New 2022 NFL Coaches ... POLL

Which of the open NFL coaching positions is the best overall?


  • Total voters
    130

E5 Yaz

Transcends message boarding
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Apr 25, 2002
90,014
Oregon
The carousel thread should still be the primary place for discussion and news/rumors. Here, though, lets vote of what we consider to be the best of the open positions.

Consider all aspects — market, ownership/management, division, current roster, salary cap, etc — and decide which is the most attractive position to have.

Discuss why below and also answer which of the jobs you think is the worst opening, and why.

* interim coach in place
 

rodderick

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 24, 2009
12,750
Belo Horizonte - Brazil
I think they're all kinda crappy, to be honest. If you believe in Fields, that's the best one, especially if Rodgers is out of that division in the short term. The Broncos have talent and you can entice/draft a QB to become competitive quickly, but I'd want absolutely no part of the Mahomes/Herbert duo for the next decade plus. Good chance those guys are the best players in the league after Brady and Rodgers retire. No thanks.
 

Greg29fan

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 14, 2005
20,484
NC
I picked Minnesota. Cook and Jefferson and both quite good and Cousins, while not worth the money he makes, doesn't make a lot of grievous errors. Get Rodgers out of that division either by trade or retirement and it's ripe for the plucking.
 

Cellar-Door

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
34,457
I lean Chicago. Good fanbase, I think they have a good young QB, that division is a Rodgers injury (or leaving) from being wide open and you'll get a new GM. The fanbase is pretty beaten down so the expectations aren't high.

I thought about LV, they have a proven QB, they made the playoffs, their owner seems not bad, etc. but that means high expectations, and you have 2 really good young QBs in division.
 

SMU_Sox

queer eye for the next pats guy
SoSH Member
Jul 20, 2009
8,878
Dallas
For me the worst owners there are the Maras and Khan so I can quickly eliminate the Giants and the Jaguars. I also would want to potentially stay away from the Fins because they believe in Tua. The only thing I believe about Tua is he ain’t it. The rest of them all have pros and cons. I voted for the Broncos but now I’m not so sure. They have draft picks, a talented roster aside from QB, but ownership questions, their loaded division, and not having a quality QB are considerable negatives. If they land Rodgers or a decent QB I think they are contenders. That’s a huge if though.

Minnesota in the short term is probably the best place to land because they have an average or better starting QB, from what I can tell stable ownership, and a lot of talent on the roster.

Long term, Chicago might be my choice. If Fields develops the way I believe he can and if Cousins and Rodgers leave or retire that is your division for the taking. You need to upgrade the OL and get more receivers for Fields. The offensive philosophy and play-calling from what I have studied, read, and listened to needs a serious overhaul.
 

Rico Guapo

New Member
Apr 24, 2009
2,150
New England's Rising Star
I'd pick the Vikings, very talented roster, good ownership, great fan base, Rodgers possibly leaving the division, Fields is still a question mark in Chicago (my two cents) and Detroit is years away from being competitive.
 

Ale Xander

Hamilton
SoSH Member
Oct 31, 2013
72,428
You’d have to be looking for the least bad ownership group. Looking at that group it’s…. Mark Davis?
Yeah I went Raiders
Least bad owner
Growing market that should still be a little patient
New beautiful stadium
Fairly friendly for signing free agents
A decent quarterback
Two great pieces on offense to build around
Underrated
Division isn’t as challenging as it appears as KC Is hitting cap hell and Denver doesn’t have a QB. Chargers are also tending up though but Raiders have a better owner.
Not sure about Raiders own cap situation.
 

SteveF

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 14, 2005
1,930
Short term it's the Jags right? You'll get a tremendous honeymoon period and you have Lawrence's second year during which he should improve quite a bit. I mean, you're going to be compared to Urban Meyer, and pretty much anyone with a pulse has to be better than him.
 

Cellar-Door

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
34,457
Short term it's the Jags right? You'll get a tremendous honeymoon period and you have Lawrence's second year during which he should improve quite a bit. I mean, you're going to be compared to Urban Meyer, and pretty much anyone with a pulse has to be better than him.
you get a bad owner and a GM who will shank you as soon as he can
 

E5 Yaz

Transcends message boarding
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Apr 25, 2002
90,014
Oregon
It came down to the Bears, Broncos and Raiders for me.

First, I eliminated the Broncos ... because I'm uncertain about the ownership flux. Who know how that will affect things in the immediate future? Plus, they might be putting too many eggs in the "trade for a star QB" basket.

I just think the Raiders are better off right now than the Bears. There's more talent on the team, Carr is more than serviceable, and there seems to be a dynamic on that team where they just play extremely hard. It seems like the best spot to walk into and be ready to win.

