Colts interview requests and confirmations (merge)

[Jason_]

1 hour ago, Defjamz26 said:

We’ve heard that before about B.B. I’m not buying into that. Just because he was under B.B. isn’t enough for him to be praised the way he is. I haven’t heard anything about him as a talent developer, a playcaller, a leader, or a guy players love. All I’ve heard is that he played under B.B. and his dad was a coach.

 

try watching games and forming your own opinions rather than reading what others think.  I've you've watched many Patriot games the past several years you'd have your own idea of how he's done as far as talent development, playcalling and leadership.  I don't care of the players love him or not, frankly.

[Restored]

34 minutes ago, J@son said:

 

try watching games and forming your own opinions rather than reading what others think.  I've you've watched many Patriot games the past several years you'd have your own idea of how he's done as far as talent development, playcalling and leadership.  I don't care of the players love him or not, frankly.

 

I think that mantra has changed as well. Part of the reason why players didn't like him is because how he treated players and staff. He was very impersonal which led to guys not wanting to go the extra mile for him. I believe that's changed now though. Failure is sometimes the biggest teacher.

[superrep1967]

On 1/3/2018 at 3:25 PM, CR91 said:

Anyone else think Nagy screams pagano 2.0

I don't know there's really no way to know that right now.I don't like guys without head coaching experience. But what makes you think Nagy is Pagano 2.0

[superrep1967]

On 1/3/2018 at 5:53 PM, Colts_Fan12 said:

Makes no sense the colts are easily the best open job plus he has agreed to meet with us he is obviously interested and there is also the rumor that we are at the top of his list too 

I think the Bears could a pretty good job because Trubisky is an up and coming QB. As far as the Colts job nobody knows whats going to happen with Luck including Luck himself. IMHO

[CR91]

5 minutes ago, superrep1967 said:

I don't know there's really no way to know that right now.I don't like guys without head coaching experience. But what makes you think Nagy is Pagano 2.0

 

The guy doesn't even have a year as OC. He has two months. He's never been a HC. 

[csmopar]

I dont know but I'm curious to see how much Jon Gurden's 10 year, 100 million dollar contract is gonna affect other teams and their coaching contracts.

[Jason_]

6 minutes ago, csmopar said:

I dont know but I'm curious to see how much Jon Gurden's 10 year, 100 million dollar contract is gonna affect other teams and their coaching contracts.

 

I'd expect it won't affect other coaching contracts much, if at all.  Gruden's situation is very unique.  The only way his contract would come into play is if someone like Bill Cowher or Brian Billick also wanted to come out of retirement to coach again.

[chrisfarley]

On 1/4/2018 at 12:33 AM, Shive said:

We hired a rookie HC in Pagano.... Hiring another rookie HC would be doing the same thing. If you don't like McDaniels, just say it, but at least have a better reason than "He's already failed before."

i agree with you, no doubt.  If we do get McDaniels, we may get Matt Patricia as well....could be a package deal (unless i missed some news on Patricia and he is not available for hire)

[Jbatc18]

Mcdaniels is the right choice foe the job.  Time for an offensive coach.  If you want to go another way like toub or a defensive guy, we need to bring in gary kubiak as offensive coordinator.  Luck would absolutely thrive in his system.  

Different note, if the reports about belichick is serious about leaving new england, do you wait to see if he would be interested?  Seems like the type of guy that if they * him off, he would like to coach somewhere else and destroy them.

[Shive]

3 hours ago, chrisfarley said:

i agree with you, no doubt.  If we do get McDaniels, we may get Matt Patricia as well....could be a package deal (unless i missed some news on Patricia and he is not available for hire)

No way we get Patricia as a DC. He would be insane to leave NE for anything less than a good HC position. Without McDaniels, he's also the most likely successor to BB.

[LSD9402]

6 hours ago, superrep1967 said:

I think the Bears could a pretty good job because Trubisky is an up and coming QB. As far as the Colts job nobody knows whats going to happen with Luck including Luck himself. IMHO

 

I think Bears end up with Nagy if this is true. He seems to want to work with them and Chi have some nice young pieces with their RBs.

McDaniels will most likely be ours most likely. He won't have to teach a raw kid how to play he can just come in and start installing with one of the best.
 

