Black Monday coach firing thread

[Songin]

Rex is probably watching in bed at home licking champagne off

his wife's

exquisite toes.

Better that than somebody else's wife......oops....wrong coach ; )

I'm no fan of Shananan (I like the Jints) but some "Redskin things" from an NFC East perspective:

1. Hire a high profile coach to manage your shambles of a football operation.

2. Force that coach to make a huge trade up that will cripple the football operation even more if it fails.

3. Fire the coach when the huge trade up fails and cripples the football operations.

Remember THE Washington Redskins?....George Allen?...the "over-the-hill-gang?...the "hogs?"....Kilmer?...Larry Brown?...Mouthy Joe Theisman...Darrell Green?...perennial playoff contenders??

The Redskins problem? Not so much Shanahan, nor RGIII.

Dan Snyder is the problem.

The Redskins are 102-136 in the 15 years this tool has owned the team. They are about to hire their 8th coach in 15 years. This including the fact that Joe Gibbs managed to stay on the job for 4 years.

Browns:
Firing Chudzinki after 1 season? When your best player (Joe Thomas) calls it a bonehead move? That's what lousy organizations do and why the Browns in 15 years have 1 playoff spot to show for it. Does the name Belichick ring a bell Cleveland?

Lions:
Giants with nothing to play for beat 'em in Detroit, knocking the Lions out of the playoffs. Schwartz sucks plain and simple. Remember how he cried like a baby in the post-game presser over Harbaugh's "overzealous" handshake at the end of a Lions-49'ers game? Can you imagine a Belichick doing that? Best WR, Reggie Bush, ferocious front 4 (even if they are a tad "dirty) and whatever you think of Stafford, etc., and this guy couldn't pull it together.

Tampa Bay:
Hey Darrelle Revis: was leaving the media-scripted "Circus" (Jets) for greener pastures money-wise and otherwise worth it? How about the mostly vanilla coverage packages TB played? Enjoy your non-guaranteed contract (pray you stay healthy). Your old coach who got the best out of you mostly playing press man coverage has a .525 winning record (.667 playoffs) and technically only 1 losing season in his 5 years as HC with didly-squat at QB fwiw. Hope the money was worth that 4-12 Darrelle; there's your "circus." Does Schiano return to "the U" as a DC under Al Golden? Does Al Golden leave the U for Penn St. now that Houston looks like they're going to go after Bill O'Brien?

Giants:
I dont think (jmho) Jerry Reese shows Coughlin the door (2 recent SBs). Coughlin will go out on his own terms (at worst he'll announce his retirement maybe after next year). He's earned it. Started 0-6 (ouch!) but bounced back going 7-3 after that. Acknowledging that injuries are part of the game, it should be noted that the Jints got the bug as bad as anyone: 14 were officially placed on IR (7 of them starters). The Giants used 63 players this year, 4 short of the NFL record. Eli's offensive line was offensive as in brutal with JAGs replacing IR players (some of which were post-prime). He himself forced too many throws. Only OL that played decent (after getting schooled in the beginning) was the rookie out of Syracuse, Pugh.
Defense was decent after that 0-6 start....offense (OL, TE, RB, WR, you name it) needs Reese to fill in the (many) blanks.

 

[BradyFTW!]

The Texans are far from a sure thing. They have several good players but overall have a severe lack of talent and depth, i.e OL, DL, LBs, DBs, QB. They didn't go 2-14 by accident (and should have been 0-16). They will need a major rebuilding.

The Texans played in a ton of close games, and due to bad luck and bad quarterbacking they lost almost all of them. They were better than their 2-14 record indicates, although still far from good. No way they should have gone 0-16.

There's definitely a talent problem on that team, and they need some of their recent draftees to step up big time if they want to get back to where they were in 2012. They really need DeAndre Hopkins to become more consistent, for starters, and they need Arian Foster to bounce back at full strength, since even at 100% he's overpaid.