I think the Giants are the worst job. That cupboard is bare where it counts on the roster, and the ownership is stuck in a different era. People always lump the Giants and Steelers together, but from an operation standpoint Pittsburgh is in far better shape.

Of course, I only picked the Giants because the Texans haven't fired Culley ... yet
 

EvilEmpire

paying for his sins
Moderator
SoSH Member
Apr 9, 2007
17,178
Washington
Vikings followed by Raiders, I think. Both teams have solid ownership, QBs and a fair amount of talent on the roster. Broncos third, mostly based on the ownership situation, but they also need to find a QB.
 

E5 Yaz

Transcends message boarding
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Apr 25, 2002
90,014
Oregon
The thing that has me questioning the Vikings is that Cousins is a $45M hit next season. That could shake up that roster
 

RG33

Certain Class of Poster
SoSH Member
Nov 28, 2005
7,199
CA
I went with the Broncos. I think they have the best roster (really good defense, really good, young offensive weapons), solid ownership and fan support, and are basically a legit QB away from contention. I would probably put the Bears 2nd and Miami 3rd.
 

Justthetippett

New Member
Aug 9, 2015
2,391
I like the Bears job. Rodgers potentially leaving opens up the division, they already have their QB, ownership is hands off, Pace is decent. If I’m Daboll, I think it’s better than the Miami job. Broncos has potential but they still need to get their QB and the division is much tougher.
 

Mystic Merlin

Member
SoSH Member
Sep 21, 2007
46,767
Hartford, CT
Bears, though the Vikes are up there. Good owners and a clean slate at GM, plus you may have a wide open QB situation in that division in the near future. I don’t know if Fields is the guy, but at least he has a chance to be, and I won’t get fired after 1-2 years. Nagy and Pace can’t say they didn’t get a fair shake, and that’s an attractive feature.

Denver? They are currently the poll leader. I don’t know how they can be considered to have a stable ownership situation - which is one of the biggest factors one should consider when selecting among various situations - when it is not clear who will own the team going forward after a protracted and tough legal battle after Bowlen’s death. And I don’t know why anyone would sign up to be in the same division as Mahomes and Herbert because they’ve got some roster talent and MIGHT get 1-2 years or Rodgers.
 

Morgan's Magic Snowplow

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 2, 2006
22,345
Philadelphia
I like the idea of getting into the NFC North but like the situation in Minnesota significantly better than in Chicago.

I wouldn't write off Fields given the situation around him but I think the Bears are in a bad place where, even if he improves significantly, they will struggle to put enough talent around him over the next couple years and then he'll be off his rookie deal. There just isn't a lot of surrounding talent right now, they don't have a first round pick this year, and while they have cap space on paper (44m) they also have only 26 players under contract so a lot of that cap space is kind of illusory. I don't see a lot of ways to improve the team next year so you're probably into year three and more realistically year four of his rookie contract before you could really build a good team around him. And that's assuming he is worth building around.

Minnesota's cap situation is bad for 2022 but I feel like you can basically keep the band together, add talent in the draft, and win the division next year if Rodgers leaves. You can then make a call on whether or not to stick with Cousins at very high numbers or go into the draft for a new QB in 2023, with a pretty good infrastructure of talent to support any new QB you might bring in.
 

Super Nomario

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 5, 2000
14,012
Mansfield MA
It came down to the Bears, Broncos and Raiders for me.

First, I eliminated the Broncos ... because I'm uncertain about the ownership flux. Who know how that will affect things in the immediate future? Plus, they might be putting too many eggs in the "trade for a star QB" basket.

I just think the Raiders are better off right now than the Bears. There's more talent on the team, Carr is more than serviceable, and there seems to be a dynamic on that team where they just play extremely hard. It seems like the best spot to walk into and be ready to win.
I agree with all of this. Denver's ownership situation is scary. The Bears are OK. The Raiders have some parts. The one concern I think is you might not have the upside some of the teams with young QBs have, but Carr's pretty good and you can compete for a playoff spot.

In terms of personnel control, right now the Giants, Vikings, and Bears don't have a GM, so you've got a chance to take front office power too. Baalke and Mayock were subordinate to the HC under Meyer and Gruden respectively, so there's an opportunity to set up a similar power structure there. The Broncos (Paton) and Dolphins (Grier) have GMs, so if personnel control is important to you, those are bad gigs.

