For those who want new blood at HC...

[chiefzilla1501]

For that matter, for those who are so against the idea of a retread, realize the following:

In the last 10 Super Bowls, there have been 20 coaches:
-14 (70%) of those coaches had 5 years of experience or GREATER
-10 (50%) of those coaches were on their second team

Of the 6 coaches with less than 5 years experience?
-Martz, Fassel, Callahan, Billick, Shanahan, Lovie Smith
-4 of those coaches (Martz, Fassel, Callahan, Shanahan) are believed to have taken BORROWED talent into the Super Bowl
-Of those coaches, only the last 3 were ever considered good long-term options
-Oh by the way, this was Shanahan's SECOND stint as a coach


So new blood is great. But history shows otherwise. New blood does not get teams to the Super Bowl, EXPERIENCE does. And those numbers above are overwhelming evidence.

New blood seems to only matter if the new coach comes in with ridiculously talented players. Obviously, the Chiefs do NOT have that.

[DaneMcCloud]

You're a boring old cunt, aren't you?

I don't mean that in a negative way.

Just a boring way.

Like fucking the same chick for 60 years or so.

[Ultra Peanut]

I like how you count Belichick as a different coach each time.

[SPATCH]

You're a boring old ****, aren't you?

I don't mean that in a negative way.

Just a boring way.

Like ****ing the same chick for 60 years or so.

SoCal Dane... just SoCal'n up right now..

[chiefzilla1501]

I like how you count Belichick as a different coach each time.

If you count Bellichick once, it means that 11/17 coaches in the last 10 Super Bowls had 5+ years of experience (64%). Not much changes.

[Ultra Peanut]

Holy shit, here's another stat:

0% of people who currently lack head coaching experience have won a Super Bowl as head coach in the last ten years!

EXPERIENCE EXPERIENCE EXPERIENCE

[orange]

Anyone who thinks Shanahan went to the Super Bowl on "borrowed talent" is too much of an idiot to merit any more response.

[kcxiv]

I dont care if its new blood or not. I just want someone who can take us to the promise land. Sometimes coaches in their first stint do something wrong, but look back and see where they could have corrected things and learn from that experience. Just like anything else. As time goes on you learn from your mistakes.

I am pretty much ok with most candidates they will bring in whoever that is. IN the end its not my choice anyways. I try not to get to upset or happy about it.

I was like that with Herm, i was like ok, not thrilled, but lets see what he has. Well, he didnt have shit, but him being the coach of the team i like, i will willing to be open minded. Regardless of who it is, i want them to suceed.

[chiefzilla1501]

Holy shit, here's another stat:

0% of people who currently lack head coaching experience have won a Super Bowl as head coach in the last ten years!

EXPERIENCE EXPERIENCE EXPERIENCE

It means that guys like Del Rio and Payton and Mangini come in every year as this new exciting face, and yet it's the boring retreads like Coughlin and Holmgren and Bellichick getting to the Super Bowl year in and year out.

I don't mind going with new blood, but people act like it's the only way and history has shown that they don't fare well. Feel free to ignore the stats I showed you which are more than compelling.

Unless... your suggestion is to hire a new head coach and wait on him for 5 years.

[Ultra Peanut]

Feel free to ignore the stats I showed you which are more than compelling. Not particularly.

[DaneMcCloud]

It means that guys like Del Rio and Payton and Mangini come in every year as this new exciting face, and yet it's the boring retreads like Coughlin and Holmgren and Bellichick getting to the Super Bowl year in and year out.

I don't mind going with new blood, but people act like it's the only way and history has shown that they don't fare well. Feel free to ignore the stats I showed you which are more than compelling.

Unless... your suggestion is to hire a new head coach and wait on him for 5 years.

If you think that the Chiefs will hire a new head coach, retread or new, and make the Super Bowl in the next five years, I think you're smokin' crack.

There would have to be an enormous amount of talent fall into their laps as well as just the right schedule and coaching for such a thing to happen.

Especially after nearly a 40 year drought of Super Bowl appearances and more than 15 years after their last playoff win.

Face it: The Chiefs are bereft of talent and it's going to take at least two amazing years to get them back on track.

