Recycling of coaches (1 Viewer)

[JohnnyU]

Without naming the countless hundreds over the history of Pro Football, why do teams consistently go after previous failures at the head coaching position to be their new head coach? They coach for a couple of years, then boom, they are fired and someone else picks them off the trash heap for another try. Why not give more young African American coordinators a chance at being a head coach? I also see this in baseball all the time. Managers jump from team to team repeating failure after failure. Now there are exceptions, like Bill Belichick, who was a failure with Cleveland and the rest is history, but for the most part, bad coach in year 2nnn means bad coach in year 2nnn + 1. Hell, not to turn this into a race thread, the same can be said for unproven, yet considered talented coaches of any race. Why not give them more chances than the constant retread?

 

[Joe Bryant]

Without naming the countless hundreds over the history of Pro Football, why do teams consistently go after previous failures at the head coaching position to be their new head coach? They coach for a couple of years, then boom, they are fired and someone else picks them off the trash heap for another try. Why not give more young African American coordinators a chance at being a head coach? I also see this in baseball all the time. Managers jump from team to team repeating failure after failure. Now there are exceptions, like Bill Belichick, who was a failure with Cleveland and the rest is history, but for the most part, bad coach in year 2nnn means bad coach in year 2nnn + 1. Hell, not to turn this into a race thread, the same can be said for unproven, yet considered talented coaches of any race. Why not give them more chances than the constant retread?

Hi Johnny U,My knee jerk answer to this is simply: Bill Belichick.I know you mentioned it but I think that's what's in their mind. At least in the back of their mind.J

 

[JohnnyU]

Without naming the countless hundreds over the history of Pro Football, why do teams consistently go after previous failures at the head coaching position to be their new head coach? They coach for a couple of years, then boom, they are fired and someone else picks them off the trash heap for another try. Why not give more young African American coordinators a chance at being a head coach? I also see this in baseball all the time. Managers jump from team to team repeating failure after failure. Now there are exceptions, like Bill Belichick, who was a failure with Cleveland and the rest is history, but for the most part, bad coach in year 2nnn means bad coach in year 2nnn + 1. Hell, not to turn this into a race thread, the same can be said for unproven, yet considered talented coaches of any race. Why not give them more chances than the constant retread?

Hi Johnny U,My knee jerk answer to this is simply: Bill Belichick.J

Yeah, I mentioned him, but I also mentioned him as being the exception rather than the rule.

 

[Joe Bryant]

Without naming the countless hundreds over the history of Pro Football, why do teams consistently go after previous failures at the head coaching position to be their new head coach? They coach for a couple of years, then boom, they are fired and someone else picks them off the trash heap for another try. Why not give more young African American coordinators a chance at being a head coach? I also see this in baseball all the time. Managers jump from team to team repeating failure after failure. Now there are exceptions, like Bill Belichick, who was a failure with Cleveland and the rest is history, but for the most part, bad coach in year 2nnn means bad coach in year 2nnn + 1. Hell, not to turn this into a race thread, the same can be said for unproven, yet considered talented coaches of any race. Why not give them more chances than the constant retread?

Hi Johnny U,My knee jerk answer to this is simply: Bill Belichick.J

Yeah, I mentioned him, but I also mentioned him as being the exception rather than the rule.

People are banking on another. Not that Belichick is the only one.Same thing with super high pick WRs. People think Randy Moss rookie year. Same thing with knee injury and Carson Palmer. There will be optimism (probably unjustified) for QBs that return from serious knee injury because of Palmer. They don't remember Culpepper as much. They remember Palmer and think "our guy can do that too". When the best coach in the NFL (and in the discussion for best coach of all time) is a "retread", you will always have people looking to duplicate that.It's not like a retread guy did ok. A retread guy is now the best coach in the league. In my opinion, that's one big reason why you keep seeing it.Of course, learning curves, knowing what you're getting, team makeup, experience and all that are factors too. Guys like Payton and Mangini provoke the same thought process for GMs looking to hire a new guy as well in the same way thinking of Belichick provokes a guy to go with a retread.J

 

[stevegamer]

Johnny:

Simply put some of the guys you'd call "retreads" are good coaches with skillsets that work at a certain point in the success cycle. Maybe they are builders who top out and can't get over the hump. Maybe they work bettter with a veteran team or a young team, etc.

