Still saying it'll be Johnson to the Moons. Falcons for Bill, Chargers for Jim. Raiders I do think go Pierce. No idea on the Titans or Panthers. But we have a pretty clear run at the #2 Offensive candidate, whether that's viewed as Slowik, Monken, Callahan or Smith.
JS is making all the noise he wants that offensive leader paired with a new QB. He seems to see where the NFL is at right now. But we'll have to keep waiting until the Lions and Texans and Ravens exit the playoffs to really start getting insights I think.
The rumor is these parts (Virginia) is that the Moons won’t be outbid for Johnson and that he wants to stay in the northeast/midwest. Of course, that could lie anywhere from “well-founded” to “wishful thinking.”
Washington has a bad team with tons of draft capital and a lot of money for free agency. If you like to build the team in your own image from the ground up, Washington is your team.
There are many things I don't really understand about what the Seahawks are doing and what some fans/GM/owner want. But I especially don't understand the idea that JS believes that we are "close" while also seemingly wanting to draft a QB to replace Geno (because Geno is not good enough apparently)
I took a look back at the QBs drafted since 2013. I then counted the number of QBs equal to or better than Geno (I tried to be very liberal including guys such as Fields and Jones for example):
Total QBs drafted since 2013 = 127 QBs
QBs better than or equal to Geno = 20 QBs (16% chance)
QBs better than or equal to Geno drafted with the 16th pick or lower = 7 QBs (6% chance)
I don't understand how one can realistically think that the team is close while also saying we need to draft (and start?) a rookie QB. Even if they don't start the rookie QB and roll with Geno ... He will likely be a lame duck QB similar to what Russ was last year to Peyton.
Hate to be the cold shower guy but I am seeing a slog for the foreseeable future.
Schneider’s contract is through the 2027 draft. I figure he’s got three seasons to show that he be effective as a traditional GM. Geno Smith will be 34 in October. While there’s not much wear-and-tear on Geno, it’s hard to see Schneider planning to lean on on a 36-year old QB in his make-or-break season.
Plus, the ultimate question isn’t how Geno compares to all other QBs—it’s whether he is good to get the Seahawks to a SB. The QBs to play in the last five SBs: Patrick Mahomes (3), Tom Brady (2), Joe Burrow, Jimmy Garropolo, Jared Goff, Jalen Hurts, and Matthew Stafford. Of these, Mahomes, Brady, and Stafford won.
If Jimmy G can get to a SB, I guess Geno can. It would take a lot of dominos falling right, though. E.g., that Niner defense was stacked with Nick Bosa and Fred Warner as rookies.
I do not see a future for Geno in Seattle either... I wonder if JS would trade him for a second rounder and try to resign Lock. No question Geno would be attractive due to skill and contract. Read yesterday that Baker may be looking for 40-50M a year. If true, Geno is even more of a steal at $30M
My opinion about the SB question is there is no doubt in my mind that Geno can win a SB. I think that the perception has been extremely skewed due to generational talent: Pat Mahomes and Tom Brady.
I also look at the world in terms of odds. What are the chances you draft a Patty Mahomes? He is clearly in a league by himself. Since 2013 there have been 127 QBs drafted so that is a 1/127 chances at drafting him (less than 1%). Don't like those odds at all and this is what bad organizations do ... they scramble to try and find Mahomes/Brady instead of building a team.
Lets talk about SB winning QBs.
Since 2000 there have been 23 SB winning QBs. Let's just call a non tier 1 QB a not top 5 QB. Some of these guys maybe better than Geno (Big Ben, Russ (6th EPA in 2023), Eli) some of these guys will be worse than Geno (Brad Johnson, Flacco (18 in EPA/Play), Dilfer, Foles). But just lumping them together as not top 5 QB that year here are the results:
Non top 5 winning QBs = 10 out of 23 chances (43%!)
So you tell me ... What is the better chance to win the Super Bowl? A not top 5 QB (43% chance) or finding a Tier 1 QB (less than 1% chance)?
Even if you say Big Ben, Eli, Stafford, and Russ were clearly top 5 QBs at the time (would disagree and so would the numbers that we have since 2012: Russ was 7th in EPA/Play in 2013 and Stafford 6th).
Trent Dilfer, Brad Johnson, Nick Foles, and Joe Flacco won Super Bowls. That is 4/23 (17% chance).
The numbers don't lie ... You have a much better chance of winning with a second tier QB than trying to find a needle in the haystack looking for Mahomes or Brady.
