Prove Changing Head Coaches Is Smart

[King Colt]

Watching Pittsburgh last night they have not been less than 50% wins since 2007 under Tomlin. So I ask how many teams have winning records with long term coaches versus teams winning despite high turnovers of coaches. Not sure how to define "long term" but five years minimum for starters. I have never been a fan of firing head coaches while retaining general managers because I seldom see new dynasties resulting from quick turnovers of HCs.

[csmopar]

46 minutes ago, King Colt said:

Watching Pittsburgh last night they have not been less than 50% wins since 2007 under Tomlin. So I ask how many teams have winning records with long term coaches versus teams winning despite high turnovers of coaches. Not sure how to define "long term" but five years minimum for starters. I have never been a fan of firing head coaches while retaining general managers because I seldom see new dynasties resulting from quick turnovers of HCs.

Yeah. While I agree, there’s also the case of Marvin Lewis and the Bengals

[RollerColt]

Only one I can really think of as an example is with the Raiders after Gruden. 

 

But that's about it. 

 

Instability breeds instability. 

 

Jets, Browns, Raiders, Panthers... 

 

Meanwhile the Steelers have had 3 different head coaches since 1969. 

 

3!

[Chrisaaron1023]

26 minutes ago, RollerColt said:

Meanwhile the Steelers have had 3 different head coaches since 1969. 

 

3!

Was just going to say.. the Steelers are an anomaly with coaches..

 

Just like the Packers with QB's.. 

[Superman]

A lot of teams are impatient with head coaches. The NFL even called out teams on this a couple years ago.

 

And on the other hand, some head coaches aren't good, and it's a waste of time to keep them.

[RollerColt]

1 hour ago, Superman said:

A lot of teams are impatient with head coaches. The NFL even called out teams on this a couple years ago.

 

And on the other hand, some head coaches aren't good, and it's a waste of time to keep them.

 

I guess the main question is how long do you wait to see if they pan out? And if it's someone who was previously fired, do you give them a second chance? 

 

I think a lot of successful franchises seem to pick up head coaches who have previous experience in the role. 

 

Reid leaving after being with the Eagles for years. 

Belichick with the Browns.

Kubiak with the Texans. 

Coughlin with the Jags. 

Carroll with the Pats. 

Dungy with the Bucs. 

 

I know there are plenty of examples of coordinators successfully making the transition as well. 

 

And obviously, you absolutely have to have a franchise QB. Pretty symbiotic connection really. A team that doesn't have both ends up having nothing. 

[Superman]

1 minute ago, RollerColt said:

 

I guess the main question is how long do you wait to see if they pan out? And if it's someone who was previously fired, do you give them a second chance? 

 

I think a lot of successful franchises seem to pick up head coaches who have previous experience in the role. 

 

Reid leaving after being with the Eagles for years. 

Belichick with the Browns.

Kubiak with the Texans. 

Coughlin with the Jags. 

Carroll with the Pats. 

Dungy with the Bucs. 

 

I know there are plenty of examples of coordinators successfully making the transition as well. 

 

And obviously, you absolutely have to have a franchise QB. Pretty symbiotic connection really. A team that doesn't have both ends up having nothing. 

 

To your first question, it's case by case. I don't think the Broncos needed more time with Nathaniel Hackett. I think the Cowboys have probably gone too far with Mike McCarthy.

 

And a big part of the equation for most HCs is the QB, and most teams aren't good enough at QB. (And that probably applies to Saleh, even though I don't know that he's a good HC, but they won 7 games with the worst QBing in the league last year.) It's really hard to evaluate a football team in general if the QB is bad; I think that applies to the HC as well.

 

I can counter your list with McVay, Shanahan, Tomlin (the subject of the OP), John Harbaugh, Sirianni (never even a play caller), Campbell, LaFluer, Taylor, etc. 

 

The truth is there is no formula for how to hire a good HC. Teams try everything, and there's almost no difference in results. A couple years ago, I read an article that showed slightly better win percentage from teams that hire retread HCs, and that's probably because retreads usually only get a second shot if they had at least some success in their first job. Other than that, college guys, hot offensive coordinators, hot defensive coordinators, position coaches, etc., there's no obvious connection between where the coach comes from, and how the team performs with him.