This is no easy fix.

[007]

If you think that the Chiefs will hire a new head coach, retread or new, and make the Super Bowl in the next five years, I think you're smokin' crack.

There would have to be an enormous amount of talent fall into their laps as well as just the right schedule and coaching for such a thing to happen.

Especially after nearly a 40 year drought of Super Bowl appearances and more than 15 years after their last playoff win.

Face it: The Chiefs are bereft of talent and it's going to take at least two amazing years to get them back on track.

This is no easy fix.
Lets just get in to the playoff mix first. Then improve on that.

Thats not saying I am satisfied with only getting to the playoffs either. Just being realistic. Start small and work your way back.

[DaneMcCloud]

Lets just get in to the playoff mix first. Then improve on that.

No offense Bro, but no thanks.

Build for the Super Bowl and nothing less.

Building for the playoffs puts you in the same exact position as the Chiefs have been in for the past 20 years under Peterson.

The goal is the Super Bowl.

Nothing more, nothing less.

[007]

No offense Bro, but no thanks.

Build for the Super Bowl and nothing less.

Building for the playoffs puts you in the same exact position as the Chiefs have been in for the past 20 years under Peterson.

The goal is the Super Bowl.

Nothing more, nothing less.I'm all about the SB but lets face it, we are not getting there next year. That doesn't mean you are not playing for it though. You have to make the playoffs to get to the SB.

I would be severely disappointed if I found out a GM and HC were not preparing their team for the SB every year.

[DaneMcCloud]

I'm all about the SB but lets face it, we are not getting there next year. That doesn't mean you are not playing for it though. You have to make the playoffs to get to the SB.

I would be severely disappointed if I found out a GM and HC were not preparing their team for the SB every year.

That's all Carl did for 20 years: "Let's make the tournament. Anything can happen.".

Of course, NOTHING happened. That was the problem.

I'm off to bed. Have a great night!

[007]

That's all Carl did for 20 years: "Let's make the tournament. Anything can happen.".

Of course, NOTHING happened. That was the problem.

I'm off to bed. Have a great night!Ultimately you are right. I do hang those losses on the HC at the time though. Marty had his team playing relentless ball during the regular season then handcuffed them in the playoffs. Dick had his team play relentless ball on offense all year but completely ignored the defense. What I would give for a coach that could attack like Dick on O but give a shit about D like Marty.

[J Diddy]

Ultimately you are right. I do hang those losses on the HC at the time though. Marty had his team playing relentless ball during the regular season then handcuffed them in the playoffs. Dick had his team play relentless ball on offense all year but completely ignored the defense. What I would give for a coach that could attack like Dick on O but give a shit about D like Marty.


If only marty could have had a son named Dick schottenheimer.

[SPATCH]

If only marty could have had a son named Dick schottenheimer.

that's stupid... marty vermeil would be way better...

[007]

If only marty could have had a son named Dick schottenheimer.heh. I've already covered this....

http://www.chiefsplanet.com/BB/showpost.php?p=3349930&postcount=16

:D

[chiefzilla1501]

If you think that the Chiefs will hire a new head coach, retread or new, and make the Super Bowl in the next five years, I think you're smokin' crack.

There would have to be an enormous amount of talent fall into their laps as well as just the right schedule and coaching for such a thing to happen.

Especially after nearly a 40 year drought of Super Bowl appearances and more than 15 years after their last playoff win.

Face it: The Chiefs are bereft of talent and it's going to take at least two amazing years to get them back on track.

This is no easy fix.

Dane, I don't think this is a quick fix. I'm with you there. But I also recognize the enormous risk you take on a new coach who has never built or rebuilt a team before. But if you're wrong? You wasted three years and you have to rebuild AGAIN. There is no fear with Cowher. He's built and rebuilt many times over. There are few retreads I support. Cowher is a rare case of a coach way too good to pass up.