I am strongly behind a Ben Johnson or Bobby Slowik hire or any other qualified OC young and upcoming guy over a guy who has already had his shot, ie, Dan Quinn, Bill or Vrabel. Something is missing with all these guys. As I think you pointed out, Ken, if we hire an OC, then no one can poach him away and just find a quality proven DC like a Raheem Morris or Wink. Or DQ if he gets passed over. Keep up the good writing, my friend. You are the only one I trust to not have a Seahawks bias. Also, can this new coach please fix the damn Oline? Looks like Abe isn’t gonna be the long term answer as well as all 3 interior guys at this point. Maybe Bradford and Olu will be OK , but I’d move Lewis back to RG and draft or sign anyone other than Phil Haynes!!
The pushback is that this is a good problem to have and that—because the rules are so skewed toward the offense—it’s a lot harder to find a quality DC.
I have no opinion on who the Seahawks’ next head coach should be. There are too many factors that I have no window into or that I am unqualified to evaluate. For me, it comes down to my confidence in John Schneider, which is middling. This means that I will withhold judgement no matter who he hires, be it Ben Johnson or Dan Quinn or someone else.
Hey, Paul, I agree, but hold John Schneider in high regard, as I do anyone until they prove that wrong. He worked hand in glove with Pete, and no one has more knowledge and learned more from Pete than anyone else in this world. Mostly, I believe he came to consensus with Pete on personnel. The drafts are on John more than Pete because he ran the scouting system day to day. Pete let him do his job. Then they came to a consensus on who to draft.
It’s all those blown Day 2 drafts, plus LJ Collier and Malik McDowell. I’m not in the “RBs don’t matter crowd,” but I don’t get taking Charbonnet over Torrence if the plan was to use Charbs as a traditional backup. Schneider’s fingerprints are on all of those; admittedly, I don’t know to what extent. On the other hand, there have been undeniable successes, and Schneider squeezes every last drop out of Day 3. Anyway, that’s why I’m in the middle.
In general, the inclusion of Dan Quinn for an interview as the head coach of the Seahawks is just being polite to him as he coached for the Hawks in the past. Not worried about this at all.
Thought JS made An interesting comment, words to the effect, “ if you hired a defensive coach, you were more app to lose. Your offensive coordinator with a successful season than the other way around. I think it’s pretty well accepted that the NFL is it an offensive league.IMHO We should be playing and developing to our strengths, making it dynamic and exciting.
The Defense needs work obviously but maybe a few draft choices, and a good defensive coordinator could fix that. We have
a potential dynamic, exciting quarterback on the roster, no, it’s not Geno Smith. Draft another quarterback, by all means. Another words cover your bet.
The 49ers Could be the Super Bowl winner this year. The Rams have paid their dues this year., next year the wallet will be open and the Rams are going bear hunting. Get past them. And the Super Bowl and all that good stuff I’ll take care of itself . Just the Way I see it.
I'm not sure Kafka has a lot of momentum and I would think that the majority of lists do have Monken ahead of him. My list has Kafka over Monken because the Seahawks have made zero connetion to Monken. If the Seahawks make a connection with Monken, watch him skyrocket in my list!
I like Kafka simply for the potential to make some literary reference jokes about his name. "Lumen Field has become a Kafkaesque landscape that no visiting team wants to navigate." "What a "metamorphosis" the Seahawks offense has seen since Kafka came to town."
This is far more challenging than just making a bunch of Monken monkey jokes,
Oh wait. In 2023, Seattle passed on 62% of plays and Detroit on just 56%. This is clearly the only measure of a head coach. NFL football is so simple! Had Pete passed on 100% of plays and never punted, he’d clearly still be HC.
But then again, “Ben” is a good name. Let’s not overcompensate things.
You state the gaping flaw in the “Let Russ Cook” thing. The argument that because a QB was terrific throwing 28 time a game he’d be just as good throwing 43 times a game is obviously weak. It was hard to respect the opinion of anyone who bought into this and yet claimed to be data driven.
So you'd want to exclude qualified people because of the color of their skin? Pardon me for saying so but that seems a tad racist. How about we sign the most qualified person regardless of skin color instead. If he's black or Asian or Hispanic, that's all good with me but let's not exclude guys (or girls) simply because of their skin color.
