What is a fair way to judge a hew hire?

[klos63]

Based on that, Danny Crossman was a horrible hire.

 

Going back further, you'd have to question the hiring of Marv Levy too. He went 2-5 in his first partial year with the Bills, after going 3-6 in his last (partial) year with KC.

 

Maybe you need more than a year?

I think you take into account much of what has been discussed here. With Marv, take it to account what he started with and was progress being made. With Crossman, management acknowledged he didn't have much to work with, they gave him quality players in year 2 and they were great.

 

I guess the point of my original post was that it's pretty ridiculous to criticize a hire they day they sign, before they even get to meet their players. It takes time, sometimes a couple years in progress.

 

Edited January 17, 2015 by klos63

[3rdand12]

I think you take into account much of what has been discussed here. With Marv, take it to account what he started with and was progress being made. With Crossman, management acknowledged he didn't have much to work with, they gave him quality players in year 2 and they were great.

 

I guess the point of my original post was that it's pretty ridiculous to criticize a hire they day they sign, before they even get to meet their players. It takes time, sometimes a couple years in progress.

 

We dont have a couple years. that would be my respectful counter.

 

we are a desperate bunch with a closing window to win.

Do we have to reset to the widely abused 3 year plan?

I hate when we do that!

 

Crossman and his rise to respectability pays homage to Whaley.

 

But you are right. its takes time for new set of characters to get settled. Thats why continuity is common with Head coaching changes. Bring the whole staff , get up and running. year two make adjustments to upgrade.

Too early to carry any strong opinions though.

[Dan]

For me, at least, I try to look at what they've done over the course of the last few seasons combined with the team/situation they were in. I like to see that a coach has a track record of consistently getting good production out of average players. For me, to call Gase a great OC when he's working with Manning carries less weight than looking at what Chan did with Fitz, just as one example.

 

But, I think everyone should realize that the dynamics of every hire change with the scenery. Nothing is guaranteed. Sure, a coach that had consistently gotten his players to play hard and produce should be expected to do well. Conversely, a coach that's had down years can often blossom in a new environment.

 

Hence, I tend to withhold all judgement until the assistants start coming in. Currently, I have a mixed feeling for Rex. I'm not a big fan of him bringing his entire Jets staff in, but most coaches like to do that. I like the Roman hire for what he's done with Kap. So, like some, I'm a little on the fence for the time being until I see what they do on the field.

 

At that point, I want to see them field a team that looks prepared, makes adjustments, plays hard and generally play above their perceived talent levels. And ultimately make progress in those areas and the win column. That was my biggest problem this past year, and why I was glad to see Marrone go. You could see the defense improve throughout the season. Yeah, they made mistakes and weren't perfect (hello 3rd and 22), but you could see noticeable improvement throughout the season and guys like Rambo step in and immediately look like they know what they're doing. Offensively, we were stuck in the mud. They seemed to regress in many areas and committed the same mistakes over and over.

 

So, in the end, I'm not sure Rex et al. will get us over the hump and turn this team into a perennial playoff contender, but I think the staff they're assembling has a proven track record and should be able to with our current players (assuming we generate a QB from somewhere). Now we just have to see what they do from here and if they can consistently field a winner, week in and week out, year after year.

[YoloinOhio]

I check out the fan message board from his previous team and see if they hate him. It's the only way to get a fair and accurate portrayal of his coaching ability with a different team. Obviously.

[Kirby Jackson]

I check out the fan message board from his previous team and see if they hate him. It's the only way to get a fair and accurate portrayal of his coaching ability with a different team. Obviously.

Poor St. Doug

[hondo in seattle]

I think you take into account much of what has been discussed here. With Marv, take it to account what he started with and was progress being made. With Crossman, management acknowledged he didn't have much to work with, they gave him quality players in year 2 and they were great.

 

I guess the point of my original post was that it's pretty ridiculous to criticize a hire they day they sign, before they even get to meet their players. It takes time, sometimes a couple years in progress.

 

I agree with this, actually.

 

Now I think a Head Coach or coordinator who gets to talk with and observe their position coaches on a daily basis can make an assessment much quicker. We fans, however, don't have that level of intimate knowledge of what the position coaches are doing - or failing to do.

[YoloinOhio]

This

 

@mortreport: Why "grade" coach hires so far? Think about reaction when this year's final four were hired: Belichick, Carroll, McCarthy & Pagano

 

Add Jim Caldwell to that list from last year