Annual NFL Coaching Carousel
- Thread starter Corsi
- Start date
His record as a head coach, including college and the pros, is 52-85. It's stunning that he can get another job.
I just had to explain to the office why I suddenly burst out laughing. Fortunately there was another NFL fan in the office.
By the way, an acknowledged X factor in the Lions throwing up all over themselves (great metaphor) in their HC search is the Fords are as cheap and stupid as any ownership group in football.
By the way, an acknowledged X factor in the Lions throwing up all over themselves (great metaphor) in their HC search is the Fords are as cheap and stupid as any ownership group in football.
Morning Woodhead said:
He did a good job down the stretch last season, but as we know up close, being a good coordinator is one thing, a good HC something else entirely.
I'm very curious why first rate people did not flock to this job with the Lions' roster. And as emphasized in a recent SI piece on Matt Millen, you could not ask for more supportive ownership. If anything, the Fords are too patient.
Well my worst nightmare has come true with the Caldwell hire, although its not really that surprising given the state of the Lions franchise the last 20 years. If they couldn't get their first choice in terms of NFL guys, I was hoping that they would go after a quality college guy. Instead they hired a crappy NFL retread, known for his terrible game management and was only able to have any success with one of the top QB's in NFL history. I have no faith in his ability to develop Stafford, and in terms of his offensive game plan abilities he lead the 29th ranked offense last year. Whats even sadder was the Ravens were debating internally whether he'd be retained, and what do the Lions do go out and hire him to be the HC. But when you are a franchise that only knows losing what do you really expect, I have no faith in anyone in the organization to really have a plan to turn this team around. In all honesty I'm more depressed now that after the 0-16 season, at least with that team you know it was devoid of talent. Instead I will get so see a talented team mire in mediocrity because of crappy leadership and coaching. Worse this guy was clearly the teams 4th choice and now fans will get to hear how he was number 1 all along. F U Detroit.
Caldwell seems like a particularly bad fit for a talented but extremely undisciplined team like the Lions. Is he going to get Stafford to cut down on mistakes? Reign in Suh? I don't see it.
I feel for Lions fans. What a kick in the pants.
I feel for Lions fans. What a kick in the pants.
Spacemans Bong said:
Stupid yes... cheap no. They paid handsomely for Maricucci and Schwartz to go away (roughly 22 million) and paying their replacements rather well. However whats lacking is a clear vision or plan from the top. If anything their problem lately as also been being to loyal to staff members, allow guys like Marnelli, Schwartz and Millen to hang around to long when they are clearly out of their depth
Shelterdog said:
What good is cap space if you don't have a QB?
Maybe that is too broad of a brush to paint with, but of the three teams you listed (Cleveland, Oakland, Jacksonville) couldn't you argue that the lack of quality QB play is and has been the problem for quite some time? Maybe some teams can get by with an average QB and good coaching (Arizona was competitive this year with Carson Palmer, after he was forgettable in Oakland), but the NFL seems to start and end with the QB.
I think someone said this before, but I'd love to see a team experiment with drafting nothing but QBs (meaning all rounds) until they hit on one. There are some obvious problems with the training camp roster limits, guaranteed money due to some draft picks, the GM and coach actually keeping their jobs and QBs that may need actual game reps to develop/fail and whatnot. But if these teams won't win until they get passable QB play, then why not do it?
OK, I had heard something about them being tight fisted. I know somebody died not that long ago, so maybe there's been a change on that front, it they're still not an ownership group that inspires any confidence.Dgilpin said:
( . ) ( . ) and (_!_) said:
Well if you have 80 million dollars to spend you can presumably bring in some pretty good talent even if your QB is subpar.
I live in suburban Detroit and I can guarantee you that if the Lions ever won the Super Bowl, this entire region would go utterly batshiat crazy. They are dying for a winner and it looks like they will continue to do so with the hiring of Jim Caldwell.
Here is how he did this year according to ESPN: Under Caldwell this season, the Ravens were 29th in total offense (307.4 yards a game) and 25th in scoring (20 points a game). Quarterback Joe Flacco, who Caldwell was brought in to mentor, threw more interceptions (22) than touchdowns (19) this season.
Holy crap that is a bad line on your resume, there Jimbo. The complaint about the Ford family has long been that they are committed to mediocrity because the Lions will still sell out. Hard to argue against that thinking with this hire.
Here is how he did this year according to ESPN: Under Caldwell this season, the Ravens were 29th in total offense (307.4 yards a game) and 25th in scoring (20 points a game). Quarterback Joe Flacco, who Caldwell was brought in to mentor, threw more interceptions (22) than touchdowns (19) this season.