Assuming that they draft Bridgewater, and that Foster and Daniels come back healthy and Hopkins improves, that will be an extremely formidable set of skill position players. I expect that they'll turn their attention to the offensive line in the middle rounds, because other than a pretty good LT, that's their definite weakness, and it's just not smart to put your rookie franchise savior behind a line that can't protect him well. That's how you get your QB hurt and help him to develop bad habits.

If Bridgewater is the real deal and they draft some serviceable OL talent, I could easily see them in the playoffs next year. The defense won't be great, but if Watt and Cushing stay healthy then it should be passable at least. Not like they have to unseat a behemoth to win the division; the Colts will be looking pretty vulnerable, especially if Wayne doesn't come back at full strength.

 

[hwc]

Why is the Raiders coach still employed?

West Coast time zone....

 

[Hercules Rockefeller]

Jeff Fisher has had two winning seasons in his last nine years as a head coach. He last won a playoff game in 2003. He is routinely listed among the best coaches in the National Football League. He has routinely hired scumbag Gregg Williams, and claims no knowledge of Williams' thug tactics. This despite Fisher himself standing over Rodney Harrison and taunting him when Bobby Wade shredded Rodney's ACL for no reason, across the field, away from the play, in 2006. What a charmed existence.

I cannot wait for Jeff Fisher to go 6-10 next season and get a lifetime extension with the Rams.

 

[Deus Irae]

The Texans job is a great one.

The Lions job is a great one, if you can fix Stafford.

The Tampa job is a terrible one.

The Redskins job has potential, but only if Snyder stays out.

The Vikings job is a terrible one.

The Cleveland job is a terrible one

 

[patsinthesnow]

The Texans job is a great one.

The Lions job is a great one, if you can fix Stafford.

The Tampa job is a terrible one.

The Redskins job has potential, but only if Snyder stays out.

The Vikings job is a terrible one.

The Cleveland job is a terrible one

Agree with most except the Browns job. Why do you think it sucks? Solid defense, top 5 WR, top 5 TE, just have to find a QB.

 

[BradyBranch39]

In his defense this was a complete rebuilding year. For the first time in forever Oakland came up with a long term plan, understanding that they had a horrible salary cap situation, and needed to look further than the current season. The Raiders had more than $56 million in dead cap money for the 2013 season; it's impossible for any team to be competitive in that situation.

For that reason alone Allen deserves a chance to return, but hey - even though Al is gone, it's still the Davis family that runs things - so it is certainly possible that they'll give him the boot.

I'm 50/50 on this one. I mean, why did he suddenly decide to start Pryor this week? McGloin has clearly looked like the better passer. And they were completely invisible in the first 3 quarters, with his job supposedly on the line.

But yeah, the GM is way, way more at fault for the state of that team. I don't think McKenzie has them on the right path, but you're right-- they did need to get that cap situation fixed.

 

[BradyBranch39]

Agree with most except the Browns job. Why do you think it sucks? Solid defense, top 5 WR, top 5 TE, just have to find a QB.

A) the owner is a buffoon who would probably fire the next guy who goes 4-12, too
B) McDaniels would trade Gordon quicker than he did Cutler & Marshall.

 

[Deus Irae]

Agree with most except the Browns job. Why do you think it sucks? Solid defense, top 5 WR, top 5 TE, just have to find a QB.

• Only 1 WR
  
• No QB
  
• Ownership/management that is too impatient to give a coach time to grown into the job.
  
• The defense finished the year at #23 in scoring. The offense finished the year at #27 in scoring.
  
• The last time the Browns won a playoff game, Bill Belichick was the coach.
  
• Since 1989, the Browns have reached double digits in wins only twice (once under BB and once under Crennel).

If they can find the QB, they can start to turn things around. That's true of pretty much every bad team, though. Just my take. Others may feel differently.

 

[Hercules Rockefeller]

The Texans job is a great one.

The Lions job is a great one, if you can fix Stafford.

The Tampa job is a terrible one.

The Redskins job has potential, but only if Snyder stays out.

The Vikings job is a terrible one.