Example: 3 years ago, if you wanted a guy to build a team, Schottenheimer, Cowher, & Dungy (and I know Cowher was never on the market) would've been be good choices, they had a track record of getting bad teams good, but couldn't win big in the playoffs. Now 2 of those guys have won the big game, so they are perceived differently.

Schottenheimer is still a great coach for a bad team - he will make you better, but the Chargers, like many feel he can't win a Super Bowl. Andy Reid is starting to get that reputation.

There are guys who've been successful somewhere, and then not successful at the next stop, or have been successful for a while at one stop. Those guys generally can get another shot.

Martz, Fisher, & LSmith have all gotten teams to big game, so they will likely get another shot soemtime - if they ever move on.

I think about Chuck Knox who coached a number of teams, and was always a good coach. At some point, you might need a change, but if there's a guy who can win - I will look at him.

 

[Joe Bryant]

I think another factor is the ease now in which an NFL coach becomes a "retread". Remember when guys had 3, 4 and even 5 year plans to turn a team around?

No more. You have 2 years (1 in Oakland).

Hasn't the turnover been something like 16 teams in the last 2 years have new head coaches?

Being a "retread" these days doesn't mean you aren't a good HC.

J

 

[fatness]

Hell, not to turn this into a race thread, the same can be said for unproven, yet considered talented coaches of any race. Why not give them more chances than the constant retread?

I'd like to see more "unproven" coaches of any color given a chance at HC jobs also. I think one of the reasons it doesn't happen is "fear of the known" vs. "fear of the unknown". With a retread coach like Wade Phillips or Norv Turner (or a million other mediocre examples), the front office feels they already know "how bad could this get?" They don't know that with a new guy. I think caution/fear is as much of or more of a factor than looking for the next Belichick. It's hard to see how much worse a first-time head coach could be than Art Shell this year, though, or [insert your example of a failed retread here].

 

[alg]

The art of 'winning' is far too complicated for us to say who is and who is not a good coach. Does the team have a GM who can find good talent? Does the team's owner spend the money needed to retain this talent? Is the HC saddled with a QB who plays coach killer?

Marv Levy was a good coach, but got fired after a disappointing season in KC. Should he have been relegated to the scrap-heap of NFL history? Wade Phillips was/is an amazing DC, and did a good job in Buffalo. He ended up fired because of certain 'political' reasons, but the man knew how to construct a team, treat his players, and get them to play their hearts out. Is he really now just a nobody-retread? And can we ever assume that even flawed coaches, who are well known to the league, somehow are exempt from that little thing called 'growth' ?

We fans have a whole bunch of opinions, but in the vast majority of cases we simply have no clue as to what is really going on. Speculation is fine, but we must temper such things with some well placed, ignorance-born humility.

 

[Joe Bryant]

Hell, not to turn this into a race thread, the same can be said for unproven, yet considered talented coaches of any race. Why not give them more chances than the constant retread?

I'd like to see more "unproven" coaches of any color given a chance at HC jobs also. I think one of the reasons it doesn't happen is "fear of the known" vs. "fear of the unknown". With a retread coach like Wade Phillips or Norv Turner (or a million other mediocre examples), the front office feels they already know "how bad could this get?" They don't know that with a new guy. I think caution/fear is as much of or more of a factor than looking for the next Belichick. It's hard to see how much worse a first-time head coach could be than Art Shell this year, though, or [insert your example of a failed retread here].