Holy crap that is a bad line on your resume, there Jimbo. The complaint about the Ford family has long been that they are committed to mediocrity because the Lions will still sell out. Hard to argue against that thinking with this hire.
Dgilpin said:
It's sad, particularly because they clearly mean well and are not the kind of prick owners you find in Dallas and DC.
The back story on Millen, per SI.
Year 1:
Ford Senior: Please be our GM Matt.
Matt: No, I'm not qualified.
Ford Senior: You're smart; you'll figure it out.
Matt: No, I need to pass.
Year 2:
Ford Senior: Please be our GM Matt?
Matt: Okay
Matt blows a few drafts, makes poor coaching hires, and the gets clipped only when Ford Jr.'s head explodes.
The discipline thing has been overstated with the Lions, supposedly that was one of Caldwell's strength was he ran a tight ship. The biggest thing end of last year and all of this season was an attention to detail/execution and poor game planning. Towards the second half of this season stuff started to come out about the babying of Stafford by the coaching staff and how Schwartz seemed to slack off after experiencing some success in 2011. I just don't see Caldwell as either a guy who develop a QB or be an innovative offensive game planner.
( . ) ( . ) and (_!_) said:
Another problem with this strategy is the incredibly low likelihood of QBs drafted after the 1st round being any good. The last couple years have been pretty freakish in this respect as we've had Kaepernick in the 2nd round and Wilson and Foles in the 3rd. But take a look at the last ten years and count the number of franchise QBs that have been acquired after Round 1.
I can see a strategy of taking a QB with your first rounder and starting them basically every year until you really like a guy.
I'd be an every other year guy. Every QB gets two years to make a show and if you're not in love with a guy you draft his replacement. I think players do get better from year one to year two but if you're not seeing potential excellence 30 starts and 2 years into somebody's career I don't like you odds of ever seeing it.Morgan's Magic Snowplow said:
Well considering that head coaches fired by the Lions never get hired as head coaches again it is fitting this might be his last hurrah.MarcSullivaFan said:
But honestly other than Whisenhunt what other good options were out there to shape a talented, undisciplined group of players into a honest good team quickly?
Another thought on Caldwell (just read this somewhere): if he was considered a good guy, good coach, good offensive coach, good QB mentor, yadda yadda... then why didn't Indy stick with him when they were going to draft Luck #1? Clearly everyone knew they were tanking in 2011 so you can't really "blame" him for their 2-14 record. That was more on the GM anyway.
Morgan's Magic Snowplow said:
Maybe a subject for another thread, but I'm interested. Here's where the top 30 QBs (by passing yards) were drafted:
1st round: 17
2nd round: 5
3rd round: 5
4th round:
5th round:
6th round: 1
7th round: 1
undrafted: 1
Most QBs were taken in the 1st round, but there is QB value to be found in rounds 2 and 3, even if it is more difficult to spot.
Morgan's Magic Snowplow said:
You obviously want a future Hall of Fame QB, but if you're not blessed with that, you can do quite nicely with a middling QB who is paid modestly. Joe Flacco won a Super Bowl, Andy Dalton has made the playoffs three straight years, etc. Among the teams looking for head coaches, Tampa Bay (Glennon) and Houston (#1 pick) seem to be best positioned to follow this model; Cleveland (Hoyer) might be able to pull it off also.
The things that kill you are execrable QB play, and paying a middling QB like a Hall of Famer. The Ravens and Lions are going to be in a world of hurt in a year or two when Flacco and Stafford start chewing up big chunks of cap space. (Those deals were designed to be cap-friendly for a couple years, but their teams will have to endure a couple years of painfully large cap hits before they can cut them without unacceptable pain.)
And "1st round" should really be broken up. I assume you're talking 2013 #s - 7 of those first-rounders were #1 overall picks, 3 more were top 4, and 4 more were top 16. It looks like after the first round is a crapshoot, but it's even steeper than that: if you're not drafting a QB in the top 5 or so, you might as well wait until the 2nd or 3rd round.Euclis20 said:
maufman said:
I agree in general. I just think that finding a "middling" QB as good as Flacco or Dalton after the first round is actually pretty difficult.
Super Nomario said:
Agree with this as well.
There's a certain logic to just throwing shit against the wall until something sticks but the problem is that the pool of available QB talent truly is mainly shit and you could easily go through a ton of QB selections before finding a guy that is just a league-average starter for the position, let alone a true difference maker.