The Cleveland job is a terrible one

I disagree about the Cleveland job being terrible for the reasons that others have stated, but I absolutely agree with you that the Browns as a franchise are a mess, and thus that job becomes less impressive despite having some good talent. It is probably a bad job.

The Vikings job is not a bad one, however. They have a high enough pick to go get a solid QB prospect, they have the best back in football, a very talented wild card type in Patterson, and a franchise left tackle in Kalil. Their offensive line was beat up this year but is not bad in general. The center Sullivan is excellent.

You're stuck with Rick Spielman, but he's actually drafted pretty well the last few years, with the massive exception of Ponder. Xavier Rhodes played well down the stretch and could be a Talib type at CB; he and Harrison Smith make the beginnings of a decent backfield.

I live in Minneapolis, and am no Vikings fan, but I am immersed in the coverage of the team whether I like it or not. Most Vikings fans are extremely down on the team right now, but I don't think it would be too great a leap to see them have a decent season next year. Plus whoever gets this job will have the benefit of the doubt because the next two seasons will be spent at the Gophers' stadium while their shiny new one gets built. Also, the Wilfs, while weirdos with shady business tactics outside of football, have been known for their patience with coaches rather than a quick trigger.

 

[Deus Irae]

I disagree about the Cleveland job being terrible for the reasons that others have stated, but I absolutely agree with you that the Browns as a franchise are a mess, and thus that job becomes less impressive despite having some good talent. It is probably a bad job.

The Vikings job is not a bad one, however. They have a high enough pick to go get a solid QB prospect, they have the best back in football, a very talented wild card type in Patterson, and a franchise left tackle in Kalil. Their offensive line was beat up this year but is not bad in general. The center Sullivan is excellent.

You're stuck with Rick Spielman, but he's actually drafted pretty well the last few years, with the massive exception of Ponder. Xavier Rhodes played well down the stretch and could be a Talib type at CB; he and Harrison Smith make the beginnings of a decent backfield.

I live in Minneapolis, and am no Vikings fan, but I am immersed in the coverage of the team whether I like it or not. Most Vikings fans are extremely down on the team right now, but I don't think it would be too great a leap to see them have a decent season next year. Plus whoever gets this job will have the benefit of the doubt because the next two seasons will be spent at the Gophers' stadium while their shiny new one gets built. Also, the Wilfs, while weirdos with shady business tactics outside of football, have been known for their patience with coaches rather than a quick trigger.

I hear what you're saying, so let me explain my takes. With the way the NFL has gone in the past 10-15 years, I look at any team without a QB as a terrible job by default. If that team has enough positives outside of that, I upgrade the team.

The Texans, for example, don't have a QB, but they've got the #1 pick, have a lot of great players, and have just recently been legitimate playoff contenders, having come off of 2 double digit wins seasons prior to this year's collapse. They also play in a division with only the Colts as real competition right now, which gives them an edge. They can become legitimate, longterm, playoff contenders again just by finding a mediocre QB.

I don't see that with the likes of Cleveland, Minnesota or Tampa Bay.

 

[Deus Irae]

Anyone who had Coughlin next in the annual coaching firing pool can tear up their tickets:

Giants boss John Mara just told reporters he wants Coughlin back on the sidelines next year.

“We still have every confidence in him,” Mara said, via Bob Glauber of Newsday.

Giants owner says he wants Tom Coughlin back | ProFootballTalk

 

[unoriginal]

On the subject of the Browns: they went 4-12, and 1-12 in games Brian Hoyer did not start, and they did it with 5 Pro Bowlers, 1 more than the New England Patriots.

I quote Pro Bowl numbers as evidence that "in general" the Browns are perceived to have a talented roster. Some people have compared this situation to like Kraft firing Belichick after a 5-11 season in 2000, BUT
(1) they didn't lose 7 to end the season
(2) nobody was selected for the Pro Bowl

Meaning Belichick did better with less, and wasn't trending downwards.

