There have been Seals used by sports franchises - but it's mostly a show to entertain the fans or make some phony-tough coach / GM look bold. After all, equating a sport to war is laughable.

Oh, and the team that did so? The Pittsburgh Pirates...

http://aol.sportingnews.com/mlb/story/2012-09-21/pittsburgh-pirates-navy-seal-training-method-email-kyle-stark-boot-camp

It's further proof that this coach doesn't get that this isn't a team of 18-21 year olds, that he's coaching grown men who are professionals at what they do.

He seems, based on the early actions he's taken and the priorities he's set, to be slightly silly.

I'll remember, when receivers are running free up the seam (yet again), that the safeties are probably better at treading water and carrying phone poles along the beach than they were in 2012.

I wanted to give Kelly a chance, but if Vick is the starting QB of this team on opening day, that's it. If he watched last year's (or the year before that) game film and his evaluation was to roll with Vick, there's little hope. I can't take another year of watching a washed up Mike Vick who was never that good in the first place.

Marvin Lewis (DC), Mike Singletary (LB coach), Jack Del Rio (LB coach), Mike Smith (LB coach), Rex Ryan (DC), Chuck Pagano (DC). Mike there are more, but that is dam near the mint as far as an organization and a coaching experience within it where one can really cut their teeth and improve as a coach on the defensive side. If I am a big time D-1 AD or even a smaller college, and need a new basketball coach, and even in the now if I can't be entirely certain of the why, I find out the names of the entire Xavier University basketball coaching staff, and start reaching out to them to be interviewed. Anyway, I'm indifferent to not really caring about the Shurmur hire considering he'll be running whatever offensive Kelly wants him too, but now by hiring two guys from the same losing organization I say no to this package deal and stamp it 'return to sender,' for sure. Singletary was the Viks LB's coach last season. Mike you do think that the Foles pick, to a degree, now appears to be a wasted pick.

Foles to KC for a 5th that could become a 4th if incentives are reached. Last season was a complete waste of time, effort, and money. The only thing ownership cared about was letting Reid go "with dignity", whatever that means.

I would not let Singletary anywhere near a football team after he took a Super Bowl squad to 3-13. He's brutal, more interested in self-promotion than results - based on his tenure in SF. But I agree better options were available across the board with this staff.

Porter, I'm over the gold standard thing, but I don't like what I'm seeing at all.

Agree with everything you said. Dennis Dixon- a 28 year old practice squader and Manuel- this is ridiculous. Stop gap or not, I don't even want to watch a game when he's playing these days. They needed a fresh start across the board.

I liked his initial press conf too because he said he's adjust his offense to his players, not the other way around. I'm not sure on Foles of course, but I liked what I saw. If he's traded, last year was a complete waste of time. If Vick's the starter, this upcoming year will be another wasted one.

Of course no one can have an opinion without having run an NFL franchise. That's why Bill Polian and Ron Wolf's blogs are so popular I guess. By that token, you're not a published author, so how can you possibly "write" an opinion on my analysis?

I have as much success in the NFL as Chip Kelly and less failure than Billy Davis.

Mike, there in lies my problem with your and other's opinions. Chip Kelly has even coached a practice yet, much less a game and people are already proclaiming failure because he signed Michael Vick to a restructured contract. It just bothers me to no end when people are quick to judge, if not flat out classify it a failure. Why not give him time, and maybe a few practices before judging his success.

I will have more respect for you if you come back on here in the fall if it proves to be successful and admit you were wrong all the way back in February when you prejudged his decisions. I know for sure you will be saying, "told you so"!! Everybody wanted change, we got it, now let's give it a chance before we judge it's success or failure.

Listen Tim we are all passionate and knowledgeable Eagles fans here, so it goes without saying that said peoples opinions and or judgements on whatever topic are often mixed with that passion and a good amount of rational thinking. I feel we all give each other that leeway, and draw out each of those converging perspectives in the majority of the regulars who participate here. Yes sometimes there are 'line-steppers or violators, but I haven't seen that in a while. I know Mike's articles have a high degree of credibility, but are never vanilla, and that's what we want to make us think and thus the discussion is started. Furthermore, Think about where we are right now, how long it took us to sink with this team over the past five or so years, then remember where the expectations were when we started the season. The observations and opinions we all offer here are a product of that long journey. Tim you are the one judging and your not taking the context of the situation I just described into consideration, however rational you and to a degree I, think your statement above is. The foundation for this team, i.e the new coaching staff, is most valid and important to debate here, and the questions and uncertainty are at a very high level, mostly because this hire of Chip Kelly wasn't the least conservative in nature. Now he hired two more question marks, who's track records as coordinators, aren't that good.

That's an interesting take, but I don't buy it. Vick's presence here is BECAUSE of Kelly. He can't then say it was Vick's fault. Shurmur is here because Kelly hired him- same deal. Spurrier figured out real quick he didn't want to be in the NFL and it became a circus because he would leave practice in the middle of the day. If Chip fails, I don't think it'll be because of bs like that.