I agree fatness.Sometimes a defensive hire doesn't mean the guy knows defense. It means it's a defensive move by the guy hiring in that he looks more to not hire the wrong guy than he does to take a chance and get the right guy.The "safe" play factor comes into effect there for sure.J

 

[Joe Bryant]

Why not give them more chances than the constant retread?

Do you have a particular instance in mind with this?I think guys like Payton and Mangini have been big factors in continuing this trend. What do you mean by "constant" retread?J

 

[fatness]

The further up any organizational chart you go, the more caution comes into play. People take risks all the time in their personal lives that they wouldn't take on the job, for example. And hiring a new entry-level person is done with less worry about disaster than hiring a new CEO. Some of that is for rational reasons, some is just an irrational "this is pretty important, we better not screw up tooooo bad" that sometimes stymies new people, ideas, whatever.

 

[redman]

Recycling is environmentally friendly. Think globally, act locally.

 

[Ozymandias]

I think it is disgraceful the way Asians are excluded from the coaching ranks. I can only think of Norm Chow.

 

[Marauder]

The NFL is a copycat league. Teams are always trying to duplicate what other successful teams have done. After the success of "retreads" like Bellicek and Shanahan everybody wanted to find the next guy like that. Now it seems to be going the other way. Last year, there were something like 8 first time head coaches and this year, after the success of guys like Payton and Mangini, that trend seems to be continuing (other than Wade Phillips I think all the Head Coach hirings are young, first time head coaches). It will swing back the other way in a few years when we start seeing a lot of these young guys fail.

 

[coolnerd]

Strange topic to me Johnny. In the last two hiring cycles there has been a trend away from hiring retreads.

Unless I am mistaken, the Bills, Cowboys, Oakland, and Chiefs are the only 4 teams out 16 hires in the last 2 years where the coach had previous NFL head coaching experience. If anything, the teams are trending more towards hiring guys with not enough experience, hoping to catch the next bright mind.

 

[guderian]

There seems to be a bias for the hot OC or DC like there's often a bias for the back-up QB. Since they haven't made any mistakes, there's always the perception that they have "it". As a result, there's always the hope/expectation that the hot OC/DC will turn into an equally great coach.

Also, I've seen the term "re-tread" used to refer to coaches with .500ish records and multiple playoff appearances. Just because they didn't make it to the Superbowl in their prior situations doesn't mean that they didn't learn anything since then and didn't improve as a coach.

Anyone that starts a business makes tons of mistakes. If you were starting up a new business wouldn't you want to work with someone that's done it before and maybe stumbled then a hot exec from a Fortune 500 company that's never done anything on their own? I've started a business and I know that I'd pick the post-start-up-Guderian over the pre-start-up-Guderian to start up a new business even though the pre-start-up-Guderian has fewer mistakes to point to and the post-start-up-Guderian didn't make the Inc. 500 in his first year.

NFL teams are billion dollar businesses and it's a smart business decision to chose the guy who's downside is .500 with the hope that he's learned something over the years and will make the leap to "great" coach, then some hot coordinator who's only had a fraction of the responsibilities necessary to run and NFL team.

 

[Snotbubbles]

Of the last 10 Superbowl winning coaches, only 2 were with the team that gave them their initial shot (Cowher and Billick). The rest were recycles from another team: Dungy, Belichick x3, Gruden, Vermiel, Shanahan x2.

Just because you didn't suceed with Team X doesn't mean you can't suceed with Team Y. To many factors go into it (talent, coordinators, GM).

 

[H.K.]

Of the last 10 Superbowl winning coaches, only 2 were with the team that gave them their initial shot (Cowher and Billick). The rest were recycles from another team: Dungy, Belichick x3, Gruden, Vermiel, Shanahan x2. Just because you didn't suceed with Team X doesn't mean you can't suceed with Team Y. To many factors go into it (talent, coordinators, GM).

Let an HC get his OTJ training at his first gig, then your "retread" is an experienced guy who has already learned from his mistakes.

