I'd say that St. Louis would be the easiest team to go into and win now. They have a good explosive offense, young defense to work with and a comparatively easy division to compete in. KC would also be very attractive, but I wonder if any coach could get the run game to work as well as Vermiel did, especially considering questions over whether the O-Line can stay as consistently strong next year.On a longer term view, I could see Green Bay having an obvious pull with the history and what not, and if a coach was guarenteed to have a three year rebuilding window, I think that could possibly be the number one. But it would be a brave decision to go there if there was a choice to go to STL or KC. Of course, if Favre comes back (I don't think he will) then you could be playoff bound next year, so would be even more attractive.On the other side of the coin, I can see the Saints having real rouble convincing a top candidate to go with them. The roster is in a mess, the owner is crazy, they don't even know where they'll be playing next year, let alone in three years time.I'd rank them:St. LouisKansas CityGreen Bay (If Favre comes back, leap above KC)MinnesotaDetroitOaklandHoustonNew Orleans
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.
If You're A Coach... (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter Pskov1420
- Start date
snogger
Footballguy
Homer in me made me Vote Vikings. With the owner saying he will spend what it takes to get a championship, hopefully they can find the right GM and Coach to pull it off. 
KC - Larry Johnson, Trent Green, Gozo and a pretty good defense.Houston has a decent team. Add in Reggie Bush and some OL help and they can defintly start competiting.Packers - IF Favre returns otherwise they drop Below The RamsRams - Great Offense, Defense needs lot's of help.Oakland - Needs a QB, but with LaMont Jordan, Randy Moss and Porter they coulde xplode with the right coach(Martz? 
)Lions - Need QB help and to find a RB with toughness and a GM that isn't looking up his butt all the time.Saints- Decent enough team, but with all the unknowns yet again for next season.... :X
KC - Larry Johnson, Trent Green, Gozo and a pretty good defense.Houston has a decent team. Add in Reggie Bush and some OL help and they can defintly start competiting.Packers - IF Favre returns otherwise they drop Below The RamsRams - Great Offense, Defense needs lot's of help.Oakland - Needs a QB, but with LaMont Jordan, Randy Moss and Porter they coulde xplode with the right coach(Martz? )Lions - Need QB help and to find a RB with toughness and a GM that isn't looking up his butt all the time.Saints- Decent enough team, but with all the unknowns yet again for next season.... :X I'd do something many would think odd, I'd take the Saints. Here's why:1. Challenge: A team with a history of losing, plus no real home, plus tons of uncertainty, plus their best player hurt, plus... lots of reasons.2. Out of spotlight: Low expectations from the general public & media.3. Self-gratification: The knowledge that if I can turn this team around in this situation, I can pretty much do anything in coaching. Plus, it would be nice to try and do a part towards improving morale in NO.4. Getting MY guys: Taking the job, one could very publically take the stance that this is certainly going to be a challenge, and that we're looking for players who aren't afraid of adversity, and want to be part of something special, and try and tie it into the hurricanes and get the type fo person I want.I might fail, but taking ont he challenge that is the Saints would be a good test for myself.
Brock Middlebrook
Footballguy
KC is coing off a 10 win season with Vermeil.With KC there would be high expectations, so even if you win 11 or 12 games. You are not a hero. Win 8 or 9 and you're ray handley (not quite, but fans will be disappointed)I'd go with StlPace, Bulger, Hot, Curtis checkyoung D with upside checkunderacheived in 2005 checkRams
Dolfan
Footballguy
That's what I'm thinking..Now I could stand a move out to Cali.
I'd take Oakland for the weather, the beaches, and the girls. You wouldn't have to actually live IN Oakland. Plus there is enough talent to work with there. Moss, Porter, Gabriel, and Jordan on offense and a decent enough line. Find yourself a QB and your offense is golden. Draft for the defense and in time, they will turn around...
Kevin Ashcraft
Footballguy
I am guessing you live in STL, DEN, OAK or SD.
I agree with NO being on the bottom of that list and I can see your point about StL on top (though I'd place KC there). However, the Houston job would have to rank above Oakland and Detroit, at a minimum. Al Davis hamstrings his coaches consistently and then fires them for things that he kept out of their control. Detroit has Matt Millen and even worse, a front office that keeps Matt Millen. That team has a history of hiring coaches and GMs that keep the franchise down. I'd say Minnesota is just above Houston because they have a better talent base and the owner seems to want to straghten things out. It's way too cold for my taste, though
Houston has state-of-the-art facilities and an owner that will spend the bucks to win. Houston doesn't have the tourist appeal of the Bay area, but it's a good city in which to live and raise a family.
mad sweeney
Footballguy
I think I'd actually take Detroit, followed by NO. KC is set up best to win now, but they're aging. Especially the OL and QB. Very high expectations year 1 and a big rebuilding project within a few years. As for NO. There will be NO expectations. Most likely be sitting on Leinert and the unending possibility of moving to L.A. with a built in local hero. It's a higher risk/higher reward situation than the others, but a unique situation to build a special team. And a fan base that won't quit on you after the disaster. they may have been wishy washy before, but galvanized since Katrina.
jurb26
Footballguy
I look at this 2 ways. If I want to win now and am only looking short term, then KC is the easy pick. They have the talent to win now and also have a simply dominante O. Problem is, they are all old with exception to LJ. The team seems to have a closing window of opportunity.If I want a solid team now that can be built up easily I pick Det or Hou. Det ideally. Add a nice Olineman via the draft to Det and I think this team could be very dangerous.
I would actually rank St. Louis quite low. Georgia Frontiere (sp?) was known as a flake owner prior to hiring Vermiel. I don't know if that label still applies, but I would be very cautious there.The top requirement for how desirable a HC job is:1. Commitment to winning2. Autonomy to do things your way and try new thingsDetroit, Oakland, and New Orleans have bad histories of owners making poor decisions that affect the football performance and/or interferring too much. In fact, Detroit and New Orleans may be no-win situations.
-OZ-
Footballguy
While the team is not close to winning, I tend to agree with this.You need a good owner first and foremost. I went with the Chiefs largely for this reason, but Hunt may not be around much longer (age).
NOT Detroit.
Maybe New Orleans, but with the idea that they will become the LA Saints soon.
Riffraff
Footballguy
I chose St. Louis:* Great offense intact* fair amount of youth* crappy division to play in (even new coaches need easy wins)* Dome team, one less thing to think about when selecting personnel.* decent enough draft position to get help on defense or offensive line* good fan baseCan go either way if you think about it:* Owner that wants to do well, but not actually win the Super Bowl (for financial reasons). Good for a new head coach, bad if you actually take the team to the cusp.
hamster_13
Footballguy
I said Oakland.
Similar threads
- Poll
