Make the Case For...

[UltimateHoboW/Shotgun]

your next HC.

We have our favorites, but all I hear is a bunch shat talking and not enough facts.

I make no bones about it I like Giants DC Spagnuolo.

1.) He has made it to the SB.
2.) Couched a team with few headliners and they end up on top.
3.) Turns LBers into DE and back again.

[footstepsfrom#27]

I like Urban Meyer even though I understand the risk in hiring college coaches. I think he's the closest thing out there to a young Mike Shanahan based on intelligence and game preparation. He's young, has achieved the pinacle of success in college, states in his book that he does not believe in "systems" but prefers routing philosophy according to his personel, and he understand the need for defense. His offense at Floriday incorporates aspects of both the WCO and other systems. At 44 he's got a good 12-15 years in front of him before he might feel burned out, meaning he's a long term solution rather than a stop gap.

The dude even looks a bit like Shanny:

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/c/c2/Urban_Meyer_spring2008practice1.jpg/530px-Urban_Meyer_spring2008practice1.jpg (http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/c/c2/Urban_Meyer_spring2008practice1.jpg)

[vailitaliano319]

no

[BroncoDoug]

no

well that was easy

[vailitaliano319]

Lets be honest here... NO college coach has EVER been successful in the NFL (except Jimmy Johnson with the Cowboys)... see what happened in Miami when he returned (terrible)...a great coach who was a product of an even more talented team (with Dallas)

Stoops and Meyer are great (stoops is good) college football coaches but what both of them do do not translate well into the NFL game.

Both OU and UF run fantasy football type offenses. I dont think that Bradford has taken a snap under center all year, that does not work in the pros.

Stoops has done very little with alot of talent... Meyer has done well and I think he is a great college coach but I just can not buy into a college coach being successful... super bowl winning level... in the NFL

[footstepsfrom#27]

Lets be honest here... NO college coach has EVER been successful in the NFL (except Jimmy Johnson with the Cowboys)... see what happened in Miami when he returned (terrible)...a great coach who was a product of an even more talented team (with Dallas)

Stoops and Meyer are great (stoops is good) college football coaches but what both of them do do not translate well into the NFL game.

Both OU and UF run fantasy football type offenses. I dont think that Bradford has taken a snap under center all year, that does not work in the pros.

Stoops has done very little with alot of talent... Meyer has done well and I think he is a great college coach but I just can not buy into a college coach being successful... super bowl winning level... in the NFL
First of all, Johnson was not "a product" of the Cowboys...HE BUILT the Cowboys. Second, it's not true that Johnson was the only succesful coach in the NFL after jumping straight from the college ranks, and you needn't go far to find another one because he coached in Denver.

John Ralston jumped from Stanford to the Broncos in 1972 and led Denver to our first ever winning season and was named AFC Coach of the Year. He had 3 winning season in his 5 years in Denver, the first winning seasons the Broncos ever had. He left only a bit over .500 but keep in mind that the Broncos when he arrived were a relic from the striped socks era, an NFL laughing stock. Ralston had to work with the Phipps brothers as owners who really had no clue.

Other college coaches have won straight off the bat. John Robinson left USC for the Rams and went to the playoffs 6 times in 9 seasons, with two NFC championship game appearances. Unfortunately for him he also played in the same division with the 49ers Bill Walsh led teams or he might have done more.

Bobby Ross jumped from Georgia Tech to the Chargers in 1992 and went 47-33 in 6 years with 3 playoff seasons and a Superbowl appearance. He even took the woeful Lions to the playoffs twice in four years after that.

Tom Coughlin jumped to the Jacksonville Jags from Syracuse in 1995 and went to the playoffs 4 of his first 5 years, including two conference championship games, and of course won the Superbowl this year.

Finally...Barry Switzer, who admittedly had Johnson's team to play with when he won the Superbowl, also went 34-14 his first 3 years in Dallas and was then fired after only one losing season. Surely at least SOME of the team's success during that time which included another NFC Championship game appearance, was due to him. Switzer was victimized by Jone's ego, and Jerry's seemingly bizarre idea that the Cowboys should have been in the Superbowl every year, and even Parcells did no better than Barry did.

Bottom line...some college coaches can handle the jump. I think Meyer is one who can. Risky? Yes. But I believe his upside is higher than any of these guys and the closest thing out there to Shanny as an offensive mind and innovator.

[Jens1893]

First of all, Johnson was not "a product" of the Cowboys...HE BUILT the Cowboys. Second, it's not true that Johnson was the only succesful coach in the NFL after jumping straight from the college ranks, and you needn't go far to find another one because he coached in Denver.

