2022 Coaching Candidates

[broncosfan_101]

Peter King laid out a scenario the other day that included us hiring Hackett as HC, trading Jeudy + 2 firsts for Rodgers, and then signing Davante Adams in free agency. I only read that little screenshot, so I don’t know why GB wouldn’t franchise Davante, but absolutely sign me up for all of that??

[Broncofan]

1 hour ago, broncosfan_101 said:

Peter King laid out a scenario the other day that included us hiring Hackett as HC, trading Jeudy + 2 firsts for Rodgers, and then signing Davante Adams in free agency. I only read that little screenshot, so I don’t know why GB wouldn’t franchise Davante, but absolutely sign me up for all of that??

Just keep in mind King has no connections - he's just posting clickbait on his weekly articles when it comes to trade speculation scenarios, this is par for the course for him.    If he's breaking news about actual current events in the league, he's been somewhat better.  But on this count, I'd trust Renck/Allbright far more, and if there's a national beat reporter who breaks it, it will be more likely the Schefters/Rappaports than King. 

Edited December 28, 2021 by Broncofan

[jsthomp2007]

8 hours ago, broncosfan_101 said:

Peter King laid out a scenario the other day that included us hiring Hackett as HC, trading Jeudy + 2 firsts for Rodgers, and then signing Davante Adams in free agency. I only read that little screenshot, so I don’t know why GB wouldn’t franchise Davante, but absolutely sign me up for all of that??

This would be amazing.  I am not sure how you get Davante out of the deal by signing him either. But I think Rogers would do just find with Patrick, Sutton, and Hamler. 

[Broncofan]

 

There is zero doubt Fangio is a great DC.   But the comments above, and his earlier comments in the year putting the L's on the players with the "they" instead of "we" in key losses, really highlights the other non-starter besides game management as far as ever considering Fangio for a HC position - in the past year or so, he's changed from always making ppl accountable, to deflecting accountability from the coaches, or his choices.     

He's totally OK with heaping zero praise on Lock because the O put up 13 pts (and to be clear, I don't think anything's changed with Lock, he's not the answer, and the Raiders D made it easy to limit the mistakes - but that was as good as you can expect from Lock, he is what he is - doesn't mean he shouldn't be recognized for a 0-mistake game).   But he's totally going to go out of his way to defend Shurmur?   Just an awful look, and literally about the 4th time this year the comments come out so one-sided about avoiding accountability.

I can't do anything but recognize his DC greatness, but his mode of turning accountability away from coaching and putting it elsewhere, along with his game management blunders that have literally not improved at all - seal his fate as "must always consider as DC, never consider as HC" - at least from competent orgs. 

[AnAngryAmerican]

12 hours ago, broncosfan_101 said:

Peter King laid out a scenario the other day that included us hiring Hackett as HC, trading Jeudy + 2 firsts for Rodgers, and then signing Davante Adams in free agency. I only read that little screenshot, so I don’t know why GB wouldn’t franchise Davante, but absolutely sign me up for all of that??

That's very similar to what Woody wrote on Sunday in the Gazette. Given now that King is part of NBC he, just like that hack Mike Florio with NBC-affiliated PFT, takes other people's work, makes a minor changes the wording, and posts it as his own.

[grizmo78]

Not going to lie... I'm not overly excited about any of the popular head coaching candidates this round. All have big red flags as well imo. 

Nathaniel Hackett at this time is my favorite. He took Jacksonville with Bortles to the playoffs as the offensive coordinator and has been the offensive coordinator for one of the best offenses in the league the past couple years. Downside is he has not called plays for the Packers (although has in the past). In the one game this year without Rodges, "his" offense with Jordan Love scored a measly 7 points against the chiefs. That's an extremely small sample size but highlights the risk of poaching coordinators with HOF QBs. 

Kellen Moore is probably my other favorite mainly due to potential. He has coached under some really underwhelming Head Coaches though which is reassuring in that he has done well in not great circumstances. Also concerning though as he won't have had great mentors to draw upon positive experiences from. His offense with a top 10 QB can be best in the league, but with an average QB like last year will also be middle of the road. IE I don't think he has proved he can elevate an offense beyond his QBs capabilities but can maximize up to it. 