Now, I am a huge fan of Spagnola. But I've seen this game played before. I have no idea if he'll field an embarrassing offense as Gregg Williams did. I have no idea if he'll lose a locker room like Wade Phillips did or piss off a locker room like Callahan did. Blast me all you want for being conservative, but while exciting hires like Romeo, Payton, and Man-genius walk in with hype, it's still the vet coaches with experience that are making Super Bowls. I don't want a head coach who will shine for 2 years, then slowly fizzle. The vast majority of head coaches do exactly that (if they shine at all). The bust rate for new head coaches within 3-5 years is ridiculously high. Really, really, really high.

Cowher WILL get the Chiefs to the playoffs. He WILL win playoff games. Because he's done it before. You can't recruit coaches hoping they'll be Bill Walsh. Cowher is no Bill Walsh, but he's better than over 90% of the coaches in the league. And I can guarantee you that over 90% of the new coach hires in the next 5 years won't match up to Cowher either.

If Cowher's off the market, everyone is fair game. But you do NOT pass up a coach like this.

[Rausch]

Anyone who thinks Shanahan went to the Super Bowl on "borrowed talent" is too much of an idiot to merit any more response.

Right, 'cause his repeated super bowls without Elway prove otherwise...

[Rausch]

If you think that the Chiefs will hire a new head coach, retread or new, and make the Super Bowl in the next five years, I think you're smokin' crack.


Do I agree with you?

Yes.

I also don't think it takes a fucking genius and 10 years to build a team.

If a GM/HC doesn't have a team winning playoff games and COMPETING for a SB in 3-4 years they probably won't...

[J Diddy]

heh. I've already covered this....

http://www.chiefsplanet.com/BB/showpost.php?p=3349930&postcount=16

:D


jeebus, please tell me I'm not thinking like you.

[007]

jeebus, please tell me I'm not thinking like you.ROFL Just the previous me from 2 years ago.

[orange]

Right, 'cause his repeated super bowls without Elway prove otherwise...

Terrell Davis. *

P.S. Who was the QB coach/Offensive Coordinator who developed Elway? Do you know?

* Just the tip of the iceberg, but the most important. He also brought in McCaffrey, Neal Smith, dozens more.

Of course, maybe it's all those Super Bowls Dan Reeves and Wade Phillips won with Elway before Shanahan that have you confused.

[lazepoo]

Dane, I don't think this is a quick fix. I'm with you there. But I also recognize the enormous risk you take on a new coach who has never built or rebuilt a team before. But if you're wrong? You wasted three years and you have to rebuild AGAIN. There is no fear with Cowher. He's built and rebuilt many times over. There are few retreads I support. Cowher is a rare case of a coach way too good to pass up.

Now, I am a huge fan of Spagnola. But I've seen this game played before. I have no idea if he'll field an embarrassing offense as Gregg Williams did. I have no idea if he'll lose a locker room like Wade Phillips did or piss off a locker room like Callahan did. Blast me all you want for being conservative, but while exciting hires like Romeo, Payton, and Man-genius walk in with hype, it's still the vet coaches with experience that are making Super Bowls. I don't want a head coach who will shine for 2 years, then slowly fizzle. The vast majority of head coaches do exactly that (if they shine at all). The bust rate for new head coaches within 3-5 years is ridiculously high. Really, really, really high.

Cowher WILL get the Chiefs to the playoffs. He WILL win playoff games. Because he's done it before. You can't recruit coaches hoping they'll be Bill Walsh. Cowher is no Bill Walsh, but he's better than over 90% of the coaches in the league. And I can guarantee you that over 90% of the new coach hires in the next 5 years won't match up to Cowher either.

If Cowher's off the market, everyone is fair game. But you do NOT pass up a coach like this.

How many retread coaches with a super bowl on their resume have taken their 2nd team to the super bowl though? It's not like Cowher was some genius coach that had his team on top forever, either... can you imagine this crowd dealing with Kordell every Sunday and staying happy? He fielded some mediocre (at best) teams over the years.

[beach tribe]

Do I agree with you?

Yes.

I also don't think it takes a ****ing genius and 10 years to build a team.

If a GM/HC doesn't have a team winning playoff games and COMPETING for a SB in 3-4 years they probably won't...

Exactly. I couldn't agree more.