John Ralston jumped from Stanford to the Broncos in 1972 and led Denver to our first ever winning season and was named AFC Coach of the Year. He had 3 winning season in his 5 years in Denver, the first winning seasons the Broncos ever had. He left only a bit over .500 but keep in mind that the Broncos when he arrived were a relic from the striped socks era, an NFL laughing stock. Ralston had to work with the Phipps brothers as owners who really had no clue.

Other college coaches have won straight off the bat. John Robinson left USC for the Rams and went to the playoffs 6 times in 9 seasons, with two NFC championship game appearances. Unfortunately for him he also played in the same division with the 49ers Bill Walsh led teams or he might have done more.

Bobby Ross jumped from Georgia Tech to the Chargers in 1992 and went 47-33 in 6 years with 3 playoff seasons and a Superbowl appearance. He even took the woeful Lions to the playoffs twice in four years after that.

Tom Coughlin jumped to the Jacksonville Jags from Syracuse in 1995 and went to the playoffs 4 of his first 5 years, including two conference championship games, and of course won the Superbowl this year.

Finally...Barry Switzer, who admittedly had Johnson's team to play with when he won the Superbowl, also went 34-14 his first 3 years in Dallas and was then fired after only one losing season. Surely at least SOME of the team's success during that time which included another NFC Championship game appearance, was due to him. Switzer was victimized by Jone's ego, and Jerry's seemingly bizarre idea that the Cowboys should have been in the Superbowl every year, and even Parcells did no better than Barry did.

Bottom line...some college coaches can handle the jump. I think Meyer is one who can. Risky? Yes. But I believe his upside is higher than any of these guys and the closest thing out there to Shanny as an offensive mind and innovator.

An article in today´s Denver Post actually goes into this a little deeper ... might just as well mention Dennis Green also, who made the playoffs in 8 of his 10 years in Minnesota and only had one losing season in his time there, HOWEVER, Johnson, Green and Coughlin are the only guys who successfully worked in the NFL for an extended period of time.

What concerns me about Stoops' probable interest, not to mention Bowlen's, is this is not a good fit. No college coach is. The list of college head coaches who successfully jumped to the NFL is summarized in the paragraph three graphs above, plus one: Tom Coughlin. Maybe add Dennis Green.

The scrapheap of college coaches who flopped in the NFL could crowd Mike Shanahan's new family room. Butch Davis. Nick Saban. Bobby Petrino. Mike Riley. Rich Brooks. Steve Mariucci. Dennis Erickson. Darryl Rogers. Dick MacPherson. Tommy Prothro. Frank Kush. Lou Holtz. Ron Meyer. Spurrier.

[footstepsfrom#27]

An article in today´s Denver Post actually goes into this a little deeper ... might just as well mention Dennis Green also, who made the playoffs in 8 of his 10 years in Minnesota and only had one losing season in his time there, HOWEVER, Johnson, Green and Coughlin are the only guys who successfully worked in the NFL for an extended period of time.
Robinson coached 9 years...that qualifies as "extended", and I just did some off the cuff research for this. I bet if I go back farther in time I can fine a bunch of guys who succeeded and some that did so over time. This whole college coaches fail thing is being overblown for two reasons; first becuase most new coaches go to bad teams to begin with, and second, because most bad teams make bad decisions, so they're coaching selections are suspect. Most college coaches who have jumped to the NFL were handed crappy teams and given little time to fix things. There's a learning curve that is there, admittedly...but i'd like to see how the record stacks up for NFL assistants who were handed bad teams. I bet that it's not outstanding either.

At one time or another virtually all NFL head coaches coached in college first. The only difference is most were made assistants at the NFL level before being offered a head job. The very thing that separates those that were not forced to be assistants first is the level of their college success. Only the most successful and brightest college coaches are offered NFL head jobs to begin with as a general rule. What if a college guy went 8-8 and 9-7 for two years...just like Shanahan has the last two years...before suddenly finding his sea legs and then you have a dynamic coach for years to come? Shanahan himself went 8-8 his first year. I'd be more than happy to take a season or two of .500 football if we could land a guy who produces exceptional results for the next decade after that. All I'm saying is we shouldn't be afraid to gamble on greatness, and I don't see anyone out there with Meyer's credentials. He won the NCAA title in 6 years...are you KIDDING me? This guy's got the goods and we should be looking a LONG time at him IMO.

[Beantown Bronco]

Lets be honest here... NO college coach has EVER been successful in the NFL (except Jimmy Johnson with the Cowboys)...

Time for a series of "Epic Fail" motivational posters.

[watermock]

Meyers would be a good coach. Stoops or Saban. But these guys live like kings now.

I like Meyers because he seems even tempered. Saban is good defensively.

