Saints planned to interview Mike McCarthy; McCarthy didn’t garner enough interest from Saints and will take a year off (2 Viewers)

[St. Geezy]

Geezy, the data is not limited. We have ALL the data on Super Bowl winning coaches. It's a small sample, but it is complete. If 35 coaches have won a SuperBowl, 8.5% have been in their 30s. We're not missing any numbers so it's not limited. We're not extrapolating. That's fact.

There's a greater chance of a coach in their 30s winning a super bowl than a coach attempting to win a 2nd Super Bowl with a new team in their 60s. There's nothing refutable about that.

You’re missing the point.

Fact - only approximately 6% of coaches all time have won a Super Bowl.

It is hard to do for EVERYONE.

You can’t single out a minuscule subset of coaches and say it is egregiously harder for them to do it.

 

[texasjefe]

I'm accepting that it may be McCarthy, but can Joe Brady pleez interview too?

 

[St. Widge]

Right. If you point out that signing a good but aging RB (over 31) from a different team is generally a bad idea, it's like you're stating the obvious. But if you point out that signing a good but aging HC (over 61) could be a bad idea, people act like you're trying to outlaw Christmas.

I mean, one is based on the physical pounding a RB takes and the fact that few RBs are still near the same level after age 30 or 31. With coaches you are assuming a cognitive or effort decline at 61. But I don't see any evidence that older coaches don't win. Who has won most of the recent Super Bowls, Bruce Arians (68), Andy Reid (66 now), Belichick (72 now). McVay is really the only recent winner that was relatively young. But, just because there is correlation doesn't mean there is causation (as you know) so I wouldn't refuse to hire a young coach based on that correlation any more than I would refuse to hire a coach that has won a SB with another team based on correlation.

I get age as a concern regarding how long he would stay, but not as a concern that he can't win. As far as how long he stays, he should be able to get this team back to a regular playoff team before he leaves which would put us in a much better position while looking for a new coach, and probably a new GM given Loomis' age, in 3 to 5 years.

 

[St. Widge]

I'm accepting that it may be McCarthy, but can Joe Brady pleez interview too?

I believe that can/will happen next week.

 

[Hubig]

He's probably gonna be the guy unless Joe Brady absolutely blew them away. Looks like the Jets are bringing in a GM Glenn is very familiar with. It would be shocking if that deal doesn't get done today.

 

[ELLIASJWILLIAMS]

Kafka might be the guy, dark horse for sure

 

[Nolan]

I don't understand the Joe Brady appeal at all.

 

[los226]

At least Mike McCarthy is better than Mike Kafka.

 

[texasjefe]

I don't understand the Joe Brady appeal at all.

Sean Payton prototype, with recent past success in the culture. Offensive wild-man.

He comes from the Coached-Drew Brees-and-Joe Burrow tree.

Now he's with Josh Allen. Brady would coach up Rattler or go get his guy.

 

[livefromDC]

You’re missing the point.

Fact - only approximately 6% of coaches all time have won a Super Bowl.

It is hard to do for EVERYONE.

You can’t single out a minuscule subset of coaches and say it is egregiously harder for them to do it.

I'm not, LOL. You're acting like we're using randomized data. We're not. NFL head coaches IS the data set. Within that data set we have known factors that are related to success. For example, the Saints should have known the likelihood of Allen's success before he coached one game. We can ignore this because "we don't know for sure" or we can look at what the data to date states.

 

[St. Widge]

I don't understand the Joe Brady appeal at all.

It's the old Family Guy do you want the boat or the mystery box. The boat is a boat, but the mystery box could be anything. Even a boat.

People are looking to be excited and entertained and Brady is that kind of hire. And it's exciting to think he could end up being great and be here for 15 plus years like Payton. But, the downside is that he could also flame out in a year or two.

 

[livefromDC]

I mean, one is based on the physical pounding a RB takes and the fact that few RBs are still near the same level after age 30 or 31. With coaches you are assuming a cognitive or effort decline at 61. But I don't see any evidence that older coaches don't win. Who has won most of the recent Super Bowls, Bruce Arians (68), Andy Reid (66 now), Belichick (72 now). McVay is really the only recent winner that was relatively young. But, just because there is correlation doesn't mean there is causation (as you know) so I wouldn't refuse to hire a young coach based on that correlation any more than I would refuse to hire a coach that has won a SB with another team based on correlation.

I get age as a concern regarding how long he would stay, but not as a concern that he can't win. As far as how long he stays, he should be able to get this team back to a regular playoff team before he leaves which would put us in a much better position while looking for a new coach, and probably a new GM given Loomis' age, in 3 to 5 years.

You have got to be kidding me. Tom Brady, Mahomes, and Tom Brady.

Okay sure. If the Saints can get Tom Brady, Patrick Mahomes, or hmm...oh yeah, Tom Brady, I think McCarthy bucks the trend. SMH...

This was lazy by your standards, Widge.

Let's pretend the Saints are doing a total rebuild and those QBs aren't available. Does that change the outlook for you at all?

 

[livefromDC]

It's the old Family Guy do you want the boat or the mystery box. The boat is a boat, but the mystery box could be anything. Even a boat.

People are looking to be excited and entertained and Brady is that kind of hire. And it's exciting to think he could end up being great and be here for 15 plus years like Payton. But, the downside is that he could also flame out in a year or two.

McCarthy can as well. And even if he doesn't, Because he's 62 next season, there's a greater chance he retires in 4 years anyway. Also note, there's NO chance he's in New Orleans for 15 plus years.

 

[St. Widge]

You have got to be kidding me. Tom Brady, Mahomes, and Tom Brady.

Okay sure. If the Saints can get Tom Brady, Patrick Mahomes, or hmm...oh yeah, Tom Brady, I think McCarthy bucks the trend. SMH...

This was lazy by your standards, Widge.

Let's pretend the Saints are doing a total rebuild and those QBs aren't available. Does that change the outlook for you at all?

It's not lazy. The point is that the fact that older coaches win a lot of Super Bowls is no more a valid reason to hire and older coach and not hire a younger coach than not hiring coaches who have won prior Super Bowls because no coach has won a Super Bowl with two different teams. There are too many variables involved to show causation. At best you have correlation because the are variables like the fact that who your QB likely has the biggest influence on who wins the Super Bowl and often a coach doesn't get that franchise QB in two different jobs.

You just have to pick the guy you think is the best coach and there is no way that having won a Super Bowl with another team should be considered a bad thing.