Somebody has changed Caldwell's wikipedia page to already add an 0-16 at Detroit as his 2014 head coaching record.
Morgan's Magic Snowplow said:
Agree 100%. The fact that the Bucs already stumbled onto Glennon gives them a big leg up on other rebuilding teams.
And I think we'll see a bunch of teams trying your "wait until the 2nd or 3rd round" strategy this year -- the lessons of Ponder, Gabbert and Tannehill will not be lost on anyone. I wouldn't be surprised if Bridgewater, Bortles and Manziel fly off the board in the first four picks (with Clowney going somewhere in there also), then no more QBs are taken for the rest of the first round.
A major flaw in people's thinking about the draft is that the draft is like a GM dealership and you can pick up a player of a certain perceived quality (1st/2nd/3rd, for example) in a particular round just like you can chose between a Cadillac, a Buick or a Chevy. Sometimes the QB class is Bradford/Tebow/McCoy/Skelton/Clausen so you're just fucked no matter who you take if you don't have the first pick.Morgan's Magic Snowplow said:
Morgan's Magic Snowplow said:
Let me deepen the frolic-and-detour.
What strategy would you guys adopt for teams like Denver and NE going forward? Forget about "replacement" or anything resembling it; you just want to be good enough to be relevant. Are you drafting a QB every year at some point in the draft?
Well depends on what happens with Mallet. I believe he is a FA after next year. So I would consider spending a mid round pick on a QB if you plan on letting Mallett walk / test the market. If you're planning on extending Mallet, then no need to draft one until Brady is closer to retirement, IMO.
Not necessarily every year, but if I saw a QB I liked and wasnt close to 100% sold on the QB's on my roster Id be taking him and letting them fight it out for the chance to play. I wouldnt hesitate to keep 4 QBs on my roster until I found a guy I was comfortable with as a starter.
If I saw a guy I liked in the 1st round and was high on another guy in the 2nd round, I wouldnt hesitate to draft both of them.
We had a bad season because we had too many good quarterbacks said no NFL team ever.
EDIT: If you are talking about trying to find a replacement NOW when Brady and Manning are still playing, that's trickier because you dont want to waste resources that wont help you win when you have a HOF QB. Until then, you need a capable backup and probably are using mid/late round flyers until you think the end is within a year or two and you see someone you absolutely love.
If I saw a guy I liked in the 1st round and was high on another guy in the 2nd round, I wouldnt hesitate to draft both of them.
We had a bad season because we had too many good quarterbacks said no NFL team ever.
EDIT: If you are talking about trying to find a replacement NOW when Brady and Manning are still playing, that's trickier because you dont want to waste resources that wont help you win when you have a HOF QB. Until then, you need a capable backup and probably are using mid/late round flyers until you think the end is within a year or two and you see someone you absolutely love.
dcmissle said:
Maybe not every year, but perhaps every other year, or possibly every third year if you think you've got something with the last guy you picked. The Patriots have drafted a QB 6 times(02, 03, 05, 08, 10, 11) since Brady became the starter. That strategy paid off when he went down and they managed a winning record and were able to flip Cassel and Vrabel for Chung. It could pay off again if Mallett is forced into action and succeeds or a team is willing to give something up for him. I think franchises are better off continually developing QBs instead of having a veteran backup. You can draft a QB that fits your system, and have him sit behind your starter for a while.
Morgan's Magic Snowplow said:
It isn't just Flacco or Dalton, there are a bunch of decent to great QBs who are available with picks 6-32. Aside from Flacco/Dalton, this group includes Tannehill (8th pick), Cutler (11th pick), Roethlisberger (11th pick), Rodgers (24th pick), and Campbell (25th pick).
Euclis20 said:
Yeah, most of those guys were picked in the first half of the first round, which is my point.
dcmissle said:
I'd like to see them draft a QB this year in rounds 4-6 if they like a guy's potential. As Brady really nears the end, I think it makes sense to invest more draft resources. But given that rookie contracts (at least after the first round) are only four years, it doesn't make that much sense to me to spend a 2nd or 3rd rounder finding his successor right now when that guy might just be a backup his whole time here or we might only get one year of pre-FA production (and pricing) out of him. Assuming you can't get a truly elite QB, the next best thing is a pretty good one on a rookie contract and if you know he's going to sit the bench for 2-3 years then the upside of taking guys is limited in that respect. A guy might start one year, look pretty decent, and then you might have to pay him 8-10M a season to keep him.
