Why don't our coordinators/assistant succeed as Head Coaches

JDLefebvre

All I can think of is Marvin Lewis and even he would've been fired a long time ago by most teams.

But those who failed in the past.

Lebeau
Mularkey
Whiz
Gailey

Know there's more but having trouble thinking of them!!!
_________________
Stay low boys.... keep those feet moving!

Sig by Joe_is_the_best
KCCO!!!

Jakuvious · Joined: 06 Sep 2010 Posts: 4607

Mainly because few coaches succeed in general. When you look at the turnover rates for coaches, there's only a handful that last more than 3 or 4 years period, and those are the coaches of teams that consistently make the postseason. So it is really just a matter of probability. Same as why most NE castoffs fail.
_________________

rollins · Joined: 19 Dec 2010 Posts: 513

I actually think Whiz is a good coach, I mean he got the Arizona Cardinals to a SB! Since then he simply hasn't had a QB that was capable of anything better than a losing season.

I don't know how much say he has with personel decisions, but that has been Arizona's problem not the coaching.

I would say with a team like Detroit Whiz would be a perrennial playoff team.

jebrick · Joined: 10 Jan 2006 Posts: 7125 Location: Indianapolis

#1 LeBeau failed with the Bengals. Paul Brown failed with the Bengals and he was the owner.

#2 related to #1 - The owner/GM of a team matter for the success of the coach.

#3 It all depends on how good your assistant coaches are Very Happy

None of them did that bad but very few owners have the patience to wait on a change for their players. Tomlin inherited crap on the Oline from Cowher and it has taken 4 years to really change it. Just can't do it over night like most people think.
_________________

"You build with draft choices. You find people with talents adaptable to your plans and then you teach them to do things the way we do them." - Chuck Noll

rollins · Joined: 19 Dec 2010 Posts: 513

Other than Whiz, the rest were just meant to be coordintors, and one of them happens to be a pretty damn good coordinator! Some guys are meant to coach while some are meant to coordinate. Look at Tomlin, I believe he is the opposite of LeBeau. LeBeau biggest strength is teaching and drawing up plays so he is better as a coordinator than HC. While Tomlin on the other hand has a knack for inspiring and leading men. Theres something about how he speaks that makes people listen, thats why he is better as a HC than a coordinator. To me he wasn't more than average as a coordinator. And I was highly skeptical of his hiring until I heard a few press conferences.

jcm412 · Joined: 10 Jan 2008 Posts: 3255

What about John Fox and Tony Dungey?[/u]

Bobikus · Joined: 07 Jun 2009 Posts: 6293

Because play drawing and calling is what typically makes a coord great while motivating and personnel management tends to be what makes an HC great. Different skills.
_________________
Geno Smith, Tavon Austin, Stedman Bailey, and Bruce Irvin will all have at least 1 pro bowl season each by the end of the decade.

FourThreeMafia · Joined: 28 Sep 2006 Posts: 40062 Location: East of Sixburgh

Bobikus · Joined: 07 Jun 2009 Posts: 6293

Arizona could have easily taken shots at guys like Flacco, Dalton, Wilson, etc while Whis was there, but chose to overpay for guys like Kolb and keep Leinart around too long despite Whis clearly disliking him from the start.
_________________
Geno Smith, Tavon Austin, Stedman Bailey, and Bruce Irvin will all have at least 1 pro bowl season each by the end of the decade.

SteelProven · Posted: Wed Jan 02, 2013 8:46 pm Post subject:

I like Whiz always have, but his drafts never really panned out. If not for L. Fitzgerald staying Whiz would of probably been gone sooner.

The Steelers coordinators never really walked into stable situations. They've all inherited mid level or poor teams. When you take over teams like that you need luck and a lot of it. Something like Bellichick did when getting Brady.

None of the Steelers coordinators ever had a functional QB for the long term. That position has to be stable in some form in fashion.
_________________

lionslicer · Joined: 06 Nov 2010 Posts: 1759

Whiz did not have that much control of the team, he was the head coach who played with players the GM gave him....

Rod Graves was responsible for everything, and probably had more responsibilities than 90% of GM's in the NFL. Whiz was hired as a coach and to play that role only. His only decisions were what he made on the field and who to play/bench...

Leinart was there so long because Graves didn't want to admit he drafted a bust.

I like how when a team is good at drafting, people praise the GM, but when they fail, they blame the coach...
_________________
Kickers are people too

C$! · Joined: 11 Dec 2007 Posts: 1344

Dom Capers and Jim Haslett did pretty good. It's hard though, these guys tend to go to teams with major issues and don't usually get the time to see it through. Look at Romeo Cronell and Charlie Weiss.some guys are just better suited to be coordinators
_________________

at23steelers · Joined: 05 Mar 2011 Posts: 3721 Location: United States

I think Arians has a chance to outshine them all, which isn't saying much. And I believe he'd be a better head coach than offensive coordinator which again is not saying much. The less situational play calling he has to make the better! Think he'd be a very average - decent coach, which is better than everyone else, and his job at offensive coordinator.

JustPlainNasty · Joined: 11 Feb 2008 Posts: 6363 Location: Las Vegas

It will always be difficult for me to like Mularkey because the first thought that comes to my mind is him dropping that pass over the middle vs Denver on the last drive of the 1989 divisional playoffs.
_________________

steelcurtain29 · Joined: 04 Oct 2007 Posts: 32643 Location: Monongahela, PA

It just shows that only the best of the best are good enough to be Head Coaches in the NFL.

How's that for some crow, Tomlin haters.
_________________
Come Follow My Oakland Multi-Sport Franchise!