eight years, each one has had at least one season of "dominance", and each has had at least one Super Bowl appearance. Their eight year averages all cross into the "very good" category, while the Chargers' is squarely in the "good" category.

It's also relevant because if we look at each of the teams the Chargers has lost to in the playoffs, the Chargers had been the worse team. In 2004, the Jets' 27.5% overall DVOA beats that of the Chargers by nearly 10%. In 2006, the Chargers were better than the Patriots but not by much (29.1% vs. 27.1%), and the Patriots actually had a higher weighted DVOA heading into that game. In 2007, the Patriots outclassed the Chargers by almost 35%. In 2008, the Steelers were better than the Patriots by about 12%, and in 2009 the Jets were better than the Chargers by 3.5% (16.9% vs. 13.4%).

My ultimate conclusion is this: the Chargers just haven't been as great as we'd like to think they were. They've been good, a couple times very good, but never dominant enough to overcome their mistakes and outclass their opponents in the post-season. If they want to win the Super Bowl, they need to finally figure out how to have all three phases of the team working at the same time, or be so incredibly dominant in one category that it makes up for deficiencies elsewhere, like the 2010 Patriots.

The blame for this ultimately lies with AJ Smith. People can rail about the coaching staff and Norv Turner, but the Chargers have actually been pretty consistent under Norv, and the one thing powering the team, the passing offense, has been consistently dominant.

AJ has done a mostly good job as a GM, but he needs to do better. I know that he has a philosophy that he follows and has faith in, but he should probably consider trying something different. He needs to do better with player personnel, in both the draft and free agency. If he doesn't, it seems likely the Chargers will find themselves in a similar position going forward has they have been in the past--good, not great, and home in January.

This FanPost was written by a member of the Bolts From The Blue community and does not necessarily reflect the views of the Bolts From The Blue editors or SB Nation.

Comment 66 comments  |  10 recs  | 

Do you like this story?

Comments

Display:

Not to mention the fact that we play in a poor division where we have teams like Denver, Oakland and KC with losing records of under 500. This helped the Chargers succeed in winning the division. Guess what happend when one of those teams showed life? We lost the division. Chargers better be ready next season, Oakland actually looks like a solid team to wach out for.

by BOLTUREYE on Jan 12, 2011 5:04 PM PST reply actions  

tricky tricky tricky tricky

its trick to rock…

"I suggest more bike" ~KSK

drinkerswithawritingproblem.blogspot.com

by justdave on Jan 12, 2011 6:46 PM PST up reply actions  

etc

"I suggest more bike" ~KSK

drinkerswithawritingproblem.blogspot.com

by justdave on Jan 12, 2011 6:46 PM PST up reply actions  

I dunno

Throw out the outlier in the first year, which, as you say, is before he really had an impact, and the Bolts are 19/20%; about where the Colts and Eagles are, below the Steelers and Pats.

The play of chance and probability within which the creative spirit is free to roam. -von Clausewitz 'On Football'

by Brian (DaBolts) on Jan 12, 2011 5:28 PM PST reply actions  

Good point

I completely missed your comment and made the same one below.

#feelinacertaintypeofway

by sd_Baby-B on Jan 12, 2011 6:22 PM PST up reply actions  

Great minds

:-)

The play of chance and probability within which the creative spirit is free to roam. -von Clausewitz 'On Football'

by Brian (DaBolts) on Jan 13, 2011 11:07 AM PST up reply actions  

DVOA 2004-2006: 23.87%.....2007-2010: 16.73%

(To be serious for a second, I agree with boltureye about docile teams and complacency.)

by TheFan09 on Jan 12, 2011 5:44 PM PST reply actions  

Yeah

those numbers aren’t exactly helping the Norv advocates’ cases.

by SoCalBoltFan on Jan 12, 2011 5:53 PM PST up reply actions  

Well, if you want to think about Marty vs. Norv

you have to include 2002-2003 to Marty’s tally. It’s not really fair to Norv to only include Marty’s good years and not his bad ones. Once you do that, you end up with the following averages:

Marty: 11.6%
Norv: 16.7%

by Zach (maestro876) on Jan 12, 2011 7:13 PM PST up reply actions  

I wasn't really being serious, but think of the quality of the players

Marty inherited…crap. Minus LT, utter crap. Norv basically inherited Super Bowl contenders, and the quality of the players hasn’t really changed all that much. Every year we still seem to be “dark horse” SB candidates.