 

If you get the HC and the QB right, the other stuff probably doesn't matter. I lean toward offensive minded HCs, but then you have DeMeco Ryans and Raheem Morris having success, primarily because they have good QBs.

[crazycolt1]

Cower only won one super bowl and went 12-9 in playoff games.  

By today's expectations he would have been fired. 

[RollerColt]

1 hour ago, Superman said:

 

To your first question, it's case by case. I don't think the Broncos needed more time with Nathaniel Hackett. I think the Cowboys have probably gone too far with Mike McCarthy.

 

And a big part of the equation for most HCs is the QB, and most teams aren't good enough at QB. (And that probably applies to Saleh, even though I don't know that he's a good HC, but they won 7 games with the worst QBing in the league last year.) It's really hard to evaluate a football team in general if the QB is bad; I think that applies to the HC as well.

 

I can counter your list with McVay, Shanahan, Tomlin (the subject of the OP), John Harbaugh, Sirianni (never even a play caller), Campbell, LaFluer, Taylor, etc. 

 

The truth is there is no formula for how to hire a good HC. Teams try everything, and there's almost no difference in results. A couple years ago, I read an article that showed slightly better win percentage from teams that hire retread HCs, and that's probably because retreads usually only get a second shot if they had at least some success in their first job. Other than that, college guys, hot offensive coordinators, hot defensive coordinators, position coaches, etc., there's no obvious connection between where the coach comes from, and how the team performs with him.

 

If you get the HC and the QB right, the other stuff probably doesn't matter. I lean toward offensive minded HCs, but then you have DeMeco Ryans and Raheem Morris having success, primarily because they have good QBs.

 

You are much more eloquent with your words and getting your point across. 

 

Yes, that was essentially what I was trying to say.

 

To add my own though: It seems like the only constant for hitting on everything including a QB, head coach, GM and players is luck. 

 

The stars have to align just right. And when they do that lucky team usually dominates for a decade. Happens in each era really. 

 

[King Colt]

We are now a microwave society. Reminds me of a song lyric "I want it all and I want it now". No coach in modern time watching players jumping ship for more money or just because they are not happy can guarantee continued success. The best poker player will fold when is delt a bad hand and wait for the next hand. Injuries are obviously a key to winning leaving a coach with nonstarters. Anyone hear the Steelers fans booing last night against the Jets? Were they booing the QB, the HC or both?

[RollerColt]

25 minutes ago, King Colt said:

We are now a microwave society. Reminds me of a song lyric "I want it all and I want it now". No coach in modern time watching players jumping ship for more money or just because they are not happy can guarantee continued success. The best poker player will fold when is delt a bad hand and wait for the next hand. Injuries are obviously a key to winning leaving a coach with nonstarters. Anyone hear the Steelers fans booing last night against the Jets? Were they booing the QB, the HC or both?

All of the above. Steelers fans have been calling for Tomlin to get fired for years now. The Wilson gamble only exacerbated their ire against him. 

[Superman]

19 hours ago, RollerColt said:

 

You are much more eloquent with your words and getting your point across. 

 

Yes, that was essentially what I was trying to say.

 

To add my own though: It seems like the only constant for hitting on everything including a QB, head coach, GM and players is luck. 

 

The stars have to align just right. And when they do that lucky team usually dominates for a decade. Happens in each era really. 

 

 

You throw in GMs, and it's even more about things just lining up in the team's favor. Les Snead was a bottom tier GM with Jeff Fisher, even his #1 pick QB looked like a bust. Then they hire a young offensive guru as HC, and now Les Snead is highly respected.

 

Same thing for Jason Licht in Tampa. He was hired in 2014, and he hired Lovie Smith as HC. The Bucs won 2 games, then 6 games, then fired Smith and hired Dirk Koetter. They won 9 games, 5 games, 5 games. He was on the chopping block. His first four first round draft picks were Mike Evans (hit), Jameis Winston (miss), Vernon Hargreaves (not a hit), and OJ Howard (miss).  Then they fired Koetter and hired Arians, and still only won 7 games. That's six seasons, no playoffs, four last place division finishes. It wasn't until they got Tom Brady in 2020 that they made the playoffs, and of course won the SB. And now they've won the division (a weak division) three times in a row, and no one talks about Jason Licht anymore, even though he's still probably not that great of a GM.

