I was underwhelmed when the Hawks fired Grubb and hired Kubiak. I predicted the offense would have fewer passing yards, but more rushing yards. I was correct in both of those, although the Kubiak offense generated about 150 more total yards. The team had over a hundred more points, but at least 40 of those were defense or ST. Obviously I'm thrilled that the change helped lead to a SB win, but I think the improvement in the defense as the players got more confident there was as important as Kubiak. Kubiak's style meshed better with MM than Grubb, but his offense was not massively better at gaining yards. It was better at time of possession which helped the defense to stay fresh.
I trust JS/MM to know what style system they want to run and to hire the guys to implement it. It worked last season and if they don't repeat, I doubt that it will be because of a change at OC.
The Dark Knight is one of the best superhero movies ever made, if for nothing else, Heath Ledger's portrayal of The Joker. It is one of the best performances of this generation, in any movie.
This has nothing to do with football but as superheros were mentioned... Time for a book recommendation!
"The Ables" by Jeremy Scott. (And subsequent sequels if you get that far).
What if you had telekinesis, but were blind? Had super-speed, but cerebral palsy? This is a fun book where superheroes are real, but this also means they can have disabilities. The book centres around a "special ed" class navigating what it even means to be a super hero, and how you can make the most of the skills you do have. A very enjoyable twist on the coming-of-age and superhero tropes you see so often, that can really make you think. Certainly you won't have seen a superhero story like this, it's a million miles from the cookie-cutter worlds of Marvel and DC.
Quarterbacks coach Andrew Janocko, going to the Raiders for what? OC, but no play calling responsibilities? Disappointed with the Seahawks because they chose someone else as OC? Better weather, lower housing costs, or something else. I believe that was an emotional decision that will come but to haunt him. I see no possible pathway where the Raiders are in the playoffs, not to mention the Super Bowl, for quite some time. That’s a huge rebuild project there, and they need every good player they have. So how exactly do they fix that problem? Good coaching and draft picks only get you so far. All the teams in the AFC West are stronger than the Raiders and have great coaches, and better players, and equal amount of draft picks as the Raiders. They have a 3 -5 year rebuild process there, and the AFC West will likely equal their rebuilt efforts. Don’t think the owners have that kind of patience, as we all have seen in recent years.
While I have seen most of the comic book movies, and enjoyed them for what they are, which is entertainment. They are entertaining, but sociologically, I find them abhorrent. They teach us to look for heroes to solve our problems rather than look inside ourselves for solutions to problems.
Does society move forward primarily through genius and inspiration or is it through incremental improvements from millions of "normal" individuals? The book "Outliers" argues, with plenty of evidence, that it is the latter.
Geniuses making grand discoveries is actually quite rare. Einstein's accomplishments were built upon the work of others who came before him. Though Einstein's contributions to science stand as an example of genius moving society forward, that is the exception not the rule, and did not spring forward in a vacuum, but depended upon other contributions.
Super heroes would be nice, but they do not exist and they only wet our appetite for saviors rather than relying upon ourselves.
Some would say that we can see ourselves as the superheroes (or at least part of us IN them), and it gives us reasons to be courageous. Iron Man, Batman, Hawkeye, and Black Widow are examples of "normal" people who just overacheived in certain areas to rub elbows with more gifted heroes and more than held their own.
Informative article. Didn't know the actor's name who played the Joker was "Ledger". He did a good job though. Art...theater, music, painting ad infinum, is ALWAYS subjective. How a coach will impact team performance, while awash with variables, is, in the end, measurable.
As for the '26 coaching line up, the test will be in the tasting and the pudding won't be ready for a while. As the fortunes of each team go, so goes the career path of coaches. At the end of the '26 season the music stops and the scramble for coaches to find a chair begins anew. I'm not knowledgeable enough about coaches (with the exception of MM) resume's to predict how they'll impact our team. I gotta go with Fleury for now via the one dude whose measurable record and opinion I trust...John Schneider.
Was convinced we'd elevate someone currently on the staff bc of continuity. But I guess you can get continuity by bringing in someone who thrives in the same environment.
Carroll confused continuity with loyalty, and got blinded by the latter when the former wasn't good enough. MacDonald has been more than clear that he wants the running game + explosives, which is what we didn't get from Grubb and did get from Kubiak. Hopefully Fleury can keep a good thing going.
