2022 Coaching Candidates

[germ-x]

2 minutes ago, jsthomp2007 said:

I have heard they had the same race car bed as kids.. So there is that

At this point I wouldn’t be surprised.

[BroncoBruin]

46 minutes ago, germ-x said:

I’ve gotten the opposite.  Seems like Quinn has been a forgone conclusion.  Even before the “search.”

Friend just sent me a video of Allbright saying Quinn turned down the Bears job because the Bears weren’t going to hire Paton as GM and that they want to work together.

Read another from a reporter out of Dallas that Quinn has the job and the rest is checking boxes and looking for OC/DC candidates.

This was also my take a couple days ago.

[germ-x]

37 minutes ago, BroncoBruin said:

This was also my take a couple days ago.

Yeah.  I think it’ll be Quinn or Gannon.  Don’t really have a preference.  Don’t know anything about Gannon, but if he can interview well enough to unseat Quinn who I think has always been the pick I’ll give it a shot until we see what he has.  I guess I should say that for any candidate not named Quinn.

I think they’re going defense just by the makeup of these candidates.  The only offensive candidate that is lead play caller is Moore.  All the rest are OC’s in name only and then taking a back seat to their offensive minded HCs on gamedays.

Now many current HCs who have been successful have done the same, but the make up of this process seems to be hiring a DC to be the HC, to me now.  Outside of Moore, all of the OC’s would have a reason to come to Denver, especially if Rodgers, Wilson, even Mayfield is the starting QB.  In Denver they would be at the top, which is something that can further their careers.

With that mindset it makes me think the only weird candidate they interviewed was Aaron Glenn.  He’s already a DC in full control.  Not that he can’t be pried away from Detroit, but he’s the one guy in the mix that doesn’t fit.  Mayo can upgrade moving from NE to Denver under a defensive minded HC, it doesn’t benefit Glenn.

I think it’s Quinn, Gannon, Glenn as my top 3.

[AnAngryAmerican]

6 hours ago, broncosfan_101 said:

Obviously Paton didn’t hire Fangio, but it’d smell a little yucky (to me, at least) to go from one ‘finally’ HC hire to another. Vic had a whole bunch of interviews before someone actually gave him a job, Bieniemy feels very similar for me. Which is not a good thing after having just lived through the Fangio era.

At some point, trust that enough other front office guys have seen enough to steer clear, no?

Fact that EB hasn’t gotten an HC job yet is something of a red flag. He checks off so many boxes. Maybe it’s just the fit hasn’t been right in the places he’s interviewed?

I know there are a few black marks in his history and his tenure at CU, as a coach, was a ****show. I think we are actually the only team with whom he has an interview this go around. There is clearly something that’s getting everyone else to shy away, especially after this many years. 

[jsthomp2007]

I think you will get a Hackett HC, and Getsy OC.  I am not sure who would emerge as the DC, Zimmer? 

[broncos67]

Woody splashed some cold water on Quinn, so that's very interesting. Denver's turmoil in the ownership ranks is definitely a problem it would seem. I don't believe that "Denver not having a QB" is an issue, because frankly plenty of teams don't have QBs. Denver is in a better spot with draft capital and cap space to land a QB than they ever have been before.

[paul-mac]

4 minutes ago, broncos67 said:

Woody splashed some cold water on Quinn, so that's very interesting. Denver's turmoil in the ownership ranks is definitely a problem it would seem. I don't believe that "Denver not having a QB" is an issue, because frankly plenty of teams don't have QBs. Denver is in a better spot with draft capital and cap space to land a QB than they ever have been before.

Allbright has said the ownership thing is a non-issue for the candidates. HC contracts are guaranteed so if the new owner really doesn’t like Quinn (or whoever) then they need to be okay with eating tens of millions of dollars to buy out the remaining 3-4 years of their contract.

 

That means 2 things:

 

1. The coach likely gets more security. New owner will almost certainly give the coach at least 2 seasons.

 

2. Even if the owner does fire the coach, he still gets paid. 

[broncos67]

2 hours ago, paul-mac said:

Allbright has said the ownership thing is a non-issue for the candidates. HC contracts are guaranteed so if the new owner really doesn’t like Quinn (or whoever) then they need to be okay with eating tens of millions of dollars to buy out the remaining 3-4 years of their contract.

 

That means 2 things:

 

1. The coach likely gets more security. New owner will almost certainly give the coach at least 2 seasons.

 

2. Even if the owner does fire the coach, he still gets paid. 

I'm gonna take Woody's word for it. I like Allbright and find him extremely credible, but I just personally think it's a stretch to say that all the candidates are fine with the ownership limbo. The monetary part of the equation aside, it stands to reason that a potential candidate doesn't want to walk into something not knowing if he's getting saddled with a Dan Snyder type of owner, or a Steve Bisciotti kind of owner. For a guy on his second HC stint, where if you fail, there's no guarantee of a 3rd, that's not altogether shocking for me. 

