AU-panther

I didn't way there was, but he might have wanted to if we would have hired a rookie coach. Like one of the "hot" OCs.

possible. but even among "typical" GMs there is some variance of how much control they have over a HC's staff. Maybe if we would have went with a young, inexperienced head coach, the GM would have been the deciding voice on the DC hire. Whereas with Reich he might have more of the final say.

I wonder if that was a Tepper call or Fitt trying a power play.

wouldn't take it. Problem with these trade hypotheticals is that fans look at all 1st the same and view trades in a vacuum. Burns might be worth two 1st but what type of team usually makes that trade? A good team, that thinks they are a player to two away. Those type of teams are usually picking at the end of the round. How many teams picking in the top 10 this year would give up their next two first? probably not many. So Burns plus #9 is really more like a top 10 pick this year and like a 24-32 pick the next two years. Also its not just if our offer is fair, its how it compares to other teams. What if Indy offers #4 plus their next 2 1st round picks? They probably view that a lot better than #9 and Burns. There is a good chance those two future picks will be top-10 type of picks. Don't get me wrong, I think Burns is valuable but it would probably be more like 1st and 2nd this year, Burns, and a future 2nd.

and we have a winner^ everyone wants to paint him as a Jerry Jones or Snyder type owner but if anything, he has been the opposite. He missed on Rhule, it happens. I would fault him more for giving Hurney too much time. Giving Ron too much time. Giving Rhule too much time. Not meddling in the decision for Bridgewater. Not meddling in the decision for Darnold. Not meddling in the decision to trade Burns. That why this idea that it wasn't an attractive job to HCs because of the owner was ridiculous. The real history he has is overpaying coaches, staying out of their way, and giving them too much time to turn it around. If I'm a coach that exactly the type of owner I want.

Here again hindsight is 20/20. If Mike Tomlin would have failed, you would say it was obvious because he had never been a HC at any level. Fact is there were other NFL people high on him also. I'm sure Cleveland fans knew Belichick was terrible after his first two losing seasons. It's always obvious after the fact. There are no certainties. Either way he swung for the fences, maybe you or I thought it was low percentage play, but the fact was other NFL people were high on him also. Either way he finally changed course (you or I might have done it sooner) but now lets see how it goes. I agree that Reich is the exact opposite, it's actually a very safe play, which I was kind of expecting.

Personally I think it is all overblown. Owners pick coaches, more times than not they are wrong, it's like drafting players. If it was easy every team would have a good coach. There is no perfect formula for finding the right coach. He went for the "program building, team building, CEO type." Personally, I'm not a big fan of college coaches for various reasons but he decided to go that route. It's easy to second guess now but fact is he was on the NFL radar. This time we are going the experienced HC, with offensive background route, no guarantee that works either. The swings and misses are going to happen, you can't control that with 100% certainty, all you can control is how you handle the misses. BTW, this same logic applies to whatever QB we draft if we do indeed draft one.

I would do that trade, but I don't think the Bears would. I'm guessing to go from 9 to 1 they are looking for something like 3 1st (probably from teams expected to be bad) and 2 2nds. I doubt they view Burns as counting for 2 1st and 2 2nds. #9 + 2024 1st + Burns is probably getting closer.

no it isn't. What do you think it actually includes?

And in three of those wins he had passing totals of 43, 120, and 164 yards. Also passer rating by itself can be a bit misleading because there is no eye test component, it's just a stat driven metric.

lol

Tell me how many penalties, sacks, and pressures each allowed...

so, all we can do is judge him on the games he did coach. Here again what is his overall record and how many wins against teams with winning records? Fact is if we tried to hire an outside coach with his record this place would riot.

90% chance he will be solid? Based on what? What is his overall record? How many of the few wins that he does have is against good teams, or even teams with a winning record?

Much ado about nothing. Pretty much every coaching search has multiple people "involved", and often not all of those people have football backgrounds, that doesn't mean they are going to be the deciding voice. All of this talk about letting "football people" make the decisions is overplayed around here. Owners buy the team, it's their money, the vast majority of time they are the ones who ultimately decide on the head coach. Now during the process do they gather information from "football people" of course, I'm sure Tepper consulted "football people" when Rhule was hired. If you are thinking Rhule, or any owner is going to stay out of the process, you are being very naive. I know it's easy to crucify Tepper, but at the end of the day he picked one coach, who although a lot of us might not had wanted as first choice but the fact was, he was on the NFL radar for openings. Listening to "football people" or fans doesn't guarantee success either, you might had ended up with someone like Hackett last year. I will say though I'm not a big fan of college HCs, I think Jimmy Johnson was the exception not the rule, but that is a subject for another day. Finding a HC is like finding a QB, there is no exact formula and there is probably some luck involved also. You pick one and if they don't work out you go make a change. If it was easy every team would have one. If anything, being too patient with Ron and Rhule bothers me more than the miss on the actual hire. Choosing the wrong candidate is going to happen, same goes for drafting QBs.

Based on what?

With $25-30m you can atleat replace a large part of his production, The draft picks are just bonus. Or you use the $30m to help other positions and spend the draft picks on rushers.

Based on what exactly? Almost seems like a narrative that has been overplayed. Think about it, so far he has shown a willingness to overpay a coach. That is a pretty big selling point to most coaches. He has shown a willingness to be overly patient with coaches according to most fans, for example both Ron and Rhule. As a future coach that would be a good thing. Also from most reports he pretty much lets his football people make the draft decisions. He isn't one of these owners trying to play GM. So he pays well, gives you plenty of time, and stays out of your way during the draft, those are the qualities that probably really make a difference to potential coaches.

and we have a winner^ I think they are just trying to make it into a feel good story, discarded QB goes to terrible team and has some success, makes for a nice story. and for those that say stats don't tell the entire story, check out his PFF grade (which is an eye test btw).

So whose idea was it to get Sam?

Make a list of the top 20-30 QBs of all time and tell me how many never had back to back winning seasons. Either Cam or Ron or Both were severely overrated. Which one was it?

So Cam isn’t worth 3-4 more wins than Darnold? If he is then their records over time probably would have been closer than people want to admit.

Rhule and Rivera are probably closer than people realize. Give Rhule prime Cam and Luke I'm sure his record is better. He goes 5-11 and 5-12 his first two years. Does Cam add 3-4 wins? I think I read or heard somewhere last year if you flip all of our one score games, we make the playoffs. Does Cam and Luke make that big of a difference? If not, then Cam isn't as good as people around here think. Now look at Ron at Wash without a good QB, 2 straight losing seasons to start out. I'm not saying Rhule is better but can't ignore the fact one had a pretty good QB and the other did not.

based on what?

He had Cam and Luke in their primes and never had back to back winning seasons.