Jump to content
Indianapolis Colts
Indianapolis Colts Fan Forum

Colts interview requests and confirmations (merge)


stitches

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 1.1k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

Just now, csmopar said:

I'm thinking it's to fulfill that having to interview a minority candidate. That said, I hope we interview a bunch of folks, be thorough just don't wait too long

If the Colts don't want to be so blatantly obvious regarding the Rooney Rule they'd interview Leslie frazier as well :thmup:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, csmopar said:

I'm thinking it's to fulfill that having to interview a minority candidate. That said, I hope we interview a bunch of folks, be thorough just don't wait too long

It may be. I get the sentiment of the rule, but honestly it's probably degrading to get an interview just because you are a minority and the team has to interview someone.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If I was raiding the Patriots for coaching personnel right now, the guy I want is Patricia, not necessarily McDaniels.  I respect McDaniels' performance with a high powered offense, but we won't have that next year unless we hit a home run in the draft and get a clean bill of health from Luck, both things that can definitely wind up not happening for us.

 

Patricia meanwhile is somehow turning that defense, which has a strong secondary but is very VERY weak on the line, into something that can win football games.  Belichick is the master of bend not break defensive schemes and Patricia has had years to learn from the best.  His style fits what we need FAR more than McDaniels' does.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Smoke317 said:

I’ve got a question for the people that don’t want McDaniels (I want him here as HC).  With the Lions firing Caldwell, could a Toub as HC & Jim Bob Cooter as OC scenario work if he’s let go with Caldwell?

Yeah, but if cooter lives up to the hype Toub would be looking for another OC sooner rather than later. Everyone loves a hot cooter.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That McDaniels article should salve many of the concerns about the guy. It's candid and revealing. He was too young and arrogant and was given too much power. And he knows it. He sounds like a much better human being today. And coach. I'd be more than fine with him as head coach. He and Luck together would be magic. And he comes from the winningest franchise around. Experience. Success. Perspective. It's all good. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, George Peterson said:

If I was raiding the Patriots for coaching personnel right now, the guy I want is Patricia, not necessarily McDaniels.  I respect McDaniels' performance with a high powered offense, but we won't have that next year unless we hit a home run in the draft and get a clean bill of health from Luck, both things that can definitely wind up not happening for us.

 

Patricia meanwhile is somehow turning that defense, which has a strong secondary but is very VERY weak on the line, into something that can win football games.  Belichick is the master of bend not break defensive schemes and Patricia has had years to learn from the best.  His style fits what we need FAR more than McDaniels' does.

I think the complete opposite. Our offense was our weakest link this year.  And I’ve been way more impressed with Patriots offense as opposed to their defense the last few years...  And don’t sleep on the fact that Patricia has maybe the greatest defensive mind of this generation, helping him make in game adjustments and making gameplans...  He won’t have that anywhere else.  

 

Patricia seems to fit more of the mold of the Pat’s assistants that fail when they leave the nest.  McDaniels already left and failed and has learned and grown some more from that experience. I don’t want to be Patricia’s first failing point.  Let him go elsewhere and fail and then get more grooming later and maybe...  But now, I’m hard pressed to separate what’s actually Patricia & what’s Belichick when it comes to that Pat’s defense.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

51 minutes ago, chad72 said:

 

Yeah, I despise the Rooney rule for that reason :(

 

I love the Rooney rule for that reason.

 

You can't get a job if you don't even get an interview.    And before the RR there were off-seasons were no AA were interviewed at all.     It's not perfect, but IMO it's far better to have it than not have it at all...

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guys, I think we are seriously overthinking a very important detail:

 

With a franchise QB, a HC's job becomes 2X easier and in the end is more likely to look good and have favorable opinions regardless of his actual job. 

 

Look at Pagano! Even with his terrible game-management, lack of in-game adjustments, and other terrible HC qualities, he still somehow managed to win A LOT of games with Luck. The mistake that we need to make sure that we DON'T make is to hire a full-on risk like we did with Pagano. There were rumors prior to Pagano's hire that he wasn't the best candidate for HC at the time and obviously now we know about the Pagano/Grigson dynamic.

 

My take on all this HC stuff: As long as we hire somebody that can be an effective game-manager, make in-game adjustments, and can assemble a quality staff, we should be fine as long as we have Luck coming back healthy (which I know isn't even guaranteed). I'd rather take a safer option than go all out on a risky move that could back-fire just as easily as it did with Pagano. I think that is partially the reason why Irsay keeps on insisting that we get a former-head coach because chances are, if those former-head coaches had a franchise QB at this disposal, they would still probably be decent-to-good head coaches.

 

My picks for HC: Jim Schwartz or Toub (would be kinda like John Harbaugh and be sorta hands-off and let his coordinators take care of a lot of in-game responsibilities while he takes care of managing stuff). 

 

I DONT want McDaniels because I think he is a risky hire (more so than Toub). There have been reports that players didn't like playing for him, that he butted heads a lot, etc. Toub on the other hand is a highly-respectable person who has led a top unit for the past decade almost. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, NewColtsFan said:

 

I love the Rooney rule for that reason.

 

You can't get a job if you don't even get an interview.    And before the RR there were off-seasons were no AA were interviewed at all.     It's not perfect, but IMO it's far better to have it than not have it at all...

 

 

My angle was that teams can tend to make the rule a sham sometimes. I agree, you won't win the lottery till you play it but sometimes, the odds of the situations these minority candidates go into are just that, like the odds of winning a lottery!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, NewColtsFan said:

 

I love the Rooney rule for that reason.

 

You can't get a job if you don't even get an interview.    And before the RR there were off-seasons were no AA were interviewed at all.     It's not perfect, but IMO it's far better to have it than not have it at all...

 

Perfect example I'm pretty sure is Vance Joseph.