And I do understand why our internal guys may not have gotten a shot. Could be they're more technical experts than leaders or innovators, the kind of things companies struggle with for their management teams too. Worst thing you can do is promote someone who's really good at what they do but don't have the tools for the next level -- you end up not solving for the next level, have to restart from scratch, but then. also you've lost the guy doing his old job so damn well. A lose-lose.
Absolutely! Some people are amazing with details and teaching people to be better players and motivating, while others are better at setting the vision, organizing coaches, delegating, and speaking with media. Not everyone is a superhei in real life that can do everything at a top-32 in the world level.
Peter Principle. When I was a director, I almost always hired senior staff from outside. Never regreted it. Had a couple who didn't work out to the agency's needs, but were still better than any internal candidate.
SSJ, I totally agree with you that as fans, we have no way of knowing whether or not Fleury will be a good OC.
We just have to trust MM & JS have done their research (which I do)….and if it doesn’t work out they will course correct quickly (see Ryan Grubb).
This is the challenge with Defensive HC’s, if they land a good OC, the OC will get a promotion to HC elsewhere. So as SSJ says, get used to a revolving door every year or two.
I like the way MM is thinking about this strategically - building a “Seattle Offense” that is consistent year to year with a common set of principles & plays that can lose coaches and still be consistently productive.
Yeah. If JS and MM have a macro idea of what they want the offense to accomplish and maybe even be, then they will interview guys until they find the one who will best bring the details together and coach the players into becoming that unit. Rinse, repeat.
So, out of the movies, and back to the field....a new OC comes in, but he comes into a team, which ultimately affects his success. The Hawks OLine is better now in the last 1-2 years. Is it that Schneider finally found the O Line bargains he always looks for (Sundell, Zabel)? In comes Kubiak with excellent O Line intelligence; he redefines the QB role to best fit Darnold, and restarts the run game. Kubiak's left a powerful, successful offensive structure behind which will benefit any incoming OC. What I will watch is Kubiak's plan (he seemed super-pumped) for the Raiders. He doesn't have Schneider to help find the talent. He hasn't opined about the first round QB pick the team could take. The team needs a lot! The curse of the first round draft pick QB is that you go to the team with the worst record and fewest quality resources. What does a powerful OLine strategic mind like Kubiak see when he jumps at the chance to lead the Raiders? And will his O Line strategies here sustain if he's not play caller???
I truly believe that the OL is better because of John Benton and Rick Dennison moreso than KK, especially Benton. He has a proven track record and is a successful veteran OL coach in the NFL. KK coached and called a great scheme, yes. But, Benton teaches guys to better offensive linemen. If he and Dennison stay, we'll be fine.
I saw where Benton is reported to be staying. Nice! Seeing as how JS hired Fleury, we now have system consistency and the same teaching staff for the OL. Sam worked with Fleury in SF, too. Looks like a good plan, so far!
Also, I want to be sure you didn't take my previous comment as any criticism. It was not meant that way, just as food for thought. Your attention paid is certainly at your own desire and is in no way in question, especially by a rando dude like me. Cheers!
No prob! I appreciated your comment! I have now seen Benton (and Fleury) mentioned in other articles and can better understand what goes on behind the scenes with these guys, so thanks!
I think we're overthinking this one, which, coming from me...
Janocko wants to work with a young QB. He wants to hitch his star to an emerging star. Milroe has nowhere to go in Seattle, for a while, but Oakland [sic] has motive and opportunity.
Yes - I struggle to see Milroe being a huge factor in how these decisions went down. He’s a 3rd-string long-shot QB. But I guess it’s the offseason now, so we need to start talking about Milroe again?
When watching film, ask yourself if a character or scene is sadistic. Sadism in film is like nitrogen in air; we don’t tend to notice it. I do. Ledger made sadism exceptionally entertaining. I saw it in the theater back in the day. Never watched another Batman movie again. Too much casual sadism in the world. [Steps off soapbox, somberly.]
Back on the coaching topic, I question whether Kubiak made the right move. I don’t think I’d want to work for Mark Davis (or his dad, Al, for that matter.) Does he last a year? Let’s imagine that he doesn’t. Does the experience help or harm his ability to become a HC again? He’d probably get another OC job quickly after a Raiders fail, so it’s probably worth the gamble for him.
Believe it or not, there was a time when the NFL did not receive 365/12/24/7 attention. In those days, few fans knew who the OC and DC of the their teams were, much less the no doubt nomadic assistant coaches.
