I agree.
Philbin is a hierarchy guy. He shuffles some papers around and delegates to his coaches, and yells at Mike Sherman when something isn't working, and yet, frustratingly, can also micromanage at times (Sherman openly said Philbin intervened in play calling). He fires at will. We have people like this in our office, too. They are career corporate people, who excel at staying in good graces of the CEO, not making too many mistakes, avoiding blame, and having a very strong team surrounding them. Take them out of their element and ask them to innovate or accomplish something on their own and they show their mediocrity.
Lazor is a hands-on guy, and a teacher. He's doing what Philbin claimed he'd do when he got here - teach, innovate, hold players to a high standard. If we see existing players suddenly excelling where before they didn't (like Egnew), then we know that our coaches didn't know what they're doing. The comments I hear Lazor making, they're very specific, and you can almost see the wheels turning in his head. Right away he wasn't happy with the communication on the line and said we're losers if we don't fix it, NOW, not tomorrow. He was immediately not satisfied with Tanny's decision-making speed, accuracy and holding the ball too long. But not for the purpose of lowering the boom, but to correct the issues. These are fundamentals he's going to fix. The previous coach, Sherman, seemed to be focusing on Tannehill not making mistakes and drilling that into him. You don't win games by avoiding mistakes, you win games by making big plays. Otherwise, Henne would still be here!
And this is just my opinion.
