Saints are flying Kafka and Weaver in for 2nd interviews [interviews rescheduled to January 24-25 due to snowstorm in N.O.] (150 Viewers)

[DSnfla]

I tend to agree. I guess I always assume they have a favorite, but maybe they don't since it's not just one guy doing the interviews. I honestly hope they don't have a favorite and that they go into every interview giving the guy an equal chance to get the job. Just because you don't like the stats or the resume as much as others doesn't mean they aren't the right choice for this specific situation. And maybe that is what they are doing since it's a 5 or 6 person group doing the interviews. Each of them probably has different guys that they would probably like, but with that many reviewing each candidate hopefully each guy will get a fair shot.

Of course, in the end, it's going to be Loomis making the decision, but hopefully he has an open mind going into each interview and will listen to the other guys doing the interviews.

I think they do have a favorite and it's MM. And I think he wants to come here. But I think they want to do due diligence and interview the rest to see if someone blows them away

 

[St. Geezy]

Especially, when you have the story in Buffalo, where there was a clear and obvious leap in play once they moved from Ken Dorsey to Brady. Brady has the Sean Payton story, the LSU story, etc.. Joe Brady should be target #1 and it feels very obvious to me.

Aside from the fact that his LSU story happened to coincide with him having arguably the two best WRs in the NFL at his disposal and a top 3 passer in the league throwing to them, or that he’s working with a MVP candidate QB at the moment that was great before he got there, there is a lot more to consider outside of stat sheet results.

What if what is obvious to you contradicts what’s happening in the interviews? What if their vision of leadership isn’t being satisfied? What if there are things about him that you don’t know about that would come about while he’s being vetted for the elevated position of NFL HC through past references?

I think we all have our favorite candidate, but none of us can say the choice is “obvious,” especially when talking about the younger guys that’s never done it before.

There are certain qualities each team looks for in a HC, speaking in regards to leadership qualities, professionalism qualities. “Is this someone I want standing up at a podium representing my organization?” “Is this someone my locker room is going to take seriously when things aren’t going particularly well?” “Is this someone whose subordinate staff is going to have the utmost respect for?”

These are questions outside observers can’t really answer. We can’t just look at coordinators’ offensive outputs and say they “should be target #1 and it feels very obvious.”

Contrary to popular belief, all of these interviews aren’t going to go perfectly. Not saying Brady won’t check all of these boxes, but these are just things to consider when declaring that you think you know who the obvious #1 target should be, especially when it is someone that’s never done the job before.

 

[Outbackjack]

Aside from the fact that his LSU story happened to coincide with him having arguably the two best WRs in the NFL at his disposal and a top 3 passer in the league throwing to them, or that he’s working with a MVP candidate QB at the moment that was great before he got there, there is a lot more to consider outside of stat sheet results.

What if what is obvious to you contradicts what’s happening in the interviews? What if their vision of leadership isn’t being satisfied? What if there are things about him that you don’t know about that would come about while he’s being vetted for the elevated position of NFL HC through past references?

I think we all have our favorite candidate, but none of us can say the choice is “obvious,” especially when talking about the younger guys that’s never done it before.

There are certain qualities each team looks for in a HC, speaking in regards to leadership qualities, professionalism qualities. “Is this someone I want standing up at a podium representing my organization?” “Is this someone my locker room is going to take seriously when things aren’t going particularly well?” “Is this someone whose subordinate staff is going to have the utmost respect for?”

These are questions outside observers can’t really answer. We can’t just look at coordinators’ offensive outputs and say they “should be target #1 and it feels very obvious.”

Contrary to popular belief, all of these interviews aren’t going to go perfectly. Not saying Brady won’t check all of these boxes, but these are just things to consider when declaring that you think you know who the obvious #1 target should be.

Great points. Well stated

 

[HogsNSaints]

Aside from the fact that his LSU story happened to coincide with him having arguably the two best WRs in the NFL at his disposal and a top 3 passer in the league throwing to them, or that he’s working with a MVP candidate QB at the moment that was great before he got there, there is a lot more to consider outside of stat sheet results.

