Ongoing Coaching & GM Rumors/Updates Talk

[Broncofan]

3 minutes ago, Xenos said:

This is starting to get ridiculous 😂

 

Familiarity over trying to improve.  

[naptownskinsfan]

1 hour ago, Soggust said:

Has he? Far more?

More than a 2x COTY? 

Both went to a SB, Quinn went to 1 div game and Rivera went to 2 div games and 1 wild card game prior to joining WAS

Rivera .546 w/l when he was hired by WAS, Quinn has a .506 career w/l.

Rivera had a 15-1 season on his resume. Quinn's best season was 11-5 when he had Kyle Shanahan and the 27th ranked Defense.

I'm curious what the case is for Quinn having shown far more as a coach?

Rivera had three winning seasons in nine years, the same amount of winning seasons that Bruce Allen had while presiding over the front office.  

There’s also the little factor that Dan Quinn is going to be a head coach, and head coach only.  Rivera finished his Carolina tenure with 3 out of 4 losing seasons and a sub .500 record over that time, and was able to parlay that into control of the front office in Washington.  

I’m also a fan of Quinn realizing that he’s not going to be able to be as involved as a play caller anymore, and is giving that up.  

While not the outcome I hoped for, I think the Commanders finally having a legitimate executive in the GM chair, who wants to be here, is going to play huge dividends and I am confident in what we’re going to build moving forward.  I think Quinn is a solid choice here.  

[Soggust]

2 minutes ago, naptownskinsfan said:

Rivera had three winning seasons in nine years, the same amount of winning seasons that Bruce Allen had while presiding over the front office.  

There’s also the little factor that Dan Quinn is going to be a head coach, and head coach only.  Rivera finished his Carolina tenure with 3 out of 4 losing seasons and a sub .500 record over that time, and was able to parlay that into control of the front office in Washington.  

I’m also a fan of Quinn realizing that he’s not going to be able to be as involved as a play caller anymore, and is giving that up.  

While not the outcome I hoped for, I think the Commanders finally having a legitimate executive in the GM chair, who wants to be here, is going to play huge dividends and I am confident in what we’re going to build moving forward.  I think Quinn is a solid choice here.  

Not saying anyone ITT is necessarily misconstruing me, but let me just clarify my takes so I don't get backed into a position of "Keeping Rivera > Quinn" because I certainly don't believe that lol.

My original take was: Rivera has proven more in his career than Quinn.

I kinda doubled down for fun on: I might take Rivera > Quinn in a vacuum

But certainly, Rivera's time in WAS was done, no question. I think most hires were going to be an upgrade in that sense.

And I hope they do. I have no hate towards WAS and the experience of Quinn is a plus, imo, especially for newer ownership. But I also think a younger culture invigoration could have really helped, and truthfully - defensive coaches just aren't as fun nowadays.

-----------

Also, for the record, this might have all started because I probably misconstrued the original RR 2.0 comment myself:

Quote

Dan Quinn is honestly not as bad as a hire as I feel people are making it. People are painting it as Ron Rivera 2.0

I read RR 2.0 as "Hiring an underwhelming retread defensive coach" instead of "Dan Quinn will be a checked out low tier coach once hired", which is how others seem to have meant it. So my bad on that one.

rtruth.gif

[MaddHatter]

If we compare Rivera before WAS to Quinn before WAS, it’s interesting 

If we include Rivera’s time in WAS it becomes far less interesting.  For the Cowboys, I hope Quinn vs Rivera post WAS is an interesting debate again haha

[BroncoSojia]

This is admittedly out of context, but I found this funny.

[nagahide13]

Lions signed Deshea Townsend as defensive passing coordinator. Not major, but I love the guys we bring in. Our secondary was certainly not great.

https://www.freep.com/story/sports/nfl/lions/2024/02/08/report-detroit-lions-hire-deshea-townsend-coach-cornerbacks-pass-game-coordinator/72525034007/

[Soggust]

8 minutes ago, nagahide13 said:

Lions signed Deshea Townsend as defensive passing coordinator. Not major, but I love the guys we bring in. Our secondary was certainly not great.

https://www.freep.com/story/sports/nfl/lions/2024/02/08/report-detroit-lions-hire-deshea-townsend-coach-cornerbacks-pass-game-coordinator/72525034007/

Going to be really careful about how I ask this, but it does feel like a lot of these coordinator positions are newer (run game, pass game, def run game, def pass game).

Could the adaptation of these positions be correlated to the implementation of compensatory picks for minority coaches? Meaning - more spots to fill = more chance at hirings = more chance at picks?

Let me be super clear - not saying ANYONE was hired only because of this or isn't worthy of the position, but simply asking if the increase in positions available might be teams wanting to give more opportunities to shine?

[ducks]

Edited February 8 by Soggust

[nagahide13]

I'm not sure. The Lions currently have Dre Bly at CBs coach. From what's being reported Townsend is taking over coaching CBs. There hasn't been anything on Dre Bly since Townsend's signing. It's very possible that Bly is getting phased out, in which case it wouldn't be a minority hiring thing. I'd also point out that no team in the world is going to bring in a bad coach just because they might get a pick back later.