Byron Leftwich is intriguing but he also has very limited experience having only followed around Bruce Arians in his career. Not a bad person to follow but question becomes how much of his success is due to Bruce and Brady. 

I'm not excited about the idea of a defensive minded head coach. It is much easier to obtain and retain quality defensive coaches than it is offensive coaches (case and point Fangio only having 1 HC opportunity despite YEARS of fantastic defenses, or Wink, or Wade, etc etc.) If an offense is successful, especially for a sustained period of time, those coaches becomes head coaches very quickly and leave with their scheme and expertise (ex. Shannahan when he left the falcons, LaFleur, McVay. Heck Zac Taylor wasn't even an offensive coordinator and still jumped to HC). 

[Broncofan]

FWIW, Allbright & Klis haven't weighed in, but Renck doesn't think demotion-but-retain is in the cards with Fangio, and everything he's posted confirms Allbright's original "playoffs or else" mandate.

 

[AnAngryAmerican]

47 minutes ago, grizmo78 said:

Not going to lie... I'm not overly excited about any of the popular head coaching candidates this round. All have big red flags as well imo. 

Nathaniel Hackett at this time is my favorite. He took Jacksonville with Bortles to the playoffs as the offensive coordinator and has been the offensive coordinator for one of the best offenses in the league the past couple years. Downside is he has not called plays for the Packers (although has in the past). In the one game this year without Rodges, "his" offense with Jordan Love scored a measly 7 points against the chiefs. That's an extremely small sample size but highlights the risk of poaching coordinators with HOF QBs. 

Kellen Moore is probably my other favorite mainly due to potential. He has coached under some really underwhelming Head Coaches though which is reassuring in that he has done well in not great circumstances. Also concerning though as he won't have had great mentors to draw upon positive experiences from. His offense with a top 10 QB can be best in the league, but with an average QB like last year will also be middle of the road. IE I don't think he has proved he can elevate an offense beyond his QBs capabilities but can maximize up to it. 

Byron Leftwich is intriguing but he also has very limited experience having only followed around Bruce Arians in his career. Not a bad person to follow but question becomes how much of his success is due to Bruce and Brady. 

I'm not excited about the idea of a defensive minded head coach. It is much easier to obtain and retain quality defensive coaches than it is offensive coaches (case and point Fangio only having 1 HC opportunity despite YEARS of fantastic defenses, or Wink, or Wade, etc etc.) If an offense is successful, especially for a sustained period of time, those coaches becomes head coaches very quickly and leave with their scheme and expertise (ex. Shannahan when he left the falcons, LaFleur, McVay. Heck Zac Taylor wasn't even an offensive coordinator and still jumped to HC). 

Truthfully, if the plan is to land Rodgers/Wilson - and on that there is ZERO doubt in my mind that is precisely how Paton is approaching the off-season; acquiring one of those 2 is plan 1A - then get a good HC who can do the CEO HC stuff - manage the game, manage the clock, be a leader, empower his coordinators - so if he comes from the offensive, defensive or special teams side of the ball, I don’t care. In that respect I’d prefer one with prior experience in that role, e.g. Allen, Quinn, Morris, etc.

What I most especially do NOT want is a hot coordinator hire. By that I mean a coordinator who has had success in one system likely under a HOF HC and with a HOF QB. I don’t want Leftwich or Moore in light of that. I don’t want Daboll because of the New England stink and I don’t want Bieniemy because everyone has avoided him for the last 3 years there just be some serious red flags. And, believe me, the Denver media will pound the table HARD for him, because 75% of them are completely inept, biased for CU, trying to stir the pot, or some combination thereof.

I like the idea of Hackett + Rodgers. It would eliminate potential drama of Rodgers working with someone he doesn’t know and Hackett has a history of success with and exposure to multiple systems. He’s the only rookie HC candidate I like right now but that comes with the caveat he is paired with Aaron.

