Barnwell: Ranking NFL's best potential head coach openings for 2023

[cookinbrak]

Ryan's and Jimmy G would be interesting.

[TheSpecialJuan]

[LinvilleGorge]

My actual reaction if I was sitting in on a Demeco Ryans interview for the Panthers job and he suggested that his plan to fix our QB situation was to sign Jimmy G after we've gone through Teddy Bridgewater, Sam Darnold, and Baker Mayfield in recent years...

[rebelrouser]

27 minutes ago, Panthercougar68 said:

Take the hater shades off for a minute. Someone not a Panthers fan literally called it attractive and guess what…trade ups can happen.

It is an attractive position but not because Wilkes won some meaningless games and hurt our draft position. It is attractive because we finally built a solid oline w/ a run game, a good D, and some decent draft picks for a change; not because Wilkes went 5-6. 

[Mr. Scot]

1 minute ago, LinvilleGorge said:

My actual reaction if I was sitting in on a Demeco Ryans interview for the Panthers job and he suggested that his plan to fix our QB situation was to sign Jimmy G after we've gone through Teddy Bridgewater, Sam Darnold, and Baker Mayfield in recent years...

/cdn-cgi/mirage/a17dbad9fdf239776f4cb06f17394553d8f645a5db7237b85ead849a28c3990d/1280/https://media.tenor.com/ZLWm1eSdDXYAAAAC/bullshit-not-again.gif

Seriously.

Ryans? Maybe. Garoppolo? Hell, no

[panthers55]

So what I got out of the chart was that if your team sucked and your interim coach couldn't turn them around, they weren't going to do it as a head coach. But in cases similar to Wilkes,where if we win Sunday he is 6-6, interim coaches who turned the team around and finished closer to 500 or better fared much better in the future.  Not surprising at all.  And yes there were exceptions to that as well.

 

[Khyber53]

2 hours ago, UNCrules2187 said:

In the article, Barnwell linked to an old Grantland article from 2015 that showed the record of interim HCs who were then promoted to full time HC: https://grantland.com/the-triangle/nfl-week-8-picks-the-weight-of-the-interim-label/

Coach	Year	Team	Pre-Interim	Post-Interim	Future Years	Future Records
Bruce Coslet	1996	Bengals	1-6	7-2	4	14-37
Dave McGinnis	2000	Cardinals	2-5	1-8	3	16-32
Dick LeBeau	2000	Bengals	0-3	4-9	2	8-24
Jason Garrett	2010	Cowboys	1-7	5-3	9	80-64
Jeff Fisher	1994	Oilers	1-9	1-5	16	141-115
Leslie Frazier	2010	Vikings	3-7	3-3	3	18-29-1
Mike Singletary	2008	49ers	2-5	5-4	2	13-18
Mike Tice	2001	Vikings	5-10	0-1	4	32-32
Richard Williamson	1990	Buccaneers	5-8	1-2	1	3-13
Romeo Crennel	2011	Chiefs	5-8	2-1	1	2-14
Tom Cable	2008	Raiders	1-3	4-8	2	13-19
		Record	26-71	33-46		340-397-1
		Win%	0.268	0.418		0.461

 

Note that I updated the table to include the full results of Garrett's tenure with Dallas. The only additions to the above since then would be Mike Mularkey in Tennessee and Doug Marrone which would be:

Coach	Year	Team	Pre-Interim	Post-Interim	Future Years	Future Records
Mike Mularkey	2015	Titans	1-6	2-7	2	18-14
Doug Marrone	2016	Jaguars	2-12	1-1	4	22-42

		Record	29-89	36-54		380-453-1
		Win%	0.246	0.400		0.456

 

This is one of the things that gives me pause about hiring Wilks as the full time HC. It just historically hasn't worked well. The only ones that I'd say are decent to good are Fisher and Garrett and neither struck me as great HCs. I actually feel like Wilks would probably be in the same realm as those guys...occasional playoff runs with a bunch of medicore seasons.

 

It's interesting to read the stats, but there's a big vacuum around them. That vacuum can be summed up with the caveat that the overall win percentage of those coaches at their next stop (0.456) is as good or better than the average for all HCs put together for the NFL in any given career span. 

It's tough to win in the NFL, for any coach whether they were an interim coach (who is always taking over a sinking or sunk ship) or whether they have inherited a successful program as we've seen in Tampa and New Orleans this year. Consistent winners like Belichick, Carrol, Harbaugh and Tomlin are very rare creatures indeed.

Wilks being an interim here isn't a slight against his capabilities as a HC at all, contrary to what that chart says.

