I don't get the "Norv is a bad head coach" sentiment. I know that sounds crazy, and I'm sure some will say I'm nuts but I just think we can't universally claim that he "can't" coach.
He took over a Washington team that was 4-12 in 1993. In his first two years, they were 3-13 and 6-10. After that point, he was 40-36-1 with them. Not great, but not awful considering the amount of turnover he had (especially at the QB position). His successors in Washington (Schottenheimer and Spurrier) weren't able to improve upon Norv's track record there at all, and Washington failed to make the playoffs any subsequent season until Joe Gibbs was back in town. Norv then goes to Oakland where his teams are, by all accounts, miserable. He goes 9-23 and his reputation as a HC is shot. So what happens when he leaves? The team proves they're even worse than everyone thought, as they drop to 2-14 and are one of the biggest jokes in NFL history. Norv's Oakland teams were terrible, but at least competed for the most part.
I know there's a lot that goes into being a coach that isn't present as a coordinator, but it's not like he has been in situations to excel. He may have coached under the two most meddling owners in all of sports, not to mention the guys who succeeded him weren't able to do anything with the same group of guys either. Norv's a phenomenal coordinator and won't break the offense, and that may be his biggest attribute here. I like the hire, not just because I'm a Norv fan but also because I would do just about anything to prevent Mora or Mooch from getting the job.
You've painted with a very broad brush here. Norv's high water mark with the 'Skins was arguably week 8 in 1996 when he'd gotten the team to a 6-1 record. They then collapsed to finish 7-9 that year. The remaining years, save for 1999 when they won a division championship and a playoff game, were marked by undisciplined teams that seemed to change little from year to year as reflected by their record. Norv started 0-7 in 1998, his 5th season with the team, and would have been fired by any other team in the league but managed to keep his job because by the time that Snyder took over it was summer 1999 and too late to hire a replacement. Bottom line: head coaching is far more about leadership than about scheme or football smarts. Norv is not a leader, and the players know it and walk all over him. I'll be interested to see whether the Chargers - already an undisciplined team in many respects, have enough on-field leaders and talent to overcome Norv because, rest assured, thats precisely what they'll have to do to win a championship with him.
Good talent = winning = great leadership. I am not disagreeing about the leadership importance, but I am saying that sometimes winning creates that respect and losing exacerbates the lack of leadership. Sometimes the key players need to be part of that leadership. Look at the Giants and Coughlin, he doesn't allow people to walk in him (I know this is not a leadership quality), yet his key players in Strahan and Tiki thought he worked the team too hard and basically threw him under the bus. Get me guys who want to live, work and sleep football.
I would think being able to manage the game and not let the usually incorrect fans dictate whether you should be going for 4th and 1 from the 22 yard line (the worst place to do so) is very important. You also need to understand clock management. Lovie Smith just made the SB and he makes some of the dumbest decisions from a game management standpoint I have ever seen. Is that good leadership, luck, or what? Just 2 quick examples from just the Seattle playoff game that were dumb decisions by Lovie.
1) Seattle at the end of the 1st half with 4th and 1 from the 8 yard line with 18 seconds left and 1 time out he goes for it. Dumb and very low % decision, but he got a TD and it worked out.
2) At the end of the game with Seattle in possession on the Bears roughly 44 yard line and the 3rd down play ends leaving it 4th and about 15 with 45 seconds left. Instead of calling an immediate timeout to force Seattle to punt, he lets the clock run down and then (Holmgren must have been sleeping here as well) calls a timeout with 2 seconds left to give Seattle a chance to throw a hail Mary??? Holmgren should have called the timeout; it is almost mind boggling how stupid it was for Lovie to call the timeout and give Seattle a chance to win; even if small. Imagine if the hail Mary worked?
there were more but just o give you some flavor
I've seen some stupefyingly dumb decisions and play-calls by Norv too. In 1999, that playoff year when he was coaching the 'Skins, one that sticks with me was their regular season game at Detroit. Detroit was a pretty good team and that was back when their quick DE's on the Silverdome's fast surface could terrorize your o-line. They'd worried all week about that. The solution was pretty simple: pound Stephen Davis, who had emerged as one of the best feature backs in the NFL that year on his way to a 290/1405/17 season. At halftime, they're down by I think four points. So what does Norv do in the 2nd half? He hands the ball to Davis four times. Four times! I think the o-line false started more times in the 2nd half. They lost 35-17.
I'm not trying to dredge up 7-year old memories just to bash him, but this stood out at the time and has always stuck with me as an example of how Norv gets overrated as a play-caller. There were certainly times he could be brilliant, but there were many other times when Redskins fans were left scratching their heads over his play calls.
One of the most mystifying things to me in the NFL in recent years has been how Norv has been Mr. Teflon. Whenever he's failed it's somehow not Norv's responsibility, it's always someone else's fault. Dan Snyder, Al Davis, the Redskins' lack of talent, the Raiders' lack of talent, bad luck, etc., etc., etc. At some point people need to realize that, whatever other factors were at work, the one constant in all of those prior failures was Norv himself.