Coaching Carousel (Football)

Status
Not open for further replies.
#76      
the juiceman cometh
Yost said:
Stefanski’s a better hire than Freddie Kitchens or Hue Jackson, neither of whom is in the NFL, but that’s a low bar.

The number of openings is small, but so is the number of qualified candidates. Until recently, almost all new head coaches were NFL coordinators. There are definitely coaches who are willing to take a gig with a terrible organization just because a head coach, but it’s pretty clear that not all coaches are that way. Ben Johnson wasn’t going to just take a job to be a HC.

Good luck to the Browns, but if an organization with a history of poor management is doing something no one else is, it’s ok to question it.
Click to expand...
Of course questioning it is fine, but you're trying to saddle this process with their whole history now when they only used it for the Stefanski hire. The rest of that history they hired guys the way any other team does. In that 2020 cycle, these were the 5 new head coaches hired:

Mike McCarthy - Dallas - 49-35 (.583)
Kevin Stefanski - Cleveland - 45-56 (.446)
Ron Rivera - Washington - 26-40-1 (.396)
Joe Judge - NY Giants - 10-23 (.303)
Matt Rhule - Carolina - 11-27 (.289)

So with 5 competing jobs, and arguably the worst draw among them, this process brought the Browns indisputably the 2nd best hire in the group. Not a home run, but I would say relatively, that's a success.
 
#77      
Grandpa
HE MISSED IT! BALL HIT THE BACK OF THE RIM AND FLEW ALL THE WAY TO HALF COURT!
 
#78      
Mr. Tibbs
do we know who also interviewed for that job in that cycle and either took themselves out or were eliminated by the process ?
 
#79      
hooraybeer
monken to the browns. wonder what NS next move is… monken was expected to be the OC under harbaugh with the giants, which imo would be an awesome spot for NS to land with dart, nabers, skat etc
 
Last edited:
#80      
Mr. Tibbs
hooraybeer said:
monken to the browns. wonder what NS next move is
Click to expand...
Monken finally getting the call . tough place to start .

NS not in consideration at Az ?
if not, there will be anywhere from 4-8 openings at HC next NFL cycle
 
#81      
ChiefGritty
illini0440 said:
Idk. Hindsight is always 20/20 but Fickell was a slam dunk at the time.
Click to expand...
As soon as he hired Phil Longo as OC (which I assume was the plan all along in terms of a transition to a spread tempo offense) it was very obvious to me that they had made the same mistake Nebraska did with Bill Callahan all those years ago, they failed to understand that the success they had achieved was built on a specific methodology and approach that made them different from other programs.

We know that method still works because Bret Bielema has kept on succeeding with it at Illinois.

And like with Nebraska, once you turn away from it, it's very difficult to get back. There's a roster transition of course, different types of linemen and skill players to play different styles, but it's bigger than that, it's philosophical and a sense of continuity that you just shatter when you say "that's not modern football, we need to radically change".

Luke Fickell was an excellent coaching prospect at that time and may yet go on to great success, perhaps even still at Wisconsin, crazier things have happened. But the plan he arrived in Madison with was a doomed fit, and too few people were saying that at the time, showing how coaching carousel chatter is much too oriented around getting the biggest name and making the biggest splash.
 
Last edited:
#82      
mhuml32
ChiefGritty said:
As soon as he hired Phil Longo as OC (which I assume was the plan all along in terms of a transition to a spread tempo offense) it was very obvious to me that they had made the same mistake Nebraska did with Bill Callahan all those years ago, they failed to understand that the success they had achieved was built on a specific methodology and approach that made them different from other programs.
Click to expand...


I get the allure. Wisconsin had realized they had reached their ceiling and their methodology wouldn't make them a national title contender. When you win 9-10 games every year, it's exciting!.......but you want to reach that next level and it's not possible with just a really good offensive line, stout defense, and a lack of skill position difference makers. So you decide to tear everything down to the studs and take the approach that the other national title contenders have taken to become one of them! Only to find out that you lost your soul in the process.
 
#83      
ChiefGritty
As long as we're on the subject of hires of terrific coaches who deserve their positive reputations but that reputation is causing coaching carousel analysts to ignore the reality that they make absolutely no sense for their current job and are a terrible fit with high probability of disaster: Kyle Whittingham.
 
#84      
Yost
the juiceman cometh said:
Of course questioning it is fine, but you're trying to saddle this process with their whole history now when they only used it for the Stefanski hire. The rest of that history they hired guys the way any other team does. In that 2020 cycle, these were the 5 new head coaches hired:

Mike McCarthy - Dallas - 49-35 (.583)
Kevin Stefanski - Cleveland - 45-56 (.446)
Ron Rivera - Washington - 26-40-1 (.396)
Joe Judge - NY Giants - 10-23 (.303)
Matt Rhule - Carolina - 11-27 (.289)

So with 5 competing jobs, and arguably the worst draw among them, this process brought the Browns indisputably the 2nd best hire in the group. Not a home run, but I would say relatively, that's a success.
Click to expand...
I think you've ignored the only point I--offhandedly--tried to make, which is that a bad organization is going to limit its pool of candidates if its hiring process is much more onerous than any of its competitors. The articles I've read seem to suggest that that is exactly what's happened.