 

[Chase Stuart]

but for the most part, bad coach in year 2nnn means bad coach in year 2nnn + 1

Is this speculation or the result of research you have done?

 

[Despyzer]

I don't think the NFL is all that much different than most other businesses. When you bring a guy in to interview for a position, one of the first considerations you have is whether this guy has any experience. When we are talking about multi-million dollar contracts and the even larger treausures that one is placing in his hands, it seems pretty reasonable to me to place a lot of emphasis on experience rather than gambling with inexperience.

 

[stevegamer]

Of the last 10 Superbowl winning coaches, only 2 were with the team that gave them their initial shot (Cowher and Billick). The rest were recycles from another team: Dungy, Belichick x3, Gruden, Vermiel, Shanahan x2. Just because you didn't suceed with Team X doesn't mean you can't suceed with Team Y. To many factors go into it (talent, coordinators, GM).

And of Dungy, Belichick, Gruden, Vermiel, & Shanahan only Shanahan & Belichick were below average, and Shanahan's 20 games in Oakland don't give a lot to work from.

 

[JohnnyU]

I'd like to see more "unproven" coaches of any color given a chance at HC jobs also. I think one of the reasons it doesn't happen is "fear of the known" vs. "fear of the unknown". With a retread coach like Wade Phillips or Norv Turner (or a million other mediocre examples), the front office feels they already know "how bad could this get?" They don't know that with a new guy. I think caution/fear is as much of or more of a factor than looking for the next Belichick.

It's hard to see how much worse a first-time head coach could be than Art Shell this year, though, or [insert your example of a failed retread here].

The part that is bolded is exactly my point. Why not give some of these "unknowns" a try. They can't do any worse than the coaches who fail time after time.

 

[JohnnyU]

I don't think the NFL is all that much different than most other businesses. When you bring a guy in to interview for a position, one of the first considerations you have is whether this guy has any experience. When we are talking about multi-million dollar contracts and the even larger treausures that one is placing in his hands, it seems pretty reasonable to me to place a lot of emphasis on experience rather than gambling with inexperience.

I disagree. A lot of companies are steering toward bringing in younger inexperienced employees. Not only are they cheaper, but they usually aren't set in their ways, and sometimes offer a new set of ideas. Now the NFL doesn't offer as much in way of on the job training as it should. I believe someone said 1 or 2 years seems to be the norm. Maybe that's what's wrong with the coaching carosel today. Yes, I still believe there is room for the "retread", but just maybe it isn't for the head coaching job. Some are great Off and Def coordinators, but lousy head coaches. Maybe some of the previously failed coaches could be good head coaches if the NFL owners and GMs had more patience, but I think it is clear with some they just don't have it as a head coach, yet the continually get chance after chance while talented unproven coordinators don't get a chance. I think that is wrong.

 

[Joe Bryant]

Why not give some of these "unknowns" a try. They can't do any worse than the coaches who fail time after time.

Do you not agree many of the recent hirings are doing exactly that?J

 

[JohnnyU]

The NFL is a copycat league. Teams are always trying to duplicate what other successful teams have done. After the success of "retreads" like Bellicek and Shanahan everybody wanted to find the next guy like that. Now it seems to be going the other way. Last year, there were something like 8 first time head coaches and this year, after the success of guys like Payton and Mangini, that trend seems to be continuing (other than Wade Phillips I think all the Head Coach hirings are young, first time head coaches). It will swing back the other way in a few years when we start seeing a lot of these young guys fail.

Maybe the problem lies with NFL owners and GMs not giving a head coach enough time to build the team the way he wants to. At least that would let us decipher who is truely a retread and who hasn't had enough time to prove their worth.

 

[Carnifex]

Of the last 10 Superbowl winning coaches, only 2 were with the team that gave them their initial shot (Cowher and Billick). The rest were recycles from another team: Dungy, Belichick x3, Gruden, Vermiel, Shanahan x2. Just because you didn't suceed with Team X doesn't mean you can't suceed with Team Y. To many factors go into it (talent, coordinators, GM).