Old Man River just kept rolling along anyway. The best teams kept winning and the worst teams kept losing.
Seems to be the most competitive professional sports league, but…
1960s (SB I–IV)
Green Bay Packers — 2
New York Jets — 1
Kansas City Chiefs - 1
1970s (SB V-XIV)
Pittsburgh Steelers — 4
Dallas Cowboys — 2
Miami Dolphins — 2
Baltimore Colts — 1
Oakland Raiders- 1
1980s (SB XV-XXIV)
San Francisco 49ers — 4
Washington Redskins — 2
Oakland/Los Angeles Raiders — 2
Chicago Bears - 1
New York Giants - 1
1990s (SB XXV-XXXIV)
Dallas Cowboys — 3
San Francisco 49ers — 1
Green Bay Packers — 1
New York Giants - 1
Denver Broncos — 2
Washington Redskins - 1
St. Louis Rams - 1
2000s (SB XXXV-XLIV)
New England Patriots — 3
Pittsburgh Steelers — 2
Baltimore Ravens — 1
Tampa Bay Buccaneers — 1
Indianapolis Colts — 1
New York Giants — 1
New Orleans Saints - 1
2010s (SB XLV-LIV)
New England Patriots — 3
Seattle Seahawks — 1
Denver Broncos — 1
Philadelphia Eagles — 1
Kansas City Chiefs — 1
Baltimore Ravens - 1
Green Bay Packers - 1
New York Giants - 1
2020s (SB LV–LX)
Kansas City Chiefs — 2
Tampa Bay Buccaneers — 1
Los Angeles Rams — 1
Philadelphia Eagles- 1
Seattle Seahawks- 1
So it’s gotten to be more competitive lately maybe due to the strength of schedule scheduling that started in 2002 but there are still 12 teams I think who have never won a Super Bowl and four who have never played in one. Name them?
I was underwhelmed when the Hawks fired Grubb and hired Kubiak. I predicted the offense would have fewer passing yards, but more rushing yards. I was correct in both of those, although the Kubiak offense generated about 150 more total yards. The team had over a hundred more points, but at least 40 of those were defense or ST. Obviously I'm thrilled that the change helped lead to a SB win, but I think the improvement in the defense as the players got more confident there was as important as Kubiak. Kubiak's style meshed better with MM than Grubb, but his offense was not massively better at gaining yards. It was better at time of possession which helped the defense to stay fresh.
I trust JS/MM to know what style system they want to run and to hire the guys to implement it. It worked last season and if they don't repeat, I doubt that it will be because of a change at OC.
The Dark Knight is one of the best superhero movies ever made, if for nothing else, Heath Ledger's portrayal of The Joker. It is one of the best performances of this generation, in any movie.
This has nothing to do with football but as superheros were mentioned... Time for a book recommendation!
"The Ables" by Jeremy Scott. (And subsequent sequels if you get that far).
What if you had telekinesis, but were blind? Had super-speed, but cerebral palsy? This is a fun book where superheroes are real, but this also means they can have disabilities. The book centres around a "special ed" class navigating what it even means to be a super hero, and how you can make the most of the skills you do have. A very enjoyable twist on the coming-of-age and superhero tropes you see so often, that can really make you think. Certainly you won't have seen a superhero story like this, it's a million miles from the cookie-cutter worlds of Marvel and DC.
Quarterbacks coach Andrew Janocko, going to the Raiders for what? OC, but no play calling responsibilities? Disappointed with the Seahawks because they chose someone else as OC? Better weather, lower housing costs, or something else. I believe that was an emotional decision that will come but to haunt him. I see no possible pathway where the Raiders are in the playoffs, not to mention the Super Bowl, for quite some time. That’s a huge rebuild project there, and they need every good player they have. So how exactly do they fix that problem? Good coaching and draft picks only get you so far. All the teams in the AFC West are stronger than the Raiders and have great coaches, and better players, and equal amount of draft picks as the Raiders. They have a 3 -5 year rebuild process there, and the AFC West will likely equal their rebuilt efforts. Don’t think the owners have that kind of patience, as we all have seen in recent years.
While I have seen most of the comic book movies, and enjoyed them for what they are, which is entertainment. They are entertaining, but sociologically, I find them abhorrent. They teach us to look for heroes to solve our problems rather than look inside ourselves for solutions to problems.
Does society move forward primarily through genius and inspiration or is it through incremental improvements from millions of "normal" individuals? The book "Outliers" argues, with plenty of evidence, that it is the latter.