Euclis20 said:
13 QBs have been picked between 16 and 32 since 2000: Boller, Campbell, Flacco, Freeman, Grossman, Losman, EJ Manuel, Pennington, Brady Quinn, Patrick Ramsay, Rodgers, Tebow, Weeden.
How many of those guys can you live with at QB? Rodgers, Flacco, maybe Campbell/Freeman/Pennington with a perfect set-up, and maybe, maybe Manuel? At best you're under a 50% of picking up a league average player and you have maybe a 20% chance of getting a better than league average player.
Pennington was way better than those other two, especially before he destroyed his shoulder. But no argument otherwise.
Morgan's Magic Snowplow said:
Not only that, but Cutler, Tannehill, and Roethlisberger were only available where they were because those were (at least as perceived at the time, for 2006) relatively strong QB drafts. Each was the third QB picked: Cutler went after Leinart and Young, Tannehill followed Luck and Griffin, and Roethlisberger followed Eli and Rivers. In a weaker year all three of those guys might have gone in the Top 5. If your pick is in the 8-16 range you really have to hope it's a deep year to get a good QB.
A former coworker that's a Lions fan made this his Facebook status today:
Q: What's the difference between the Detroit Lions and a tire fire? A: None that I can see.
Q: What's the difference between the Detroit Lions and a tire fire? A: None that I can see.
Here's a list of QBs drafted in round 2 or 3 in the past 10 drafts (2004-13).
John Beck
Brian Brohm
Jimmy Clausen
Kellen Clemens
Brodie Croyle
Andy Dalton
Trent Edwards
Nick Foles
Charlie Frye
Mike Glennon
David Greene
Chad Henne
Tarvaris Jackson
Colin Kaepernick
Kevin Kolb
Ryan Mallett
Colt McCoy
Kevin O'Connell
Brock Osweiler
Matt Schaub
Geno Smith
Drew Stanton
Andrew Walter
Pat White
Charlie Whitehurst
Russell Wilson
QBs who have started a playoff game are listed in bold. I'm not saying that's the best criterion, but I can do it from memory and don't have time to look up 26 PFR pages.
The $64,000 question, obviously, is whether the higher success rate in the past few years is an SSS anomaly or reflects a fundamental change.
You have to go back to 2005 to find QBs drafted in round 4 or later who had significant NFL careers -- Kyle Orton, Matt Cassel and Ryan Fitzpatrick went in the late rounds that year. In the years since, you're looking at Matt Flynn and a handful of guys who made spot starts. The odds of getting a quality QB in the late rounds have never been good, but they've gotten a lot worse since the Pats stole Brady in the 6th round.
I think the declining hit rate in the late rounds suggests that the recent uptick in 2nd and 3rd rounders having good careers is a SSS anomaly, but ymmv.
John Beck
Brian Brohm
Jimmy Clausen
Kellen Clemens
Brodie Croyle
Andy Dalton
Trent Edwards
Nick Foles
Charlie Frye
Mike Glennon
David Greene
Chad Henne
Tarvaris Jackson
Colin Kaepernick
Kevin Kolb
Ryan Mallett
Colt McCoy
Kevin O'Connell
Brock Osweiler
Matt Schaub
Geno Smith
Drew Stanton
Andrew Walter
Pat White
Charlie Whitehurst
Russell Wilson
QBs who have started a playoff game are listed in bold. I'm not saying that's the best criterion, but I can do it from memory and don't have time to look up 26 PFR pages.
The $64,000 question, obviously, is whether the higher success rate in the past few years is an SSS anomaly or reflects a fundamental change.
You have to go back to 2005 to find QBs drafted in round 4 or later who had significant NFL careers -- Kyle Orton, Matt Cassel and Ryan Fitzpatrick went in the late rounds that year. In the years since, you're looking at Matt Flynn and a handful of guys who made spot starts. The odds of getting a quality QB in the late rounds have never been good, but they've gotten a lot worse since the Pats stole Brady in the 6th round.
I think the declining hit rate in the late rounds suggests that the recent uptick in 2nd and 3rd rounders having good careers is a SSS anomaly, but ymmv.
Also when it comes to picking a QB in the top 5, the penalty for whiffing isn't nearly as bad under the new CBA. Russell buried the Raiders, Sanchez with the Jets etc. Now you can afford to pick a new QB every other year or so without crippling your cap.
Morning Woodhead said:
It depends on the opportunity cost. The financial hurt of the Russell pick would be less under the current rules, but passing on Megatron (who went 2nd overall) would sting as much as ever.