So yeah.

by TheFan09 on Jan 12, 2011 9:37 PM PST up reply actions  

Marty

had Rivers for one year.
And a bunch of nobody’s every other year, except for Tomlinson

Dielman on Rivers: "I've tried to get him to say s--- or f--- and all he'll ever do is say, 'Golly gee, I can't do that."

by Superduperboltman on Jan 13, 2011 6:29 AM PST up reply actions  

Like that loser Drew Brees. What ever happened to that midget?

Bolts from the Blue // "It's a league game, Smokey." - Walter Sobchak
Bloody Elbow // "Mongo only pawn in game of life." - Mongo

by Richard Wade on Jan 13, 2011 10:02 AM PST up reply actions   2 recs

Merriman at his peak was good for +5% all by himself.

by Stephen (shaynes41) on Jan 13, 2011 10:06 AM PST up reply actions  

Might as well throw Curtis Painter in there too.

The National League West title was all but a lock,
Then they lost 10 in a row, ‘twas like a punch in the jock!

Bolts from the Blue - General Manager: It is what it isn't

by Wonko on Jan 13, 2011 8:05 PM PST up reply actions  

I'll pay you to take Eli as well

6/10/2010 - Tra Thomas signs with the Chargers
8/21/2010 - Tra Thomas retires.

That was fast.

by SD FTW on Jan 14, 2011 9:21 AM PST up reply actions  

Do. Not. Want.

The National League West title was all but a lock,
Then they lost 10 in a row, ‘twas like a punch in the jock!

Bolts from the Blue - General Manager: It is what it isn't

by Wonko on Jan 15, 2011 12:10 AM PST up reply actions  

a pro bowl year

and 2 other disaster years.
then he was sent away. and now he got a ring in Nawlans.

Dielman on Rivers: "I've tried to get him to say s--- or f--- and all he'll ever do is say, 'Golly gee, I can't do that."

by Superduperboltman on Jan 13, 2011 11:18 AM PST up reply actions  

I'm curious

about the offense / defense / special teams splits for those periods. Would you mind posting those too? I suspect Wade’s defense boosted the Marty-era numbers, though who the credit for success should be applied to is certainly up for debate.

#feelinacertaintypeofway

by sd_Baby-B on Jan 12, 2011 6:26 PM PST up reply actions  

Sure.

Here are Offense/Defense/ST.

2003: 2.2% / 11.0% / -3.1%
2004: 18.2% / -3.9% / -3.0%
2005: 20.8% / -2.5% / 0.1%
2006: 27.0% / 2.4% / 4.4%
2007: 5.8% / -8.2% / 4.3%
2008: 24.1% / 8.3% / 1.7%
2009: 21.8% / 8.8% / 0.4%
2010: 19.3% / -6.4% / -8.1%

by Zach (maestro876) on Jan 12, 2011 7:21 PM PST up reply actions  

It's not so much Wade's defenses inflating those 2004-2006 Marty teams

as it is to the defense dragging down the 2008-2009 Norv teams. 2007 is kind of a weird year, because it was Rivers learning the new offense and growing as a player, and not really figuring things out until the end of the season. That year Philip was super inconsistent, and had a lot of up and down performances. The defense, on the other hand, still had Merriman in his prime, and got a TON of turnovers, which lead to its being the #6 overall and #1 weighted defense.

2008-2009 saw some pretty crappy defense here in San Diego, especially pass defense. That was really the undoing of those teams. 2010, the problem was special teams, as is readily apparent.