And while a sadsack organization firing a coach after a single season is alarming, I don't think their front office is incompetent. They made two moves this season I heard about multiple times:
(1) Lombardi going to bat for Hoyer, despite him having done little in the league to that point, and that turned out to be right.
(2) The front office evaluating Richardson as bad and getting what they could for him, which turned out to be right again.

So I think they have some credibility. Those were two credibility-testing moves and neither one blew up in their face.

 

[YearbookCurfew]

Aaand once again Jason Garrett is safe again.

 

[BradyFTW!]

On the subject of the Browns: they went 4-12, and 1-12 in games Brian Hoyer did not start, and they did it with 5 Pro Bowlers, 1 more than the New England Patriots.

I quote Pro Bowl numbers as evidence that "in general" the Browns are perceived to have a talented roster. Some people have compared this situation to like Kraft firing Belichick after a 5-11 season in 2000, BUT
(1) they didn't lose 7 to end the season
(2) nobody was selected for the Pro Bowl

Meaning Belichick did better with less, and wasn't trending downwards.

And while a sadsack organization firing a coach after a single season is alarming, I don't think their front office is incompetent. They made two moves this season I heard about multiple times:
(1) Lombardi going to bat for Hoyer, despite him having done little in the league to that point, and that turned out to be right.
(2) The front office evaluating Richardson as bad and getting what they could for him, which turned out to be right again.

So I think they have some credibility. Those were two credibility-testing moves and neither one blew up in their face.

I don't think moving on from your coach after 1 year is necessarily a terrible sign, provided that you have a very clear understanding of what went wrong and have modified your coaching search accordingly moving forward. It goes with the general sentiment that mistakes are acceptable as long as you learn from them. Much like with Trent Richardson, if they concluded that Chud was a bad fit this quickly, then it's better to move on now than wait for waiting's sake. While I don't think it's totally fair to evaluate a coach after saddling him with Brandon Weeden, I can envision situations where moving on after one year might not be an awful idea.

Also, for the greater point re: quarterbacks, how often does a team with a good quarterback fire its coach? Without looking into it in any depth, I think you'd be hard-pressed to find more than 1-2 per year, and even when it does happen that quarterback has major question marks. Generally speaking, the best a new coach can hope for is an entrenched QB with some significant red flags attached, like Rivers/Cutler last year or Stafford and RG3 this year. Cutler, by both numbers and record, is basically a slightly-above-average starting QB, and Rivers was coming of the worst season of his career last year. Stafford just ended the season so badly that there have to be major questions going forward about whether he's even a good QB, or just a strong arm to throw to Megatron.

We can generally operate under the assumption that, if a coach is fired, the team wasn't very good the previous years. With rare exceptions like Lovie Smith and Marty Schottenheimer after his 14-2 year, pretty much every firing happens because the team was bad the previous year. So it's almost a foregone conclusion that a new coach will be walking into a bad situation. The question then becomes "why was this a bad situation?" There are a lot of reasons why a team can go 4-12, which can basically be broken down into two groups:

A) your QB sucked
B) Everything else goes to hell, since in today's NFL that's the only way that a really good QB goes 4-12.

Coaches don't get fired when an elite QB is playing high-caliber football, because elite QBs make their teams competitive. Mike McCarthy is a bad coach, but he's not going to get fired because his teams will be in the hunt for as long as he has Aaron Rodgers.

Based on that, if I'm going into a bad situation as a new coach, I'd rather be dealing with an otherwise-solid team that has a void at QB, rather than a team with an okay-but-not-great-because-great-ones-make-their-teams-competitive quarterback, and then a ton of holes elsewhere.

This is especially true if you seriously believe that you're better than most at identifying and coaching up quarterbacks. If McDaniels really can identify a good QB prospect and coach him up, then the Browns and Texans are easily the two best jobs for him, since if he can simply do what he does best, they should be in contention sooner rather than later.

 

[ausbacker]

Agree with most except the Browns job. Why do you think it sucks? Solid defense, top 5 WR, top 5 TE, just have to find a QB.