[X-Clown]

2 hours ago, UNCrules2187 said:

In the article, Barnwell linked to an old Grantland article from 2015 that showed the record of interim HCs who were then promoted to full time HC: https://grantland.com/the-triangle/nfl-week-8-picks-the-weight-of-the-interim-label/

Coach	Year	Team	Pre-Interim	Post-Interim	Future Years	Future Records
Bruce Coslet	1996	Bengals	1-6	7-2	4	14-37
Dave McGinnis	2000	Cardinals	2-5	1-8	3	16-32
Dick LeBeau	2000	Bengals	0-3	4-9	2	8-24
Jason Garrett	2010	Cowboys	1-7	5-3	9	80-64
Jeff Fisher	1994	Oilers	1-9	1-5	16	141-115
Leslie Frazier	2010	Vikings	3-7	3-3	3	18-29-1
Mike Singletary	2008	49ers	2-5	5-4	2	13-18
Mike Tice	2001	Vikings	5-10	0-1	4	32-32
Richard Williamson	1990	Buccaneers	5-8	1-2	1	3-13
Romeo Crennel	2011	Chiefs	5-8	2-1	1	2-14
Tom Cable	2008	Raiders	1-3	4-8	2	13-19
		Record	26-71	33-46		340-397-1
		Win%	0.268	0.418		0.461

 

Note that I updated the table to include the full results of Garrett's tenure with Dallas. The only additions to the above since then would be Mike Mularkey in Tennessee and Doug Marrone which would be:

Coach	Year	Team	Pre-Interim	Post-Interim	Future Years	Future Records
Mike Mularkey	2015	Titans	1-6	2-7	2	18-14
Doug Marrone	2016	Jaguars	2-12	1-1	4	22-42

		Record	29-89	36-54		380-453-1
		Win%	0.246	0.400		0.456

 

This is one of the things that gives me pause about hiring Wilks as the full time HC. It just historically hasn't worked well. The only ones that I'd say are decent to good are Fisher and Garrett and neither struck me as great HCs. I actually feel like Wilks would probably be in the same realm as those guys...occasional playoff runs with a bunch of medicore seasons.

 

Edit: nevermind, forgot Freddie kitchens was promoted to OC for the browns when hue jackson was fired and Not HC. Became HC the following year and then went 6-10

Edited January 6, 2023 by X-Clown

[ECHornet]

32 minutes ago, panthers55 said:

So what I got out of the chart was that if your team sucked and your interim coach couldn't turn them around, they weren't going to do it as a head coach. But in cases similar to Wilkes,where if we win Sunday he is 6-6, interim coaches who turned the team around and finished closer to 500 or better fared much better in the future.  Not surprising at all.  And yes there were exceptions to that as well.

 

We have different interpretations of those stats.

Best I can tell from looking at it....

If you hire an interim coach, you are going to suck.

[panthers55]

1 minute ago, ECHornet said:

We have different interpretations of those stats.

Best I can tell from looking at it....

If you hire an interim coach, you are going to suck.

You got to remember they already sucked so that is not news. And most of those interim coaches were not at 500 or better post interim so why would they do better moving forward.  But if you actually look at the chart you can see that interim coaches who were able to turn things around did better because obviously they were better coaches to begin with. 

[ECHornet]

4 hours ago, panthers55 said:

You got to remember they already sucked so that is not news. And most of those interim coaches were not at 500 or better post interim so why would they do better moving forward.  But if you actually look at the chart you can see that interim coaches who were able to turn things around did better because obviously they were better coaches to begin with. 

That's just not what the data shows at all.

Of the 5 coaches who showed the worst improvement in winning percentage from pre-to-post interim, 3 of them had top 5 best winning % in future records.

Only 1 coach who showed top 5 best improvement from pre-to-post interim had a top 5 winning % in future records: Jason Garrett. The other four coaches who showed the best improvement ended up in the bottom 6 winning % in future records.

If anything, you might be better off hiring the interim coach who does the worst with his team. 

Edited January 7, 2023 by ECHornet

[onmyown]

7 hours ago, LinvilleGorge said:

This is what I've been saying about the roster. We have a young stud at every key position outside of QB. 

People, like 75% of the huddle, were saying this last year too, and that Darnold was the issue, and the oline was fine.

This year it could’ve been true.

But I’d add we just need another dline playmaker.

This team loves to give opposing QBs all day long and that will get you destroyed in the playoffs.

[LinvilleGorge]

23 minutes ago, onmyown said:

People, like 75% of the huddle, were saying this last year too, and that Darnold was the issue, and the oline was fine.

This year it could’ve been true.

But I’d add we just need another dline playmaker.

This team loves to give opposing QBs all day long and that will get you destroyed in the playoffs.

Oh, we could definitely use another playmaker on the DL. We could use a better starter at WR opposite DJ. We could use better secondary depth. We could use help at LB.

No such thing as a perfect roster. You're always going to have needs and spots you'd like to upgrade if the opportunity presents itself. But having young studs at pretty much all the key non-QB positions isn't a terrible place to be sitting. It opens up the possibility of going all in on a QB if the opportunity presents itself.

[glenwo2]

9 hours ago, Wundrbread33 said:

This probably isn’t the way others look at this, but here’s my take:

 

We will hire Wilks, or someone else. And Wilks, or someone else won’t be Matt Rhule.

 

Therefore I will be excited for Panthers football in 2023. 
 

Hell yeah.

This is how EVERYONE should view this.

No matter who we hire, it won't be Matt Rhule.

....unless we hire Ron Rivera again...in which case, for many of you it will be "GO CANES!"