 

[Y2Jared]

I am willing to let McDaniels have a chance and would welcome him in.  We all screw up, make mistakes and him being with Belichek for the last 5-6 years has probably done him alot of good. He's matured, grown up and is ready to act on lessons learned if given another head coaching opportunity.  

 

Pete Carroll was a flop early on but he is now one of the top coaches in the league now.  

I have nothing against the KC guys and would welcome them in as well but I refuse to disqualify McDaniels as a solid head coach candidate.

[Defjamz26]

Still not done, but I’ve been doing some research on Wilks, and I like what I see and hear. He’s number 2 on my list after Toub.

[stitches]

Something I'm noticing about fanbases attitude towards prospective head coaches(this comes with the disclaimer that there are of course outliers within fanbases)

1. Colts fans seem overly sensitive about the new coach having experience. They don't mind retreads(McDaniels). They don't like Nagy because he's only coordinated for 2 months. They want an offensive coach.

2. Bears fans - don't want retreads, don't want old coaches... they want something fresh. Nagy and DeFilippo  is very popular option among them. They want an offensive coach. 

3. Detroit fans - don't want retreads, don't want old coaches. They don't want an OC for a coach. Want defensive minded coach. They really want Patricia. 

etc....

 

Can you guess the common thread about all those? Yes, fanbases want pretty much the polar opposite of what they've had so far with their most recent unsuccessful coach. 

 

IMO this is not the right way to look at it at all. You can get bad retreads or bad inexperienced coach, you can get good retreads or good inexperienced coach. The problem with Chuck was not that he was inexperienced. In fact, the more experienced he became the more his inefficiencies started to show. The problem with Chuck was that he wasn't a good coach, he had no attention to detail, he didn't have the ability to identify who his best players are and put him in game and develop them. He had hard time enforcing accountability.

 

IMO we have to focus on attributes that are much more important for a coaching job than that. It doesn't matter if Nagy (or DeFilippo) has only been coordinator for 2 months if he is one of the sharpest offensive minds and can teach and install a creative offense that maximizes the talents of his players and if he is a talented playcaller who can find mismatches and abuse them consistently, who can gameplan and find the small advantages and put his players in a position to succeed. It wouldn't matter if he's inexperienced if he can command the room and his players see that he puts them in a position to succeed. Now would he make mistakes from inexperience? Sure, but if the coach has the self-reflection and self-awareness it's much easier to learn and change inefficiencies because of inexperience than it to fix the flawed processes of an already experienced coach who has it drilled within his mind that this is how things should be done. 

 

Same goes for the more experienced candidates we have - focus mainly on the important things that will make them successful headcoach, not on the position or the experience level or the fact that they've failed before. Maybe their fall before had nothing to do with their abilities, or maybe they've improved since their last shot as a HC.  

[richard pallo]

17 hours ago, Jbatc18 said:

Mcdaniels is the right choice foe the job.  Time for an offensive coach.  If you want to go another way like toub or a defensive guy, we need to bring in gary kubiak as offensive coordinator.  Luck would absolutely thrive in his system.  

Different note, if the reports about belichick is serious about leaving new england, do you wait to see if he would be interested?  Seems like the type of guy that if they * him off, he would like to coach somewhere else and destroy them.

Just read where BB has a strong interest in coaching the Giants and only the Giants.  If there relationship is truly falling apart maybe Kraft trades him to the Giants for their No. pick.  They most likely will take one of the QB's.  He then could promote McDaniels or Patricia.  Wouldn't that be wild!

[coltsva]

5 minutes ago, richard pallo said:

Just read where BB has a strong interest in coaching the Giants and only the Giants.  If there relationship is truly falling apart maybe Kraft trades him to the Giants for their No. pick.  They most likely will take one of the QB's.  He then could promote McDaniels or Patricia.  Wouldn't that be wild!

This would be a very interesting scenario.

[krunk]

10 hours ago, Defjamz26 said:

Still not done, but I’ve been doing some research on Wilks, and I like what I see and hear. He’s number 2 on my list after Toub.

On the same page except I like him bettr than Toub.

[stitches]

 

[richard pallo]

18 minutes ago, stitches said:

 

Great!  I guess that only leaves Wilks to bring in from the known candidates that we requested interviews for.  Still puzzled why we havn't heard of an official request for Toub but we did for Nagy. 

[Iron Colt]

Why would anyone want a 56 year old Special Teams coach to be our next Head Coach?

 

Give me McDaniels or Nagy all day long.