So yes, solely for the money I am sure the candidates don't have an issue, but there's more than money at stake with a HC job.

[broncosfan_101]

20 minutes ago, broncos67 said:

I'm gonna take Woody's word for it. I like Allbright and find him extremely credible, but I just personally think it's a stretch to say that all the candidates are fine with the ownership limbo. The monetary part of the equation aside, it stands to reason that a potential candidate doesn't want to walk into something not knowing if he's getting saddled with a Dan Snyder type of owner, or a Steve Bisciotti kind of owner. For a guy on his second HC stint, where if you fail, there's no guarantee of a 3rd, that's not altogether shocking for me. 

So yes, solely for the money I am sure the candidates don't have an issue, but there's more than money at stake with a HC job.

And I’d go the opposite way. If I was a head coach, I’d be much more concerned about not having a QB than the ownership situation. 

[broncos67]

3 minutes ago, broncosfan_101 said:

And I’d go the opposite way. If I was a head coach, I’d be much more concerned about not having a QB than the ownership situation. 

I disagree with this. End of the day, ownership is a bigger issue than QB. In my eyes it is anyway. Obviously you need a QB to win in this league. But you also need a top-down functional organization. Ownership sets the tone, the vision, and controls the purse strings. If I were a highly regarded coach, I'd want to know what the organizational tone and tenor of the team I'm joining is. 

Now, if Denver's ownership was settled, I'd be concerned about joining with the QB situation as is, but I think for certain candidates, especially those coming from strong organizations already (Green Bay as an example), you have to consider that heavily.

[broncosfan_101]

13 minutes ago, broncos67 said:

I disagree with this. End of the day, ownership is a bigger issue than QB. In my eyes it is anyway. Obviously you need a QB to win in this league. But you also need a top-down functional organization. Ownership sets the tone, the vision, and controls the purse strings. If I were a highly regarded coach, I'd want to know what the organizational tone and tenor of the team I'm joining is. 

Now, if Denver's ownership was settled, I'd be concerned about joining with the QB situation as is, but I think for certain candidates, especially those coming from strong organizations already (Green Bay as an example), you have to consider that heavily.

I’m just thinking that a good GM can help shield you from a nosy owner. And even if an absolutely terrible guy buys the team, it’s gotta take at least 2-3 years for that rot to really permeate the building, doesn’t it? Especially with a grownup like Paton in charge of football ops? 
 

2-3 years with more Teddy/Lock QB play and you’ve got no chance. 

[paul-mac]

Wink Martindale out as the Ravens DC. I know he wasn’t great when he was out DC under Mac, but he’s learned a lot since then. I’d take him back for sure. 

[germ-x]

1 hour ago, paul-mac said:

Wink Martindale out as the Ravens DC. I know he wasn’t great when he was out DC under Mac, but he’s learned a lot since then. I’d take him back for sure. 

Woody says he wants him back.

[AKRNA]

Well, just a couple of thoughts.

As far as hiring a defensive guy I'd think this is a very lousy looking job, almost a "can't win" proposition. reasons are pretty simple. 1. Last year Vic took a marginally talented defensive roster, lots of injuries, and schemed them into the 3rd rated defense as far as PPG in the league, a full 9 PPG lower than 2020. That's an impossibly high bar to follow.

2. Looking at the team the obvious places where improvement is needed, offense and ST's aren't your specialty but are exactly what needs to be fixed.

3. With a new staff, system and approach (replacing one that has been very effective over a 3 year span) chances are very high that in the next few years you won't achieve that level of success.

If I'm a defensive guy I'm turning it down.

If I'm an offensive guy the job looks great, especially if I'm really good with QB's. 1. I'd have a roster stacked with "skill position" talent. A young OL, great at the run game and improving almost weekly. One more talented draft pick for Munch to work with and it could be a top 5-10 unit. Just need a QB and guess what, I'm an expert at developing them.

Defense is simple. Keep the entire staff intact. Add a couple of DL/Edge guys in the draft and let 'em go. Right now, the best chance we have of maintaining a strong defense with the talent we have is a staff already under contract. if it doesn't work out, replace your DC next year.

If I'm an offensive guy I'm all over this job.

 

[Zukhyubern]

https://twitter.com/mikeklis/status/1484909268075753472?s=21
 

Really bummed if true.. not sure it means anything but I was really stoked on the idea of Paton and his staff having full autonomy here. Guess that was a pipe dream.