[the Talking Can]

so that's why DV and Herm took us to the superbowl

[patteeu]

Anyone who thinks Shanahan went to the Super Bowl on "borrowed talent" is too much of an idiot to merit any more response.

He "borrowed" the biggest talent on those teams, John Elway.

[patteeu]

Terrell Davis. *

P.S. Who was the QB coach/Offensive Coordinator who developed Elway? Do you know?

* Just the tip of the iceberg, but the most important. He also brought in McCaffrey, Neal Smith, dozens more.

Of course, maybe it's all those Super Bowls Dan Reeves and Wade Phillips won with Elway before Shanahan that have you confused.

He stumbled into Davis in the 6th round of the draft. John Elway was a top tier franchise QB.

Marty Shottenheimer would have had 5 rings if he'd have been able to borrow John Elway the way Shanahan did. Hell, he might have had 2 or 3 of them if Elway would have decided to play baseball instead of football.

[jjjayb]

Unless... your suggestion is to hire a new head coach and wait on him for 5 years.

Which will be 5 years sooner than if we keep Herm. He will Never win a superbowl.

[MahiMike]

The reason vet coaches are making the SB's is because only recently has there been a
movement to sign coordinators to HC positions. Look no further than this year to see
how well new blood has outcoached the retreads. To break it down, look at the coaches
in the playoffs:

New blood - Ravens/Harbaugh, Falcons/Mike Smith, Dolphins/Sparano, Vikings/Childress,
Steelers/Tomlin, Cardinals/Whisenhunt

Retreads - Colts/Dungy, Chargers/Norv, Eagles/Reid, Titans/Fisher, Panthers/Fox,
Giants/Coughlin

Check it out. Exactly 50/50 between new blood and retreads. If you pair the talent
level with each team to their coaching staffs, one could argue that the retreads have
far superior talent. The new bloods are doing far more with less talent. This tells me that the players are responding to them and that they are actually deserving of
their HC roles.

Of course I would take Fisher or Coughlin any day. But those guys are rare. I think
if we're rebuilding, let's train a HC at the same time. Hopefully an offensive
coordinator from a perennial points maker that can also ground it out in the snow.

[orange]

He stumbled into Davis in the 6th round of the draft.

And Belichick stumbled into Brady in the 6th round. You need some luck, too. Deal with it.

[MOhillbilly]

If you think that the Chiefs will hire a new head coach, retread or new, and make the Super Bowl in the next five years, I think you're smokin' crack.

There would have to be an enormous amount of talent fall into their laps as well as just the right schedule and coaching for such a thing to happen.

Especially after nearly a 40 year drought of Super Bowl appearances and more than 15 years after their last playoff win.

Face it: The Chiefs are bereft of talent and it's going to take at least two amazing years to get them back on track.

This is no easy fix.

i dont agree. there IS enough talent on this team to make a SB run in the next five years. but this team needs a shakedown in leadership, QB,GM,HC,DC ya thats alot but the NFL is set up for bad teams to get better and 5 years is the window.

[Bwana]

And how many of those has Herm won? Exactly, he is NOT the answer. He would figure out a way to screw up holding a clip board.

[raybec 4]

And how many of those has Herm won? Exactly, he is NOT the answer. He would figure out a way to screw up holding a clip board.

Well,according to this thread you are incorrect because of all of his experience. He's been a HC for more than 5 years his Superbowl win has to be just around the corner.

[DTLB58]

I think instead of the phrase "new blood" I would tend to use Clark's words and say I want a "new set of eyes" on this franchise. The difference being expirence of course.

One coach that comes to my mind right off the top who had not been a HC before but took his team to a SB soon after taking over is John Fox. Even though his expirence was as a D-coordinator he still has some offense there in Carolina and has created a nice run-pass mix especially the 2nd half of this season.

It seems like we in KC always hire someone who leans more one way than the other when it comes to offensive philosophy. I would like to see a nice well balanced offensive scheme put in place. I think Miami had that this year also.

I would be all for Steve Spagnuolo. New set of eyes, NFL expirenced , been around good winning teams in Philly and with the G-men.

[FringeNC]

Survivorship principle. Good coaches don't get fired. Not firing a bad coach doesn't make him into a good coach. Additionally, almost all good coaches have an immediate (positive!) impact.