[paul-mac]

I’m not liking this idea that the media are floating that Fangio will be retained in order give the new owner their pick of Head Coach. Not one bit. 

[jolly red giant]

1 hour ago, paul-mac said:

I’m not liking this idea that the media are floating that Fangio will be retained in order give the new owner their pick of Head Coach. Not one bit. 

You are not the only one - and we are going to see a lot of stuff about this over the next couple of weeks.

How about Jim Caldwell as a potential HC?

[broncos_fan _from _uk]

2 hours ago, paul-mac said:

I’m not liking this idea that the media are floating that Fangio will be retained in order give the new owner their pick of Head Coach. Not one bit. 

While I agree, it does make sense. What are the other options?

1) wait until March when we have a new owner to hire a HC and miss out on every good candidate?

2) hire a HC who will immediately be on the hot seat as the new owner had no say in his selection?

2b) most HC candidates will know about the above and all things being equal will select any other job being offered. 
 

now, the counter argument is that the coach will be Patons selection and assuming that the new owner comes in realizing that Paton is pretty damn good at his job (his reputation precedes him and his first year was successful) then they may trust him to run the football side of things.

[Broncofan]

28 minutes ago, broncos_fan _from _uk said:

While I agree, it does make sense. What are the other options?

1) wait until March when we have a new owner to hire a HC and miss out on every good candidate?

2) hire a HC who will immediately be on the hot seat as the new owner had no say in his selection?

2b) most HC candidates will know about the above and all things being equal will select any other job being offered. 
 

now, the counter argument is that the coach will be Patons selection and assuming that the new owner comes in realizing that Paton is pretty damn good at his job (his reputation precedes him and his first year was successful) then they may trust him to run the football side of things.

Honestly if there's a good owner that's the only option.   The media take that an owner should have a say in who the HC is pure hogwash.  Good owners don't get involved in football decisions.    It's that simple.     If you don't like the GM decisions you replace the GM.   Everything Paton has done in year 1 would make this a non-starter.

If we get an owner that wants to overrule HC decisions or would question a GM's final recommendation after coming in, then we're in a lot bigger trouble than just the HC hire.     To be clear, the only 2 owners on record who are on record as being that involved - Jags owner Shad Khan & Cowboys' Jerry Jones.     And before that - the CLE ownership under Jimmy Stefanski - he of the famous "I took Baker Mayfield after I got a sign from a homeless dude" decision-making (and let Hue Jackson convince him the GM's were the problem, and not Hue). 

The hiring cycle to pick from the best candidates is in Jan/Feb.   Paton should act accordingly.  

Edited December 29, 2021 by Broncofan

[paul-mac]

58 minutes ago, broncos_fan _from _uk said:

While I agree, it does make sense. What are the other options?

1) wait until March when we have a new owner to hire a HC and miss out on every good candidate?

2) hire a HC who will immediately be on the hot seat as the new owner had no say in his selection?

2b) most HC candidates will know about the above and all things being equal will select any other job being offered. 
 

now, the counter argument is that the coach will be Patons selection and assuming that the new owner comes in realizing that Paton is pretty damn good at his job (his reputation precedes him and his first year was successful) then they may trust him to run the football side of things.

I’d go with this option, with the owner being on a five year contract to mirror the five years that Paton has left on his deal.

 

If the new owner doesn’t buy in to the Paton/HC project at all then it’s on him to pony up the cash and clean the house, but more likely it will just deter anyone from buying the team if they’re not bought into the Paton led project. 

[broncofan48]

Just now, paul-mac said:

I’d go with this option, with the owner being on a five year contract to mirror the five years that Paton has left on his deal.

 

If the new owner doesn’t buy in to the Paton/HC project at all then it’s on him to pony up the cash and clean the house, but more likely it will just deter anyone from buying the team if they’re not bought into the Paton led project. 

Do you mean head coach and Paton both being on a 5 year deal?

[paul-mac]

1 minute ago, broncofan48 said:

Do you mean head coach and Paton both being on a 5 year deal?

Yes