I understand what you’re saying and am going to be supportive of whoever is chosen. I’d just like to see more representation of minorities in leadership in a league made up of a high percentage of minority players. We know that there are competent African American coaches because we’ve seen Mike Tomlinson and DeMecon Ryans, and competent Hispanic coaches like Tom Flores and Ron Rivera. I certainly don’t think it’s a first or second priority, but I don’t think it should be totally ignored. The NFL requires interviews of minority candidates and I’d like to think they’re sincere about providing those opportunities. I just think it would be cool if the Hawks went from the oldest, whitest coach in the league to a young, non white coach, while winning many games and ultimately a SB.
I’m not at all offended by your comments. I understand my position isn’t universally popular. I’m certainly not suggesting lowering standards, but as Ken and others have pointed out, whoever is chosen will have a hard time being successful. And even if a team picks the hot, trendy coach there are no guarantees. I also factor in that location and circumstances are important. Someone who succeeds in one place might fail elsewhere, or vice versa. Given all that, and the history of the vast majority of coaches being white, I’m comfortable with race being a factor, maybe a tie breaker between equal candidates.
And I’m 100% going to root for success for the next Hawks coach, regardless of race, gender, sexual orientation, etc., just I’ve rooted for each one since Jack Patera stepped onto a practice field in Cheney.
"Given all that, and the history of the vast majority of coaches being white, I’m comfortable with race being a factor, maybe a tie breaker between equal candidates."
Whether or not it's even possible for all things being equal, you're literally saying the guy was chosen because he was black. That's not progress, it's demeaning.
But it was hard to support Patera. He was a defensive coach, if I remember correctly. He had the Belichek attitude. Grumpy and uncommunicative. Plus, we lost most of our games.
Those were definitely different times. Grumpy, authoritarian coach, no water during practice in Cheney, 2 a day practices etc. Patera was defensive minded, but also ran a few crazy trick plays and wasn’t bad for an expansion team coach. I don’t think he was ever a head coach anywhere after his time with the Hawks.
I'm sorry to not just let this go but this stuff makes no sense to me.
"I just think it would be cool if the Hawks went from the oldest, whitest coach in the league to a young, non white coach, while winning many games and ultimately a SB."
We already know there are competent black coaches who can win the Super Bowl, Tony Dungy and Mike Tomlin have proven this. So if the Seahawks hire a black coach who's successful it's not as if this is breaking new ground. Personally I don't think race has any business whatsoever being part of a hiring process, that's how you end up with the Claudine Gays of the world. I really think there are a lot of people who suffer from white guilt who don't understand that lowering standards (not something you're advocating outright) does nobody any good. It's the personification of the soft bigotry of low expectations and it needs to go away because it creates a victim class who and we're seeing today just how detrimental that is. There's nothing wrong with a meritocracy, in fact, it's the best system we have.
Meritocracy is not a bad goal to have. The issue is that there are those in power who think merit = a certain class of folks taken at face value, literally. Often opportunity given by those with power is nestled at the apex of white and male. You could even ask, what merit is required to own an nfl team? Would it be that they would have had to play football? In that case there are less than a half dozen of the 32 owners who have. Their merit is based on the bank account and not even experience and yet they make decisions that impact those folks who do have merit. DEI practices are there to tip the hand and make sure that power isn’t abused to only focus on a certain subset of the population. Now in some cases it is all a horse and pony show and that is really sad. I don’t know what the answer is but you can’t claim, and I don’t think you have, that there are folks in the world who don’t discriminate. We listen to doctors, mechanics, chefs scientists all because of their experience. Why don’t we do the same for folks with lived experience?
"You could even ask, what merit is required to own an nfl team?... Their merit is based on the bank account and not even experience and yet they make decisions that impact those folks who do have merit.
This is what's known as "owning a business". Every business owner makes decisions, including personnel, based upon if it's going to help their business. As a business owner I can assure you I don't care about race in my hiring practices, I just want someone who will show up and do a good job. So based upon my personal experience I would say that it's likely that most other business owners feel the same.
"DEI practices are there to tip the hand and make sure that power isn’t abused to only focus on a certain subset of the population."
You're kidding yourself. DEI practices have been imposed to divide the country by creating a victim class for the purpose of grabbing/holding power. They're a tool to drive a wedge between the races so we fight amongst ourselves instead of the people wielding the actual power.
"We listen to doctors, mechanics, chefs scientists all because of their experience."