I think we'll wind up with Spags.

[gyldenlove]

I definitely like the Spags plan, for a number of reasons I will now highlight in the style of a Letterman top 10 (some things will have been said before):

10. He has been to the super bowl recently. Unlike many others his playoff experience is recent so he knows what it takes to win in todays NFL.

9. He coaches the 4-3. Most of our defenders are best suited for a 4-3 front, so by bringing in a 4-3 guy we won't have to get a brand new set of defensive starters, we can keep some players and upgrade on the worst positions.

8. He is middle aged. He just turned 49 a couple of weeks ago so he has a lot of experience and yet he is young enough to have a long shelf-life.

7. He has a well rounded defensive background. He has coached defensive line, defensive backs, linebackers, special teams and been defensive assistant as well as defensive coordinator. This means he has a good feel for every part of every defensive players tasks and should help him install a good defensive system.

6. He would be a first time HC. This means he has no direct coaching tree he would be liable to pull assistants out of, so he can build a staff of new people who are good for the job and not people he is used to working with.

5. He doesn't get final say in term of player personnel. This means we can hire a full-time GM to handle contract talks, trades, scouting, draft, free agent signings etc. Very few coaches can do both successfully, and we saw with Shanahan that it is not always a good thing to have a coach with total power.

4. He is an NFL veteran in terms of coaching. He is used to the way things work in the NFL and his philosphy and methods are adjusted to the pro way.

3. He pulled his name out of contention for the Redskins HC job last year because he wasn't ready. That means he knows his limitations and is serious about his job, it also means he is likely a quite loyal employee.

2. Hiring him would allow us to keep some of our offensive staff in tact. We have a young offense and the worst thing you can do with young offensive players is to change the system too much, it throws off their development and wastes talent. With Spags running the defense we could concievably keep Jeremy Bates running the offense with Turner, Fisch and Dennison as position coaches and assistants.

1. He is one of the best defensive coaches out there. He build one of the strongest defenses in the league with young players and a lot of players not considered top tier for their position. Hopefully he can do something similar if he comes here.

[lex]

I definitely like the Spags plan, for a number of reasons I will now highlight in the style of a Letterman top 10 (some things will have been said before):

10. He has been to the super bowl recently. Unlike many others his playoff experience is recent so he knows what it takes to win in todays NFL.

9. He coaches the 4-3. Most of our defenders are best suited for a 4-3 front, so by bringing in a 4-3 guy we won't have to get a brand new set of defensive starters, we can keep some players and upgrade on the worst positions.

8. He is middle aged. He just turned 49 a couple of weeks ago so he has a lot of experience and yet he is young enough to have a long shelf-life.

7. He has a well rounded defensive background. He has coached defensive line, defensive backs, linebackers, special teams and been defensive assistant as well as defensive coordinator. This means he has a good feel for every part of every defensive players tasks and should help him install a good defensive system.

6. He would be a first time HC. This means he has no direct coaching tree he would be liable to pull assistants out of, so he can build a staff of new people who are good for the job and not people he is used to working with.

5. He doesn't get final say in term of player personnel. This means we can hire a full-time GM to handle contract talks, trades, scouting, draft, free agent signings etc. Very few coaches can do both successfully, and we saw with Shanahan that it is not always a good thing to have a coach with total power.

4. He is an NFL veteran in terms of coaching. He is used to the way things work in the NFL and his philosphy and methods are adjusted to the pro way.

3. He pulled his name out of contention for the Redskins HC job last year because he wasn't ready. That means he knows his limitations and is serious about his job, it also means he is likely a quite loyal employee.

2. Hiring him would allow us to keep some of our offensive staff in tact. We have a young offense and the worst thing you can do with young offensive players is to change the system too much, it throws off their development and wastes talent. With Spags running the defense we could concievably keep Jeremy Bates running the offense with Turner, Fisch and Dennison as position coaches and assistants.

1. He is one of the best defensive coaches out there. He build one of the strongest defenses in the league with young players and a lot of players not considered top tier for their position. Hopefully he can do something similar if he comes here.

...the Broncos need an architect that can rebuild the defense and this guy has by far the best resume for that. Plus, Denver has had underachieving DEs that were taken high not long ago and this guy does well freeing up DEs to succeed. And if you want to say Moss sucks, consider that the Giants were the team that Denver thought would draft Moss causing them to move up (at least I think thats correct).

[Bronx33]

I definitely like the Spags plan, for a number of reasons I will now highlight in the style of a Letterman top 10 (some things will have been said before):

11. Hes on a mission from god http://img185.imageshack.us/img185/528/image81zd1.gif

10. He has been to the super bowl recently. Unlike many others his playoff experience is recent so he knows what it takes to win in todays NFL.

