The Next Head Coach

[Woodie]

LeBeau setup the Zone blitzes. He did it before he was with the Steelers, and Cowher hired him to get it.

And the Steelers have been running the 3-4 before Cowher, since 83..

Oh, I realize LeBeau's contribution. I'm just making the point that some are trying to minimize Cowher's influence when he clearly was not a hands off HC. While he is not my first choice as HC, I do feel we could do worse.

Mularkey would be a bad fit. If you're looking for offensive minds, you can find better.

Another downside to offensive coaches - they tend to want to focus more on offense. Some call their own plays. All distractions.

I don't disagree with you at all. I guess with Mularkey, I'm looking at the similarities with the Falcons offense and our offense, and like what he is doing there...of course having a young franchise QB certainly helps.

[Mr. Scot]

Jerry did talk to Spurrier, didn't he?

Dodged a bullet there..

Don't think so. Fans wanted him and there was a false rumor that he was in town, but Washington snapped him up so fast I don't think we even had a shot if we'd been so inclined.

[magnus]

I think Ron Rivera would be a solid option.

is this cover 2 Rivera or 3-4 Rivera?

Granted he's been without Merriman healthy but last year they were terrible against the pass.

[Purity-Control]

Rivera didnt impress me last night

[Claws]

Boy did he not at all?! That defense was lost for a good portion of the game. No matter how pissed he got on the sideline, it didn't make a difference.

It's a sad state of affairs for SD when with all that talent they are already 2 games behind Denver.

[Woodie]

Gantt had an article about this a while back, but you can also pick up a lot by looking at the team's history.

It's not just that defensive coaches are all the team has ever hired. It's pretty much all they've ever even interviewed. The only coach I can think of that Richardson has considered who wouldn't have been purely considered a defensive coach would be Joe Gibbs (when the expansion first started).

It seems pretty clear it's Richardson's philosophy. And honestly, he's not alone in that line of thinking.

Gantt speculates a lot and often leaps to conclusions based on his own ideas rather than from any real inside info. So I would have to see the exact article to determine if it was just his own thoughts or something he gained from discussions with JR. And like I said, without knowing JR's feelings on the HC candidates at the times we were looking, there is no way to know for certain we hired out of preference rather than it just being a coincidence they were all former DC's.

And to be honest, I cannot remember all of the HC candidates he looked at from the teams inception. But as Magnus said, he did look at Spurrier, so there may be a couple of offensive guys you forgot about. Nevertheless, I think JR is going to look at all options if he does decide to make a change at HC. And to be clear, I'm not arguing what JR's preference is or is not (since, at best, I would only be guessing), just that none of us knows for certain, so we should not simply ignore offensive options out of hand.

[magnus]

it's kinda like Russ Grimm. Former player, has some cred, and name recognition goes a long way when people want to be excited. See - Gruden, Cowher.

So you see Grimm and think the OL is one spot that the Steelers have lagged since the Cowher change. Bad last year, bad this year, and they've spent tons on it. So clearly he was a big part of that, right?

but then you look at the AZ line and they're not that good, they can't run the ball, they have a top 5 pick at RT that's not dominant, and it's been a few years since people thought of him as can't miss. Haley got a job before he did, after calling plays only that one year.

It puts doubt when you're passed over for a job or two, and then the same success isn't necessarily there. Then you see, what, 10 unexperienced head coaches? in the last few years. And these two weren't part of that hire.

Same for Rivera. You look at his past, and he's got pedigree. Player in this league. Experience for a few years under Reid and Johnson (see also - Spags, Harbaugh, McDermott). Experience under Smith in the C2. Got some interviews.

But then Lovie didn't keep him. He had to get into the next DC job when another guy was let go, and hasn't flourished in it. So now he's in a scheme that may not fit him that well, and he's not running it that well. If he did get an interview, he has to distance himself from his own current work, and have to explain why he wouldn't do what he's doing now. Which is awkward.

You can see guys out there that have had success, and the more recent issues don't mean they couldn't be. But owners don't want coaching projects. If you don't have head coaching experience you have to show that you had success underneath a successful guy and will bring that.

[Mr. Scot]

it's kinda like Russ Grimm. Former player, has some cred, and name recognition goes a long way when people want to be excited. See - Gruden, Cowher.

So you see Grimm and think the OL is one spot that the Steelers have lagged since the Cowher change. Bad last year, bad this year, and they've spent tons on it. So clearly he was a big part of that, right?

but then you look at the AZ line and they're not that good, they can't run the ball, they have a top 5 pick at RT that's not dominant, and it's been a few years since people thought of him as can't miss. Haley got a job before he did, after calling plays only that one year.

It puts doubt when you're passed over for a job or two, and then the same success isn't necessarily there. Then you see, what, 10 unexperienced head coaches? in the last few years. And these two weren't part of that hire.

Same for Rivera. You look at his past, and he's got pedigree. Player in this league. Experience for a few years under Reid and Johnson (see also - Spags, Harbaugh, McDermott). Experience under Smith in the C2. Got some interviews.

But then Lovie didn't keep him. He had to get into the next DC job when another guy was let go, and hasn't flourished in it. So now he's in a scheme that may not fit him that well, and he's not running it that well. If he did get an interview, he has to distance himself from his own current work, and have to explain why he wouldn't do what he's doing now. Which is awkward.