What if what is obvious to you contradicts what’s happening in the interviews? What if their vision of leadership isn’t being satisfied? What if there are things about him that you don’t know about that would come about while he’s being vetted for the elevated position of NFL HC through past references?

I think we all have our favorite candidate, but none of us can say the choice is “obvious,” especially when talking about the younger guys that’s never done it before.

There are certain qualities each team looks for in a HC, speaking in regards to leadership qualities, professionalism qualities. “Is this someone I want standing up at a podium representing my organization?” “Is this someone my locker room is going to take seriously when things aren’t going particularly well?” “Is this someone whose subordinate staff is going to have the utmost respect for?”

These are questions outside observers can’t really answer. We can’t just look at coordinators’ offensive outputs and say they “should be target #1 and it feels very obvious.”

Contrary to popular belief, all of these interviews aren’t going to go perfectly. Not saying Brady won’t check all of these boxes, but these are just things to consider when declaring that you think you know who the obvious #1 target should be, especially when it is someone that’s never done the job before.

You were respectful and I don’t even disagree with your points, so I want to be sure to just try and thoroughly say my side.

First paragraph: It’s generally difficult to know when exactly something clicks for a group of immensely talented guys, but in the case of Burrow/Chase/JJ I think we can all see they started becoming “those guys” in 2019 when Brady was added to the LSU staff. They all had Superman leaps that year. No one will ever know, but could Mahomes ever be the guy he is without association with Andy Reid? Is it possible Tom Brady never becomes what he is without “the Patriot Way”? All time greats in this sport have all time mentors. No, I am not saying Joe Brady in his 1 year at LSU gets credit for everything that happens from then on in their career - but completely taking their single biggest ascension year from him, (like the other guy is doing) when there’s undeniable correlation to their spike, is also not fair to the truth.

Rest of the paragraphs: I truly meant “seems obvious to me” as purely to me. I do think vetting these candidates can change the queue of coaches, and I think that’s why you don’t just conduct interviews with one guy until he says no. But I would also say, there is a paper thin line between due diligence and making sure you get the right fit, and demanding that your questions be answered exactly how you want them answered - bypassing the best candidate to make sure that he checks unnecessary boxes that you’ve conjured, ie Jerry Jonesing the situation.

Ultimately, what I am speaking to in the “obvious” comment is the pre-interview thought process (which is exactly where we as fans always stay in the process). When you are looking around the league at potential candidates for the job - and there’s a guy that worked with and in large part emulates the best coach this organization has ever had, went to the direct correlated college fanbase’s team in-state and had a legendary season, and is in place for his first NFL job after proving he’s incredible at coordinating an offense - I do think the first guy in the queue before due diligence is done should’ve been obvious.

 

[St. Geezy]

You were respectful and I don’t even disagree with your points, so I want to be sure to just try and thoroughly say my side.

First paragraph: It’s generally difficult to know when exactly something clicks for a group of immensely talented guys, but in the case of Burrow/Chase/JJ I think we can all see they started becoming “those guys” in 2019 when Brady was added to the LSU staff. They all had Superman leaps that year. No one will ever know, but could Mahomes ever be the guy he is without association with Andy Reid? Is it possible Tom Brady never becomes what he is without “the Patriot Way”? All time greats in this sport have all time mentors. No, I am not saying Joe Brady in his 1 year at LSU gets credit for everything that happens from then on in their career - but completely taking their single biggest ascension year from him, (like the other guy is doing) when there’s undeniable correlation to their spike, is also not fair to the truth.

Rest of the paragraphs: I truly meant “seems obvious to me” as purely to me. I do think vetting these candidates can change the queue of coaches, and I think that’s why you don’t just conduct interviews with one guy until he says no. But I would also say, there is a paper thin line between due diligence and making sure you get the right fit, and demanding that your questions be answered exactly how you want them answered - bypassing the best candidate to make sure that he checks unnecessary boxes that you’ve conjured, ie Jerry Jonesing the situation.

Ultimately, what I am speaking to in the “obvious” comment is the pre-interview thought process (which is exactly where we as fans always stay in the process). When you are looking around the league at potential candidates for the job - and there’s a guy that worked with and in large part emulates the best coach this organization has ever had, went to the direct correlated college fanbase’s team in-state and had a legendary season, and is in place for his first NFL job after proving he’s incredible at coordinating an offense - I do think the first guy in the queue before due diligence is done should’ve been obvious.