But... people around the league are definitely looking at the 49ers success with developing coaches and the picks they've been getting. We'd have to be pretty oblivious to think nobody is taking notes.

We could also point to the successes the 49ers have had and wonder why other teams haven't been able to do the same thing?

Edited February 8 by nagahide13

[naptownskinsfan]

1 hour ago, Soggust said:

Not saying anyone ITT is necessarily misconstruing me, but let me just clarify my takes so I don't get backed into a position of "Keeping Rivera > Quinn" because I certainly don't believe that lol.

My original take was: Rivera has proven more in his career than Quinn.

I kinda doubled down for fun on: I might take Rivera > Quinn in a vacuum

But certainly, Rivera's time in WAS was done, no question. I think most hires were going to be an upgrade in that sense.

And I hope they do. I have no hate towards WAS and the experience of Quinn is a plus, imo, especially for newer ownership. But I also think a younger culture invigoration could have really helped, and truthfully - defensive coaches just aren't as fun nowadays.

-----------

Also, for the record, this might have all started because I probably misconstrued the original RR 2.0 comment myself:

I read RR 2.0 as "Hiring an underwhelming retread defensive coach" instead of "Dan Quinn will be a checked out low tier coach once hired", which is how others seem to have meant it. So my bad on that one.

rtruth.gif

Again, look at his work after the 15-1 season.  One winning season, sub .500 record.  That got him control of personnel as the head coach.  

Meanwhile, Quinn got a great defense going down there in Dallas as a coordinator again, instead of struggling as a head coach after a great season and a Super Bowl appearance.  

What they did in the years leading up to being hired by Washington is night and day.  So I think the “hot take” is that they hired RR 2.0, but if you look under the hood, it’s a very different scenario but also a different situation. 

[Soggust]

21 minutes ago, nagahide13 said:

I'm not sure. The Lions currently have Dre Bly at CBs coach. From what's being reported Townsend is taking over coaching CBs. There hasn't been anything on Dre Bly since Townsend's signing. It's very possible that Bly is getting phased out, in which case it wouldn't be a minority hiring thing. I'd also point out that no team in the world is going to bring in a bad coach just because they might get a pick back later.

But... people around the league are definitely looking at the 49ers success with developing coaches and the picks they've been getting. We'd have to be pretty oblivious to think nobody is taking notes.

We could also point to the successes the 49ers have had and wonder why other teams haven't been able to do the same thing?

Yeah maybe I should have started with the "more coaches = easier to micro manage aspects of the game" but I feel at a certain point there might be too many cooks in the kitchen?

Conversely, more people to fire/blame when things go bad too =p

[Soggust]

6 minutes ago, naptownskinsfan said:

Again, look at his work after the 15-1 season.  One winning season, sub .500 record.  That got him control of personnel as the head coach.  

Meanwhile, Quinn got a great defense going down there in Dallas as a coordinator again, instead of struggling as a head coach after a great season and a Super Bowl appearance.  

What they did in the years leading up to being hired by Washington is night and day.  So I think the “hot take” is that they hired RR 2.0, but if you look under the hood, it’s a very different scenario but also a different situation. 

I will concede that Rivera's trajectory, even at the time of hire, was less optimistic than Quinn imo.

I think that's a fair difference.

[MagicMT]

Quinn has a losing record without Shananan, I personally think he was the worst hire of this last coaching cycle. 
I would absolutely be okay to have him as a DC, but I wouldn't want him as head coach. 
I am just not a big fan of hiring a retread coach, and I don't know what Quinn has changed since his failed HC days that would make him a better one this time around (maybe some Cowboys/Commanders fans can tell me). 
I apply this same logic with Kingsbury, who was okay then awful with Arizona, producing an uncreative offense full of screens and shotgun snaps at the goal line with no adaptability whatsoever. Kyler Murray being good at creating plays out of structure really helped him out, and even then was the offense ever top 10 when Kingsbury was designing it? 
I feel like teams would be rewarded more often going for a new HC hires. They might not be good in the end, or they might be great, but why not try your hands with someone like Aaron Glenn or Anthony Weaver or Bobby Slowik? Same thing with OCs, there's so many candidates, why not try someone new? Even if it doesn't pan out, at least you've tried! 
The goal should be to try to be contenters for the SB, not play around .500. I feel hiring Quinn is a direct path to being average. Anyway, I might be wrong but this is just how I see things playing out. Maybe Quinn has adapted and will field a good team/defense and Kingsbury will lead a good offense with the QB they'll pick #2 and be a contenders in a couple of years. But I wouldn't bet anything on it. In fact, I'd bet that the opposite happens. 

[Mr.UFO]

Panthers hire Buccaneers QB coach Brad Idzik as OC. I don't know if he will be calling plays, or if it will be Dave Canales.

[Broncofan]

2 minutes ago, Mr.UFO said:

Panthers hire Buccaneers QB coach Brad Idzik as OC. I don't know if he will be calling plays, or if it will be Dave Canales.

I mean, if it's not Canales, I don't know what else he brings to the table.  A huge part of QB development with a young starting QB is matching the game plan to the QB's strengths and giving him the best chance to succeed, it's critical here to Young's development.

Edited February 8 by Broncofan

[HTTRDynasty]

Like this probably more than any other coaching hire we've made so far.