And of Dungy, Belichick, Gruden, Vermiel, & Shanahan only Shanahan & Belichick were below average, and Shanahan's 20 games in Oakland don't give a lot to work from.

Plus, Shanahan and Belichick were recycled right back into the coaching system and spent 4+ years earning their 2nd shot. I think it's fair to say that both earned their right to become a head coach again as much on their merits as assistants after their stint HC as anything else. I really don't think it is fair to consider them retreads.

 

[JohnnyU]

Why not give some of these "unknowns" a try. They can't do any worse than the coaches who fail time after time.

Do you not agree many of the recent hirings are doing exactly that?J

I still think we see too many of the past failures being considered the first choice in these hirings (Norv Turner comes to mind), but I could be wrong. Like I said in my last post, I think owners and GMs need to have more patience with head coaches. At least that would tell them whether or not that person was truely competent or not.

 

[JohnnyU]

Of the last 10 Superbowl winning coaches, only 2 were with the team that gave them their initial shot (Cowher and Billick). The rest were recycles from another team: Dungy, Belichick x3, Gruden, Vermiel, Shanahan x2. Just because you didn't suceed with Team X doesn't mean you can't suceed with Team Y. To many factors go into it (talent, coordinators, GM).

And of Dungy, Belichick, Gruden, Vermiel, & Shanahan only Shanahan & Belichick were below average, and Shanahan's 20 games in Oakland don't give a lot to work from.

Plus, Shanahan and Belichick were recycled right back into the coaching system and spent 4+ years earning their 2nd shot. I think it's fair to say that both earned their right to become a head coach again as much on their merits as assistants after their stint HC as anything else. I really don't think it is fair to consider them retreads.

I too don't consider either of those head coaches retreads, but I do with coaches like Norv Turner, Art Shell, and countless others who have failed multiple times. How many times does Norv Turner or those that look just like him, get before someone like Mike Singletary or Ron Rivera get their first shot?

 

[Despyzer]

How many times does Norv Turner or those that look just like him, get before someone like Mike Singletary or Ron Rivera get their first shot?

Turner has only had two shots; his first was before Singletary and Rivera were in the coaching ranks, and the second one was with the Raiders, so that one shouldn't really count. It seems to me that Singletary and Rivera are being given just as much juice as Turner has this time around. I don't really see the misbalance in this particular scenario.

 

[JohnnyU]

How many times does Norv Turner or those that look just like him, get before someone like Mike Singletary or Ron Rivera get their first shot?

Turner has only had two shots; his first was before Singletary and Rivera were in the coaching ranks, and the second one was with the Raiders, so that one shouldn't really count. It seems to me that Singletary and Rivera are being given just as much juice as Turner has this time around. I don't really see the misbalance in this particular scenario.

Sure his shot with the Raiders count. I see two problems here, 1) Owners and GMs not giving a head coach enough time to prove his worth, 2), those who have had many shots and failed are still being considered as first choices (in my mind) for current open HC jobs. I could be wrong however. I guess it's a perception thing with me.

 

[Marauder]

but for the most part, bad coach in year 2nnn means bad coach in year 2nnn + 1

Is this speculation or the result of research you have done?

This sounds like the kind of project that is right up your alley, Chase.

 

[JohnnyU]

but for the most part, bad coach in year 2nnn means bad coach in year 2nnn + 1

Is this speculation or the result of research you have done?

This sounds like the kind of project that is right up your alley, Chase.

Of course that is speculation on my part. I'm sure there are success stories out there after several failures. I guess I would like to see owners do two things; give head coaches more time to build a team, and give perceived competent young coordinators a chance before hiring guys who have failed many times.Edited to add that I know this is already going on (hiring new blood), but I think owners can do even a better job. Mostly I would like to see them not give up on a guy after 1 or 2 seasons.