I don't listen to those people at all except for my mechanic, who I hand picked. Science has been sold to the highest bidder, even the editors of the leading journals know most of the stuff they publish is wrong (see attached link). Doctors are nothing more than legalized drug pushers for Pharma. Fifteen years ago I had been diagnosed with asthma and my doctor put me on a steroid inhaler and told me the asthma would progressively get worse and my dosage would continue to get higher. I gained 10 lbs in a month from the steroids and I said "screw it, there's gotta be a better way". I did some research, made a diet change (to low carb) and my asthma disappeared in a few days. Let that sink in, I do not have asthma anymore. I also lost 40 lbs, my hand tremors disappeared and I no longer needed glasses. I went Carnivore for a year and my lifelong hayfever is now gone. Do you think you're ever going to get advice to go low carb or just eat meat from a typical doctor even though it's the healthiest thing you could do for your body?
I don't accept appeals to authority, it's what's called a logical fallacy. The only thing I accept is hard data and even that I scrutinize to the best of my ability before accepting it. I'm all for experience in a field, I think that's a good thing. But I don't see how the lived experience of simply being black or any other race helps in being an NFL coach. I think hiring based on race is a huge mistake and unless you have data backing up your position your opinion to the contrary is just that, your opinion.
Meritocracy is the goal, but when the field has been tilted against people because of their skin color for hundreds of years, certainly the Rooney Rule is the least the league can do to create a level field for all races. To my eye, it is working, albeit slowly. Perhaps in a few more decades, the Rooney Rule will be abolished. But that day is not today, and I think that is what it sounds like you are saying.
My comment has nothing to do with the Rooney Rule, to be frank I'm just completely over conversations about race. All I care about is competency... can the person do the job. When a coach is hired all I want to know about are his qualifications and race is not a qualification of merit.
The entire goal has been to not see color because we make the assumption that color has nothing to do ability or potential. I completely agree with that. I think that anyone is capable of anything if they put their mind to it so I am totally against quotas or reduced standards in order to promote more people of a certain color hired in a certain field. If I were a black man I wouldn't want an interview because there's some silly rule saying black guys had to be interviewed. It's a slap in the face, I'd want the interview because my body of work showed I had the ability. And once you start hiring people simply due to the color of their skin you take away all incentive to be better. Competition is a good thing... it's probably the best motivator out there. We need to embrace competition and stop with the quotas, they haven't worked in the 60 years since the Equal Rights Amendment was passed unless of course your goal is simply to say "I'm not racist, look at all the minorities I've hired".
With all due respect, the “entire goal” has been TO see and UNDERSTAND race, and how it affects the way ability and potential are expressed uniquely in individuals.
As Jerod Mayo said so clearly this week, “If you ‘don’t see color,’ you don’t see racism.” If you don’t see racism, you can’t combat it in the workplace or community.
Race-conscious hiring/admissions doesn’t lead to lowered standards or enforced quotas. It recognizes multiple forms of merit. It values creating teams/companies/schools and communities that are made up of a variety of individual strengths, backgrounds and viewpoints.
The most consistently incompetent people involved with NFL organizations are those that did not earn their position through football knowledge, skill, or merit. The owners. Let's lose the Rooney Rule, but replace all NFL owners with minority women chosen by random lottery. Let them interview and hire whoever they want.
Hmmm. Not good, with such a huge game coming up. I expected better of him, if only as a team player. Do we travel to him or he to us? I am not big on Zoom meetings, but can see it as an effective first contact. No doubt he has Campbell's blessing. And who knows? Maybe JS says our Hawks must make a decision soon and he's simply keeping his name in the hat as the hiring process grinds on. In this event, it is a Good Sign for us as a top 3 destination.
Still saying it'll be Johnson to the Moons. Falcons for Bill, Chargers for Jim. Raiders I do think go Pierce. No idea on the Titans or Panthers. But we have a pretty clear run at the #2 Offensive candidate, whether that's viewed as Slowik, Monken, Callahan or Smith.
JS is making all the noise he wants that offensive leader paired with a new QB. He seems to see where the NFL is at right now. But we'll have to keep waiting until the Lions and Texans and Ravens exit the playoffs to really start getting insights I think.
The rumor is these parts (Virginia) is that the Moons won’t be outbid for Johnson and that he wants to stay in the northeast/midwest. Of course, that could lie anywhere from “well-founded” to “wishful thinking.”
Washington has a bad team with tons of draft capital and a lot of money for free agency. If you like to build the team in your own image from the ground up, Washington is your team.
The new ownership is a wild card. Harris is a bit of a cipher.
