Below are all Head Coaches in each Super Bowl going back to 1996 (I got tired of researching). The wins and losses are based off of their first 2 seasons with a team. If they were head coaches of multiple teams during their career then I included the first 2 seasons of each team they coached. The list is sorted by lowest winning percentage first.
Aside from Lovie Smith and Ken Whisenhunt who are in their 2nd season with new teams, every other coach that made it to the Super Bowl has started off better than Gus Bradley.
My question for the masses: Does anyone genuinely believe that Bradley can have this bad of a career start and then lead a team to the Super Bowl?
If you do believe so, please provide tangible evidence why.
![[Image: 2aexw75.jpg]](http://i61.tinypic.com/2aexw75.jpg)
I posted this in the other thread but like I expected you ignored it. Feel free to address this:
Quote:"To be quite honest with you we may have won more games than I anticipated when I first took the job over the two year period. I was very honest with Shad where we were at. He knew even before I interviewed where we were at. When we hired Gus I told him exactly where we were at from a talent standpoint and that we were going to do this with youth," Caldwell told reporters when asked about the win total the past two years.
<a class="bbc_url" href='http://www.bigcatcountry.com/2014/12/31/7473987/jaguars-2015-offseason-david-caldwell-nfl-free-agency'>http://www.bigcatcountry.com/2014/12/31/7473987/jaguars-2015-offseason-david-caldwell-nfl-free-agency</a>
You only went back to 96. How can you say "the one guy in history"? History is a lot longer than 19 years.
Lot of SB winners at the bottom maybe a good strategy in there somehow???
Quote:I posted this in the other thread but like I expected you ignored it. Feel free to address this:
<a class="bbc_url" href='http://www.bigcatcountry.com/2014/12/31/7473987/jaguars-2015-offseason-david-caldwell-nfl-free-agency'>http://www.bigcatcountry.com/2014/12/31/7473987/jaguars-2015-offseason-david-caldwell-nfl-free-agency</a>
I didn't ignore anything on purpose for what it's worth. I understand the Bradley and Caldwell were hired by Khan with him knowing the franchise was a mess and it would take an overhaul to turn around.
However, facts are still facts and I'm asking a simple question here.
Quote:I didn't ignore anything on purpose for what it's worth. I understand the Bradley and Caldwell were hired by Khan with him knowing the franchise was a mess and it would take an overhaul to turn around.
However, facts are still facts and I'm asking a simple question here.
And facts are the team decided to build slow. Caldwell has said that much. How can you ignore that fact?
If a homeowner tells you "you have one year to build this house. I understand if it starts slow because we have to import some parts from overseas", would you rate the builder the same way from another who got a mandate of "get this done in 2 months. I don't care if you get cheap materials or hire illegal help. Just get it done now"?
The answer of course is no, because both were given different mandates and were hired with different expectations.
I still believe that both Gus and Dave have this season. If this season turns out to be the same as the past two, both of them, if I was Khan...are gone. You can comment about Gus all you like, but Dave has done him no favors. Year in and year out, we are usually the least talented team on the field.
Dave decided to gut this roster. Some players he let go, he was right in doing so. Some players, he was wrong.
His top picks have been Luke (joke and always hurt), Cyp (underachieving), Blake (preseason star so far), Lee and Arob (always hurt, drops), and Fowler (already hurt).
His FA signings? Marks was a success as a prove it guy. What other impact FA did Dave bring here? This year was supposed to be his "Big" spending year. House? Skuta? Where's Odrick? Julius hurt already and hasn't played a down of real football. Pernell's been good.
Aside from maaaaybe Marks, who did Dave bring in to this team whether draft or FA, that opposing teams need to gameplan for?
No one.
The only exception maaaaybe being Julius, who got hurt 1 play into the preseason.
Quote:I posted this in the other thread but like I expected you ignored it. Feel free to address this:
<a class="bbc_url" href='http://www.bigcatcountry.com/2014/12/31/7473987/jaguars-2015-offseason-david-caldwell-nfl-free-agency'>http://www.bigcatcountry.com/2014/12/31/7473987/jaguars-2015-offseason-david-caldwell-nfl-free-agency</a>
I think that's the crux of our problem. We where Bad really Bad when David took over so he went with the philosophy of tearing it all down to the bone and building it back up in his image. That almost never works, for starters it requires not missing in the draft (which we've done our fair share of) and hitting on key contributors in the free agency (which we haven't done very well). Any missteps in either of those two categories and you're just going backwards for no reason.
