Another Hue bromance thread...go figure.
Head coach is an extremely challenging job and very few guys are consistent winners. In fact only a handful of head coaches have a lifetime record better than .500.
Take a guy like Andy Reid, a proven .600 winning percentage coach, who now has the Eagles on a 6 game losing streak.
That said, Mckenzie obviously made a huge mistake selecting Dennis Allen , who is in the Lane Kiffin, Mike Nolan, Romeo Crenel category of bout .250 percentage wins.
Keeping Hue Jackson for another year would have made the most sense. Or perhaps giving a proven .550 to .600 winner like Wade Phillips or Marty Schotenheimer a 1-2 year contract would have given the Raiders oranization some stability , likely an 8-8 type record, and a good foundation from which to build upon during future years.
Don't knock 8-8. It's respectable. The team is competitive, keeping it's players and fan base interested, a player or two away from a lengthy playoff run. Mark Davis and Mckenzie could have had that if they had gone with a proven .500 type coach.
Another Hue bromance thread...go figure.
What kind of sick bastard starts a thread like this.
You can argue whether hue was the answer or not but to throw Allen in with a bunch of proven losers at this point in his career is just ignorant.
I will just leave it at that because this is a waste of my energy that could be used staring at the sun or arguing with my foot
Rate this thread: Terrible
All these kiffen's, cable's, jackson's, and allen's are a joke. It is time to get a guy that knows how to motivate, game-plan, and win. Jon Gruden!
Team: "Find a way to draft Johnny Manziel"
This thread is definitely not about Hue Jackson, I only mentioned him because last year he was the team's coach,. and for his two year career he had a solid .500 record.
This thread is about how challenging it is to be a successful head coach.
Mark Davis and Mckenzie should have stuck with Hue, or hired another proven .500 winning percentage type coach. it doesn't matter which guy, just a proven competent head coach.
The problem with hiring a guy who has never been a head coach anywhere (such as Lane Kiffin, Mike Nolan, Mike Singletary , Dennis Allen,,,,,etc...) is that chances are the guy will be overwhelmed and end up with a .250 type winning percentage.
If Davis and Mckenzie wanted a fresh face they should have picked a proven college head coach. That's no guarantee of success, either, but at least the college guy has some head coach experience.
But How do you know that Reggie didn't look at some College Coach for the job ?
Just because he didn't hire one doesn't mean he didn't contact one about the job either .
That if wanting to throw in the sub .500 records for coaches in their 1st season then you would be missing quite a few of the Hall of Fame coaches now to because of struggling in their first season or two with the job . Bill Walsh(2-14) , Bill Parcells(3-12-1) , Jimmy Johnson(1-15) , Bill Belichick(6-10) , Mike Shanahan(7-9) , and Vince Lombardi who had 5 future hall of fame players on his team went 1-10-1 worst record in all of Packers history .
Yet see how it turned out for the franchise by sticking by the coaches and allowing them to grow into the role and using the draft to help upgrade their rosters and fit to their schemes .
Will Dennis have a coaching career like these guys who is to say only time will tell for this on him .
Will he be in a long line of coaches that are maybe just .500 coaches too .
Will he be a coach that is in the ranks of being bad too is only again time will tell for this too .
But got to give the man at least 3 years to see what he can do and does he change during this time too . Got to give him the chance to sit down with Reggie at the end of the season and say hey this is who I will keep on my staff and these are who I'm replacing and this is who I want you to contact for filling their roles with .
I agree with your premise that it is hard to be a successful NFL head coach. Don't you think it is a little early to decide that Allen cannot be successful? He may not be a good coach. I just think it's a little early to lump him together with guys like Crennel and Nolan. Or to compare him with long-time head coaches like Phillips or Schotenheimer. The sample size is just too small.
DA may turn out to be a poor head coach. Belichik was 6-10 his first year. Tom Landry was 0-11-1. Chuck Noll was 1-13. DA will probably never reach the level of those Hall of Fame coaches. He may turn out like Nolan. Or Spagnola. Or multiple other coordinators who didn't work out as head coaches. It's just too soon to make that determination. If it was that easy, we'd all be head coaches or GMs.
One other thing, if it were easy to get a top coach here, wouldn't it have happened already? Cowher, Gruden (if you consider him a top coach), and Harbaugh were not exactly beating down the Raiders door looking for that opportunity. It's not that attractive of a job at this point.
Bill Walsh was hired after the 49er's had gone through 3 different head coaches in 3 years. Monte Clark. Ken Meyer, and Pete Mculley were all terrible coaches. The team looked lost every year. And for the previous 7 or 8 years before that Dick Nolan was not much better.
From game one (with Walsh as coach) 49er fans absolutely knew the 49ers were in much better hands. Even though the team was losing game after game it was clear they were a well coached team using smart, innovative use of players and game plans. From the first game he coached the team looked disciplined, organized, energetic , using good fundamental blocking and tackling techniques, showing clear improvement from week to week etc.... and fans knew it was just a matter of time before the team started consistently winning games. During press conferences Walsh would give detailed explanations of specific plays both teams used and why they worked or did not work. He was a leader who had complete control of his team, knowing without any doubt what exactly had to be done and how to do it.
Starting this season I do not think Raider fans expected many wins. But they did expect to see a well coached team that looked liked they knew what they were doing on the field, showing some week to week evidence of good coaching. Unfortunately, the Raider coaching staff has shown no evidence of teaching good fundamental blocking and tackling techniqies, or innovative use of players, or creative play calling.
It's not the losses which hurt. It is the revelation that this is not a well coached team which causes fans (and players I presume) to lose faith.
A few people here have made the same comment about head coaching the Raiders being a less than desireable job opportunity. But since "hands on' Al Davis is no longer living, my thinking is that being the Raiders head coach could be one of the NFL's best jobs. Great fan base, legacy of 3 Superbowls,, Bay Area living etc... What's not to like?
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)