There are many things I don't really understand about what the Seahawks are doing and what some fans/GM/owner want. But I especially don't understand the idea that JS believes that we are "close" while also seemingly wanting to draft a QB to replace Geno (because Geno is not good enough apparently)
I took a look back at the QBs drafted since 2013. I then counted the number of QBs equal to or better than Geno (I tried to be very liberal including guys such as Fields and Jones for example):
Total QBs drafted since 2013 = 127 QBs
QBs better than or equal to Geno = 20 QBs (16% chance)
QBs better than or equal to Geno drafted with the 16th pick or lower = 7 QBs (6% chance)
I don't understand how one can realistically think that the team is close while also saying we need to draft (and start?) a rookie QB. Even if they don't start the rookie QB and roll with Geno ... He will likely be a lame duck QB similar to what Russ was last year to Peyton.
Hate to be the cold shower guy but I am seeing a slog for the foreseeable future.
Hope to be wrong!
Here’s the way I see it:
Schneider’s contract is through the 2027 draft. I figure he’s got three seasons to show that he be effective as a traditional GM. Geno Smith will be 34 in October. While there’s not much wear-and-tear on Geno, it’s hard to see Schneider planning to lean on on a 36-year old QB in his make-or-break season.
Plus, the ultimate question isn’t how Geno compares to all other QBs—it’s whether he is good to get the Seahawks to a SB. The QBs to play in the last five SBs: Patrick Mahomes (3), Tom Brady (2), Joe Burrow, Jimmy Garropolo, Jared Goff, Jalen Hurts, and Matthew Stafford. Of these, Mahomes, Brady, and Stafford won.
If Jimmy G can get to a SB, I guess Geno can. It would take a lot of dominos falling right, though. E.g., that Niner defense was stacked with Nick Bosa and Fred Warner as rookies.
I do not see a future for Geno in Seattle either... I wonder if JS would trade him for a second rounder and try to resign Lock. No question Geno would be attractive due to skill and contract. Read yesterday that Baker may be looking for 40-50M a year. If true, Geno is even more of a steal at $30M
My opinion about the SB question is there is no doubt in my mind that Geno can win a SB. I think that the perception has been extremely skewed due to generational talent: Pat Mahomes and Tom Brady.
I also look at the world in terms of odds. What are the chances you draft a Patty Mahomes? He is clearly in a league by himself. Since 2013 there have been 127 QBs drafted so that is a 1/127 chances at drafting him (less than 1%). Don't like those odds at all and this is what bad organizations do ... they scramble to try and find Mahomes/Brady instead of building a team.
Lets talk about SB winning QBs.
Since 2000 there have been 23 SB winning QBs. Let's just call a non tier 1 QB a not top 5 QB. Some of these guys maybe better than Geno (Big Ben, Russ (6th EPA in 2023), Eli) some of these guys will be worse than Geno (Brad Johnson, Flacco (18 in EPA/Play), Dilfer, Foles). But just lumping them together as not top 5 QB that year here are the results:
Non top 5 winning QBs = 10 out of 23 chances (43%!)
So you tell me ... What is the better chance to win the Super Bowl? A not top 5 QB (43% chance) or finding a Tier 1 QB (less than 1% chance)?
Even if you say Big Ben, Eli, Stafford, and Russ were clearly top 5 QBs at the time (would disagree and so would the numbers that we have since 2012: Russ was 7th in EPA/Play in 2013 and Stafford 6th).
Trent Dilfer, Brad Johnson, Nick Foles, and Joe Flacco won Super Bowls. That is 4/23 (17% chance).
The numbers don't lie ... You have a much better chance of winning with a second tier QB than trying to find a needle in the haystack looking for Mahomes or Brady.
Also, I should clarify one thing. I think the whole notion of a "Franchise QB" or you need a "Franchise QB" to win is garbage.
Every player at every position should be challenged for their starting role at all times. Including QB.
IMO, there is only a couple guys worth a franchise QB type contract: Pat Mahomes and maybe Josh Allen/Burrow.
Organizations make mistakes signing guys like Cousins, Hurts, etc. to deals that should only be afforded to the Mahomes level talent.
Is Geno a "Franchise QB"? No. But neither is almost every QB. Baker Mayfield? What a joke that is to be talking 40-50 million for him.
I am strongly behind a Ben Johnson or Bobby Slowik hire or any other qualified OC young and upcoming guy over a guy who has already had his shot, ie, Dan Quinn, Bill or Vrabel. Something is missing with all these guys. As I think you pointed out, Ken, if we hire an OC, then no one can poach him away and just find a quality proven DC like a Raheem Morris or Wink. Or DQ if he gets passed over. Keep up the good writing, my friend. You are the only one I trust to not have a Seahawks bias. Also, can this new coach please fix the damn Oline? Looks like Abe isn’t gonna be the long term answer as well as all 3 interior guys at this point. Maybe Bradford and Olu will be OK , but I’d move Lewis back to RG and draft or sign anyone other than Phil Haynes!!