[Lzen]

If you think that the Chiefs will hire a new head coach, retread or new, and make the Super Bowl in the next five years, I think you're smokin' crack.

Can it be done within 5 years? Of course it can. Don't be so naive. In this day and age of FA, it is very possible. You just need the right people to do the job. And this Chiefs team does have some good quality talent. Sure, they need some help in some spots, but there is already some good talent in place. It is the coaching and development that needs drastic improvement, IMO. That is why it is vital to get the right GM who can spot talent (whether it be FA or draft picks) and coaches who can spot talent as well as develop them into NFL stars.

[Chiefnj2]

Other than guys like Parcells and Belichick making the Super Bowl seems to be more luck and timing than anything else.

[the Talking Can]

Fox had Carolina in the superbowl...didn't win, but he got them there as a non-retread coach...

[chiefzilla1501]

How many retread coaches with a super bowl on their resume have taken their 2nd team to the super bowl though? It's not like Cowher was some genius coach that had his team on top forever, either... can you imagine this crowd dealing with Kordell every Sunday and staying happy? He fielded some mediocre (at best) teams over the years.

Funny you should ask that. There are 3 coaches who have tried it in recent memory. Amazingly, very few Super Bowl coaches have gotten a second chance at coaching (i.e. Fassel, Billick). Dick Vermeil and Bill Parcells did not make it (though, Parcells has done it with 2 different teams--the Pats and the Giants). The third is Holmgren, who made it with both Green Bay and Seattle.

[chiefzilla1501]

Well,according to this thread you are incorrect because of all of his experience. He's been a HC for more than 5 years his Superbowl win has to be just around the corner.

It doesn't suggest that all coaches with 5+ years of experience see this trend. But if an experienced coach like Cowher comes in with a long history of winning, you don't hesitate to pull the trigger.

[chiefsngop]

Man I tell you what, that Dwayne Bowe, he's so god darned good that 45% of the time he catches the ball every time.

And that dang dong Herman Edwards has failed to make that Super Bowl 100% of the time.

But that said, I'd say no matter who we hire, we got ourselves about a 1 in 32 chance of makin the big one next year.

Oh and as far as hiring based solely on experience goes, I musta hibernated through the Dick Vermiel Chiefs Super Bowl.

[chiefzilla1501]

Man I tell you what, that Dwayne Bowe, he's so god darned good that 45% of the time he catches the ball every time.

And that dang dong Herman Edwards has failed to make that Super Bowl 100% of the time.

But that said, I'd say no matter who we hire, we got ourselves about a 1 in 32 chance of makin the big one next year.

Oh and as far as hiring based solely on experience goes, I musta hibernated through the Dick Vermiel Chiefs Super Bowl.

It is not a 1/32 chance. I think Vegas would make a fool out of you. The odds are weighted one way or the other, and bringing in Cowher would vastly increase those odds. What you just said assumes that Detroit and New England have the same chances of making the Super Bowl in 2009. That's obviously not true.

Second, as for Vermeil... a head coach is one piece, but he can't do it if the front office is completely inept at doing their jobs. The Chiefs were the worst in the league at drafting young players and whiffed on almost every free agent they brought in after the first rush of players. When it came to picking a new defensive coordinator, the Chiefs didn't look outside their network to find a replacement. The difference between Vermeil in St. Louis and KC was that their GM consistently brought in good players via the draft/free agency and forced Vermeil to look outside the organization for their guys. Most teams need a solid front office, a very good coach, and a solid QB. It's very difficult to find many Super Bowl teams who don't have all 3, or have one of those 3 things severely lacking.

[chiefzilla1501]

The reason vet coaches are making the SB's is because only recently has there been a
movement to sign coordinators to HC positions. Look no further than this year to see
how well new blood has outcoached the retreads. To break it down, look at the coaches
in the playoffs:

New blood - Ravens/Harbaugh, Falcons/Mike Smith, Dolphins/Sparano, Vikings/Childress,
Steelers/Tomlin, Cardinals/Whisenhunt

Retreads - Colts/Dungy, Chargers/Norv, Eagles/Reid, Titans/Fisher, Panthers/Fox,
Giants/Coughlin

Check it out. Exactly 50/50 between new blood and retreads. If you pair the talent
level with each team to their coaching staffs, one could argue that the retreads have
far superior talent. The new bloods are doing far more with less talent. This tells me that the players are responding to them and that they are actually deserving of
their HC roles.