[RollerColt]

5 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

You throw in GMs, and it's even more about things just lining up in the team's favor. Les Snead was a bottom tier GM with Jeff Fisher, even his #1 pick QB looked like a bust. Then they hire a young offensive guru as HC, and now Les Snead is highly respected.

 

Same thing for Jason Licht in Tampa. He was hired in 2014, and he hired Lovie Smith as HC. The Bucs won 2 games, then 6 games, then fired Smith and hired Dirk Koetter. They won 9 games, 5 games, 5 games. He was on the chopping block. His first four first round draft picks were Mike Evans (hit), Jameis Winston (miss), Vernon Hargreaves (not a hit), and OJ Howard (miss).  Then they fired Koetter and hired Arians, and still only won 7 games. That's six seasons, no playoffs, four last place division finishes. It wasn't until they got Tom Brady in 2020 that they made the playoffs, and of course won the SB. And now they've won the division (a weak division) three times in a row, and no one talks about Jason Licht anymore, even though he's still probably not that great of a GM.

 

I keep going back to the QB being the main solution. Even if that franchise QB struggles (Mahomes in 2024) they're just that good to make plays when it matters most. 

 

I truly feel like I talk myself in circles most of the time when it comes to the Colts and team creation. It's all just luck. 

 

Maybe we'll finally have our stars align again someday. 

[Superman]

25 minutes ago, RollerColt said:

 

I keep going back to the QB being the main solution. Even if that franchise QB struggles (Mahomes in 2024) they're just that good to make plays when it matters most. 

 

I truly feel like I talk myself in circles most of the time when it comes to the Colts and team creation. It's all just luck. 

 

Maybe we'll finally have our stars align again someday. 

 

I don't have a problem with coaches and GMs being held accountable, and sometimes that means a change needs to be made. But yeah, I think sometimes the discourse is overly critical, when the reality is that success usually comes down to one or two main decisions working out positively. And when it comes to the two biggest decisions -- HC and QB -- most teams struggle to get those right, let alone get both right at the same time. 

 

It's fine for fans to have high expectations, and to want the team to be a meaningful competitor. In the case of Colts fans, I do think there's a little bit of a lack of reality for some, though. We had Peyton Manning, and then Andrew Luck. For 20 years, we didn't really have to worry about the QB position (ironically, throughout those 20 years, there was always a contingent of fans who wanted the team to make a QB change). And now, we've seen up close how most of the rest of the NFL experiences the pursuit of a good QB, and it's not fun.

[RollerColt]

3 hours ago, Superman said:

 

I don't have a problem with coaches and GMs being held accountable, and sometimes that means a change needs to be made. But yeah, I think sometimes the discourse is overly critical, when the reality is that success usually comes down to one or two main decisions working out positively. And when it comes to the two biggest decisions -- HC and QB -- most teams struggle to get those right, let alone get both right at the same time. 

 

It's fine for fans to have high expectations, and to want the team to be a meaningful competitor. In the case of Colts fans, I do think there's a little bit of a lack of reality for some, though. We had Peyton Manning, and then Andrew Luck. For 20 years, we didn't really have to worry about the QB position (ironically, throughout those 20 years, there was always a contingent of fans who wanted the team to make a QB change). And now, we've seen up close how most of the rest of the NFL experiences the pursuit of a good QB, and it's not fun.

It wasn’t much fun in the 90s either. (Though my dad liked how cheap the tickets were… we were able to go to a lot of games between 1992-2001. Once the team really took off it got harder to afford tickets, still was able to be there in person for the big time playoff games at least!)

[crazycolt1]

On 10/21/2024 at 5:57 PM, RollerColt said:

 

You are much more eloquent with your words and getting your point across. 

 

Yes, that was essentially what I was trying to say.

 

To add my own though: It seems like the only constant for hitting on everything including a QB, head coach, GM and players is luck. 

 

The stars have to align just right. And when they do that lucky team usually dominates for a decade. Happens in each era really. 

 

Your luck comment is the total truth. 

When Brady was drafted was Belichick really that smart?

Was Reid really that smart in drafting Mahomes where he was drafted?

Most all head coaches are not successful in their first gigs. Too many in this forum keep forgetting that Shane is only in his 2nd season as a head coach.  He is still learning.