All fair points. We’ll see how the chips fall!

 

[webster]

Aside from the fact that his LSU story happened to coincide with him having arguably the two best WRs in the NFL at his disposal and a top 3 passer in the league throwing to them, or that he’s working with a MVP candidate QB at the moment that was great before he got there, there is a lot more to consider outside of stat sheet results.

What if what is obvious to you contradicts what’s happening in the interviews? What if their vision of leadership isn’t being satisfied? What if there are things about him that you don’t know about that would come about while he’s being vetted for the elevated position of NFL HC through past references?

I think we all have our favorite candidate, but none of us can say the choice is “obvious,” especially when talking about the younger guys that’s never done it before.

There are certain qualities each team looks for in a HC, speaking in regards to leadership qualities, professionalism qualities. “Is this someone I want standing up at a podium representing my organization?” “Is this someone my locker room is going to take seriously when things aren’t going particularly well?” “Is this someone whose subordinate staff is going to have the utmost respect for?”

These are questions outside observers can’t really answer. We can’t just look at coordinators’ offensive outputs and say they “should be target #1 and it feels very obvious.”

Contrary to popular belief, all of these interviews aren’t going to go perfectly. Not saying Brady won’t check all of these boxes, but these are just things to consider when declaring that you think you know who the obvious #1 target should be, especially when it is someone that’s never done the job before.

Sometimes it’s best to look at results and don’t hire someone based on how good they interview. Apparently DA is great in interviews it’s why he’s had two head coaching jobs. I personally wouldn’t want Loomis choosing my next head coach

 

[St. Geezy]

Sometimes it’s best to look at results and don’t hire someone based on how good they interview. Apparently DA is great in interviews it’s why he’s had two head coaching jobs. I personally wouldn’t want Loomis choosing my next head coach

That’s where the vetting process I mentioned kicks in. You’re right, you never go based solely on interviews.

You ask others about them and piece all of that data together along with your own interview results and gut instinct in order to figure out if you’re dealing with a potential fraud or not.

Not sure I agree on that last statement. Mickey is batting .500. He hired the greatest coach in franchise history and then one of the worst, partly based on the previous guy’s advice and an understandable yet misguided attempt to continue that previous guy’s success.

 

[Covington Saint]

and then one of the worst,

you must look beyond the results. Dennis Allen was dealt an awful hand during most of his tenure. When he wasn't, we actually performed fairly well.

 

[St. Geezy]

you must look beyond the results. Dennis Allen was dealt an awful hand during most of his tenure. When he wasn't, we actually performed fairly well.

I think he kept us “mildly competent” when everything was mostly at its peak around him, but I wouldn’t say we played well and I certainly don’t think we would have ever found ourselves on a big game stage in late January under his leadership.

I do agree though, I know we make fun of the saying, but “the beyond” was definitely a factor in the bottom eventually falling out.

 

[Covington Saint]

I think he kept us “mildly competent” when everything was mostly at its peak around him, but I wouldn’t say we played well and I certainly don’t think we would have ever found ourselves on a big game stage in late January under his leadership.

I do agree though, I know we make fun of the saying, but “the beyond” was definitely a factor in the bottom eventually falling out.

do not underestimate how bad we got positionally shredded with injuries. OL. WR. RB at times. CB at times. On and On. the excuses during some of the years were completely legitimate. Nobody saw the bottom falling out on michael thomas like it did. or ryan ramczyk... or cam jordan's extention being a bad decision.

 

[HogsNSaints]

you must look beyond the results. Dennis Allen was dealt an awful hand during most of his tenure. When he wasn't, we actually performed fairly well.

I legitimately don’t know what we are chasing with some of the comments here in this thread.

“We must look beyond his actual performance”. I feel like some people are living in some Steven Seagal inspired magical mystery land.

 

[Doug B]

you must look beyond the results.