I think the Giants are the worst job. That cupboard is bare where it counts on the roster, and the ownership is stuck in a different era. People always lump the Giants and Steelers together, but from an operation standpoint Pittsburgh is in far better shape.
Well ... let's see once Colbert (as reported) steps down. The next-highest personnel guy in the organization is: Dan Rooney Jr., their player personnel coordinator. Art's grandson and Dan's kid. So Pittsburgh might have the same dysfunctional org structure as the Giants come next week.
 

j-man

Member
Dec 19, 2012
3,646
Arkansas
I think they're all kinda crappy, to be honest. If you believe in Fields, that's the best one, especially if Rodgers is out of that division in the short term. The Broncos have talent and you can entice/draft a QB to become competitive quickly, but I'd want absolutely no part of the Mahomes/Herbert duo for the next decade plus. Good chance those guys are the best players in the league after Brady and Rodgers retire. No thanks.
KC once reid retires Kc will step back also once hill loses his 4.3 speed and kelce is 34 as well
LAC their ownship is very cheap plus their coach is a littie too in love with altihlcs idk if they will pay herbert 300+ mil plus if they do they wont spend around him
the team long term to worry about for denver is vegas players owner smart gm upgrade as coach
 

j-man

Member
Dec 19, 2012
3,646
Arkansas
Bears, though the Vikes are up there. Good owners and a clean slate at GM, plus you may have a wide open QB situation in that division in the near future. I don’t know if Fields is the guy, but at least he has a chance to be, and I won’t get fired after 1-2 years. Nagy and Pace can’t say they didn’t get a fair shake, and that’s an attractive feature.

Denver? They are currently the poll leader. I don’t know how they can be considered to have a stable ownership situation - which is one of the biggest factors one should consider when selecting among various situations - when it is not clear who will own the team going forward after a protracted and tough legal battle after Bowlen’s death. And I don’t know why anyone would sign up to be in the same division as Mahomes and Herbert because they’ve got some roster talent and MIGHT get 1-2 years or Rodgers.
this biggest strike aga denver was elway bad drafting 2015 2017 was really bad denver will get a good owner mr b shouild had a better plan in place for when he passed
 

bosockboy

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
19,861
St. Louis, MO
Raiders have the most available cap space in the league over the next 3 years. They would have won 12-13 games without the Gruden/Ruggs debacles. I’m biased, but it’s easily them.
 

SMU_Sox

queer eye for the next pats guy
SoSH Member
Jul 20, 2009
8,878
Dallas
Raiders have the most available cap space in the league over the next 3 years. They would have won 12-13 games without the Gruden/Ruggs debacles. I’m biased, but it’s easily them.
They won the two games after the Gruden firing and had the point differential of a 7-10 team. This is, to quote one Dick LeBeau, the height of folly.
PFF power rankings (which they use for gambling) has them 15th overall with 0.6 points and 19th overall in terms of overall grade. Football Outsiders has their DVOA at -5.2%, 21st overall. Their Pythag wins based on point differential is 6.8.

Their roster leaves a lot to be desired especially on defense.
Congratulations on making the playoffs but your admitted bias I think is skewing reality.

My biggest negative for the Raiders was their lack of talent at too many positions on the roster.
 

bosockboy

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
19,861
St. Louis, MO
They won the two games after the Gruden firing and had the point differential of a 7-10 team. This is, to quote one Dick LeBeau, the height of folly.
They lost to the Bears at home with Gruden still on the sideline before he was finally pushed out. That game specifically they were shell shocked. Lost to the Giants (!) immediately after the Ruggs week. Those were their two worst performances of the year.
 

mauf

Anderson Cooper × Mr. Rogers
Moderator
SoSH Member
Looking at this through the eyes of a coach who is in-demand, and with the caveat that even the best of these openings is just ok:

Bears: You’d have to believe Fields is good, and I don’t. You’ll use up your three years before you get another QB who can win.

Broncos: Tough division and an impatient front office — Elway might be the worst boss in the league. Only tempting because of the possibility they land Rodgers or Wilson.

Dolphins: One of a few options that might be good if you have say on personnel, or at least who the GM is. Hard pass if Ross is as committed to Grier as he appears to be.

Giants: Mara has moved on quickly from two coaches in a row, but they both richly earned it; over time, he has been patient. If you have input on personnel and can sell Mara on the need for a root-and-branch rebuild, this isn’t a terrible gig. Obviously, those are two big ifs.

Jaguars: If you come out of the negotiation either with full control or a GM who you like in place, this is the best opening by far. And I think the right coach gets those things. I don’t believe for a second that Khan is actually committed to Baalke beyond an immediate transition period.

Raiders: They overachieved this year; you’d have to assess in the interview whether Davis recognizes this and is willing to let you undertake a broader overhaul than a playoff team typically does. Tough division. I do think Davis would be one of the better owners to coach under — good combination of knowledge of the game and a modicum of patience.

Vikings: This one is a trap. For my money Zimmer is the best coach who got sacked this week. You’d probably be luckier in one-score games, but achieving real improvements in the near term would be very hard. And Zimmer’s firing suggests there would be little patience for any struggles.

I voted Jaguars because I think the right coach gets control and has a patient owner, a potential franchise QB, and lots of flexibility. If you assume you have to live with the personnel guy currently in place, or someone chosen by ownership with minimal input from you, I’d choose the Raiders (but that job might not actually be available).
 