Norv has pretty much done what he was brought in to do—he’s turned Philip into an elite quarterback, and kept the offense consistently very good. The passing offense has been dominant each of the last three years, being held back only by the rushing offense which suffered from LT’s decline in 2008-09, and fumble-itis in 2010. The men who were put in charge of the defense have been unable to really put together a consistently good, or at least average defense. Wade’s defenses weren’t that great, but they weren’t terrible either (outside of 2003, that is). They didn’t reach the highs of the 2007/2010 defenses, but not the lows of the 2008-09 ones either.

by Zach (maestro876) on Jan 12, 2011 7:34 PM PST up reply actions   2 recs

replying to both comments

Thank you! For both the stats and the assessment, I mean. ‘06 was the first time I watched more than two or three football games in a season by watching every Chargers game after the Ravens loss (week 4?). Because of that I only knew what I read on all but the final year of Marty and Wade and even that was with rookie eyes. This sort of worked to smooth the seam between what was before my time and what I’ve witnessed since ’06, which in turn serves to clarify my perspective on the current times.
High fives!

#feelinacertaintypeofway

by sd_Baby-B on Jan 12, 2011 9:16 PM PST up reply actions  

If you throw out 2003

The Chargers are nearly tied with both the Colts and the Eagles. So in years that actually matter they are tied with the majority of teams on that list.

#feelinacertaintypeofway

by sd_Baby-B on Jan 12, 2011 6:20 PM PST reply actions  

Uh... no.

Every WR in the world wants to play here, under Charlie Joiner and Norv Turner, catching balls in the sun from Philip Rivers and spending the rest of his days checking out our awesome babe supply.

An autumn Sunday,
Perched in front of the big screen,
Beer in white knuckles.

by Neoplatonist Bolthead on Jan 13, 2011 2:36 PM PST up reply actions  

Great Job

Interesting info, damn those Patriots.

by JeromeB on Jan 12, 2011 7:50 PM PST reply actions  

I know, right?

It’s almost sickening how good they’ve been. Their eight year average (AVERAGE) is nearly that of a dominant team. That means when they’re good, they’re really damn good, and when they’ve have an off year, they’re still pretty good.

by Zach (maestro876) on Jan 12, 2011 7:52 PM PST up reply actions  

To be fair

You should factor in the whole “cheating” thing.

6/10/2010 - Tra Thomas signs with the Chargers
8/21/2010 - Tra Thomas retires.

That was fast.

by SD FTW on Jan 13, 2011 8:22 AM PST up reply actions  

great job Zach

see this is the key reason i got off the " fire AJ" bandwagon. the bottom line he’s given this team a chance to winners for years to come. and he’s done it with two different coaches and two franchise QB’s. but that doesn’t mean i will ignore some his decisions, i saw as questionable, that he’s made concerning personell. and in no way will i take on the attitude of “as long we’re winning, who cares”.

AJ has proven to me he can pick winners from rookie free agents, in lower rounds, the top round and even FA. but the bottom line it’s time to put team on the field that wins it all. even if that means rolling the dice on 2 time DUI winner.

The peanut gallery has spoken!!!

by gatesoftds on Jan 12, 2011 11:15 PM PST reply actions  

To some degree

I think that the success that our FO has had with UDFA’s has made them a bit arrogant in the draft. Lately we’ve gotten as good or better production out of “lesser” picks. Also, the perceived wealth of talent has likely caused them to reach for players that could have almost certainly been had with a lower pick.

This year we have a 1st & 2 2nds. If AJ truly believes in building via the draft, his staff needs to knock this one out of the park, particularly with regards to getting difference-makers on the defense.

If the thunder don't get ya then the lightning will!!

Robert Hunter

by Buck Melanoma on Jan 13, 2011 2:59 AM PST up reply actions  

Agreed

but for me to come out and say " AJ has done a poor job" is seen as blasphemy here. not to mention the stats above would disagree with such a statement. but more to my point, i refuse to overlook some questionable decisions because of his measure of success here. it’s only fair to roll with the good as well as the bad, there were clear signs to question some things, and time only revealed those decisions, in light of this seasons current success.

