I see where you're coming from but it makes no sense to me. A manager, person in charge, head coach etc is RESPONSIBLE for every person's performance/actions under them on an organizational chart. That is why they are paid more and are given the authority to hire/fire bench/play those people under them. It is a head coaches responsibility to locate the fault/blame and eliminate it from happening again. Now for sure, errors are always made but Munchak has shown during his tenure he seems incapable of managing the players in a fashion that eliminates or at least greatly reduces their execution errors. The same principle applies to his assistant coaches. He picked a bad batch at first, got a pass for the "late hiring" and re-loaded. So far, same results. So despite his attempts at addressing those problems, they still remain. And HE is responsible for that despite the blame/fault lying on the assistant coaches and players. That responsibility goes along with his job as head coach. A second point is that the league is set up with parity. The more you lose, the more OPPORTUNITY you have to correct the talent level of your roster. Picking high in a draft doesn't guarantee you top talent but it increases your available options (players, picks) to utilize. That is where the quality of an organization's ability to scout and develop players comes in. So in essence, an organization's "talent level" is directly attributable to the GM, the scouting department AND the COACHES. I still contend that if anyone can recognize the difference between responsibility and fault, Munchak does deserve the level of criticism he is receiving. And as you mentioned, that is real point on which you and I disagree.