[stitches]

Here's something weird - none of the national guys have reported anything about any interview being scheduled with Dave Toub, while they mentioned that the Colts are meeting with Nagy tomorrow. George Bremer said an interview with Taub has not been requested yet. 

 

This is a very interesting situation. A lot of people assumed we are scheduling an interview with Toub and that we have interest in him and just automatically counted it as scheduled once the info about Nagy was released, but no reliable source has confirmed that the Colts are actually meeting with Taub.

 

So why would that be? Are we not interested in Toub? Or is it a situation of Ballard knowing Toub so well that he doesn't even need a meeting? 

[Jason_]

9 minutes ago, stitches said:

? Or is it a situation of Ballard knowing Toub so well that he doesn't even need a meeting? 

 

I highly doubt that's it. The interviews involve many more people than just the GM and candidate. Owners and other front office personnel are usually involved.  I can't imagine Irsay not wanting to be involved in the full interview process with Toub no matter how well Ballard knows him

[richard pallo]

9 minutes ago, stitches said:

Here's something weird - none of the national guys have reported anything about any interview being scheduled with Dave Toub, while they mentioned that the Colts are meeting with Nagy tomorrow. George Bremer said an interview with Taub has not been requested yet. 

 

This is a very interesting situation. A lot of people assumed we are scheduling an interview with Toub and that we have interest in him and just automatically counted it as scheduled once the info about Nagy was released, but no reliable source has confirmed that the Colts are actually meeting with Taub.

 

So why would that be? Are we not interested in Toub? Or is it a situation of Ballard knowing Toub so well that he doesn't even need a meeting? 

I have been saying this the last couple of days now in different threads.  It is very peculiar.  I find it hard to believe that he is not a candidate.  I threw out the idea that maybe they are very good friends and knowing the fact that he might have to fire him someday if it doesn't work out might keep him away.  Bill Polian has said he thinks five candidates are enough.  We are interviewing six.  I'm sure we will find out sooner or latter on what's going on.  

[stitches]

14 minutes ago, J@son said:

 

I highly doubt that's it. The interviews involve many more people than just the GM and candidate. Owners and other front office personnel are usually involved.  I can't imagine Irsay not wanting to be involved in the full interview process with Toub no matter how well Ballard knows him

 

7 minutes ago, richard pallo said:

I have been saying this the last couple of days now in different threads.  It is very peculiar.  I find it hard to believe that he is not a candidate.  I threw out the idea that maybe they are very good friends and knowing the fact that he might have to fire him someday if it doesn't work out might keep him away.  Bill Polian has said he thinks five candidates are enough.  We are interviewing six.  I'm sure we will find out sooner or latter on what's going on.  

Kevin Bowen said that it's possible the info about Nagy meeting was leaked by his agent and he's not Toub's agent so it's not weird that only one of them is mentioned. He also said, he thinks Toub is meeting with the Colts tomorrow, just like Nagy. 

[VaAllDay757]

3 hours ago, Iron Colt said:

Why would anyone want a 56 year old Special Teams coach to be our next Head Coach?

 

Give me McDaniels or Nagy all day long.

John harbaugh was a special team coach before becoming a head coach....so it's not farfetched as it sounds

[jshipp23]

7 minutes ago, VaAllDay757 said:

John harbaugh was a special team coach before becoming a head coach....so it's not farfetched as it sounds

John Harbaugh wasn't 56 years old...he was still climbing the ladder he just skipped a few steps...Toub has never climbed the ladder....just saying...

[Peterk2011]

16 hours ago, stitches said:

IMO we have to focus on attributes that are much more important for a coaching job than that. It doesn't matter if Nagy (or DeFilippo) has only been coordinator for 2 months if he is one of the sharpest offensive minds and can teach and install a creative offense that maximizes the talents of his players and if he is a talented playcaller who can find mismatches and abuse them consistently, who can gameplan and find the small advantages and put his players in a position to succeed. It wouldn't matter if he's inexperienced if he can command the room and his players see that he puts them in a position to succeed. Now would he make mistakes from inexperience? 

 

I can only remember 3 coaches who won superbowl(s) with their first teams as HC in the last 30-35 years. And I doubt there were many before. Those 3 I remember are Harbaugh, Payton and McCarthy. All three had years and years of experience as coordinators before they won their first HC job.

