Jump to content

Evaluating Head Coaches Methodology, and Applying it to current coaches.


Chaos

Recommended Posts

My simple methology for evaluating coaches, is to put them into one of three categories. (this applies to all sports and all levels).  

 

  1. Generates results better than the talent on the roster would indicate
  2. Achieves the results the talent on the roster would indicate
  3. Achieves results worse than the talent on the roster would indicate. 


Four guys in the NFL seem to consistently fall into category 1.  John Harbaugh, Mike Tomlin, Andy Reid and and Bill Belichek.  I can't remember a single season where I felt like coaching held back thier respective teams.   I think Reid and Belichek have been blessed with better talent than Tomlin and Reid over time.  I don't think you really evaluate a coach on a single season.  By that metric Doug Pederson winning the super bowl with Nick Foles at QB, makes him the greatest coach of the 21st century.  I think Zac Taylor and Sean McVay can make the case they have gotten the most of out thier rosters, but they don't quite have the longevity of the other guys.  Not sure where I put Pete Carroll. I thought his most successful teams were stacked.  But ex-Seahawks don't seem to shine elsewhere. (maybe recency bias from R. Wilson).  So maybe Carroll is getting the most out the team.  

Among recent coaches I think Adam Gase is the leading example of cateogory three. Mike McCarthy may belong thier despite having actually won a super bowl.  

 

In history I think Joe Gibbs was the best for achieving results exceeding the roster.  


Are these three categories a reasonable summary way to evaluate a coach?

 



 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You're never going to be able to objectively apply such a criteria.

 

Your results will be filled with subject opinions and conclusions, which invalidates the results.

 

You can guess however!  And you can have opinions, but don't present it as some sort of quasi-science.

 

 

  • Agree 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Nextmanup said:

You're never going to be able to objectively apply such a criteria.

 

Your results will be filled with subject opinions and conclusions, which invalidates the results.

 

You can guess however!  And you can have opinions, but don't present it as some sort of quasi-science.

 

 

wierd. never said it was scientific. I think its quite clearly subjective. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Chaos said:

My simple methology for evaluating coaches, is to put them into one of three categories. (this applies to all sports and all levels).  

 

  1. Generates results better than the talent on the roster would indicate
  2. Achieves the results the talent on the roster would indicate
  3. Achieves results worse than the talent on the roster would indicate. 


Four guys in the NFL seem to consistently fall into category 1.  John Harbaugh, Mike Tomlin, Andy Reid and and Bill Belichek.  I can't remember a single season where I felt like coaching held back thier respective teams.   I think Reid and Belichek have been blessed with better talent than Tomlin and Reid over time.  I don't think you really evaluate a coach on a single season.  By that metric Doug Pederson winning the super bowl with Nick Foles at QB, makes him the greatest coach of the 21st century.  I think Zac Taylor and Sean McVay can make the case they have gotten the most of out thier rosters, but they don't quite have the longevity of the other guys.  Not sure where I put Pete Carroll. I thought his most successful teams were stacked.  But ex-Seahawks don't seem to shine elsewhere. (maybe recency bias from R. Wilson).  So maybe Carroll is getting the most out the team.  

Among recent coaches I think Adam Gase is the leading example of cateogory three. Mike McCarthy may belong thier despite having actually won a super bowl.  

 

In history I think Joe Gibbs was the best for achieving results exceeding the roster.  


Are these three categories a reasonable summary way to evaluate a coach?

 



 

 

 

Not sure I'd put Reid or Tomlin i nthe top tier.  It took Reid about 15 years before he won.  In any of those years did he not have top talent?  Tomlin won when he had top talent, lately he hasn't done all that great.  Made the playoffs, but that's about it.  Agree on Harbaugh and Belichick

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Jay_Fixit said:

2. - McDermott has failed immensely.

 

I’d say that if Buffalo brought in a better coach, this team would thrive.

 

I’d even say McDermott might be the Bulls version of Doug Collins.

He's failed in the playoffs. He's done very well in the regular season. 

 

People are mostly happy with McD and his results. Most are willing to give him more time to thrive in the playoffs.

 

The next few seasons should tell us a lot about McD. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, newcam2012 said:

He's failed in the playoffs. He's done very well in the regular season. 

 

People are mostly happy with McD and his results. Most are willing to give him more time to thrive in the playoffs.

 

The next few seasons should tell us a lot about McD. 

Lol.

 

He has one season.