 

[Despyzer]

This sounds like the kind of project that is right up your alley, Chase.

Interestingly enough, there was a thread started on something similar to this about a month ago.

 

[JohnnyU]

This sounds like the kind of project that is right up your alley, Chase.

Interestingly enough, there was a thread started on something similar to this about a month ago.

I believe that one was dedicated to hiring college coaches, which is different from this thread. I'm actually against hiring college coaches. I advocate hiring from within the NFL, but that's just me.

 

[Despyzer]

This sounds like the kind of project that is right up your alley, Chase.

Interestingly enough, there was a thread started on something similar to this about a month ago.

I believe that one was dedicated to hiring college coaches, which is different from this thread. I'm actually against hiring college coaches. I advocate hiring from within the NFL, but that's just me.

The success rate for retreads is mentioned in that thread. I didn't post the link here in order to re-direct the conversation there. I did it for reference purposes to address the question.

 

[guderian]

I don't think the NFL is all that much different than most other businesses. When you bring a guy in to interview for a position, one of the first considerations you have is whether this guy has any experience. When we are talking about multi-million dollar contracts and the even larger treausures that one is placing in his hands, it seems pretty reasonable to me to place a lot of emphasis on experience rather than gambling with inexperience.

I disagree. A lot of companies are steering toward bringing in younger inexperienced employees. Not only are they cheaper, but they usually aren't set in their ways, and sometimes offer a new set of ideas. Now the NFL doesn't offer as much in way of on the job training as it should. I believe someone said 1 or 2 years seems to be the norm. Maybe that's what's wrong with the coaching carosel today. Yes, I still believe there is room for the "retread", but just maybe it isn't for the head coaching job. Some are great Off and Def coordinators, but lousy head coaches. Maybe some of the previously failed coaches could be good head coaches if the NFL owners and GMs had more patience, but I think it is clear with some they just don't have it as a head coach, yet the continually get chance after chance while talented unproven coordinators don't get a chance. I think that is wrong.

These companies aren't bringing in the younger, inexperienced employees to run the company though.

 

[JohnnyU]

I believe that one was dedicated to hiring college coaches, which is different from this thread. I'm actually against hiring college coaches. I advocate hiring from within the NFL, but that's just me.

The success rate for retreads is mentioned in that thread. I didn't post the link here in order to re-direct the conversation there. I did it for reference purposes to address the question.

I see, thanks Despyzer

 

[JohnnyU]

I don't think the NFL is all that much different than most other businesses. When you bring a guy in to interview for a position, one of the first considerations you have is whether this guy has any experience. When we are talking about multi-million dollar contracts and the even larger treausures that one is placing in his hands, it seems pretty reasonable to me to place a lot of emphasis on experience rather than gambling with inexperience.

I disagree. A lot of companies are steering toward bringing in younger inexperienced employees. Not only are they cheaper, but they usually aren't set in their ways, and sometimes offer a new set of ideas. Now the NFL doesn't offer as much in way of on the job training as it should. I believe someone said 1 or 2 years seems to be the norm. Maybe that's what's wrong with the coaching carosel today. Yes, I still believe there is room for the "retread", but just maybe it isn't for the head coaching job. Some are great Off and Def coordinators, but lousy head coaches. Maybe some of the previously failed coaches could be good head coaches if the NFL owners and GMs had more patience, but I think it is clear with some they just don't have it as a head coach, yet the continually get chance after chance while talented unproven coordinators don't get a chance. I think that is wrong.

These companies aren't bringing in the younger, inexperienced employees to run the company though.

Good point, but different animal IMO. Young new hires at Microsoft aren't the same as young qualified Off and Def Coordinators of the NFL, who by the way are closer to "running the show" than new hires of a non-NFL company. Yet, you still have new hires in non-NFL companies who make a rapid accent to the top, but like I said, it's a different animal, and harder to boot.