Geniuses making grand discoveries is actually quite rare. Einstein's accomplishments were built upon the work of others who came before him. Though Einstein's contributions to science stand as an example of genius moving society forward, that is the exception not the rule, and did not spring forward in a vacuum, but depended upon other contributions.
Super heroes would be nice, but they do not exist and they only wet our appetite for saviors rather than relying upon ourselves.
Some would say that we can see ourselves as the superheroes (or at least part of us IN them), and it gives us reasons to be courageous. Iron Man, Batman, Hawkeye, and Black Widow are examples of "normal" people who just overacheived in certain areas to rub elbows with more gifted heroes and more than held their own.
Informative article. Didn't know the actor's name who played the Joker was "Ledger". He did a good job though. Art...theater, music, painting ad infinum, is ALWAYS subjective. How a coach will impact team performance, while awash with variables, is, in the end, measurable.
As for the '26 coaching line up, the test will be in the tasting and the pudding won't be ready for a while. As the fortunes of each team go, so goes the career path of coaches. At the end of the '26 season the music stops and the scramble for coaches to find a chair begins anew. I'm not knowledgeable enough about coaches (with the exception of MM) resume's to predict how they'll impact our team. I gotta go with Fleury for now via the one dude whose measurable record and opinion I trust...John Schneider.
Was convinced we'd elevate someone currently on the staff bc of continuity. But I guess you can get continuity by bringing in someone who thrives in the same environment.
Carroll confused continuity with loyalty, and got blinded by the latter when the former wasn't good enough. MacDonald has been more than clear that he wants the running game + explosives, which is what we didn't get from Grubb and did get from Kubiak. Hopefully Fleury can keep a good thing going.
And I do understand why our internal guys may not have gotten a shot. Could be they're more technical experts than leaders or innovators, the kind of things companies struggle with for their management teams too. Worst thing you can do is promote someone who's really good at what they do but don't have the tools for the next level -- you end up not solving for the next level, have to restart from scratch, but then. also you've lost the guy doing his old job so damn well. A lose-lose.
Sounds like The Peter Principle to me ...
Absolutely! Some people are amazing with details and teaching people to be better players and motivating, while others are better at setting the vision, organizing coaches, delegating, and speaking with media. Not everyone is a superhei in real life that can do everything at a top-32 in the world level.
*superhero*
Peter Principle. When I was a director, I almost always hired senior staff from outside. Never regreted it. Had a couple who didn't work out to the agency's needs, but were still better than any internal candidate.
Aussies love being the underdog.
Maybe we should have looked for one to be the OC?
SSJ, I totally agree with you that as fans, we have no way of knowing whether or not Fleury will be a good OC.
We just have to trust MM & JS have done their research (which I do)….and if it doesn’t work out they will course correct quickly (see Ryan Grubb).
This is the challenge with Defensive HC’s, if they land a good OC, the OC will get a promotion to HC elsewhere. So as SSJ says, get used to a revolving door every year or two.
I like the way MM is thinking about this strategically - building a “Seattle Offense” that is consistent year to year with a common set of principles & plays that can lose coaches and still be consistently productive.
in MM & JS I trust!!
Yeah. If JS and MM have a macro idea of what they want the offense to accomplish and maybe even be, then they will interview guys until they find the one who will best bring the details together and coach the players into becoming that unit. Rinse, repeat.
True but what we do know, he was a Whiner which puts him in a major “wait and see” category…
So, out of the movies, and back to the field....a new OC comes in, but he comes into a team, which ultimately affects his success. The Hawks OLine is better now in the last 1-2 years. Is it that Schneider finally found the O Line bargains he always looks for (Sundell, Zabel)? In comes Kubiak with excellent O Line intelligence; he redefines the QB role to best fit Darnold, and restarts the run game. Kubiak's left a powerful, successful offensive structure behind which will benefit any incoming OC. What I will watch is Kubiak's plan (he seemed super-pumped) for the Raiders. He doesn't have Schneider to help find the talent. He hasn't opined about the first round QB pick the team could take. The team needs a lot! The curse of the first round draft pick QB is that you go to the team with the worst record and fewest quality resources. What does a powerful OLine strategic mind like Kubiak see when he jumps at the chance to lead the Raiders? And will his O Line strategies here sustain if he's not play caller???