The pushback is that this is a good problem to have and that—because the rules are so skewed toward the offense—it’s a lot harder to find a quality DC.
Wish you were running the Hawks. We would be a juggernaut in no time.
Ben Johnson did miracles in Detroit. Loved watching that game.
I think after this week he will be able to pick where he wants to go.
I have no opinion on who the Seahawks’ next head coach should be. There are too many factors that I have no window into or that I am unqualified to evaluate. For me, it comes down to my confidence in John Schneider, which is middling. This means that I will withhold judgement no matter who he hires, be it Ben Johnson or Dan Quinn or someone else.
This is the best comment I have seen in sometime.
Hey, Paul, I agree, but hold John Schneider in high regard, as I do anyone until they prove that wrong. He worked hand in glove with Pete, and no one has more knowledge and learned more from Pete than anyone else in this world. Mostly, I believe he came to consensus with Pete on personnel. The drafts are on John more than Pete because he ran the scouting system day to day. Pete let him do his job. Then they came to a consensus on who to draft.
It’s all those blown Day 2 drafts, plus LJ Collier and Malik McDowell. I’m not in the “RBs don’t matter crowd,” but I don’t get taking Charbonnet over Torrence if the plan was to use Charbs as a traditional backup. Schneider’s fingerprints are on all of those; admittedly, I don’t know to what extent. On the other hand, there have been undeniable successes, and Schneider squeezes every last drop out of Day 3. Anyway, that’s why I’m in the middle.
In general, the inclusion of Dan Quinn for an interview as the head coach of the Seahawks is just being polite to him as he coached for the Hawks in the past. Not worried about this at all.
Thought JS made An interesting comment, words to the effect, “ if you hired a defensive coach, you were more app to lose. Your offensive coordinator with a successful season than the other way around. I think it’s pretty well accepted that the NFL is it an offensive league.IMHO We should be playing and developing to our strengths, making it dynamic and exciting.
The Defense needs work obviously but maybe a few draft choices, and a good defensive coordinator could fix that. We have
a potential dynamic, exciting quarterback on the roster, no, it’s not Geno Smith. Draft another quarterback, by all means. Another words cover your bet.
The 49ers Could be the Super Bowl winner this year. The Rams have paid their dues this year., next year the wallet will be open and the Rams are going bear hunting. Get past them. And the Super Bowl and all that good stuff I’ll take care of itself . Just the Way I see it.
I'd want Monken over Kafka. In fact, I don't really understand the popularity of Kafka... the Giants were poor on offense.
I'm not sure Kafka has a lot of momentum and I would think that the majority of lists do have Monken ahead of him. My list has Kafka over Monken because the Seahawks have made zero connetion to Monken. If the Seahawks make a connection with Monken, watch him skyrocket in my list!
I like Kafka simply for the potential to make some literary reference jokes about his name. "Lumen Field has become a Kafkaesque landscape that no visiting team wants to navigate." "What a "metamorphosis" the Seahawks offense has seen since Kafka came to town."
This is far more challenging than just making a bunch of Monken monkey jokes,
He has received strong endorsements from Patrick Mahomes and Andy Reid.
They could just be helping out a former colleague
Will Ben Baldwin like Ben Johnson, because “Ben”?
Oh wait. In 2023, Seattle passed on 62% of plays and Detroit on just 56%. This is clearly the only measure of a head coach. NFL football is so simple! Had Pete passed on 100% of plays and never punted, he’d clearly still be HC.
But then again, “Ben” is a good name. Let’s not overcompensate things.
You state the gaping flaw in the “Let Russ Cook” thing. The argument that because a QB was terrific throwing 28 time a game he’d be just as good throwing 43 times a game is obviously weak. It was hard to respect the opinion of anyone who bought into this and yet claimed to be data driven.
Haha
You are welcome, Joe! Keep up the great work!
I agree that the Dallas game probably ruined Quinn’s chances of being Head Coach, maybe anywhere. A really bad pre interview audition.
I have no problem with John other than my previous expressed hope for a non white coach, he seems like a very high quality candidate.
So you'd want to exclude qualified people because of the color of their skin? Pardon me for saying so but that seems a tad racist. How about we sign the most qualified person regardless of skin color instead. If he's black or Asian or Hispanic, that's all good with me but let's not exclude guys (or girls) simply because of their skin color.