You can see guys out there that have had success, and the more recent issues don't mean they couldn't be. But owners don't want coaching projects. If you don't have head coaching experience you have to show that you had success underneath a successful guy and will bring that.

Grimm has had some chinks in his armor of late. My question would be how much to attribute to him and how much to Ken Whisenunt. For what it's worth, Grimm doesn't strike me as the kind of guy who'd make a great OC, but head coach and OC aren't the same thing.

Ditto with Rivera, especially since I don't have much confidence in Norv Turner as a head coach (OC or QB coach, sure). I'd add that the one thing that really struck me last night was how much they miss starting nose guard Jamal Williams (out for the year). Lots of 3-4 attacks lag minus that dominant NT. Feel pretty sure that given the reins, Rivera would prefer a 4-3.

Funny thing when I think about it is how parallel this is to the current situation. John Fox was hired primarily off of running the Giants defense that was dominant in the Super Bowl season, but his defense the year following wasn't as good if I recall correctly. And of course the next year he came to Carolina.

[Lonestar13]

Mariucci and Mangino FTW

[magnus]

Grimm has had some chinks in his armor of late. My question would be how much to attribute to him and how much to Ken Whisenunt. For what it's worth, Grimm doesn't strike me as the kind of guy who'd make a great OC, but head coach and OC aren't the same thing.

Ditto with Rivera, especially since I don't have much confidence in Norv Turner as a head coach (OC or QB coach, sure). I'd add that the one thing that really struck me last night was how much they miss starting nose guard Jamal Williams (out for the year). Lots of 3-4 attacks lag minus that dominant NT. Feel pretty sure that given the reins, Rivera would prefer a 4-3.

Funny thing when I think about it is how parallel this is to the current situation. John Fox was hired primarily off of running the Giants defense that was dominant in the Super Bowl season, but his defense the year following wasn't as good if I recall correctly. And of course the next year he came to Carolina.

Fox (and Marvin Lewis, who I'd still have been fine with) both had problems with the rules at the time, in which going to the playoffs cost you a shot at the best jobss. So, a little different. And only a small lag time. Grimm and Rivera have been out for, what, three years now from what gave them their notoriety?

Do agree that assistants can be good head coaches without being good coordinators. Like I said above that's becoming a trend. As long as you have a good plan, can get good assistants, and can bring the right attitude, I don't guess it matters what your last job was.

[panthersphan]

LESLIE FRAIZER!!!

He seems like a good option - just look at this high powered machine that he's running over in Minnesota (defense)

[Mesmer]

Boy did he not at all?! That defense was lost for a good portion of the game. No matter how pissed he got on the sideline, it didn't make a difference.

It's a sad state of affairs for SD when with all that talent they are already 2 games behind Denver.

People need to realize that it's not 2006 anymore. The Chargers are nowhere near as talented as you think they are. They are not bad, but they are not the talent powerhouse they were that year, and they have been sliding down the slope ever since.

Edit: On topic I'm really not excited about anyone for Panthers HC right now. None of them really peak my interest.

[Mr. Scot]

Fox (and Marvin Lewis, who I'd still have been fine with) both had problems with the rules at the time, in which going to the playoffs cost you a shot at the best jobss. So, a little different. And only a small lag time. Grimm and Rivera have been out for, what, three years now from what gave them their notoriety?

Do agree that assistants can be good head coaches without being good coordinators. Like I said above that's becoming a trend. As long as you have a good plan, can get good assistants, and can bring the right attitude, I don't guess it matters what your last job was.

Honestly, you could argue that being a position coach is a closer resemblance to being a head coach in some ways. Head coaching is game planning, decision making and motivation. Coordinating is all Xs and Os.

The ideal mix would likely be someone successful at both levels (hence why OCs and DCs tend to be the ones who get the jobs) but guys like Andy Reid prove you can make the leap and be successful.

[rayzor]

Honestly, you could argue that being a position coach is a closer resemblance to being a head coach in some ways. Head coaching is game planning, decision making and motivation. Coordinating is all Xs and Os.

The ideal mix would likely be someone successful at both levels (hence why OCs and DCs tend to be the ones who get the jobs) but guys like Andy Reid prove you can make the leap and be successful.

that could be the reason why denver is looking like it is. from the X's and O's they are doing well, but from a management and motivational standpoint mcdaniels has been horrible. cutler's and marshall's problems didn't appear overnight. shanny had that under control for the most part. mcdaniels is too young and immature to handle those personnel situations. too easy to get into pissing contests. if he had been able to keep cutler happy and on the team the broncos would have been very tough to beat. kind of like the AFC version of the saints right now...the only thing that was missing was a respectable defense and from the looks of it, they finally have it.

truthfully i think i would rather have a position coach or someone that has previous head coaching experience in the NFL or at another level. that guy would have to be able to let the coordinators do their job. coordinators are too easy to become obsolete. they get something going that is hot for a moment but, unless they are true innovators or are able to stumble upon something pretty revolutionary, they turn into one dimensional leaders. they get stuck in a rut thinking that the way they did it will continue to work and because they were considered to be an authority in one area, they should continue to keep themselves in the kitchen and will mingle too much.

i guess it's the difference between micro and macro managing. i don't want an HC who will micro manage everything. get the best coaches/coordinators/players for the job and enable them to do their best. give them some direction and then let them figure out the best way to get it done and trust that they will.