I truly believe that the OL is better because of John Benton and Rick Dennison moreso than KK, especially Benton. He has a proven track record and is a successful veteran OL coach in the NFL. KK coached and called a great scheme, yes. But, Benton teaches guys to better offensive linemen. If he and Dennison stay, we'll be fine.
Thanks Shaymus....an optimistic sceenario! I'll pay more attention as I hear these names.....
I saw where Benton is reported to be staying. Nice! Seeing as how JS hired Fleury, we now have system consistency and the same teaching staff for the OL. Sam worked with Fleury in SF, too. Looks like a good plan, so far!
Also, I want to be sure you didn't take my previous comment as any criticism. It was not meant that way, just as food for thought. Your attention paid is certainly at your own desire and is in no way in question, especially by a rando dude like me. Cheers!
No prob! I appreciated your comment! I have now seen Benton (and Fleury) mentioned in other articles and can better understand what goes on behind the scenes with these guys, so thanks!
"Why O.C.erious?
dang, Kenjoe cannot take a break from THIS. hah, hah.
That one was my favorite, too.
I think we're overthinking this one, which, coming from me...
Janocko wants to work with a young QB. He wants to hitch his star to an emerging star. Milroe has nowhere to go in Seattle, for a while, but Oakland [sic] has motive and opportunity.
Yes - I struggle to see Milroe being a huge factor in how these decisions went down. He’s a 3rd-string long-shot QB. But I guess it’s the offseason now, so we need to start talking about Milroe again?
When watching film, ask yourself if a character or scene is sadistic. Sadism in film is like nitrogen in air; we don’t tend to notice it. I do. Ledger made sadism exceptionally entertaining. I saw it in the theater back in the day. Never watched another Batman movie again. Too much casual sadism in the world. [Steps off soapbox, somberly.]
Back on the coaching topic, I question whether Kubiak made the right move. I don’t think I’d want to work for Mark Davis (or his dad, Al, for that matter.) Does he last a year? Let’s imagine that he doesn’t. Does the experience help or harm his ability to become a HC again? He’d probably get another OC job quickly after a Raiders fail, so it’s probably worth the gamble for him.
KK is going to be paid for another five years even if he gets fired, so I don't think he really cares about being an OC somewhere else.
Maybe a reunion happens down the road, ala Josh McDaniels
And Ledger died (drug overdose, I guess, but I remembered it as suicide...close enough) six months after filming that role.
Really good work on this one Ken
And the puns were flying like touchdown passes today.
May the 12s be with you.
Believe it or not, there was a time when the NFL did not receive 365/12/24/7 attention. In those days, few fans knew who the OC and DC of the their teams were, much less the no doubt nomadic assistant coaches.
Old Man River just kept rolling along anyway. The best teams kept winning and the worst teams kept losing.
Seems to be the most competitive professional sports league, but…
1960s (SB I–IV)
Green Bay Packers — 2
New York Jets — 1
Kansas City Chiefs - 1
1970s (SB V-XIV)
Pittsburgh Steelers — 4
Dallas Cowboys — 2
Miami Dolphins — 2
Baltimore Colts — 1
Oakland Raiders- 1
1980s (SB XV-XXIV)
San Francisco 49ers — 4
Washington Redskins — 2
Oakland/Los Angeles Raiders — 2
Chicago Bears - 1
New York Giants - 1
1990s (SB XXV-XXXIV)
Dallas Cowboys — 3
San Francisco 49ers — 1
Green Bay Packers — 1
New York Giants - 1
Denver Broncos — 2
Washington Redskins - 1
St. Louis Rams - 1
2000s (SB XXXV-XLIV)
New England Patriots — 3
Pittsburgh Steelers — 2
Baltimore Ravens — 1
Tampa Bay Buccaneers — 1
Indianapolis Colts — 1
New York Giants — 1
New Orleans Saints - 1
2010s (SB XLV-LIV)
New England Patriots — 3
Seattle Seahawks — 1
Denver Broncos — 1
Philadelphia Eagles — 1
Kansas City Chiefs — 1
Baltimore Ravens - 1
Green Bay Packers - 1
New York Giants - 1
2020s (SB LV–LX)
Kansas City Chiefs — 2
Tampa Bay Buccaneers — 1
Los Angeles Rams — 1
Philadelphia Eagles- 1
Seattle Seahawks- 1
So it’s gotten to be more competitive lately maybe due to the strength of schedule scheduling that started in 2002 but there are still 12 teams I think who have never won a Super Bowl and four who have never played in one. Name them?