Very interesting Porter. That's a debate that I've heard before. Now that offenses are scoring out of control, you have to win with a great defense to slow them down. I don't know. I always think you need a complete team- offense, defense and special teams to win in the NFL. That hasn't changed, but I see your point.

You win, I have wasted my last minutes with this........

Wow - never in my life have I seen a journalist - whose success depends upon his readership - respond to someone in such an unprofessional matter in regards to a discussion of opinion. Good luck to you and your writing future, Mr. Diviney.

Ms. Leah S, Mr. Tim's first ever contribution on Mike's blog and this post started with this condensing laced commentary. "Mike, I am really thrilled to get the chance to read your blog before you are whisked away to run an NFL franchise. Your knowledge of the NFL seems far superior to Chip Kelly, Billie Davis, or anyone else that is getting paid to coach. I am truly surprised you have been available this long and shame on the 32 teams in the NFL that have passed up your talent evaluation ability." So you should consider context here, and someone's established style

Yes Leah S., either agree with the blogger or say nothing. Criticism only allowed by host, or his followers.

You said you disagree with some of the views expressed in this piece about the new coaching staff. What in that first response of yours, which I just noted above, has any resemblance to a rebuttal with your supporting reasons for such. Heck just one point and one reason, only two sentences, and then season it with whatever else. This is how you enter the conversation, wherein how does one even respond or further the conversation, and how could you expect any less than what you got back. To be honest this response of yours sounded empty, a bit self-serving and overall plain foolish.

Yeah Bo or Mike, or whoever you are, I am self serving. Might be the most hilarious, ridiculous accusation I might have heard. So Am I supposed to comply for a while before I criticize? I happen to stumble across Mike's piece, which ironically I found self serving, offering his two cents that this was a bad move, but I guess since I am not a loyal follower and having hung on his every word during the season, I need medication or have a bug up my a$$ as he so eloquently pointed out. His indicating I might read his analysis might be more my speed is ok though right? I am ok if people criticize me, not everybody agrees, I ask you, re-read this "Change on its face, is not progress, it has to be the right change" While you may not like my "style" I stand by my first post, Mike comes off thinking he knows better then the people that were hired THIS YEAR to run this team. I on the other hand am willing to give the opportunity to execute their plan and not hold them accountable for the mistakes made by the leadership of the 1995 front office for not drafted Derrick Brooks, or whoever drafted Mike Mamula over Warren Sapp. While those are obvious failures this organization of front office executives had nothing to do with that. I prefer to look forward then dredge up the past. If they fail, I will be first in line to criticize, until then I will wait. However it won't be here in Mike's Blog, as you and he have proven only conformers are welcome.

Bo yes, not sure what you mean, second it was your first comment, it was empty and pointless, you weren't constructing a counter argument you were attacking the writer of said piece. Third, I just read your other comments, which you added this morning and they're constructive, and shouldn't that be what this or any like forum should be about. For what it is worth I appreciated reading them, and agree with some of your your points. If your first ever comment here was along the lines of your most recent comments and wasn't the one I've now referenced and took umbrage with I wouldn't have spent this time debating you as such. I personally am not fond of other Eagles fans who try to tell myself or others that I can't question, have opinions, which the judgements you say really are, about the state of my team. This is our team and the owners have been caretakers, who come and go, but what seems to be a constant is a tract record and or history with far more failures and questionable decisions, some small and unseen and some large and obvious. Any loyal Eagles fan has earned this sad right to be jaded and express strong opinions questioning whatever move this organization makes. I wish I didn't feel this way, but we've gone 54 years without an NFL title, wherein passionate NFL fans in any city, would be frustrated with this franchise. Mike has that right, I and others do too, so don't tell me I don't and try to start an argument from there, that first comment was foolish.

While I agree with your examples above I will take the other side, the FANS are not RIGHT on every big issue, they are right on the ones they want to remember. How about when the fan base, all the way up to the guy who ran the Stae of PA were SCREAMING for Ricky Williams over Donavan McNabb how did that turn out? Or when they released Troy Vincent, some fans thought the sky was falling, Bobby Taylor, Duece Staley just to name a few. I am not arguing they are genius, I am stating that with bad there is also good. People wonder why Eagles fans, or Philly fans in general get a bad rap, this is part of it. We DWELL on the negative.

I'll share another example, toward the end the fans were screaming that Donavan McNabb sucked and we needed a real QB. Well they got their wish, we traded Donavan, but of course the fan base was outraged that we traded him in division. I think the Eagles got that one right. While we are still looking for that better QB, for every bad move, I think we could reference a good one, where the Eagles were right and the fans were wrong, and vice versa.

Tim, that draft thing was overblown. I was at the Eagles draft party at D&B and no one booed. That was the Gov and a handful of idiot fans in NYC hired for a radio publicity stunt. McNabb was embraced after that and had one of the most popular jerseys of all time. Reggie Miller was booed on draft day too, but no one knows because he wasn't a baby about it.

My recollection was that fans were very happy to see McNabb go. Any trepidation over him going to an awful Skins team was mitigated by the huge haul in picks the Eagles got in return (which is something I will never take away from them).