The peanut gallery has spoken!!!

by gatesoftds on Jan 13, 2011 4:29 PM PST up reply actions  

Not a poor job

I can’t say that AJ has done a poor job at all. I would rate him as a better-than-average GM. I just feel that he has taken a vegetarian approach to the draft too often & has at times (VJ, MCNeill) escalated the stakes to a higher level than necessary.

If the thunder don't get ya then the lightning will!!

Robert Hunter

by Buck Melanoma on Jan 14, 2011 8:16 AM PST up reply actions  

Agreed

and that’s also why i got off the “Fire AJ” bandwagon. it didn’t make sense to have his head on a platter over a handful of questionable decisions.

The peanut gallery has spoken!!!

by gatesoftds on Jan 14, 2011 2:34 PM PST up reply actions  

agree, but

We need to shore up our O line. Rivers was the second most sacked qb in the nfl AND our running gamne wasn’t very good. Also, IF we can pick up another running back in the lower rounds, I’d say get one. But, I think they should give curtiss brinkley a shot. He looked pretty good the few time he got to carry the ball. I’m not giving up on mathews, just saying I wasn’t impressed. I guess because of all the hype, perhaps I expected too much.

by irishlad on Jan 14, 2011 8:33 AM PST up reply actions  

Hard to say its not O-line involved in the sacks IMO

Sure PR aired it out alot. And long pass plays should correlate with sacks.

But how much of that was dictated by play calling vs. coverage vs. pressure. I assume PR doesn’t want to get his jersey dirty. Maybe if he doesn’t have to adjust to so much quick pressure he finds the first read and begins to look like Tom Brady out there.

Either way if the coverage forces the long ball, he needs the protection to make that pass.

by Trendsearcher on Jan 14, 2011 10:55 AM PST up reply actions  

If my question wasn't clear...

I was referencing the loss of Tomlinson in pass protection.

by SJO on Jan 14, 2011 11:31 AM PST up reply actions  

It may have been the cause for 3 or 4 of them

but the whole line was creamed at st louis, and against denver (lol wut?) for 7 and 5 sacks. there were also 2 or 3 sacks that were the “aborted snap” variety. One third of the sacks came in two games.

Dielman on Rivers: "I've tried to get him to say s--- or f--- and all he'll ever do is say, 'Golly gee, I can't do that."

by Superduperboltman on Jan 14, 2011 12:39 PM PST up reply actions  

Oh I saw a BIG drop off in LT's blocking in his last year

If that is what we were gonna get moving forward, we were not missing anything. His screen passes weren’t good either.

And that’s too bad because he’s always been a solid blocker and all purpose type-guy.

Actually in the second half of 2010 I thought the FBs did a solid job pass protecting. Sproles and Mathews had some breakdowns. I’d say we didn’t miss LT’s pass protection in 2010.

by Trendsearcher on Jan 14, 2011 2:50 PM PST up reply actions   1 recs

No.

LT was used to pick of the blitzing LB/DB. they’ve been getting to PR all season with only 3 or 4 guys.

The peanut gallery has spoken!!!

by gatesoftds on Jan 15, 2011 12:59 AM PST up reply actions  

a combination of both.

the run game takes pressure off the QB. however poor run blocking or change in philosophy, has lead to a decline in the run. so El Capitan holds onto the ball longer, to throw it more. which leads to sacks.

which comes back to, making improvements to the O-line, via draft or FA’s. or changing the way they run the ball, to be more productive in the run game, to take pressure off El Capitan.

The peanut gallery has spoken!!!

by gatesoftds on Jan 14, 2011 2:44 PM PST up reply actions  

RUN MOAR

6/10/2010 - Tra Thomas signs with the Chargers
8/21/2010 - Tra Thomas retires.