9. He coaches the 4-3. Most of our defenders are best suited for a 4-3 front, so by bringing in a 4-3 guy we won't have to get a brand new set of defensive starters, we can keep some players and upgrade on the worst positions.

8. He is middle aged. He just turned 49 a couple of weeks ago so he has a lot of experience and yet he is young enough to have a long shelf-life.

7. He has a well rounded defensive background. He has coached defensive line, defensive backs, linebackers, special teams and been defensive assistant as well as defensive coordinator. This means he has a good feel for every part of every defensive players tasks and should help him install a good defensive system.

6. He would be a first time HC. This means he has no direct coaching tree he would be liable to pull assistants out of, so he can build a staff of new people who are good for the job and not people he is used to working with.

5. He doesn't get final say in term of player personnel. This means we can hire a full-time GM to handle contract talks, trades, scouting, draft, free agent signings etc. Very few coaches can do both successfully, and we saw with Shanahan that it is not always a good thing to have a coach with total power.

4. He is an NFL veteran in terms of coaching. He is used to the way things work in the NFL and his philosphy and methods are adjusted to the pro way.

3. He pulled his name out of contention for the Redskins HC job last year because he wasn't ready. That means he knows his limitations and is serious about his job, it also means he is likely a quite loyal employee.

2. Hiring him would allow us to keep some of our offensive staff in tact. We have a young offense and the worst thing you can do with young offensive players is to change the system too much, it throws off their development and wastes talent. With Spags running the defense we could concievably keep Jeremy Bates running the offense with Turner, Fisch and Dennison as position coaches and assistants.

1. He is one of the best defensive coaches out there. He build one of the strongest defenses in the league with young players and a lot of players not considered top tier for their position. Hopefully he can do something similar if he comes here.


fixed

[Inkana7]

Spagnuolo's defensive calls are brilliant. It's quite a sight to behold after watching our defense all year. Even when the Giants go to a 4 man rush they stunt and twist and do so many different things that the offensive line gets confused and if they don't get a sack, they hit the QB. His blitz schemes are the best in the NFL. He disguises and mixes up coverages with the best of them as well.

But most importantly, he has his defenses playing fast. Every player is on the same page and they get the job done.

[Rohirrim]

Here's who I want:
http://partmule.com/blog16/wp-content/uploads/2007/12/parcells.jpg

I think he would also be an inspiration to the players in the conditioning program.

[footstepsfrom#27]

He would be a first time HC. This means he has no direct coaching tree he would be liable to pull assistants out of, so he can build a staff of new people who are good for the job and not people he is used to working with.
That also means he has limited person experience with delegating responsibilities to assistants, and has no direct experience seeing how particular individuals respond to his leadership. Since when is having no HC experience an asset? This is the first time I've ever heard it expressed as such. You're also assuming that a guy with HC experience couldn't make value judgements about anyone other than his own guys, which seems unfounded.
He doesn't get final say in term of player personnel. This means we can hire a full-time GM to handle contract talks, trades, scouting, draft, free agent signings etc. Very few coaches can do both successfully, and we saw with Shanahan that it is not always a good thing to have a coach with total power.
Bowlen wanted Shanahan to have that power and until recently it worked great. Shanahan's problem was his lack of interest in defense, not his power over personel. Not having power over contracts, etc...is one thing; not having control over your own personel is quite another. It think it's a bad idea to not let a coach play with the players he wants to bring in, so no, this is not a selling point if in fact it's true.
He pulled his name out of contention for the Redskins HC job last year because he wasn't ready. That means he knows his limitations and is serious about his job, it also means he is likely a quite loyal employee.
Or maybe it means he's not ready now either...less than a year after he said that. If he "knew his limitations" made him unready a year ago, why is suddenly qualified to be the next Shanahan? This one really concerns me.
Hiring him would allow us to keep some of our offensive staff in tact. We have a young offense and the worst thing you can do with young offensive players is to change the system too much, it throws off their development and wastes talent. With Spags running the defense we could concievably keep Jeremy Bates running the offense with Turner, Fisch and Dennison as position coaches and assistants.
No the worst thing we could do is emasculate the new coach and tell him he has to play with Mike Shanahan's staff instead of his own. That's the definition of "puppet"...see Barry Switzer. I don't see hiring a guy based on the fact that he's wiling to be a yes man as a strong point...in fact that would make me exlude him from consideration if it's true.

[UltimateHoboW/Shotgun]

That also means he has limited person experience with delegating responsibilities to assistants, and has no direct experience seeing how particular individuals respond to his leadership. Since when is having no HC experience an asset? This is the first time I've ever heard it expressed as such. You're also assuming that a guy with HC experience couldn't make value judgements about anyone other than his own guys, which seems unfounded.