I understand what you’re saying and am going to be supportive of whoever is chosen. I’d just like to see more representation of minorities in leadership in a league made up of a high percentage of minority players. We know that there are competent African American coaches because we’ve seen Mike Tomlinson and DeMecon Ryans, and competent Hispanic coaches like Tom Flores and Ron Rivera. I certainly don’t think it’s a first or second priority, but I don’t think it should be totally ignored. The NFL requires interviews of minority candidates and I’d like to think they’re sincere about providing those opportunities. I just think it would be cool if the Hawks went from the oldest, whitest coach in the league to a young, non white coach, while winning many games and ultimately a SB.
I’m not at all offended by your comments. I understand my position isn’t universally popular. I’m certainly not suggesting lowering standards, but as Ken and others have pointed out, whoever is chosen will have a hard time being successful. And even if a team picks the hot, trendy coach there are no guarantees. I also factor in that location and circumstances are important. Someone who succeeds in one place might fail elsewhere, or vice versa. Given all that, and the history of the vast majority of coaches being white, I’m comfortable with race being a factor, maybe a tie breaker between equal candidates.
And I’m 100% going to root for success for the next Hawks coach, regardless of race, gender, sexual orientation, etc., just I’ve rooted for each one since Jack Patera stepped onto a practice field in Cheney.
"Given all that, and the history of the vast majority of coaches being white, I’m comfortable with race being a factor, maybe a tie breaker between equal candidates."
Whether or not it's even possible for all things being equal, you're literally saying the guy was chosen because he was black. That's not progress, it's demeaning.
But it was hard to support Patera. He was a defensive coach, if I remember correctly. He had the Belichek attitude. Grumpy and uncommunicative. Plus, we lost most of our games.
Those were definitely different times. Grumpy, authoritarian coach, no water during practice in Cheney, 2 a day practices etc. Patera was defensive minded, but also ran a few crazy trick plays and wasn’t bad for an expansion team coach. I don’t think he was ever a head coach anywhere after his time with the Hawks.
I'm sorry to not just let this go but this stuff makes no sense to me.
"I just think it would be cool if the Hawks went from the oldest, whitest coach in the league to a young, non white coach, while winning many games and ultimately a SB."
We already know there are competent black coaches who can win the Super Bowl, Tony Dungy and Mike Tomlin have proven this. So if the Seahawks hire a black coach who's successful it's not as if this is breaking new ground. Personally I don't think race has any business whatsoever being part of a hiring process, that's how you end up with the Claudine Gays of the world. I really think there are a lot of people who suffer from white guilt who don't understand that lowering standards (not something you're advocating outright) does nobody any good. It's the personification of the soft bigotry of low expectations and it needs to go away because it creates a victim class who and we're seeing today just how detrimental that is. There's nothing wrong with a meritocracy, in fact, it's the best system we have.
Meritocracy is not a bad goal to have. The issue is that there are those in power who think merit = a certain class of folks taken at face value, literally. Often opportunity given by those with power is nestled at the apex of white and male. You could even ask, what merit is required to own an nfl team? Would it be that they would have had to play football? In that case there are less than a half dozen of the 32 owners who have. Their merit is based on the bank account and not even experience and yet they make decisions that impact those folks who do have merit. DEI practices are there to tip the hand and make sure that power isn’t abused to only focus on a certain subset of the population. Now in some cases it is all a horse and pony show and that is really sad. I don’t know what the answer is but you can’t claim, and I don’t think you have, that there are folks in the world who don’t discriminate. We listen to doctors, mechanics, chefs scientists all because of their experience. Why don’t we do the same for folks with lived experience?
"You could even ask, what merit is required to own an nfl team?... Their merit is based on the bank account and not even experience and yet they make decisions that impact those folks who do have merit.
This is what's known as "owning a business". Every business owner makes decisions, including personnel, based upon if it's going to help their business. As a business owner I can assure you I don't care about race in my hiring practices, I just want someone who will show up and do a good job. So based upon my personal experience I would say that it's likely that most other business owners feel the same.
"DEI practices are there to tip the hand and make sure that power isn’t abused to only focus on a certain subset of the population."
You're kidding yourself. DEI practices have been imposed to divide the country by creating a victim class for the purpose of grabbing/holding power. They're a tool to drive a wedge between the races so we fight amongst ourselves instead of the people wielding the actual power.
"We listen to doctors, mechanics, chefs scientists all because of their experience."