Cellar-Door

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
34,457
PFF power rankings (which they use for gambling) has them 15th overall with 0.6 points and 19th overall in terms of overall grade. Football Outsiders has their DVOA at -5.2%, 21st overall. Their Pythag wins based on point differential is 6.8.

Their roster leaves a lot to be desired especially on defense.
Congratulations on making the playoffs but your admitted bias I think is skewing reality.

My biggest negative for the Raiders was their lack of talent at too many positions on the roster.
Also from a coach perspective, a lot of how long you get is expectations based, taking over a team that made the playoffs but probably shouldn't have is the hardest spot, because expectations are going to be playoffs minimum, wins in the playoffs more likely, so you're off to a rough start if you play better but don't make the playoffs.
 

tims4wins

PN23's replacement
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
37,054
Hingham, MA
Vikings: This one is a trap. For my money Zimmer is the best coach who got sacked this week. You’d probably be luckier in one-score games, but achieving real improvements in the near term would be very hard. And Zimmer’s firing suggests there would be little patience for any struggles.
The Vikings look like a classic example where a new coach will be luckier in one score games, Rodgers may leave GB, Vikes win the division, everything looks great for the new coach... then they go 6-11 in 2023.
 

Super Nomario

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 5, 2000
14,012
Mansfield MA
Giants: Mara has moved on quickly from two coaches in a row, but they both richly earned it; over time, he has been patient. If you have input on personnel and can sell Mara on the need for a root-and-branch rebuild, this isn’t a terrible gig. Obviously, those are two big ifs.
It's three coaches, actually: McAdoo, Shurmur, and Judge.

Vikings: This one is a trap. For my money Zimmer is the best coach who got sacked this week. You’d probably be luckier in one-score games, but achieving real improvements in the near term would be very hard. And Zimmer’s firing suggests there would be little patience for any struggles.
I don't think they were impatient with Zimmer. Back-to-back losing years on a team built to win in the near term. He was the longest-tenured coach not to make a Super Bowl. Perhaps most concerningly, he's supposed to be a defensive guy and the D was bad the last two years. I think it was time. I think most coaches in his situation would have been fired.
 

mauf

Anderson Cooper × Mr. Rogers
Moderator
SoSH Member
I don't think they were impatient with Zimmer. Back-to-back losing years on a team built to win in the near term. He was the longest-tenured coach not to make a Super Bowl. Perhaps most concerningly, he's supposed to be a defensive guy and the D was bad the last two years. I think it was time. I think most coaches in his situation would have been fired.
You’re right that the Vikings are “built to win in the near term” — they are not planning for a brighter day in 2-3 years the way many of these teams are. But I think that reflects a level delusion among ownership and fans; the Vikings are an average team that won’t be serious contenders without a major overhaul. As T4W notes, there might be an opening for the new coach to win a weak division in 2022, but I’m bearish on their medium-term prospects.

I hadn’t considered your point about the Vikings’ defense declining; maybe it was time for a coaching change. I still wouldn’t want the job.
 

BigJimEd

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 4, 2002
4,432
I went with the Broncos. I think they have the best roster (really good defense, really good, young offensive weapons), solid ownership and fan support, and are basically a legit QB away from contention. I would probably put the Bears 2nd and Miami 3rd.
As others have said, they are for sale and could have a new owner by next season. Tough to take a job when you don't know who your boss will be in 6 months.

https://www.cbssports.com/nfl/news/legal-ruling-clears-way-for-broncos-sale-team-expected-to-have-new-ownership-before-2022-season/
 

rymflaherty

Member
SoSH Member
Jun 27, 2010
3,420
Norfolk
There wasn’t one that stood out to me.
So I went with Jacksonville. I think there’s some talent there. Not an insanely difficult division. And figure, after this year with Urban, simply being competent should earn you good will with the fan base.
And then tie-breaker…I’m a big AEW fan.
 

Jungleland

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 2, 2009
2,351
I think it's Jacksonville by a fair bit unless you think Baalke is 100% safe, which I don't. I think Trevor kind of sucked this year, but there's at least hope his tools will pay off with better coaching.

-Broncos and Raiders - South is magnitudes weaker as a division than the AFC west.
-Giants - have to be up for a MASSIVE rebuild
-Dolphins - pretty good option, better if you like Tua. I think it's a sneaky tough division but not unwinnable.
-Bears - Low on talent and I don't trust Fields
-Vikings - Decent option but you'll be too good to pick a QB high in 2023 and Kirk will be prohibitively expensive
 

E5 Yaz

Transcends message boarding
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Apr 25, 2002
90,014
Oregon
I'd add Culley to the poll, but no one in their right mind would pick the Texans