Bowlen wanted Shanahan to have that power and until recently it worked great. Shanahan's problem was his lack of interest in defense, not his power over personel. Not having power over contracts, etc...is one thing; not having control over your own personel is quite another. It think it's a bad idea to not let a coach play with the players he wants to bring in, so no, this is not a selling point if in fact it's true.

Or maybe it means he's not ready now either...less than a year after he said that. If he "knew his limitations" made him unready a year ago, why is suddenly qualified to be the next Shanahan? This one really concerns me.

No the worst thing we could do is emasculate the new coach and tell him he has to play with Mike Shanahan's staff instead of his own. That's the definition of "puppet"...see Barry Switzer. I don't see hiring a guy based on the fact that he's wiling to be a yes man as a strong point...in fact that would make me exlude him from consideration if it's true.

Well actually Shannahan did the same thing when he was with the 49ers. And look how well it turned out for him. It says a lot about a man that knows what he wants and is willing to waith for it and demand it when the opportunity comes.

[Inkana7]

Spagnuolo also completely turned the Giants D around in 2 years. Before he was hired the Giants were 25th in total defense, 28th against the pass. Sounds familiar. They were 7th last year in total defense, 11th in Pass defense and 5th this season in total defense and 8th in pass defense! That's incredible. One year. From 25th to 7th. One more and they go from 7th to 5th WITHOUT their best D-Lineman.

They have no big names in their secondary, a bunch of low round guys and FAs at Linebacker. Obviously Antonio Pierce deserved to be drafted, but Danny Clark is starting at OLB for him. He was let go by Oakland!

If we don't hire him, I'll cry.

[Rohirrim]

Spagnuolo also completely turned the Giants D around in 2 years. Before he was hired the Giants were 25th in total defense, 28th against the pass. Sounds familiar. They were 7th last year in total defense, 11th in Pass defense and 5th this season in total defense and 8th in pass defense! That's incredible. One year. From 25th to 7th. One more and they go from 7th to 5th WITHOUT their best D-Lineman.

They have no big names in their secondary, a bunch of low round guys and FAs at Linebacker. Obviously Antonio Pierce deserved to be drafted, but Danny Clark is starting at OLB for him. He was let go by Oakland!

If we don't hire him, I'll cry.

Damn! In that case bring him in. I don't care if he puts all their dumb asses in prayer meetings. Praise the Lord! !Booya!

[Inkana7]

Tony Dungy is radically religious. I don't think that's a problem for the Colts.

[Rohirrim]

With the Broncos current offense and a number 8 defense, I might even be moved to have a religious experience.

[Inkana7]

With the Broncos current offense and a number 8 defense, I might even be moved to have a religious experience.

#2 Offense + Top 15 Defense = Championship

[Bronx33]

#2 Offense + Top 15 Defense = Championship


Exactly my thoughts.

[Cito Pelon]

Since I've been saying for a couple years 50% of the OC's and DC's in the league could do just as good a job as Shanahan, that's my case for the next HC.

For the guys that Bowlen has lined up for interviews, Spags, Garrett and Dennison are the most NFL experienced, Garrett and Dennison former NFL players, Dennison for the Broncos and a CSU alum.

Josh McDaniels and Raheem Morris are young (32), little experience. Beyond those some possibilities are Leslie Frazier a former NFL player and SB player and coach with CHI and IND. Can't talk to him til Minny is eliminated. He's 50'ish yrs old same as Spags and Dennison.

Then maybe we see Rex Ryan and Ron Rivera interviewed, both can't be contacted til they're eliminated in the playoffs. Rivera played on the CHI '85 SB team, DC for the latest CHI SB appearance. Rex Ryan son of Buddy, twin brother to Rob of the Raiders. Never played in the NFL, been on the Ravens staff for nine years. I see he interviewed for the MIA and ATL HC jobs last year.

Spag, Dennison, Frazier might be the best choices. I don't talk to them, so I don't know.

[footstepsfrom#27]

Well actually Shannahan did the same thing when he was with the 49ers. And look how well it turned out for him. It says a lot about a man that knows what he wants and is willing to waith for it and demand it when the opportunity comes.
I don't recall Shanahan saying that, but if you say so I'll take your word for it. Be that as it may, I still think we should know WHY he made that statement. If he simply thought he needed another year...fine. If he meant something more...

Just sayin'...

[Endy]

My vote is for Spags for a couple of reasons.

First, why hire an offensive minded coach when you just fired the best one in the game? Our defense sucks, our offense is very good. Hopefully a guy like Spags would be open to keeping guys like Bates and Turner around for some continuity on the side of the ball that deserves it.