In addition to trading trash for high picks (and blowing those high picks), the Eagles have been great at letting guys go at the right time. Except maybe for Dawkins. The issue has, for me anyway, been the replacements. They're almost always a downgrade.

But my post was in reference to your initial message - which pretty much amounted to what the ESPN's of the world continually say...Eagles fans should pay for the tickets, shut up, and cheer. Doesn't work that way. And NYC and Boston )having lived in both) are EVERY BIT as a bad as Philly when it comes to sports negativity.

I agree - McNabb trade was a great deal. My thinking is that the Eagles would have had slightly worse records with McNabb than they went on to have with Vick, as Reid and McNabb both went downhill in a hurry after that season.

Port, let's agree to disagree about the drafting of Donavan McNabb. WIP talk radio and it's stepford followers had a field day with that issue for months. I stopped listening to WIP then and haven't had them on since.

Let's just agree to disagree on that subject, I might be making too much of it and you might be dismissing it too easily.

I'll say this - last year's draft looks to have been very, very good.

I know I pass such judgements, once again considering context, but always hope for the best. If the Eagles were in a better place, with a GM and to a lesser extent our recently questionable owner, I wouldn't have much merits to my mildly negative judgements. By the way, Tampa picked two first ballot hall of famers, Derrick Brooks, in that '95 first round. it wasn't just the Eagles, but this only goes to further prove the sad draft record of bad Eagles GMs and player personnel guys . We really haven't had a strong and or notable GM since the late 70's, with Jim Murray, who built that '80 Super Bowl team.

Again Tim, you won't listen to WIP because you hear people disagreeing with you. Your condescending tone is the problem. Disagree all you want, I welcome it, but don't do so by attacking anyone (me in this case) who doesn't agree with you. I didn't tell you you had to agree with me, but you criticized me for having an opinion different from you own. We've seen Donovan McNabb's story written since he left the nest- enough said about that.

Except for the Eagles.

Sorry you find them so dumbest. I don't like the limited moves he's made. The D coordinator and QB were the most important decisions he had to make. In my opinion, I strongly disagree with what he's done on both counts.

I am a fan first and foremost and I hope he succeeds. He's made 2 moves and I strongly disagree with either of them.

I AM a fan who loves the Eagles. I would reply more, but I'm confused by your high-quality use of "indent" and "hustle environment".

You know Larry, that's a great idea got me thinking about a 'what if.' I really wasn't a huge Tebow fan, for the reasons many weren't, first was his lack of ability to read defenses, and go to his secondary options if his first wasn't available. Second was his mechanics, that said I thought if he had the option or Reid was intrigued, then why wouldn't he have wanted to join the Eagles for a year and have Reid polish-up another QB. Really why didn't his agent direct him to a team like the Eagles, who had a coach with solid track record with coaching the QB position? Here's the 'what if,' lets say Reid did just that, even without getting much game time, now Tebow runs Kelly's offense, which is quite similar to the one he ran at UF. Tebow would have been the Eagles starting QB for this upcoming season. I think Tebow's build, would make him a far more durable version of this new age QB, which is the main concern with the slighter buit but well know starting QBs, Wilson & RG3, who ran some form of the read option, this past season.

I think Tebow would be great, for all the pros that Mike just pointed out, but he needs to have a year like Vick had, wherein his mechanics and field vision, will be improved. Larry I agree he has to find that franchise which will accept his unique set of skills which most NFL QBs don't have, but which he did use to some degree of success already. With this read-option now coming into vogue, and a scheme he is familiar with, all he has to do is work on the obvious, cause no matter what, he'll still need those skills. Think a slightly smaller but far quicker Ben Roethlisberger, doing what RG3 just did this past season.

Mike all those good points are the uncoachable things, the things we all wish Donovan had more of. The things Tim are deficient in are only realated to technique. His speed, arm strength and of course leadership skills are all better than McNabb's ever were. For example, if you just look at Tebow's throwing mechanics, wherein most of these spread or read option QBs are only using 5 or 3 step drops. I think if a coach helps him clean both those up, his accuracy on all the passes will improve dramatically. I've seen him be quite accurate at times, specifically the slants, but when he isn't, I feel its his footwork that fails him. His elongated motion, is my main concern. That quasi wind-up/ball dip in his throwing motion is a well ingrained muscle memory thing cause he once was a baseball pitcher.. I think you see this flaw more on his 5 step drop than his 3 step, which he's improve with since entering the league. This is going to take the most time to correct. All that said I think he actually can read defenses quite well. now three years in the league, being a smart and motivated guy which I assume he is. He has now spent how many hours in NFL film rooms? He didn't have the proper mechanics, to then transfer them to a game situation, wherein it took him too long to release the ball and with his footwork way off. He knew such short comings in his technique wouldn't allow him to react quick enough to look off his first option and then throw to his second or third.

McNabb's arm was stronger than Tebow's. He just chose to throw dump off's all the time because he wanted to protect his meaningless TD:INT ratio. He was, perhaps, the most risk-averse QB in the history of the NFL.