 

Pagano was a 0.5+ coach, who could bring a good team into the playoffs. They didn't fire him because he was bad. They fired him because he wasn't superbowl bound. The Colts - and fans - want a coach who they believe can lead this team to win it all. No one has done that yet without years of experience at least as coordinator. So, inexperience IS a concern. Even if the guy is brilliant,there is a legitimate concern, that his first HC job will only be an intermediate step on his journey to the ultimate victory. The less the experience, the bigger the concern.

[Defjamz26]

1 hour ago, stitches said:

Here's something weird - none of the national guys have reported anything about any interview being scheduled with Dave Toub, while they mentioned that the Colts are meeting with Nagy tomorrow. George Bremer said an interview with Taub has not been requested yet. 

 

This is a very interesting situation. A lot of people assumed we are scheduling an interview with Toub and that we have interest in him and just automatically counted it as scheduled once the info about Nagy was released, but no reliable source has confirmed that the Colts are actually meeting with Taub.

 

So why would that be? Are we not interested in Toub? Or is it a situation of Ballard knowing Toub so well that he doesn't even need a meeting? 

There’s still a lot of time to interview him. Ballard said it’d be a long process. Maybe they wait until after the Super Bowl. Or maybe he’s the top of their 2nd wave of interviews because they didn’t want to overwhelm themselves.

[NewColtsFan]

30 minutes ago, Peterk2011 said:

 

I can only remember 3 coaches who won a superbowl with their first team as a HC in the last 30-35 years. And I doubt there was many before. Those 3 I remember are Harbaugh, Payton and McCarthy. All three had years and years of experience as coordinators before they won their first HC job.

 

Pagano was a 0.5+ coach, who could bring a good team into the playoffs. They didn't fire him because he was bad. They fired him because he wasn't superbowl bound. The Colts - and fans - want a coach who they believe can lead this team to win it all. No one has done that yet without years of experience at least as coordinator. So, inexperience IS a concern. Even if the guy is brilliant,there is a legitimate concern, that his first HC job will only be an intermediate step on his journey to the ultimate victory. The less the experience, the bigger the concern.

 

I think you can add Mike Tomlin to that list..

 

[superrep1967]

On 1/3/2018 at 8:18 AM, stitches said:

 

What about Del Rio as DC?

[Peterk2011]

49 minutes ago, NewColtsFan said:

 

I think you can add Mike Tomlin to that list..

 

 

Oh, indeed. And he is an exception, he was quite young and inexperienced when hired as HC.

 

At least there is an example then, so if Nagy will be hired, the Colts don't have to make history.

[stitches]

25 minutes ago, Peterk2011 said:

 

Oh, indeed. And he is an exception, he was quite young and inexperienced when hired as HC.

 

At least there is an example then, so if Nagy will be hired, the Colts don't have to make history.

The point is - even with inexperienced coach, experience is really not the fundamental quality you are looking for. Experience is a proxy for good decision making and eliminating some of the risk of getting a bad decision-maker(i.e. he's shown to be good decision-maker). You can get inexperienced coach who makes the right decisions/knows how to carry himself/etc or you can get an experienced coach who has flawed decision-making, flawed attitude, etc. That's why you evaluate the underlying fundamental skills and qualities of the coach, not the catchall "experience" that might be positive or negative or somewhere in between(example, having experienced Chuck Pagano right now is probably not what you are looking for).. 

[VaAllDay757]

3 hours ago, jshipp23 said:

John Harbaugh wasn't 56 years old...he was still climbing the ladder he just skipped a few steps...Toub has never climbed the ladder....just saying...

Not every head coach will start young age shouldn't make a difference whether they deserve the job or not

[VaAllDay757]

Pettine as DC???? Hmmmmmm

[Peterk2011]

1 hour ago, stitches said:

The point is - even with inexperienced coach, experience is really not the fundamental quality you are looking for. Experience is a proxy for good decision making and eliminating some of the risk of getting a bad decision-maker(i.e. he's shown to be good decision-maker). You can get inexperienced coach who makes the right decisions/knows how to carry himself/etc or you can get an experienced coach who has flawed decision-making, flawed attitude, etc. That's why you evaluate the underlying fundamental skills and qualities of the coach, not the catchall "experience" that might be positive or negative or somewhere in between(example, having experienced Chuck Pagano right now is probably not what you are looking for).. 