That was fast.

by SD FTW on Jan 14, 2011 4:27 PM PST up reply actions  

RUN WELL.

the chargers need to run the ball “better”, not more. on average if you run the ball “up the middle” 12 times for 9 yards, running it 12 more times isn’t going to improve the Chargers run game.

the O-lines first step is back, like you would in pass protection. but in a run offense, the O-lines needs to attack the D-line and move them off the line of scrimmage. the change in philosophies has kept the run game in a steady decline for four seasons. RM24 is the sole reason the run game has perked up, but only a little. don’t expect that young man to pull miracles runs, like he did against the broncos, for every game. the play design and blocking needs to improve, to get more production from RM24.

The peanut gallery has spoken!!!

by gatesoftds on Jan 15, 2011 12:53 AM PST up reply actions   1 recs

I think mike tolbert might disagree with you on the end of that post

He’s been the most important component of the “slightly” improved run game.
Him and Jacob Hester’s improved blocking technique.

by Alex Bourque on Jan 17, 2011 6:15 AM PST up reply actions   1 recs

Why?

i said it needs to “improve”. the potential is there, they just need to be consistant at making there blocks, and being less predictable at running the ball.

The peanut gallery has spoken!!!

by gatesoftds on Jan 22, 2011 11:34 AM PST up reply actions  

"My ultimate conclusion is this: the Chargers just haven't been as great as we'd like to think they were."

I love the research and analysis, but I’m not sure that I agree with your conclusion. The problem is this: the DVOA ratings (and any other measure of on-field results for that matter), inherently intermix the players’ talent with the skillset of the coaching.

If the original hypothesis is “We think we’ve had these great teams and should have done something special with them, and blame coaches and the front office when something goes wrong,” then you can’t dismiss that hypothesis on DVOA alone.

In other words, I still think that the talent level of the Chargers has been at a very good/dominant/near-elite level since 2006. But I also believe that Norv’s philosophy and inability to maximize the talent given to him (other than the quarterback position) has brough the team down to a good/very good level. And the DVOA ratings do not categorically refute that opinion.

by hablodepablo on Jan 13, 2011 9:52 AM PST reply actions  

I agree on DVOA not telling us much in this case

In fact, it doesn’t tell you a whole lot more than what the casual observer could tell you about each season. The DVOA is much more useful on a per player or per unit basis, and gets more interesting when it indicates something contrary to common knowledge.

In this case, the team DVOA tells you exactly what you would expect. Either the DVOA is not at a dominant level because the players aren’t good (AJ’s fault), or the coaches aren’t good (also AJ’s fault), or we have had more than our share of fluky injuries (which means our depth wasn’t good, also AJ’s fault)

So, we haven’t won a SB and it’s AJ’s fault… Who knew the signonsandiego charger forums were right after all!!

by Stephen (shaynes41) on Jan 13, 2011 10:15 AM PST up reply actions  

Yeah, I had the same question

Isn’t DVOA measuring performance more than “talent”?

The thong is, it happened.

by Goofus on Jan 13, 2011 11:13 AM PST up reply actions  

The DVOA is a descriptive stat, not a predictive stat

If the Chargers had “dominant” DVOAs of 30%+ it would be because they were playing for or winning conference championships and Super Bowls. In other words, the DVOA tells us that the team doesn’t compete at the highest level regardless of what the talent level actually is. The DVOA doesn’t tell us that the team can’t compete at the highest level or that it doesn’t have the talent. Using DVOA as the sole indicator, it would be equally valid to say 1) the team plays up to its potential; 2) the talent on the team is better than the record indicates, but the team underachieves; and 3) the talent on the team isn’t as good as the record indicates, but the team overachieves. DVOA isn’t capable of differentiating among these. In fact, neither are we; it’s totally subjective. The majority opinion on this blog appears to be that the team has more talent, but underachieves. DVOA simply doesn’t support the statement that the Chargers haven’t competed at the highest level because of a lack of talent.