Your response is that the only thing additional requirements will do is get rid of lazy candidates. Your evidence for that statement is, I guess, that this process resulted in hiring a coach with a sub-.500 record and 1 playoff win.

What you call lazy, I call discernment. People with options don't always feel the need to jump through extra hoops for sub-optimal jobs.

Edited to add: From what I read in an article about the Browns's process, Mike McDaniel pulled himself out of contention for the Browns job while continuing to interview elsewhere. It makes sense to me that the 42 y/o coach who's well-respected chose not to do unnecessary work when he had other options. It also makes sense that 59 y/o Todd Monken, whose only head coaching gig is at FBS powerhouse Southern Miss, would stay in the process.
 
Last edited:
#85      
gary?
ChiefGritty said:
As long as we're on the subject of hires of terrific coaches who deserve their positive reputations but that reputation is causing coaching carousel analysts to ignore the reality that they make absolutely no sense for their current job and are a terrible fit with high probability of disaster: Kyle Whittingham.
Click to expand...

really? i don't follow other teams that closely, especially not utah, but from what little i've read it sounds like he runs a b1g style of team out west. i could be completely off as this was gleaned mostly from the knuckleheads at r/cfb
 
#86      
OrangeBlue98
Mr. Tibbs said:
Monken finally getting the call . tough place to start .

NS not in consideration at Az ?
if not, there will be anywhere from 4-8 openings at HC next NFL cycle
Click to expand...
Still think Nate would do well to get a playcalling OC role first. Admittedly, I think those opportunities are rapidly dwindling at the present time. I think he was hurt by the Rams going deep in the playoffs.

Things could still change, though.
 
#87      
the juiceman cometh
Yost said:
I think you've ignored the only point I--offhandedly--tried to make, which is that a bad organization is going to limit its pool of candidates if its hiring process is much more onerous than any of its competitors. The articles I've read seem to suggest that that is exactly what's happened.

Your response is that the only thing additional requirements will do is get rid of lazy candidates. Your evidence for that statement is, I guess, that this process resulted in hiring a coach with a sub-.500 record and 1 playoff win.
Click to expand...
Sure, but, again, look at the other coaches hired by organizations that are so much more appealing to potential candidates. None of them turned out great, and all but one of them turned out MUCH worse than the guy the Browns hired. NYG were arguably the best job that cycle (depending on how negatively you view working for Jerry Jones) and their guy was out after 2 seasons. Given the assignment, Stefanski did a pretty good job. You said it yourself, the Browns are a historically very bad organization!

Yost said:
What you call lazy, I call discernment. People with options don't always feel the need to jump through extra hoops for sub-optimal jobs.
Click to expand...
You act like there are hundreds of NFL head coaching jobs. This year has seen a record number of openings, and that record number is 10. 10 jobs for dozens of candidates. If you're one of the top candidates in the cycle, maybe you get considered by half those jobs. Suddenly, it's not starting to look like you're a "person with options" as much anymore, at least if your burning desire is to be a HC. If you don't care so much, sure, but that raises the question of commitment.

Also, it seems to be you're considering some guy who is at the top of every team's list. How likely is it a candidate that ends up getting offers from multiple teams is going to choose the Browns anyway? I think part of the ting here is that the Browns are never going to get the top available guy, so they are trying something they hope allows them to find the diamond in the rough - be it a long time coach whose been looked over (Monken) or a young up-and-comer who others maybe think is still a few years away (Nate).

Yost said:
Edited to add: From what I read in an article about the Browns's process, Mike McDaniel pulled himself out of contention for the Browns job while continuing to interview elsewhere. It makes sense to me that the 42 y/o coach who's well-respected chose not to do unnecessary work when he had other options. It also makes sense that 59 y/o Todd Monken, whose only head coaching gig is at FBS powerhouse Southern Miss, would stay in the process.
Click to expand...
And he ended up with an OC job instead of a HC job. Which is fine. But it makes you wonder how badly he actually wanted to be a HC.

Also, Nate stayed in the process to the very end, while also interviewing elsewhere. What does that tell you? I think it tells you he values every opportunity and isn't going to be dissuaded by a little extra work. Which, by the way, is going to be a defining feature of a job like HC of the Cleveland Browns.
 