 

There is a self-contradiction in your argument. You can't truly evaluate underlying fundamental skills and qualities without real life samples. You need samples to see how those skills translate to everyday practice. If no sample, you can only give your trust and hope for the best.

 

There is McDaniels for example. When he was interviewed for the Broncos HC job, he has checked every one of those underlying skill and qualities you are looking for. He was widely considered as one of the most brilliant young prodigy-s of professional football. He was ultra smart, creative, intuitive, etc. Everything. Except one. Experience. There was no real life test of how those undeniable skills will translate to good leadership. And he failed, big time.

 

That's when experience comes handy. Even bad history. Now, McDaniels is looking for his second chance. He is still the same smart guy who he was 8 years ago. But now, he has his history. And this history helps both him, and all those GM's who interview him. He can ask himself questions about why he failed, and try to find the answers. And GM's can ask the same - or different - questions, and evalute his answers. The final verdikt will be based big time on these questions and answers. If there is no history, there are no questions to ask, and no answers to give.

[stitches]

2 minutes ago, Peterk2011 said:

 

There is a self-contradiction in your argument. You can't truly evaluate underlying fundamental skills and qualities without real life samples. You need samples to see how those skills translate to everyday practice. If no sample, you can only give your trust and hope for the best.

 

There is McDaniels for example. When he was interviewed for the Broncos HC job, he has checked every one of those underlying skill and qualities you are looking for. He was widely considered as one of the most brilliant young prodigy-s of professional football. He was ultra smart, creative, intuitive, etc. Everything. Except one. Experience. There was no real life test of how those undeniable skills will translate to good leadership. And he failed, big time.

 

That's when experience comes handy. Even bad history. Now, McDaniels is looking for his second chance. He is still the same smart guy who he was 8 years ago. But now, he has his history. And this history helps both him, and all those GM's who interview him. He can ask himself questions about why he failed, and try to find the answers. And GM's can ask the same - or different - questions, and evalute his answers. The final verdikt will be based big time on these questions and answers. If there is no history, there are no questions to ask, and no answers to give.

Pretty much all of the candidates have no head coaching experience(this will be a projection on what they show to you as fundamental skills and qualities), but a lot of them have experience at their side of the ball. You can evaluate their work there and you can evaluate their knowledge/ingenuity/etc. at the interview and with the tape their teams have put forward. Some will have good enough sample, some will have one you have to project.  

 

With McDaniels - he obviously hadn't checked out all the boxes. That's why he failed. His people skills were obviously misevaluated for example. 

[Peterk2011]

Well, I have to say, after the Chiefs-Titans game, Nagy has fallen off my list of favourite candidates. After Kelce's injury, that entire offense has fallen apart despite with Smith, Hill, Hunt were still on board. 

No, thank you.

[Boiler_Colt]

I'm all for McDaniels at this point. If we want him I think we're really only competing with the Giants or if for some wacky reason BB leaves NE. Then he could be the successor there. I would suspect BB might have good things to say to him about the Giants organization. 

[Peterk2011]

2 hours ago, stitches said:

With McDaniels - he obviously hadn't checked out all the boxes. That's why he failed. His people skills were obviously misevaluated for example. 

 

And why were his people skills mievaluated? Probably because the lack of samples. If he had some head coaching history, he might have not been misevaluated. Or they would've proof that he learned from his mistakes already..

 

2 hours ago, stitches said:

Pretty much all of the candidates have no head coaching experience(this will be a projection on what they show to you as fundamental skills and qualities), but a lot of them have experience at their side of the ball. You can evaluate their work there and you can evaluate their knowledge/ingenuity/etc. at the interview and with the tape their teams have put forward. Some will have good enough sample, some will have one you have to project.

 

Certainly. No one gets an opportunity for a HC interview from the street, everyone has some background. But it does matter how much and what kind of bacground. This is not A or B, this is A and B. A good candidate has to check both. He's got to have those underlying fundamentals that you mentioned, but he also has to prove that he can use those fundamentals the right way. Neither is more important than the other.

[Defjamz26]

23 hours ago, krunk said:

On the same page except I like him bettr than Toub.

Listen to this post game address by him: 

 

 

He is well spoken and commanded the room. He knows his X’s and O’s, probably better than Pagano. He also held one of his young CBs accountable by saying what he did wrong. He didn’t just sit there and sing the praises of the team but was critical and went into depth about how the game went. That’s all HC stuff IMO.