Greg Schiano come on downIf Flores leaves, does BB leave the DC position open and hand the responsibility to Boyer/Daly? I don’t think Steve Belichick would be in the mix for that yet.
This would be awesome. On first glance, you would think, wtf are the Cardinals thinking. But then you realize he has 14 years of Belichick experience. I hope he gets it from a good for him perspective, but on the other hand, we need him to be DC here.Mike Munchak declined a 2nd interview for the Arizona job per Chris Mortensen. Brian Flores, according to Adam Schefter, is now a real possibility to be the head coach in Arizona. Crazy.
I totally agree with this.Greg Schiano come on down
I highly, highly doubt itMight Dean Pees be a candidate for defensive coordinator? He left the Ravens and had done that job here before
Schiano would be my choice as DC. He's a BB guy and a great defensive mind.I highly, highly doubt it
He retiredMight Dean Pees be a candidate for defensive coordinator? He left the Ravens and had done that job here before
Thanks for telling us you were kidding.Mangini.
Yes, I'm 100% kidding.
I've seen too many jokes go over too many heads recently.Thanks for telling us you were kidding.
If he were serious, he would have called him MangeniusThanks for telling us you were kidding.
You must know a lot of short peopleI've seen too many jokes go over too many heads recently.
Wonder if this sheds some light on Munchak declining his 2nd interview with AZ.Todd Haley is out as Steelers OC.
So did Dante.He retired
I wasn't impressed with Pees when he was here anyways. Ohio State brought in the Washington State defensive coordinator so something might be going on in Columbus. This screams Schiano back to the NFL.So did Dante.
I'd prefer Schiano, but you can't always get what you want.
The Pats struggled defensively for a bit. There was talk that Pees had been fired. That is false. Pees is adamant that he has never been fired, and there is no reason to disbelieve him.I remember Pees' tenure here ending poorly, but I could just be conflating that with how the 2009 season went as a whole. Still, pretty rare for someone just to leave the NEP because their contract has expired, right?
I thought Haley’s inability to get along with Roethlisberger did him in. Not that Haley’s performance was stellar, mind you, but I’m pretty sure he’d be out of work even if he had been the second coming of Mike Martz.IMO - nobody did less with more (in the NFL this season) than Sarkisian.
Apparently, the 'Pitt people' felt the same about Haley.
I think we need to know what he said to really assess that. Frankly, him being left out of the report suggests he said nothing negative about the Pats given the overall slant of the report and its desparation to find anything approximating evidence.I suspect Pees’ peripheral involvement in DFG (was interviewed but left out of the Wells report) probably rules out a return.
Good for him! That’s a pretty fast track.
I was hoping he'd make his way back to New England, but yes - good luck to him.Good for him! That’s a pretty fast track.
When this doesn’t work out he will be the defensive coordinator for the Pats.I was hoping he'd make his way back to New England, but yes - good luck to him.
It may mean they realize mariota isn’t the long term solutionI really don't understand this hire. One of the big points with Mularkey and Mariota was that they weren't running the most efficient offense for that QB. Now they hire a defensive minded HC? Vrabel better hire a star OC or else he is going to fail.
Vrabel played under Haley in KC right? Wonder if he is an option, although it seems like they are a bit of a personality clash.
Interesting. Hadn't considered that perspective. That would put Vrabel in kind of a bind though. Mariota is entering year 4, so they'd have to make a decision on whether to exercise the 5th year option.It may mean they realize mariota isn’t the long term solution
Yeah, well, times are tough all around...Interesting. Hadn't considered that perspective. That would put Vrabel in kind of a bind though. Mariota is entering year 4, so they'd have to make a decision on whether to exercise the 5th year option.
You're always picking from one side or the other. I mean, if they took an offensive mind, they would really need a good DC (especially since they've used their first pick on offense seven years in a row).I really don't understand this hire. One of the big points with Mularkey and Mariota was that they weren't running the most efficient offense for that QB. Now they hire a defensive minded HC? Vrabel better hire a star OC or else he is going to fail.
Haley was my first thought, too.Vrabel played under Haley in KC right? Wonder if he is an option, although it seems like they are a bit of a personality clash.
Mariota didn't have a great 2017, but the dude is 24. Also, I have trouble seeing what this has to do with Vrabel's hire. If they really were willing to give up on Mariota after three seasons, they would still need a guy who can develop the next guy.It may mean they realize mariota isn’t the long term solution
He still can, as the replacement for BB after BB retires and MV gets fired in Music City.I was hoping he'd make his way back to New England, but yes - good luck to him.
Pagano was a scapegoat? I know he didn’t have Luck but come on. The guy wasnt a good coach. Indy needed changes top to bottom.You're always picking from one side or the other. I mean, if they took an offensive mind, they would really need a good DC (especially since they've used their first pick on offense seven years in a row).
I'm not a fan of the idea that because you have a young QB, you have to pick an offensive guy. Brady has played his whole career under a defensive guy. Peyton most of his (Caldwell and Kubiak the only exceptions). Roethlisberger. Brees developed under Schottenheimer before landing with Payton. I don't think the offensive minds really have a better track record of developing young QBs; the devil is in the details. I see a paint-by-numbers approach around the league where you draft a young QB, surround him with OL and WR talent, pair him with an up-and-coming offensive genius, and now he has to throw 50 times a game because the defense is straight garbage.
And Mularkey's gone because he wasn't Jon Robinson's guy. The same thing happened in Detroit. Owners hire a new GM but want to keep the HC; the new GM says "fine" and then scapegoats and cans the HC at the first opportunity. We've seen that play out in TEN, DET, and IND this offseason; fast-forward to next year when he see Dorsey jettison Hue.
Haley was my first thought, too.
Mariota didn't have a great 2017, but the dude is 24. Also, I have trouble seeing what this has to do with Vrabel's hire. If they really were willing to give up on Mariota after three seasons, they would still need a guy who can develop the next guy.
I don't disagree with your assessment of Pagano, but why not fire him last offseason when they fired Grigson and let Ballard pick his own guy? Keeping the old HC on just buys time for the new GM; if they have a down year, they just can the HC. The whole thing is distasteful to me, both the owner meddling to force the GM to keep the coach he doesn't really want and the GM "nudge nudge wink wink" agreeing to keep on the coach when you know he's going to throw him under the bus at the first convenient opportunity.Pagano was a scapegoat? I know he didn’t have Luck but come on. The guy wasnt a good coach. Indy needed changes top to bottom.
Because maybe Ballard wanted to give him a year and they weren’t certain on Luck’s health? If he goes 8-8 or makes the playoffs or whatever, improves as a coach and keeps them competitive without Luck, you keep him. He’s been up and down as a coach and overall not good, but he still has given them good seasons. You don’t need to necessarily throw the baby out with the bath water.I don't disagree with your assessment of Pagano, but why not fire him last offseason when they fired Grigson and let Ballard pick his own guy? Keeping the old HC on just buys time for the new GM; if they have a down year, they just can the HC. The whole thing is distasteful to me, both the owner meddling to force the GM to keep the coach he doesn't really want and the GM "nudge nudge wink wink" agreeing to keep on the coach when you know he's going to throw him under the bus at the first convenient opportunity.