 

Though I do see both sides of the argument. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, chad72 said:

 

My angle was that teams can tend to make the rule a sham sometimes. I agree, you won't win the lottery till you play it but sometimes, the odds of the situations these minority candidates go into are just that, like the odds of winning a lottery!!

 

The other angle is that most candidates don't get hired until they've been through the interview process a couple times. They get some exposure, the teams give feedback to the league office, and their names get circulated a little bit more. It's definitely not good to just be the Rooney Rule candidate, but I think it helps in a lot of cases.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, stitches said:

 

 

I think that is the perfect send off to give prospective to our players. To not just blame coaches, but themselves and be accountable. Sometimes the problem is staring at you in the mirror.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Belilcheck or however the hell you spell it always has his hands in that defense. I’d be more reluctant to take the DC under him than I would the OC under him. There has been numerous times where he huddled up with the defense is they are struggling. I haven’t seen much of that when it comes to offense 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, chad72 said:

 

My angle was that teams can tend to make the rule a sham sometimes. I agree, you won't win the lottery till you play it but sometimes, the odds of the situations these minority candidates go into are just that, like the odds of winning a lottery!!

 

Yes...   it can be a sham sometimes....

 

Team X is hiring Coach Y and everyone knows it.    So why should any AA candidate interview in that case?

 

Because interviewing for the top job is a good thing.    Because you might really impress the room of execs.   And even if you don't get the job this time, you might get the job the next time it comes open.    Or, an executive in the room leaves that franchise to become the GM elsewhere.   Maybe he was wowed and now he's got a shot to hire you.

 

I would always tell an AA candidate to interview for every job you can even if it's a sham.   Because it could lead to something someday.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, NewColtsFan said:

 

Yes...   it can be a sham sometimes....

 

Team X is hiring Coach Y And everyone knows it.     So why should any AA candidate interview in that case?

 

Because interviewing for the top job is a good thing.    Because you might really impress the room of execs.   And even if you don't get the job this time, you might get the job the next time it comes open.

Or, an executive in the room leaves that franchise to become the GM elsewhere.   Maybe he was wowed and now he's got a shot to hire you.

 

I would always tell an AA candidate to interview for every job you can even if it's a sham.   Because it could lead to something someday.

 

 

True. Jim Caldwell did get interviewed around for the longest time till he got the break with Dungy retiring and then later with the Ravens as OC, and it went from there.

 

Another guy who gets a lot of interviews is the Lions DC, Teryl Austin. I think he is a good DC, not sure if he got let go with Caldwell as well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, NorthernBlue said:

Perfect example I'm pretty sure is Vance Joseph.

 

Though I do see both sides of the argument. 

 

The other example is Mike Tomlin at Pittsburgh.   The job was reportedly going to one of two former Steelers players.    Tomlin was just a guy who HAD to be interviewed.   A formality.    And then he interviewed and wowed them and got the job.    

 

So it CAN happen.....

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, NewColtsFan said:

 

Yes...   it can be a sham sometimes....

 

Team X is hiring Coach Y And everyone knows it.     So why should any AA candidate interview in that case?

 

Because interviewing for the top job is a good thing.    Because you might really impress the room of execs.   And even if you don't get the job this time, you might get the job the next time it comes open.

Or, an executive in the room leaves that franchise to become the GM elsewhere.   Maybe he was wowed and now he's got a shot to hire you.

 

I would always tell an AA candidate to interview for every job you can even if it's a sham.   Because it could lead to something someday.

 

It also gives experience to the people being interviewed. It lets them know what teams are looking for and even if they don't get the job this time they will be better prepared to grab the job that really is up for grabs next time around. And next time around league offices and teams will know that the guy is highly regarded, he will get name recognition that helps raise his profile... 

 

It's not as simple as it's a sham, do away with it... there are several levels to it that make having it worth it over not having it. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, DougDew said:

Just curious, and OT, but does Luck hold other players accountable....at all?  I know Manning did. 


I'm pretty sure there's a quote from Castonzo or somebody about Luck ripping into teammates when necessary, holding them accountable. Can't seem to find it though.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, NewColtsFan said:

 

The other example is Mike Tomlin at Pittsburgh.   The job was reportedly going to one of two former Steelers players.    Tomlin was just a guy who HAD to be interviewed.   A formality.    And then he interviewed and wowed them and got the job.    

 

So it CAN happen.....

 

I agree with the rule but in the case of the Colts this year, I think its a bit irrelevant.  I think the draw is for someone with a short passing game offense experience, hence the McDaniels and Nagy chatter.  If there is a black coach with the reputation on offense the Colts appear to be seeking, then the interview process bears fruit.  But unless there is a candidate with that background, I don't know if the Rooney Rule is going to help the Colts land their next HC.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, DougDew said:

I agree with the rule but in the case of the Colts this year, I think its a bit irrelevant.  I think the draw is for someone with a short passing game offense experience, hence the McDaniels and Nagy chatter.  If there is a black coach with the reputation on offense the Colts appear to be seeking, then the interview process bears fruit.  But unless there is a candidate with that background, I don't know if the Rooney Rule is going to help the Colts land their next HC.

Not relevant for today’s nfl but I wonder if interviewing a woman qualifies despite women being the majority of the population.  Just thinking out loud 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There's probably not going to be too many other names mentioned. I bet the next coach comes from Nagy, Toub, or Mcdaniels unless Wilks blows their socks off. I bet the process goes about as long as the GM search did or less.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, krunk said:

There's probably not going to be too many other names mentioned. I bet the next coach comes from Nagy, Toub, or Mcdaniels unless Wilks blows their socks off. I bet the process goes about as long as the GM search did or less.

They can't hire one of the three before they interview Wilks, so the Wilks interview will have to come pretty soon.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...