 

[stevegamer]

I was looking for a kind of recent itneresting retread, and I found Art Shell, who is a VERY interesting case, I think.

From 1989-1994, he went 54-38 in the regular season, & 1-2 in the playoffs:

1989 7 51990 12 41991 9 71992 7 91993 10 61994 9 7TOTAL 54 38He took over mid-season the first year, and got a 1-3 team to 8-8. His teams had fairly pedestrian talent at the skill positions, excluding Tim Brown - the name RB's he had were on their last legs. He's a guy who I would have thought would've gotten another HC job before this year. Now, he's a coach who is slightly above .500 after the debacle in Oakland, who has been screwed by Davis' failures as a GM this year, and somewhat in the past.

He's probably the bottom level of a retread coach I'd want my team to consider - winning track record, with a good reason he failed to succeed that was external to him explaining the most recent debacle.

 

[Carnifex]

Of the last 10 Superbowl winning coaches, only 2 were with the team that gave them their initial shot (Cowher and Billick). The rest were recycles from another team: Dungy, Belichick x3, Gruden, Vermiel, Shanahan x2. Just because you didn't suceed with Team X doesn't mean you can't suceed with Team Y. To many factors go into it (talent, coordinators, GM).

And of Dungy, Belichick, Gruden, Vermiel, & Shanahan only Shanahan & Belichick were below average, and Shanahan's 20 games in Oakland don't give a lot to work from.

Plus, Shanahan and Belichick were recycled right back into the coaching system and spent 4+ years earning their 2nd shot. I think it's fair to say that both earned their right to become a head coach again as much on their merits as assistants after their stint HC as anything else. I really don't think it is fair to consider them retreads.

I too don't consider either of those head coaches retreads, but I do with coaches like Norv Turner, Art Shell, and countless others who have failed multiple times. How many times does Norv Turner or those that look just like him, get before someone like Mike Singletary or Ron Rivera get their first shot?

Currently, I think Wade Philips is the only current head coach with 2 or more previous head coaching stints. He has been a defensive coordinator for the past 5 seasons before getting his current job, which could qualify him under the Shanahan/Belichick standard which you seem to agree with.Frankly, I think you are trying to find a problem where there isn't one.PS. Shouldn't Singletary get a coordinator position to help his chances? 4 years as a linebackers coach is going to make it difficult to get a head coaching job, no matter how well your interview goes.

 

[Chase Stuart]

but for the most part, bad coach in year 2nnn means bad coach in year 2nnn + 1

Is this speculation or the result of research you have done?

This sounds like the kind of project that is right up your alley, Chase.

Of course that is speculation on my part.

Thanks. I just thought maybe you had done some research or read something interesting.

 

[CalBear]

Of the last 10 Superbowl winning coaches, only 2 were with the team that gave them their initial shot (Cowher and Billick). The rest were recycles from another team: Dungy, Belichick x3, Gruden, Vermiel, Shanahan x2. Just because you didn't suceed with Team X doesn't mean you can't suceed with Team Y. To many factors go into it (talent, coordinators, GM).

If I recall correctly, Dungy, Gruden, and Vermiel all left their previous jobs of their own accord; they weren't fired. Big difference.

 

[redman]

Of the last 10 Superbowl winning coaches, only 2 were with the team that gave them their initial shot (Cowher and Billick). The rest were recycles from another team: Dungy, Belichick x3, Gruden, Vermiel, Shanahan x2. Just because you didn't suceed with Team X doesn't mean you can't suceed with Team Y. To many factors go into it (talent, coordinators, GM).

If I recall correctly, Dungy, Gruden, and Vermiel all left their previous jobs of their own accord; they weren't fired. Big difference.

Definitely true of Vermeil, but Dungy was let go (can't remember if not renewed or actually fired) by the Bucs and Gruden was traded away by Al Davis from the Raiders because they had a falling out. Neither guy left "on good terms" as it were.