Are Marlon McCree and Antonio Cromartie the same person? Just askin'.

by QLFixBoy on Jan 13, 2011 11:26 AM PST up reply actions  

You are right QLFixBoy

The DVOA metric does tell us something about the relative performance of the team, but not why.

Another option to compare the players might be how many former-Chargers are active in the league relative to other teams. This brings all of AJ’s peers into the equation. Not only is AJ saying they are good enough, but the rest of the teams are also validating the Chargers choices.

by Trendsearcher on Jan 13, 2011 12:21 PM PST up reply actions  

Not so sure about that either.

Belichick, for instance, keeps most of his better players until they’re old and gray, and only have a few years left in the tank.

An autumn Sunday,
Perched in front of the big screen,
Beer in white knuckles.

by Neoplatonist Bolthead on Jan 13, 2011 2:45 PM PST up reply actions  

How about something else?

Say the sum of years played in the NFL for all active players in the league?

The flaws there would be an understatement for new GM’s. But that idea would cover GM’s that keep their guys AND GMs that find NFL caliber players but can’t hold on to ’em.

by Trendsearcher on Jan 14, 2011 10:59 AM PST up reply actions  

I agree

that we aren’t as good as our record over the last several years would indicate. We’ve played in a poor division most of the time. However, both of the years Marty had us in the playoffs saw better DVOA than any of Norv’s teams…yet the only playoff wins have been with Norv. DVOA still doesn’t give the full picture. That said, Norv’s teams are inconsistent enough to drive someone mad.

by Cake or Death on Jan 13, 2011 3:09 PM PST reply actions  

This article strikes me as an endorsement for Norv Turner,

The equation is simple.
If we have been the most talented and, in the opinion of the author, well coached. Then we should have been to at least one Super Bowl in four tries.
Truth is we haven’t. So yes, AJ is responsible for player personnel but the coach is responsible for player performance, whom by the way was AJ’s guy.

If you aren't fired with enthusiasm, then you will be fired with enthusiasm. Vince Lombardi

by Bolt Brother on Jan 16, 2011 9:51 PM PST reply actions  

There are plenty of good teams that don't win Super Bowls

It’s one of the toughest things to win in sports since there is such an influence from “luck”, “fluke” and “opportunity” plays…the “Any Given Sunday” concept.
In other sports, the series concept can remove most of the luck factors.
 
In football, the most important thing is getting into the tournament consistently to give yourself the best chance to actually make a Super Bowl. There is no denying that AJ Smith’s teams have been capable of getting into the tournament and for that alone he should be applauded.

by Alex Bourque on Jan 17, 2011 6:22 AM PST up reply actions  

And we haven't done it often.

It’s a competitive league. If you’ve got a team that’s consistently in the top half of the NFL, you should statistically play in three playoff series and one championship game every four years. That’s exactly what we’ve done with Norv. In the seven years the Chargers have been good, they’ve pretty much also done what you’d expect, with five playoff appearances. No championships, but no WC-round losses either. Keep plugging away, and eventually….

An autumn Sunday,
Perched in front of the big screen,
Beer in white knuckles.

by Neoplatonist Bolthead on Jan 17, 2011 10:48 AM PST up reply actions  

You lost me at
The blame for this ultimately lies with AJ Smith.

I can’t see how the data supports that conclusion.

"When the going gets tough... TheGrandHatching pops in later." -- WG

by TheGrandHatching on Jan 17, 2011 11:46 AM PST reply actions  

Comments For This Post Are Closed


BFTB Apparel Store

Bftbshirtstore_medium

Facebook

Chargers on Twitter


Managers

Paddlin_small John Gennaro

Assistant Editors

Dont-panic-thumb_small Wonko

Pomeranian_of_war_small Richard Wade

Antonio_small creanium

Columnists

Sdclogo2_small Orz

Tn_small Jeff (sliderockmpc)

Wrong_small_small Superduperboltman

Screen_shot_2011-08-05_at_2 jkvandal