Secondly, the dude has experience. I don't want to see some guy who is younger than me (33) roaming the sidelines trying to look like he knows WTF he is doing.

Third, by all accounts he is a coach whose players will follow into the burning depths of hell (or Arrowhead, which is actually hell's foyer).

Fourth, and this one is purely personal, I want to think that the Broncos job is something you coach for 25 years to get. 32 year old coaches get jobs in Oakland, not in Denver.

[gyldenlove]

Quote:
Originally Posted by gyldenlove
He would be a first time HC. This means he has no direct coaching tree he would be liable to pull assistants out of, so he can build a staff of new people who are good for the job and not people he is used to working with.

That also means he has limited person experience with delegating responsibilities to assistants, and has no direct experience seeing how particular individuals respond to his leadership. Since when is having no HC experience an asset? This is the first time I've ever heard it expressed as such. You're also assuming that a guy with HC experience couldn't make value judgements about anyone other than his own guys, which seems unfounded.

Quote:
He doesn't get final say in term of player personnel. This means we can hire a full-time GM to handle contract talks, trades, scouting, draft, free agent signings etc. Very few coaches can do both successfully, and we saw with Shanahan that it is not always a good thing to have a coach with total power.

Bowlen wanted Shanahan to have that power and until recently it worked great. Shanahan's problem was his lack of interest in defense, not his power over personel. Not having power over contracts, etc...is one thing; not having control over your own personel is quite another. It think it's a bad idea to not let a coach play with the players he wants to bring in, so no, this is not a selling point if in fact it's true.

Quote:
He pulled his name out of contention for the Redskins HC job last year because he wasn't ready. That means he knows his limitations and is serious about his job, it also means he is likely a quite loyal employee.

Or maybe it means he's not ready now either...less than a year after he said that. If he "knew his limitations" made him unready a year ago, why is suddenly qualified to be the next Shanahan? This one really concerns me.

Quote:
Hiring him would allow us to keep some of our offensive staff in tact. We have a young offense and the worst thing you can do with young offensive players is to change the system too much, it throws off their development and wastes talent. With Spags running the defense we could concievably keep Jeremy Bates running the offense with Turner, Fisch and Dennison as position coaches and assistants.

No the worst thing we could do is emasculate the new coach and tell him he has to play with Mike Shanahan's staff instead of his own. That's the definition of "puppet"...see Barry Switzer. I don't see hiring a guy based on the fact that he's wiling to be a yes man as a strong point...in fact that would make me exlude him from consideration if it's true.

As a defensive coordinator he has plenty of experience delegating. He was in charge of play calling on defense and the led the most dominant unit of the defending super bowl champions. Most people with head coaching experience are not head coaches because they were no good at it, we don't need to pull in a failure just to find out it wasn't the team, it was the coach - that is what San Diego did and they went from a super bowl contender to a joke.

How many good free agents did Shanahan sign in the last 10 years? it is not for lack of trying either, he spend a ton of money. Contract-wise it wasn't much better, we had to let go of Berry, Heyward and Pryce for contract reasons, and of course a couple of draft picks because he got too creative. Draft-wise it wasn't impressive either, we will quite likely not have a single 2005 draft pick on the roster next year, only DJ Williams from 2004 since Bell will be back selling phones, nobody from 2003, nobody from 2002, Ben Hamilton from 2001 and nobody from earlier drafts (assuming Nalen retires). That means that every single roster spot will be filled with picks made in the last 4 drafts (2009 included) and free agency. Coughlin doesn't have final say in New York and he did quite well, Tomlin doesn't in Pittsburgh and he does quite well, Schottenheimer didn't in San Diego and he did quite well. It is much easier to find a guy who is a good GM and a guy who is a good coach and let them work together rather than finding a guy who is a good GM and coach.

That is exactly the thing, he is not going to be the "next Shanahan", he is going to the next head coach. We know he is a good coach, the Giants defense have proved that, and he is not being asked to be a good GM because someone else will deal with that job. He knew he wasn't ready, and if he is ready now then he will also know not to meddle with things he is not ready to take on like trading and managing the draft.

If we take away everything that our offensive line does well now, everything Cutler has learned, everything Royal and Marshall have learned and ask them all to do something different, they will fail. We you have a good offense, why do you want to change that? We are not the Lions, we are not 0-16, we actually did quite a few things right, why throw that away just for the sake of change? I know Obama got a lot of Americans hooked on change, but if you change something good, chance is you are going to make it worse.