  • Haha (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you truly believe Allen is a top 3 qb, our offense is top 3, defense top 5, 0 Superbowl appearances I don't see how you say its not a failure on coaching to not get the talent they have to the SB at least.  Many opportunities, many failures.  Almost any coach could get this team in the playoffs with Josh Allen.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Gunsgoodtime said:

If you truly believe Allen is a top 3 qb, our offense is top 3, defense top 5, 0 Superbowl appearances I don't see how you say its not a failure on coaching to not get the talent they have to the SB at least.  Many opportunities, many failures.  Almost any coach could get this team in the playoffs with Josh Allen.

 

The problem is Patrick Mahomes and Joe Burrow are really good too. 

  • Agree 1
  • Awesome! (+1) 2
  • Thank you (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, GunnerBill said:

This isn't a methodology. It is just subjective opinion.

 

Jesus, the season can't get here soone enough.

could not agree more.  this board has turned into the the "how many oblique ways can I say McD sucks" board.   very tired train of OPs. 

 

 Starting to think the NFL has its playoff format wrong , the all or nothing single elimination tournament format.   It causes fans to destructively dump on their team for an entire off season based on a single game, the outcome of which is driven by any number of fairly random factors no one would have anticipated.   

  • Thank you (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The same folks who claim Bean has not done a good job with free agency or the draft now want to spin a narrative that McD hasn’t done a good enough job with the massively loaded team?  Talk about conflicting narratives. 

  • Like (+1) 1
  • Haha (+1) 2
  • Awesome! (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, ProcessTruster said:

could not agree more.  this board has turned into the the "how many oblique ways can I say McD sucks" board.   very tired train of OPs. 

 

 Starting to think the NFL has its playoff format wrong , the all or nothing single elimination tournament format.   It causes fans to destructively dump on their team for an entire off season based on a single game, the outcome of which is driven by any number of fairly random factors no one would have anticipated.   

 

21 minutes ago, nedboy7 said:

The same folks who claim Bean has not done a good job with free agency or the draft now want to spin a narrative that McD hasn’t done a good enough job with the massively loaded team?  Talk about conflicting narratives. 

 

This the same poster that during the draft kept making long lists of the obvious players still on the board the Bills might take with their next pick so he could clout chase and say "he correctly predicted the pick" lol

 

So no surprise to see him frame a thread like this to back door his way into a narrative he is trying manufacture of slamming McD again

Edited by Alphadawg7
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, Chaos said:

My simple methology for evaluating coaches, is to put them into one of three categories. (this applies to all sports and all levels).  

 

  1. Generates results better than the talent on the roster would indicate
  2. Achieves the results the talent on the roster would indicate
  3. Achieves results worse than the talent on the roster would indicate. 


Four guys in the NFL seem to consistently fall into category 1.  John Harbaugh, Mike Tomlin, Andy Reid and and Bill Belichek.  I can't remember a single season where I felt like coaching held back thier respective teams.   I think Reid and Belichek have been blessed with better talent than Tomlin and Reid over time.  I don't think you really evaluate a coach on a single season.  By that metric Doug Pederson winning the super bowl with Nick Foles at QB, makes him the greatest coach of the 21st century.  I think Zac Taylor and Sean McVay can make the case they have gotten the most of out thier rosters, but they don't quite have the longevity of the other guys.  Not sure where I put Pete Carroll. I thought his most successful teams were stacked.  But ex-Seahawks don't seem to shine elsewhere. (maybe recency bias from R. Wilson).  So maybe Carroll is getting the most out the team.  

Among recent coaches I think Adam Gase is the leading example of cateogory three. Mike McCarthy may belong thier despite having actually won a super bowl.  

 

In history I think Joe Gibbs was the best for achieving results exceeding the roster.  


Are these three categories a reasonable summary way to evaluate a coach?

 



 

 

 

I evaluate the same way: results versus talent.  So, yes, it's reasonable.  I can't imagine doing it any other way.  

50 minutes ago, nedboy7 said:

The same folks who claim Bean has not done a good job with free agency or the draft now want to spin a narrative that McD hasn’t done a good enough job with the massively loaded team?  Talk about conflicting narratives. 

 

I've noticed that.  

 

We haven't won a SB, yet, but we are winning a lot of games.  So between Beane and McD, one of them must be doing something right.  

  • Agree 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

This topic is OLD. A NEW topic should be started unless there is a very specific reason to revive this one.

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...