Blowing up a roster almost never works, you have to retain talent even if it's a just miniscule talent until you can find replacements. We've been trying to correct the same damn problems we had when David was hired a pathetic offense and no pass rush, except he added to the problem at LT, OLB, and then the secondary. While trying to figure out how the hell to get a modern offense and a pass rush and accidently creating roster holes at LT, OLB, CB, SS, and FS we've had older players naturally age and seen roster holes develop at C, OG, and K. Of all those roster holes to come about for one reason or another in the last 3 years what has he corrected? Hell I'm not even sure if our WR and RB are any better then when he was hired, I hear it but I'm not seeing it yet.
David Caldwell is the crux of the problem.
Simple answer, no. I really think if we go 0-5 he's gone.
Quote:I think that's the crux of our problem. We where Bad really Bad when David took over so he went with the philosophy of tearing it all down to the bone and building it back up in his image. That almost never works, for starters it requires not missing in the draft (which we've done our fair share of) and hitting on key contributors in the free agency (which we haven't done very well). Any missteps in either of those two categories and you're just going backwards for no reason.
Blowing up a roster almost never works, you have to retain talent even if it's a just miniscule talent until you can find replacements. We've been trying to correct the same damn problems we had when David was hired a pathetic offense and no pass rush, except he added to the problem at LT, OLB, and then the secondary. While trying to figure out how the hell to get a modern offense and a pass rush and accidently creating roster holes at LT, OLB, CB, SS, and FS we've had older players naturally age and seen roster holes develop at C, OG, and K. Of all those roster holes to come about for one reason or another in the last 3 years what has he corrected? Hell I'm not even sure if our WR and RB are any better then when he was hired, I hear it but I'm not seeing it yet.
David Caldwell is the crux of the problem.
Yeah, you cant do a complete tear down. It sounds great, but by getting rid of guys like Daryl Smith, Knighton, and Monroe you essentially created unnecessary holes. Then you try to replenish with your own picks who, quite frankly, havent lived up to expectations for the most part. The defense is the better side of the ball because they addressed it more in FA. There's a reason you really haven't ever seen anything likd this.
Just seeing Gus Bradley's name (with his 7-26 HC record) in there among all those head coaches who have been to a Super Bowl blows my mind and I am unable to answer at this time.
I might try again later.
I don't think the OP knows what analytics are.
Funny how you started at '96.
A year earlier and you'd have to include the Cowboys who although Jimmy was gone, it was still the team he built.
His record was 8-24 his first 2 years.
That was with Troy and Michael during both years...
Quote:Funny how you started at'96.
A year earlier and you'd have to include the Cowboys who although Jimmy was gone, it was still the team he built.
His record was 8-24 his first 2 years.
That was with Troy and Michael Coe both years...
No intentional exclusion to the method...but are you implying that you believe that Bradley is the next Jimmy Johnson? And the Jags are the 90s Cowboys?
If people believe that then that's what I'm asking here? What about Bradley makes you think he's the next great coach of this era?
Quote:
Since you offered such constructive feedback...
"The field of data analysis. Analytics often involves studying past historical data to research potential trends, to analyze the effects of certain decisions or events, or to evaluate the performance of a given tool or scenario. The goal of analytics is to improve the business by gaining knowledge which can be used to make improvements or changes."
<div style="color:rgb(0,0,0);background-color:rgb(255,255,255);">
It was also a play on words since the Jags like to use it a lot and it's netted little results thus far.
</div>
Well at least you know what Google means. You copying and pasting the coaching records of Super Bowl coaches since 1996 is not analytics.
Quote:Well at least you know what Google means. You copying and pasting the coaching records of Super Bowl coaches since 1996 is not analytics.
I'm not sure what you're bringing to the table here?
Quote:No intentional exclusion to the method...but are you implying that you believe that Bradley is the next Jimmy Johnson? And the Jags are the 90s Cowboys?
If people believe that then that's what I'm asking here? What about Bradley makes you think he's the next great coach of this era?
He asks why you left stopped at 96, which conveniently would have meant a coach with only 8 wins his first two years would be included.
And your response is "What about Bradley makes you think he's the next great coach of this era?".
Quote:You cherry picked.
Cherry picking is only using data in favor of an argument. I gave the whole body of work for the last 19 years and asked a simple question in light of the data. Maybe you could offer something more than a negative opinion.
Did you know Chuck Noll was 6-22 his first two years?
And yet in the initial post you ask Does anyone genuinely believe that Bradley will become the one guy in history that can truly have this bad of a career start and then lead a team to the Super Bowl?
When in fact he would not be the "one guy in history" as you put it.
Or maybe you don't know what history means either.