ESPN's Power Rankings of Head Coaches

[get louder at lambeau]

Really? Did I say the guy sucked as a HC? I just don't think he's top 5. How many times last year did we question his clock management skills or play calling on short yardage plays. Also being a HC is more than about play calling. Don't know why you mentioned Tomlin but dude has been in the SB two out of his 4 years at HC and he's the youngest SB winning coach in NFL history. Would take him in a heart beat over MM. Why? Because he has that IT factor you look for in a coach. MM is top 10 IMO which last time I checked aint half bad.

So wait, in your mind McCarthy's success is all due to TT, Rodgers, and Capers, but Tomlin's somehow ISN'T due to Kevin Colbert, Roethlisberger, and LeBeau? It's due to his "IT factor" instead? Huh. You know the Steelers were pretty good before Tomlin took over too, right?

[RashanGary]

Brandon, you seem a little nit picky, bro. MM's strengths are so strong that the weaknesses he does have rightfully get overlooked.

[channtheman]

Here's one reporters opinion. Just another thought, and one with which I--for the most part--agree.

Vic, regarding Coach McCarthy being a play-caller that is “scary,” is that scary good or scary bad?

Vic: If you’re a Packers fan, it’s scary good. Coach McCarthy has a special aptitude for offense and, make no mistake about it, today’s game is about offense. We are in the midst of a revolution in the game like I have never seen. Yeah, we experienced a similar movement in the early-1980s, right after the rules changes of 1978 opened up the field and gave birth to the “West Coast offense” and “Air Coryell” movements, but defense soon found a way to deal with those strategies and balance was restored to the game. I don’t think that’s going to happen this time. I think we’re in an offensive explosion that is going to continue. I think we’re heading for Arena League-type scores. The days of batter-ball are over. Football is all about offense now. It’s about play count and scheme and play-calling. It’ll always be players first and plays second because plays can’t work if they’re not executed by players, but it’s plain to see that today’s game promotes and rewards the execution of a high-tech strategy more than it does the execution of a baseline strategy, and that’s why you need a head coach who either is the creator of a high-tech strategy and approach or demands it from his offensive staff. The Packers have that guy.

I was under the impression that the offense really took off when MM scaled the offense BACK. As in he simplified it more rather than making it more complex. Seems to say the exact opposite of what this guy said. Execution of a simple offense is more than enough to score lots of points.

[Guiness]

Not sure about foot-pounds, but Rex Ryan has a foot fetish and weighs about 400 pounds. That's hard to beat.

that was sweet.

[mraynrand]

Here's one reporters opinion. Just another thought, and one with which I--for the most part--agree.

Vic, regarding Coach McCarthy being a play-caller that is “scary,” is that scary good or scary bad?

Vic: If you’re a Packers fan, it’s scary good. Coach McCarthy has a special aptitude for offense and, make no mistake about it, today’s game is about offense. We are in the midst of a revolution in the game like I have never seen. Yeah, we experienced a similar movement in the early-1980s, right after the rules changes of 1978 opened up the field and gave birth to the “West Coast offense” and “Air Coryell” movements, but defense soon found a way to deal with those strategies and balance was restored to the game. I don’t think that’s going to happen this time. I think we’re in an offensive explosion that is going to continue. I think we’re heading for Arena League-type scores. The days of batter-ball are over. Football is all about offense now. It’s about play count and scheme and play-calling. It’ll always be players first and plays second because plays can’t work if they’re not executed by players, but it’s plain to see that today’s game promotes and rewards the execution of a high-tech strategy more than it does the execution of a baseline strategy, and that’s why you need a head coach who either is the creator of a high-tech strategy and approach or demands it from his offensive staff. The Packers have that guy.

I don't think the NFL is headed to arena-like scores. You have to have too many skilled positions filled to do it, and your QB has to be exceptional. There are only about 5-10 max QBs who can do this in the modern NFL, and many of them don't have enough weapons surrounding them, including O-line. Plus, defenses are pretty sophisticated and confusing. Arena scores will require a rules change(s) to favor the offense and more domes.

[Brandon494]

So wait, in your mind McCarthy's success is all due to TT, Rodgers, and Capers, but Tomlin's somehow ISN'T due to Kevin Colbert, Roethlisberger, and LeBeau? It's due to his "IT factor" instead? Huh. You know the Steelers were pretty good before Tomlin took over too, right?

Oh were the Steelers before Tomlin? Thanks for flilling me in on that. Why dont you go back and read what I wrote because I never said McCarthy doesnt deserve any credit and I never said Colbert, Roethlisberger, and LeBeau did not help Tomlin as well. Maybe I just like Tomlin better as a HC because HE IS THE BETTER HEAD COACH!