There's two kinds of results -- raw results (plain stats, W-L record, etc.) and there's expected results (stats compared to other players or to the same player's previous years, similarly for team stats, etc.).

HOF-level talents get wasted or ruined in the NFL all the time. This is just one example of many ... but check out Steve Young's two seasons in Tampa (19 starts). The offensive staff was pretty much run-to-set-up-the-pass guys that figured force-feeding James Wilder 360+ carries a season would help support long-developing pass plays way downfield -- a 1960s approach.

Same thing could've happened to Mahomes. Say he time-traveled back and played on Bum Phillips' Saints. Similar deal to Steve Young in Tampa. OC King Hill was still running the I-formation with George Rogers, Hokie Gajan, and later Earl Campbell. Phillips would be telling Mahomes, "Son, three things can happen when you pass the football ... and two of them are bad." When Mahomes did get a chance to pass, it would be off of play action on third-and-longs where the line would be expected to hold their blocks a little too long. Mahomes could take off ... but in the 80s, defenders could take his head off. With all of Mahomes talents ... he wouldn't have thrived in that kind of environment.

What players need to max out is someone who can support their preparation, point out things on film that they wouldn't catch themselves, catch things in footwork and delivery that aren't obvious to most. This turns Mahomes and Young into Super Bowl winners. It turns Daniel Jones into a playoff-game winner with career-best stats. And it turns Tommy Divito and Tyrod Taylor into guys good enough to tread water for a few weeks.

 

[St. Widge]

I think they do have a favorite and it's MM. And I think he wants to come here. But I think they want to do due diligence and interview the rest to see if someone blows them away

I always thought that MM was the favorite and maybe he is, but if they do go ahead and interview Brady, Moore, and maybe Kingsbury, it might mean that either they are still wide open or that they do like MM, but they want to make sure someone else isn't better.

MM makes a lot of sense for this team, but I do wonder how many in the front office want to swing for the fences with a young coach to try to duplicate the Payton magic.

 

[Covington Saint]

There's two kinds of results -- raw results (plain stats, W-L record, etc.) and there's expected results (stats compared to other players or to the same player's previous years, similarly for team stats, etc.).

HOF-level talents get wasted or ruined in the NFL all the time. This is just one example of many ... but check out Steve Young's two seasons in Tampa (19 starts). The offensive staff was pretty much run-to-set-up-the-pass guys that figured force-feeding James Wilder 360+ carries a season would help support long-developing pass plays way downfield -- a 1960s approach.

Same thing could've happened to Mahomes. Say he time-traveled back and played on Bum Phillips' Saints. Similar deal to Steve Young in Tampa. OC King Hill was still running the I-formation with George Rogers, Hokie Gajan, and later Earl Campbell. Phillips would be telling Mahomes, "Son, three things can happen when you pass the football ... and two of them are bad." When Mahomes did get a chance to pass, it would be off of play action on third-and-longs where the line would be expected to hold their blocks a little too long. Mahomes could take off ... but in the 80s, defenders could take his head off. With all of Mahomes talents ... he wouldn't have thrived in that kind of environment.

What players need to max out is someone who can support their preparation, point out things on film that they wouldn't catch themselves, catch things in footwork and delivery that aren't obvious to most. This turns Mahomes and Young into Super Bowl winners. It turns Daniel Jones into a playoff-game winner with career-best stats. And it turns Tommy Divito and Tyrod Taylor into guys good enough to tread water for a few weeks.

This is an elongated deflection of facts during Dennis Allen's tenure of being dealt a constant hand of terrible luck and injuries on top of not having a true QB1 half of the years.

 

[3ParStillDriver]

you must look beyond the results. Dennis Allen was dealt an awful hand during most of his tenure. When he wasn't, we actually performed fairly well.

Bad coaches perform fairly well when everything is lining up great (health, schedule etc) and perform terribly when they don't. (ex, Dennis Allen)
Good coaches perform great when everything is lining up great, and perform fairly well when they don't. (ex, Mike Tomlin, Mike McCarthy)
The best coaches perform exceptionally well when everything is lining up great, and perform fairly good when they don't. (ex, Andy Reid)

These are the differences between non-playoff teams, playoff teams and superbowl contenders.