#88      
Mr. Tibbs
Yost said:
I think you've ignored the only point I--offhandedly--tried to make, which is that a bad organization is going to limit its pool of candidates if its hiring process is much more onerous than any of its competitors. The articles I've read seem to suggest that that is exactly what's happened.

Your response is that the only thing additional requirements will do is get rid of lazy candidates. Your evidence for that statement is, I guess, that this process resulted in hiring a coach with a sub-.500 record and 1 playoff win.

What you call lazy, I call discernment. People with options don't always feel the need to jump through extra hoops for sub-optimal jobs.

Edited to add: From what I read in an article about the Browns's process, Mike McDaniel pulled himself out of contention for the Browns job while continuing to interview elsewhere. It makes sense to me that the 42 y/o coach who's well-respected chose not to do unnecessary work when he had other options. It also makes sense that 59 y/o Todd Monken, whose only head coaching gig is at FBS powerhouse Southern Miss, would stay in the process.
Click to expand...
I would guesstimate that quite a few ex HC’s said no thanks to participating in the process .

example
I had pretty good grades in high school and had always dreamed about going to a military Academy. I had talked to some people and while I missed the chance to get in on the early admission process with the political appointment , I pushed forward . I received the application in the mail and no lie, it must have been 50 pages long . After getting thru the first couple pages I realized there was nfw I was going to finish , much less answer the questions / essays in any way that was going to impress anyone besides my aunt or grandma.

I refocused on the UI application & went all in on that alone . applied nowhere else .Got accepted in December & accepted in return . I didnt take my first campus visit until April .
 
#89      
Yost
the juiceman cometh said:
Sure, but, again, look at the other coaches hired by organizations that are so much more appealing to potential candidates. None of them turned out great, and all but one of them turned out MUCH worse than the guy the Browns hired. NYG were arguably the best job that cycle (depending on how negatively you view working for Jerry Jones) and their guy was out after 2 seasons. Given the assignment, Stefanski did a pretty good job. You said it yourself, the Browns are a historically very bad organization!


You act like there are hundreds of NFL head coaching jobs. This year has seen a record number of openings, and that record number is 10. 10 jobs for dozens of candidates. If you're one of the top candidates in the cycle, maybe you get considered by half those jobs. Suddenly, it's not starting to look like you're a "person with options" as much anymore, at least if your burning desire is to be a HC. If you don't care so much, sure, but that raises the question of commitment.

Also, it seems to be you're considering some guy who is at the top of every team's list. How likely is it a candidate that ends up getting offers from multiple teams is going to choose the Browns anyway? I think part of the ting here is that the Browns are never going to get the top available guy, so they are trying something they hope allows them to find the diamond in the rough - be it a long time coach whose been looked over (Monken) or a young up-and-comer who others maybe think is still a few years away (Nate).


And he ended up with an OC job instead of a HC job. Which is fine. But it makes you wonder how badly he actually wanted to be a HC.

Also, Nate stayed in the process to the very end, while also interviewing elsewhere. What does that tell you? I think it tells you he values every opportunity and isn't going to be dissuaded by a little extra work. Which, by the way, is going to be a defining feature of a job like HC of the Cleveland Browns.
Click to expand...
You're treating every opportunity for HC equally, but they're not. Some people--like Nate--may want to apply for everything. Other people--like Ben Johnson or Mike McDaniel do not. I don't see how that latter group of people are lazy for not wanting to deal with a "little extra work" for a job they value lower than other open jobs.

My perspective on this is that for senior-level roles in niche fields, personality tests and fake work assignments are stupid. They appeal to management consultants and NFL GMs cosplaying as management consultants, but I think their main value is to allow organizations to minimize accountability when a hire doesn't work out.
 
#90      
ptgrd23
Todd Monken
3 years HC at Southern Miss 13-25 record
NFL OC at Tampa 1 year, Cleveland 1 year, Baltimore 2 years

Must be really good at writing essays and taking personality tests because the resume is not there for NFL HC

Typical Cleveland hire -

Shamur OC 9-23
Chudzinksi OC 4-12
Pettine DC 10-22
Jackson OC 3-36
Kitchens OC 6-10
Stefanski OC 45-56

See a trend- they are cheap and only hire coordinators
 
#91      
jamarvelous31
the juiceman cometh said:
Or to weed out candidates who are not willing to put in work.

Head coach in the NFL or even in college is not like normal jobs. This job calls for workaholics. If some essays and hypotheticals put you off the job, I'd be concerned about how willing you'd be to do what it takes on a day-to-day basis.
Click to expand...
I'd also say that if these guys can't find someone to ghost write it (or use AI) then they aren't showing the resourcefulness necessary for the role.
 