I don't listen to those people at all except for my mechanic, who I hand picked. Science has been sold to the highest bidder, even the editors of the leading journals know most of the stuff they publish is wrong (see attached link). Doctors are nothing more than legalized drug pushers for Pharma. Fifteen years ago I had been diagnosed with asthma and my doctor put me on a steroid inhaler and told me the asthma would progressively get worse and my dosage would continue to get higher. I gained 10 lbs in a month from the steroids and I said "screw it, there's gotta be a better way". I did some research, made a diet change (to low carb) and my asthma disappeared in a few days. Let that sink in, I do not have asthma anymore. I also lost 40 lbs, my hand tremors disappeared and I no longer needed glasses. I went Carnivore for a year and my lifelong hayfever is now gone. Do you think you're ever going to get advice to go low carb or just eat meat from a typical doctor even though it's the healthiest thing you could do for your body?
https://rosemarycottageclinic.co.uk/blog/2020/01/15/corruption-of-medical-research-in-the-words-of-the-worlds-top-journal-editors/
I don't accept appeals to authority, it's what's called a logical fallacy. The only thing I accept is hard data and even that I scrutinize to the best of my ability before accepting it. I'm all for experience in a field, I think that's a good thing. But I don't see how the lived experience of simply being black or any other race helps in being an NFL coach. I think hiring based on race is a huge mistake and unless you have data backing up your position your opinion to the contrary is just that, your opinion.
Well I am glad your research improved your health!
Meritocracy is the goal, but when the field has been tilted against people because of their skin color for hundreds of years, certainly the Rooney Rule is the least the league can do to create a level field for all races. To my eye, it is working, albeit slowly. Perhaps in a few more decades, the Rooney Rule will be abolished. But that day is not today, and I think that is what it sounds like you are saying.
My comment has nothing to do with the Rooney Rule, to be frank I'm just completely over conversations about race. All I care about is competency... can the person do the job. When a coach is hired all I want to know about are his qualifications and race is not a qualification of merit.
The entire goal has been to not see color because we make the assumption that color has nothing to do ability or potential. I completely agree with that. I think that anyone is capable of anything if they put their mind to it so I am totally against quotas or reduced standards in order to promote more people of a certain color hired in a certain field. If I were a black man I wouldn't want an interview because there's some silly rule saying black guys had to be interviewed. It's a slap in the face, I'd want the interview because my body of work showed I had the ability. And once you start hiring people simply due to the color of their skin you take away all incentive to be better. Competition is a good thing... it's probably the best motivator out there. We need to embrace competition and stop with the quotas, they haven't worked in the 60 years since the Equal Rights Amendment was passed unless of course your goal is simply to say "I'm not racist, look at all the minorities I've hired".
“My comment has nothing to do with the Rooney Rule, to be frank I'm just completely over conversations about race.”
I doubt that Black coaches see it this way. Plus, it’s definitely a slap in the face to *not* be interviewed because you are Black.
With all due respect, the “entire goal” has been TO see and UNDERSTAND race, and how it affects the way ability and potential are expressed uniquely in individuals.
As Jerod Mayo said so clearly this week, “If you ‘don’t see color,’ you don’t see racism.” If you don’t see racism, you can’t combat it in the workplace or community.
Race-conscious hiring/admissions doesn’t lead to lowered standards or enforced quotas. It recognizes multiple forms of merit. It values creating teams/companies/schools and communities that are made up of a variety of individual strengths, backgrounds and viewpoints.
The most consistently incompetent people involved with NFL organizations are those that did not earn their position through football knowledge, skill, or merit. The owners. Let's lose the Rooney Rule, but replace all NFL owners with minority women chosen by random lottery. Let them interview and hire whoever they want.
I like the list. Living in Tx I see the cowboys and Texans a lot. I am very impressed with the Texas OC so I would rate him a bit higher
With you 100%. Ban the Dan! Quinn don't even begin!
He was blown out Sunday and by blowouts by SF. Loses to AZ and the patriots. Both not great teams.
Hard pass on Quinn
Cowboys defensive stats were skewed heavily by playing a bunch of bad teams. 11ppg vs sub .500 and 28ppg vs .500+
Hmmm. Not good, with such a huge game coming up. I expected better of him, if only as a team player. Do we travel to him or he to us? I am not big on Zoom meetings, but can see it as an effective first contact. No doubt he has Campbell's blessing. And who knows? Maybe JS says our Hawks must make a decision soon and he's simply keeping his name in the hat as the hiring process grinds on. In this event, it is a Good Sign for us as a top 3 destination.