[Brandon494]

Brandon, you seem a little nit picky, bro. MM's strengths are so strong that the weaknesses he does have rightfully get overlooked.

Hes not top 5 in the league bro

[Bretsky]

These are POWER rankings and his team didn't trend well at the end. Tomlin should be above him for that reason.

That's nuts; look at the roster Hoody was coaching last year; the team has a huge makeover in the past three years going very young. Ditched Moss. Welker back from a torn ACL was not as effecitive. Not a bunch of talent at RB. Very young on defense. Many can't even name the Pats two starting WR's. We witnessed two TE's develop like we wish Quarless would have developed. Plenty of teams had more talent than the Pats in the AFC. They had Hoody and Brady.

Last year might have been Hoody's best job in the regular season doing what he did with that talent....since the undefeated year. Hard to discount any coach who can go undefeated in a season

[Bretsky]

These are POWER rankings and his team didn't trend well at the end. Tomlin should be above him for that reason.

I don't think you were one of them, but I got railed on for naming Tomlin in mid season as a coach I'd rate over MM. Posters noted how he inherited a great assistant coaching staff that makes him look better then he is. For what it's worth I didn't buy into it

[Bretsky]

For the same reason, Reid is too high. He has been consistently good, but what "great" performance has he had? He has had very good teams, but about a .500 playoff record. One SB appearance is a plus, but no SB wins.

Looking back at it, for the Packers under MM to continually improve and be playing their best at the very end of the season, while losing more and more players including in the SB itself, was really a masterful performance.

If someone had told me the Packers would play with Bush and Lee as the 2nd and 3rd CBs for over half the game against the Steelers, I would have expected 40 points from Big Ben. MM had the team believing in itself no matter who was lost.

Reid seemed to own Mike Sherman; that is his great accomplishment

[Bretsky]

Last year was a known rebuilding year for the Pats. Despite being favored and losing to the Jets, they overarchieved like crazy last season and have like a million early draft picks this year to continue loading. I would rank last year as a positive for hoody and the Pats considering they retooled their entire defense. Expectations will be higher this year, but you can't blame their young inexperienced defense for folding in a tough playoff match last year.

WINNER and FIVE CLAP POST

[mraynrand]

Because he has that IT factor you look for in a coach.

The lure of the dark side is strong. Resist it young Luke Partialwalker.

[Freak Out]

[Patler]

Wasn't aware MM coached defense. Let's be real MM is a good coach but having a QB like Rodgers and Capers running the defense how well of a job did he really do? Top 5 HC? Don't think so. He just has a top 5 GM, QB, and Defensive Coordinator to make him look better than he actually is? Ask yourself this question, if you had to get rid of one guy would it be ARod, TT, MM, or Capers? I think you already know what my answer is.

And who made Rodgers into the QB he is? Most seem to acknowledge that the change in Rodgers from the player drafted to the player now performing on the field is pretty significant.

Who is the person primarily responsible for the attitude in the locker room, the "next man up" attitude for dealing with injuries, etc.

Who is primarily responsible for the design of the offense? Who called the plays?

Who hired Capers?

By your analysis, no HC deserves credit, because they all have assistant coaches and they all turn over one side of the ball to a coordinator while they (the HC) applies their expertise to just one area. It is a "criticism" that could be applied to every HC in the league.

[Patler]

Ask yourself this question, if you had to get rid of one guy would it be ARod, TT, MM, or Capers? I think you already know what my answer is.

Very easy answer, Capers; because there are good, long-experienced coordinators available all the time, and they can be obtained by offering them the right contract. I really like Capers, but two years ago there were a number of proven D coordinators available. A few others could probably have done just as well. Good ones become available because they fail as HCs, the HCs they work for fail, or the GM who provides their players fails. It's not uncommon to have one or more very experienced, very successful coordinators looking for jobs in the off season.

Franchise QBs are in limited supply and aren't as available in the open market as coaches. They aren't on the streets looking for jobs like coordinators are. They are hard to replace. The usual source is the draft, with its high percentage of failures and development period that takes at least about 3 years.

GMs and HCs fall into the same boats. It is less common to find good ones on the street looking for jobs. Young guys primed to move up are always available, but you never know for sure if they will have what it takes, it takes a while for them to gain experience and it takes a number of years for them to transform a team into what they want.

How often are franchise QBs (still playing like one) available in the open market?
How often are proven, successful GMs available in the open market?
How often are proven successful HCs available in the open market?
How often are proven successful coordinators available in the open market?

I think it is pretty obvious which is the easiest to replace, if you have to pick one.