Shelterdog said:
In a vacuum, that doesn't mean much. Over that same time span, 24 QBs were taken between 1 and 15: Andrew Luck, Robert Griffin, Ryan Tannehill, Cam Newton, Jake Locker, Blaine Gabbert, Christian Ponder, Sam Bradford, Matt Stafford, Mark Sanchez, Matt Ryan, Jamarcus Russell, Vince Young, Matt Lienart, Jay Cutler, Alex Smith, Eli Manning, Philip Rivers, Ben Roethlisberger, Carson Palmer, Byron Leftwich, David Carr, Joey Harrington, and Michael Vick.
How many of those guys can you live with at QB? Around half? Depends on how Stafford/Bradford/Tannehill end up in the next few years..there are a whole lot of misses in the 1st half of the draft.
My original point was that good QBs DO exist outside the very top of the draft. Looking at the 2013 top 15 passers, this time by DYAR:
Peyton Manning, Philip Rivers, Drew Brees, Matt Ryan, Nick Foles, Tom Brady, Tony Romo, Colin Kaepernick, Russell Wilson, Aaron Rodgers, Ben Roethlisberger, Matt Stafford, Josh McCown, Andrew Luck, Carson Palmer. 7 of those players were taken in the top half of the 1st round, 1 was taken in the bottom half of the 1st round, 2 were taken in the 2nd round, 3 were taken in the 3rd round, and 2 were taken later. Half of the good QBs in the league were drafted outside the top 16.
Nobody is arguing with that.Euclis20 said:
The point is that the probability of landing a good QB via any given area of the draft (or outside the draft) is what matters, not the mere existence of good QBs taken in later rounds. The whole conversation has been about probability, starting with the assertion that it would be a good strategy to use all your draft picks on QBs to my point about the low probability of landing a decent QB outside the first round, to Nomario's point about probability actually dropping off after the top half of the first round, even to your latest point about there being only a roughly 50% QB success rate near the top of the draft.
maufman said:
The biggest change I can personally see is that coaches are now willing to incorporate more of the collegiate offenses their QB's are used to. That makes the transition a hell of a lot easier for the rookies. It also suggest a flatter development curve than QB's of previous eras, though.
I think it's also that, while there has been a transition to at least elements of "collegiate offenses," there has also been resistance. Guys taken a bit later who have had success -- specifically Russell Wilson or Colin Kaep -- slipped because they were in some sense "non-traditional" due to size and/or the sorts of offenses they ran. The anomaly might be that they slipped during a period of transition in terms of perception of what makes for a successful NFL QB -- that would explain both why they were drafted lower than they now would be but also why they were at least given an opportunity when guys in their mold may not have been previously. Everything I see has Manziel as a 1st rounder, even a very high 1st rounder, but I suspect that wouldn't have been the case just a couple of years ago before Wilson succeeded.
Now a more traditional QB type like Foles also slipped and succeeded, so it's not say that's the only thing that explains non-1st rounder success is this transitional period. But it probably has something to do with what seems like an oddly high number of guys making in the last couple of years who weren't 1st rounders.
Be interesting to see how Geno Smith or Brock Osweiler (on whom the Broncos are supposedly high) will pan out, in re 2nd rounders who are more traditional stand and deliver guys.
Now a more traditional QB type like Foles also slipped and succeeded, so it's not say that's the only thing that explains non-1st rounder success is this transitional period. But it probably has something to do with what seems like an oddly high number of guys making in the last couple of years who weren't 1st rounders.
Be interesting to see how Geno Smith or Brock Osweiler (on whom the Broncos are supposedly high) will pan out, in re 2nd rounders who are more traditional stand and deliver guys.
Morgan's Magic Snowplow said:
In that case, I'll quit digging myself deeper.
Here are the guys who were drafted in rounds 4-7 (I cannot find a reliable list of all undrafted QBs), and made 50+ starts (by decade):
2000s: David Garrard, Kyle Orton, Tom Brady, Marc Bulger, Derek Anderson, Matt Cassell, Ryan Fitzpatrick (7 players)
1990s: Scott Mitchell, Aaron Brooks, Mark Brunell, Jeff Blake, Gus Frerotte (4 players)
1980s: Rich Gannon, Steve Beuerlein, Mike Pagel, Eric Hipple, Rodney Peete, Mark Rypien, Stan Humphries, (7 players)
1970s: Joe Theismann, Vince Ferragamo, Steve Grogan, Bob Avellini, Pat Haden (5 players)
I don't think the odds have gotten much worse of finding a QB capable of starting for a few years, but I can't say for sure without a comprehensive list of all undrafted players (I purposely excluded players drafted after round 7, assuming they would be undrafted today).