 

[CalBear]

Definitely true of Vermeil, but Dungy was let go (can't remember if not renewed or actually fired) by the Bucs and Gruden was traded away by Al Davis from the Raiders because they had a falling out. Neither guy left "on good terms" as it were.

Gruden and Dungy had both won 30 games in the three years prior to their departures, and had winning records and made the playoffs in the year they left. They were successful coaches. A retread is someone like **** Jauron who has one winning season in his career. Or for that matter, Norv Turner who is 58-82-1.

 

[Bri]

NFL coaches are a rare breed though. You can't just plugin some DC or OC or college coach and expect results.

Ray Handley, Ray Rhodes, Ray Perkins, Spurrier...countless examples of teams failing doing just that.

 

[Bevo]

Without naming the countless hundreds over the history of Pro Football, why do teams consistently go after previous failures at the head coaching position to be their new head coach? They coach for a couple of years, then boom, they are fired and someone else picks them off the trash heap for another try. Why not give more young African American coordinators a chance at being a head coach? I also see this in baseball all the time. Managers jump from team to team repeating failure after failure. Now there are exceptions, like Bill Belichick, who was a failure with Cleveland and the rest is history, but for the most part, bad coach in year 2nnn means bad coach in year 2nnn + 1. Hell, not to turn this into a race thread, the same can be said for unproven, yet considered talented coaches of any race. Why not give them more chances than the constant retread?

Hi Johnny U,My knee jerk answer to this is simply: Bill Belichick.I know you mentioned it but I think that's what's in their mind. At least in the back of their mind.J

I guess, maybe, possibly....Except one thing sticks in my mind, this was happening before the Belichik phenomenon. This has been going on for decades.

 

[JohnnyU]

but for the most part, bad coach in year 2nnn means bad coach in year 2nnn + 1

Is this speculation or the result of research you have done?

This sounds like the kind of project that is right up your alley, Chase.

Of course that is speculation on my part.

Thanks. I just thought maybe you had done some research or read something interesting.

It would be interesting to explore this deeper. What consititutes a "retread"? How many times of being a failure is enough? How much time should be given to a coach to build a team?

 

[Phurfur]

Since only one coach wins each year the system is set up to fail. Every year you have a possible 31 retread coaches. Would you consider Marty S. a retread? He sure would be an improvement for over half the teams in the NFL.

 

[JohnnyU]

Since only one coach wins each year the system is set up to fail. Every year you have a possible 31 retread coaches. Would you consider Marty S. a retread? He sure would be an improvement for over half the teams in the NFL.

Retread = coach that isn't successful (below .500) year after year, with perhaps a winning season once in awhile, yet keeps getting HC jobs. I wouldn't classify a coach that doesn't win the SB a retread. There are plenty of winning coaches that have never won the SB that I classify as winners.

 

[Pat Patriot]

Since only one coach wins each year the system is set up to fail. Every year you have a possible 31 retread coaches. Would you consider Marty S. a retread? He sure would be an improvement for over half the teams in the NFL.

Retread = coach that isn't successful (below .500) year after year, with perhaps a winning season once in awhile, yet keeps getting HC jobs. I wouldn't classify a coach that doesn't win the SB a retread. There are plenty of winning coaches that have never won the SB that I classify as winners.

Romeo Crennel has been unsuccessful. Are you saying he never gets another chance?Is Cam Cameron a retread because he was already fired as a college coach or is retread specific to the NFL? Would Pete Carroll be a retread?Last couple of years. First time NFL head coaches off the top of my head:Romeo CrennelSean PaytonEric ManginiCam CameronMike TimlinNick SabanGary KubiakBrad ChildressMike McCarthyRod MarinelliBobby PetrinoMike NolanScott LinehanKen WhisenhuntRetreadsDick JauronWade PhillipsArt ShellHerm EdwardsLooks to me like there have been MANY more NEW Head Coaches than RETREADS. If you want to change your argument that only 2 of the new coaches were BLACK, that is a case you can make.