Of course I would take Fisher or Coughlin any day. But those guys are rare. I think
if we're rebuilding, let's train a HC at the same time. Hopefully an offensive
coordinator from a perennial points maker that can also ground it out in the snow.

Mahi Mike, I'm really glad you brought up this point because it points back to a condition I always refer to as "the honeymoon effect." When new coaches come in, it always gets everyone jazzed up. It fills the city and locker room with excitement, hope and possibility. And opposing teams often struggle to scheme a new head coach when they have little idea of the coach's tendencies and tricks up their sleeves. Often times, as in Baltimore, a good team just needs a fresh face. The true test is not whether you can win right away; it's whether you can sustain progress over time as NFL teams begin to figure you out and as the team takes on your identity. Eric Mangini and Sean Payton came in looking like incredible coaching pick-ups and brilliant offensive minds; they've been average at best ever since. Callahan and Gruden took borrowed teams to the Super Bowl, then imploded the next season.

New coaches either benefit off "borrowed" talent, as Tomlin has largely done or they never prove to be anything more than a perennial 9-10 win coach at absolute best. Whisenhunt and Childress are two clear examples of the latter... so far. Tomlin's taking borrowed talent and many would argue that he's already starting to run the offense into the ground. Too soon to tell on Harbaugh and Smith. Too soon to tell on Sparano, but I am completely convinced that he's going to get exposed big time next season.

The appropriate question we as Chiefs' fans have to ask is: what coach do we trust most to win both now and 5 years from now? What coach do we expect to build a Super Bowl team, and not one who makes it on some kind of a fluke? What coach do we think has potential to manage an entire team to a 14-win season, not just a constant stream of 8-9 win seasons? Because I don't want a coach who might fluke the Chiefs into a Super Bowl. I want a coach that we think is so good that he gives us a chance to win a Super Bowl not just within 2-3 years, but also 5+ years down the road. As of now, Cowher and Spagnola appear to me to be the only two guys that give me that kind of comfort.

[Dayze]

bringing Cowher in is like hooking up with the sister of a chick you used to nail years ago (Marty); they look familiar, you're already familiar with the family etc.

[chiefzilla1501]

bringing Cowher in is like hooking up with the sister of a chick you used to nail years ago (Marty); they look familiar, you're already familiar with the family etc.

No. Marty is the chick you used to make out with. Cowher is the sister that went all the way.

[Crush]

No, Marty is the chick that gave you crabs. Cowher is the sister that will give you herpes.

[King_Chief_Fan]

For that matter, for those who are so against the idea of a retread, realize the following:

In the last 10 Super Bowls, there have been 20 coaches:
-14 (70%) of those coaches had 5 years of experience or GREATER
-10 (50%) of those coaches were on their second team

Of the 6 coaches with less than 5 years experience?
-Martz, Fassel, Callahan, Billick, Shanahan, Lovie Smith
-4 of those coaches (Martz, Fassel, Callahan, Shanahan) are believed to have taken BORROWED talent into the Super Bowl
-Of those coaches, only the last 3 were ever considered good long-term options
-Oh by the way, this was Shanahan's SECOND stint as a coach


So new blood is great. But history shows otherwise. New blood does not get teams to the Super Bowl, EXPERIENCE does. And those numbers above are overwhelming evidence.

New blood seems to only matter if the new coach comes in with ridiculously talented players. Obviously, the Chiefs do NOT have that.
for those who still want old blood let the numbers show 6-26 the past two seasons....lost 23 of 25...out with the old, in with the new.

[Rausch]

Terrell Davis. *

P.S. Who was the QB coach/Offensive Coordinator who developed Elway? Do you know?

* Just the tip of the iceberg, but the most important. He also brought in McCaffrey, Neal Smith, dozens more.