[footstepsfrom#27]

As a defensive coordinator he has plenty of experience delegating. He was in charge of play calling on defense and the led the most dominant unit of the defending super bowl champions. Most people with head coaching experience are not head coaches because they were no good at it, we don't need to pull in a failure just to find out it wasn't the team, it was the coach - that is what San Diego did and they went from a super bowl contender to a joke.
I'm not suggesting we hire an NFL retread, but head coaching experience at the college level prior to being in the NFL is a plus, not a negative. Being an assistant, even a coordinator...is not the same job, as you just pointed out. Why then is it a plus to have never had that experience?
How many good free agents did Shanahan sign in the last 10 years? it is not for lack of trying either, he spend a ton of money. Contract-wise it wasn't much better, we had to let go of Berry, Heyward and Pryce for contract reasons, and of course a couple of draft picks because he got too creative. Draft-wise it wasn't impressive either, we will quite likely not have a single 2005 draft pick on the roster next year, only DJ Williams from 2004 since Bell will be back selling phones, nobody from 2003, nobody from 2002, Ben Hamilton from 2001 and nobody from earlier drafts (assuming Nalen retires). That means that every single roster spot will be filled with picks made in the last 4 drafts (2009 included) and free agency. Coughlin doesn't have final say in New York and he did quite well, Tomlin doesn't in Pittsburgh and he does quite well, Schottenheimer didn't in San Diego and he did quite well. It is much easier to find a guy who is a good GM and a guy who is a good coach and let them work together rather than finding a guy who is a good GM and coach.
I already said the GM duties that have to do with contract negotiations and similar stuff should be done by somebody else. But not letting the coach have control over his players is a different thing. Just because soem coaches have accepted it doesn't mean they like it. Keep in mind that Tomlin in Pittsburgh is in one of the top two organizations in the NFL for using the draft, NE being the other, so why would he complain? Coughlin up till last year was on the verge of being fired, Schottenheimer was fired...I bet if you asked him he'd tell you he wanted to pick his own players.
That is exactly the thing, he is not going to be the "next Shanahan", he is going to the next head coach. We know he is a good coach, the Giants defense have proved that, and he is not being asked to be a good GM because someone else will deal with that job. He knew he wasn't ready, and if he is ready now then he will also know not to meddle with things he is not ready to take on like trading and managing the draft.
I said, "the next Shanahan" as a term to designate a guy we want to lead this team for a decade or more. That guy doesn't have to "manage the draft" in order to have final say over who we choose. Trading players is something that the coach needs to approve. Or do we want players traded the coach wanted to keep or player son the roster he doesn't want? That's what Jerry Jones does...how's it working out for him?
If we take away everything that our offensive line does well now, everything Cutler has learned, everything Royal and Marshall have learned and ask them all to do something different, they will fail. We you have a good offense, why do you want to change that? We are not the Lions, we are not 0-16, we actually did quite a few things right, why throw that away just for the sake of change? I know Obama got a lot of Americans hooked on change, but if you change something good, chance is you are going to make it worse.
I'm not suggesting we change the entire system or throw it all away. I'm suggesting the new guy be somebody who already recognzies the value of what's here and how to appropriately use talent. This offense is good, but not great...it can improve. Just because a new guy brings in his own assistants doesn't necessarily mean we dump the whole thing but the coach has to have control over his team...or else it's not his team.

That should make sense...

[UltimateHoboW/Shotgun]

I don't recall Shanahan saying that, but if you say so I'll take your word for it. Be that as it may, I still think we should know WHY he made that statement. If he simply thought he needed another year...fine. If he meant something more...

Just sayin'...

Bronco histroy 101. After letting Reeves go Bowlen went to Shannahan first. Shannanhan hadn't won the SB yet but But he turned the job down feeling he handn't gotten enough experience from the 49ers' system. That was the only reason Wade Phillips got the HC

[DBroncos4life]

Here's who I want:
http://partmule.com/blog16/wp-content/uploads/2007/12/parcells.jpg

I think he would also be an inspiration to the players in the conditioning program.

The only coach that I thought should be a choice.

[DBroncos4life]

It will be Jimmy Johnson

[UltimateHoboW/Shotgun]

It will be Jimmy Johnson

ok explain.

[DBroncos4life]

ok explain.

It would just be a shocking pick with the names being tossed out here. I think with a owner that is willing to spend and place talent around him Jimmy is a pretty good coach.

[UltimateHoboW/Shotgun]

It would just be a shocking pick with the names being tossed out here. I think with a owner that is willing to spend and place talent around him Jimmy is a pretty good coach.

Have to agree. Jimmy Johnsons eagles are ranked 3rd with like what 1 probowler. And he worked with Spagnoulo.

[Inkana7]

Johnson's like 75. He'll never be a HC.