The Tampa job is not a terrible one. In fact, the Tampa job is a pretty darn good one if Glennon develops. On O, Doug Martin, Vincent Jackson, Mike Williams, Carl Nicks and on D Darrelle Revis, Mark Barron, Gerald McCoy, Adrian Clayborn and Lavonte David are all excellent players to build around.

If you can build some depth and put those defensive players in positions to succeed, they could be the next Carolina Panthers rebuild candidates.

Also, the Browns is a bloody attractive job if the right HC is brought in. They're stocked with picks and are well positioned to move around come the draft/trade period.

There are some great openings for Head Coaches this season. Nobody in their right mind would want to work for Snyder or Jerryworld (if that becomes available) given their meddling and undermining.

 

[BradyFTW!]

The Tampa job is not a terrible one. In fact, the Tampa job is a pretty darn good one if Glennon develops. On O, Doug Martin, Vincent Jackson, Mike Williams, Carl Nicks and on D Darrelle Revis, Mark Barron, Gerald McCoy, Adrian Clayborn and Lavonte David are all excellent players to build around.

If you can build some depth and put those defensive players in positions to succeed, they could be the next Carolina Panthers rebuild candidates.

Also, the Browns is a bloody attractive job if the right HC is brought in. They're stocked with picks and are well positioned to move around come the draft/trade period.

There are some great openings for Head Coaches this season. Nobody in their right mind would want to work for Synder or Jerryworld (if that becomes available) given their meddling and undermining.

Washington is probably the least attractive destination for a HC, it'll be interesting to see who they get. RG3's ceiling is really the only positive, with the negatives being whether or not he gets healthy enough to reach it, terrible ownership, lack of draft picks, an awful defense that's losing its leader to retirement, no WRs, etc. etc.

 

[ausbacker]

Washington is probably the least attractive destination for a HC, it'll be interesting to see who they get. RG3's ceiling is really the only positive, with the negatives being whether or not he gets healthy enough to reach it, terrible ownership, lack of draft picks, an awful defense that's losing its leader to retirement, no WRs, etc. etc.

I don't particularly like RGME's media profile, his need to have attention paid to him all the time and quite frankly, what I see as an attitude of entitlement. I can't see him objectively and will openly say so until proven otherwise (I'm sure he's a fine young man it's more his presentation that irks me). Couple that with Snyder and all the other factors you've put forward, well, it doesn't look like an attractive work place.

 

[Bella*chick]

Washington is probably the least attractive destination for a HC, it'll be interesting to see who they get. RG3's ceiling is really the only positive, with the negatives being whether or not he gets healthy enough to reach it, terrible ownership, lack of draft picks, an awful defense that's losing its leader to retirement, no WRs, etc. etc.

Very true but besides RG3's potential, they also have a bit more money to play with in FA in the coming year. They were penalized this year (last year too, maybe) along with Dallas.

But still, the totality of that job is that it sucks. It's like a black hole. No one can be successful there and they have had a lot of big names come through. Gibbs 2.0 came the closest and the best he can be described as is mediocre.

 

[Bobsyouruncle]

IMO, the best jobs

1. Texas- Lots of talent, easy division, stable ownership, high pick
Negatives- Everybody expects them to win now, need a QB.

2. CLE- Good talent, High picks, somewhat easier division (BAL and PITT appear to be trending down, CIN good but not dominant). Low expectations.
Negatives- No QB, Ownership trigger happy

3. DET- Good QB, best WR in NFL, low draft pick. Good owners. Lots of talent.
Negatives- everybody thinks they can win now, Suh appears to be a child who can't be coached, the fan base is blind to this. You either keep the man child as a cancerous leader or get crucified for letting him walk. Possibly same for Stafford. Impossible division.

4. TB- Possible QB in Glennon. Decent talent, low expectations.
Negatives- Difficult division with CAR and NO. Owners want to move to London.

5. MIN- low expectations, AP, ummm...Aaron Rodgers gets hurt a lot
Negatives- No QB, short on talent. In division with GB and CHI. My money is on GB owning the division for 5-10 more years.

6. WAS- weakest division, really just win 8 games
Negatives- everything else, it's a train wreck.