Shanny was very good at adding offseason talent. Draft, now that we can look back, can only be deemed good on Smith and Davis. After that it was bust following bust following bust.

Of course, maybe it's all those Super Bowls Dan Reeves and Wade Phillips won with Elway before Shanahan that have you confused.

I don't think you can blame a QB choking and playing his worst game of the year on coaching...

[whoman69]

Lies, damn lies and statistics. Its full of false premises and faulty facts. Missing John Fox with less than five years, Bill Callahan in his first year with Oakland, Barry Switzer. Try again.

You discount anyone who won with less than 5 years experience as having done so with borrowed talent. Give me a break. The fact is that these statistics you seem to place total creedence in show that it takes awhile to build a Super Bowl power. It shows that teams need to show some patience. It took Chuck Noll six years to get to his first Super Bowl, John Madden 7 seasons. Rarely is a coach like Walsh or Gibbs able to get there in three or four.

How many of these Super Bowl coaches had been with their team long enough that they were on the verge of being fired if they didn't get the job done? Coaches like Fisher, Holmgren and Coughlin were mired in years of mediocrity before they struck gold. They were all rumored to be on the chopping block.

Why just 10 years in your stats? Go back further and you have plenty of Super Bowl champions who don't meet your criteria like Walsh, Gibbs, Ditka and Parcelles all of whom were on their first coaching stint with less than 5 years experience. Joe Gibbs had plenty of experience when he came back to Washington. How did that work out. The Lions had three coaches with more than five years experience in the Super Bowl era and have nothing to show for it.

In order to do a study you also have to consider coaches that didn't make it to the Super Bowl. I can show plenty of examples of teams that took experienced coaches, Super Bowl winning coaches, and went nowhere. Only four coaches have taken two teams to the Super Bowl, while none have won with two different teams. Plenty of teams that hired a coach with a Super Bowl pedigree were sorely dissappointed, George Seiffert with Carolina, Hank Stram in New Orleans, Mike Ditka in New Orleans, Tom Flores in Seattle, and Jimmy Johnson in Miami. The list goes on and on. Those are only the winners. Guys like Sam Wyche Bobby Ross couldn't catch on again.

And to update your list both coaches in this year's Super Bowl had less than five years experience and were with their first team.

[patteeu]

Lies, damn lies and statistics. Its full of false premises and faulty facts. Missing John Fox with less than five years, Bill Callahan in his first year with Oakland, Barry Switzer. Try again.

Switzer's superbowl was more than 10 years ago. Callahan is included in the OP analysis. A guy who gets 1 out of 3 of his facts right, shouldn't be casting too many faulty facts stones, but your John Fox point appears to be a valid criticism.

You discount anyone who won with less than 5 years experience as having done so with borrowed talent.

Another error in your error-riddled analysis.

[chiefzilla1501]

Lies, damn lies and statistics. Its full of false premises and faulty facts. Missing John Fox with less than five years, Bill Callahan in his first year with Oakland, Barry Switzer. Try again.

You discount anyone who won with less than 5 years experience as having done so with borrowed talent. Give me a break. The fact is that these statistics you seem to place total creedence in show that it takes awhile to build a Super Bowl power. It shows that teams need to show some patience. It took Chuck Noll six years to get to his first Super Bowl, John Madden 7 seasons. Rarely is a coach like Walsh or Gibbs able to get there in three or four.

How many of these Super Bowl coaches had been with their team long enough that they were on the verge of being fired if they didn't get the job done? Coaches like Fisher, Holmgren and Coughlin were mired in years of mediocrity before they struck gold. They were all rumored to be on the chopping block.

Why just 20 years in your stats? Go back further and you have plenty of Super Bowl champions who don't meet your criteria like Walsh, Gibbs, Ditka and Parcelles all of whom were on their first coaching stint with less than 5 years experience. Joe Gibbs had plenty of experience when he came back to Washington. How did that work out. The Lions had Wayne Fontes and

In order to do a study you also have to consider coaches that didn't make it to the Super Bowl. I can show plenty of examples of teams that took experienced coaches, Super Bowl winning coaches, and went nowhere. Only four coaches have taken two teams to the Super Bowl, while none have won with two different teams. Plenty of teams that hired a coach with a Super Bowl pedigree were sorely dissappointed, George Seiffert with Carolina, Hank Stram in New Orleans, Mike Ditka in New Orleans, Tom Flores in Seattle, and Jimmy Johnson in Miami. The list goes on and on. Those are only the winners.