[Stormontheplains]

My vote, Kyle Shanahan!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[UltimateHoboW/Shotgun]

Johnson's like 75. He'll never be a HC.

What does age have to do with it? Coughin won the Sb last year.

[vailitaliano319]

First of all, Johnson was not "a product" of the Cowboys...HE BUILT the Cowboys. Second, it's not true that Johnson was the only succesful coach in the NFL after jumping straight from the college ranks, and you needn't go far to find another one because he coached in Denver.

John Ralston jumped from Stanford to the Broncos in 1972 and led Denver to our first ever winning season and was named AFC Coach of the Year. He had 3 winning season in his 5 years in Denver, the first winning seasons the Broncos ever had. He left only a bit over .500 but keep in mind that the Broncos when he arrived were a relic from the striped socks era, an NFL laughing stock. Ralston had to work with the Phipps brothers as owners who really had no clue.

Other college coaches have won straight off the bat. John Robinson left USC for the Rams and went to the playoffs 6 times in 9 seasons, with two NFC championship game appearances. Unfortunately for him he also played in the same division with the 49ers Bill Walsh led teams or he might have done more.

Bobby Ross jumped from Georgia Tech to the Chargers in 1992 and went 47-33 in 6 years with 3 playoff seasons and a Superbowl appearance. He even took the woeful Lions to the playoffs twice in four years after that.

Tom Coughlin jumped to the Jacksonville Jags from Syracuse in 1995 and went to the playoffs 4 of his first 5 years, including two conference championship games, and of course won the Superbowl this year.

Finally...Barry Switzer, who admittedly had Johnson's team to play with when he won the Superbowl, also went 34-14 his first 3 years in Dallas and was then fired after only one losing season. Surely at least SOME of the team's success during that time which included another NFC Championship game appearance, was due to him. Switzer was victimized by Jone's ego, and Jerry's seemingly bizarre idea that the Cowboys should have been in the Superbowl every year, and even Parcells did no better than Barry did.

Bottom line...some college coaches can handle the jump. I think Meyer is one who can. Risky? Yes. But I believe his upside is higher than any of these guys and the closest thing out there to Shanny as an offensive mind and innovator.

A lot of ifs-ands-or buts.... Jimmy Johnson was a great coach on both levels but when push comes to shove do you want a college coach running an NFL team? Think Meyer is a great college coach, but it just doesnt fit.

NO

[UltimateHoboW/Shotgun]

A lot of ifs-ands-or buts.... Jimmy Johnson was a great coach on both levels but when push comes to shove do you want a college coach running an NFL team? Think Meyer is a great college coach, but it just doesnt fit.

NO

ok. if you don't like meyer. thats fine. but you need to give some reasons, because otherwise its just shat talking.

now me personally i'm not a big fand college HC to NFL HC. its for the fact that in college most of these kids are kids. 99.9% of these kids have never been away from home. In the NFL the average roster is 28 years old.a lot of them are married. they are grown men. the rah rah stuff that works in college doesn't work in the NFL. my favorite example is from lou hultz. this little 70 year old 90 lb man pulls his player by the face mask and is yelling at him on national tv and all the player does stand there and take it. imagine if that was happened to champ bailey. that coach would died.

[Inkana7]

What does age have to do with it? Coughin won the Sb last year.

Coughlin was 49 when he got his first Head Coaching job. And he's only 62 now. It's common knowledge that teams are reluctant to hire old dudes as Head Coaches.

[UltimateHoboW/Shotgun]

Coughlin was 49 when he got his first Head Coaching job. And he's only 62 now. It's common knowledge that teams are reluctant to hire old dudes as Head Coaches.

Look all I'm saying age shouldn't be a minus. Its like this between a 28 year old swimsuit model and a 38 year old model victoria's secret model. I'm not throwing either out of bed because of age. :)

[broncoblue]

sitting on the fence with a blister on my ass...i just hope for not back2back but a threepeat.Im greedy and dont care.

[Inkana7]

Look all I'm saying age shouldn't be a minus. Its like this between a 28 year old swimsuit model and a 38 year old model victoria's secret model. I'm not throwing either out of bed because of age. :)

NFL exec's would. You can say that it shouldn't be a minus, but it is.

[RunSilentRunDeep]

I like Spags but the Giants D has slipped the second half of the season. Also, everyone is looking at this as if he'll be 100% hands on with the defense. He may hire a DC that sucks balls. Marvin Lewis has had eight years in Cincy and still can't produce a solid unit despite being a Super Bowl winning DC.

[UltimateHoboW/Shotgun]

NFL exec's would. You can say that it shouldn't be a minus, but it is.

Look all I'm saying is that we should look for the best canidate and record should count more than some number on a your drivers license.