#92      
and 69 others
If a person does not want to be the Cleveland Browns head coach enough to fill out some paperwork, why would the Browns want that person? If someone says, “Screw the Browns, I’m not completing the test, I’ll go somewhere else” then good riddance and thank goodness we found out now. The Browns want someone who wants to be the Browns coach. And with all due respect, I would guess you maybe weren’t suited for a military academy if you didn’t want to complete the app. Like me, you were probably better suited for UI.

P.s., Ever since how they rewarded Watson in light of what he (allegedly) did, I hate the Browns and want them to lose every game.
 
#93      
illini0440
ptgrd23 said:
Todd Monken
3 years HC at Southern Miss 13-25 record
NFL OC at Tampa 1 year, Cleveland 1 year, Baltimore 2 years

Must be really good at writing essays and taking personality tests because the resume is not there for NFL HC

Typical Cleveland hire -

Shamur OC 9-23
Chudzinksi OC 4-12
Pettine DC 10-22
Jackson OC 3-36
Kitchens OC 6-10
Stefanski OC 45-56

See a trend- they are cheap and only hire coordinators
Click to expand...
A very lazy report on his resume, been a passing game coordinator twice, was OC at Tampa for 2 years not 1, OC at Georgia for 2 years, won two national titles. A highly respected offensive coach.
 
#94      
the juiceman cometh
Yost said:
You're treating every opportunity for HC equally, but they're not. Some people--like Nate--may want to apply for everything. Other people--like Ben Johnson or Mike McDaniel do not. I don't see how that latter group of people are lazy for not wanting to deal with a "little extra work" for a job they value lower than other open jobs.
Click to expand...
But that's my point. Ben Johnson and Mike McDaniel don't want the job anyway. Ben Johnson probably doesn't go to Cleveland even if they offer him the job without an interview or any process, and McDaniel would apparently either rather be an OC than a HC at Cleveland, or would take it but isn't willing to put in what, maybe ten extra hours? For a job that sometimes has you working 100 hour weeks? So what's the point in constructing a hiring process aimed at getting them to interview and ultimately reject you?

Also, the Browns process is unique to pro sports, but it's similar to the way some major companies like Google, Meta, McKinsey, Bain, and NVIDIA hire. A lot of those companies are way more intense than the Browns (imagine 7, 8 rounds of interviews).
 
#97      
ptgrd23
OC for some bad NFL teams
Tampa 5-11 HC retained
Tampa 5-11 HC fired
Cleveland 6-10 HC fired
Baltimore 8-9 HC fired

Chip Kelly was OC at Ohio State when they won national championship in 2024. Would you hire him as your NFL head coach?

A lousy hire by Cleveland - just like their last 6 hires (ex OCs). That why Cleveland is laughing stock of AFC North and have not won it since 1989 (36 years)
 
#98      
Mr. Tibbs
Yost said:
You're treating every opportunity for HC equally, but they're not. Some people--like Nate--may want to apply for everything. Other people--like Ben Johnson or Mike McDaniel do not. I don't see how that latter group of people are lazy for not wanting to deal with a "little extra work" for a job they value lower than other open jobs.

My perspective on this is that for senior-level roles in niche fields, personality tests and fake work assignments are stupid. They appeal to management consultants and NFL GMs cosplaying as management consultants, but I think their main value is to allow organizations to minimize accountability when a hire doesn't work out.
Click to expand...
agree 💯

like any college AD, you need to have a 3-5 man short list on hand at all times .

If you fire a coach not knowing who you want , you’re a fool .

If none of your top 3 or so are interested you are a bigger fool .

all this other interview & essay crap is just bs put forward by McKinsey or Heidrick & Struggles to cover a$$es. it means NOTHING in running a football team .

If Browns mgmt was responsible to shareholders like any Apple or Nvdia is , it’s one thing . but they aren’t . they are only responsible to the owner .
 
#99      
Bucktown
Mr. Tibbs said:
I would guesstimate that quite a few ex HC’s said no thanks to participating in the process .

example
I had pretty good grades in high school and had always dreamed about going to a military Academy. I had talked to some people and while I missed the chance to get in on the early admission process with the political appointment , I pushed forward . I received the application in the mail and no lie, it must have been 50 pages long . After getting thru the first couple pages I realized there was nfw I was going to finish , much less answer the questions / essays in any way that was going to impress anyone besides my aunt or grandma.

I refocused on the UI application & went all in on that alone . applied nowhere else .Got accepted in December & accepted in return . I didnt take my first campus visit until April .
Click to expand...
When I applied in the mid-1980's, the Illinois application was a one page Scantron. There was a chart with GPA, ACT and class rank. If you were above the line you were in!
 
#100      
Mr. Tibbs
yup. it was pretty easy in 1978. I pretty much knew I’d get in

my earlier commentary re West Point was not to diminish their process . I clearly was not up to those expectations. My point was to indicate how some people take themselves out of consideration just because the process itself is either bs or “intimidating “ .
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back