And to update your list both coaches in this year's Super Bowl had less than five years experience and were with their first team.

You pulled this thread from out of the grave. But there's nothing ridiculous about the idea. Callahan and Switzer were not good coaches. They took teams with outrageous talent to the Super Bowl and then completely lost their teams. A good coach should be able to build a team and also to coach that team well enough to win games. Those guys could clearly do the latter, but not the former. Take a look at how outrageously good the rosters were in Oakland and Dallas and how quickly that roster imploded. As I said with the "honeymoon effect" teams get fired up about getting a new coach and new coaches often do much better their first season then the 2nd or 3rd season (see Sean Payton, Herm Edwards, Eric Mangini). So yeah, coaches that coach outrageously talented teams that the former coach built (i.e. Gruden, Seifert, Callahan, Switzer), they shouldn't apply here--Haley did not inherit an outrageously talented team.

The second point was that most coaches who don't inherit outrageously talented teams typically take 5 years to get to the Super Bowl.

And the reason you don't go back 20 or even 10 years is that you're talking about an entirely different era of teams. Coaches like Jimmy Johnson and George Seifert benefited big time off of having a team that could unapologetically spend like the Yankees to load up their team with expensive talent with no cap consequence.

I would have preferred a coach with experience, like a Holmgren or a Shanahan. But I'm fine with Haley. We just have to realize that it might take 5 years to build this thing, if at all.

[patteeu]

You pulled this thread from out of the grave. But there's nothing ridiculous about the idea. Callahan and Switzer were not good coaches. They took teams with outrageous talent to the Super Bowl and then completely lost their teams. A good coach should be able to build a team and also to coach that team well enough to win games. Those guys could clearly do the latter, but not the former. Take a look at how outrageously good the rosters were in Oakland and Dallas and how quickly that roster imploded. As I said with the "honeymoon effect" teams get fired up about getting a new coach and new coaches often do much better their first season then the 2nd or 3rd season (see Sean Payton, Herm Edwards, Eric Mangini). So yeah, coaches that coach outrageously talented teams that the former coach built (i.e. Gruden, Seifert, Callahan, Switzer), they shouldn't apply here--Haley did not inherit an outrageously talented team.

The second point was that most coaches who don't inherit outrageously talented teams typically take 5 years to get to the Super Bowl.

And the reason you don't go back 20 or even 10 years is that you're talking about an entirely different era of teams. Coaches like Jimmy Johnson and George Seifert benefited big time off of having a team that could unapologetically spend like the Yankees to load up their team with expensive talent with no cap consequence.

I would have preferred a coach with experience, like a Holmgren or a Shanahan. But I'm fine with Haley. We just have to realize that it might take 5 years to build this thing, if at all.

It was Rausch who pulled it from the grave. I think whoman mistook it for a new thread, but I could be the one who's mistaken.

[whoman69]

It was Rausch who pulled it from the grave. I think whoman mistook it for a new thread, but I could be the one who's mistaken.

I didn't mistake it for a new thread, I missed it the first time. Valid criticism of my mistake, but Switzer is still in the free agency era.

If history is an indicator, if we had hired Cower or Shanahan then statistically we would have a zero percent chance of winning a Super Bowl.

The point remains there are plenty of teams that went with an experienced coach and failed. 10 years is not really a good indication when we have nearly 45 years of Super Bowl history. Chuck Noll, Bill Walsh, Joe Gibbs were all coaches that were successful coordinators that took their teams to the Super Bowl with their first team. Jon Gruden is the same example of an experienced coach who took a successful team they inherited to the Super Bowl but could not sustain it. Seifert shouldn't be dismissed as he not only took an inherited team to the Super Bowl but was able to sustain that and take a team with a new QB there.