Quote:Let's break this down into a simple logical operation.

 

Either Gus is an elite coach capable of helping the roster achieve above its level and the roster is so bad that even though it's been historically bad so far during his tenure he's making it better to even get to historically bad...

 

Or, Gus is just a run of the mill kind of head coach that simply only achieves at the rate a run of the mill coach would for a given roster talent level, or even possibly below that.

 

Which do you think it is? That he's got a group that's overachieving to even get to historical levels of terribleness, and he's so far doing as bad a job as Mularky, (which would mean Mularky was an elite coach, too, since he achieved similarly to Gus) or that we're really just seeing what Gus is capable of without having a very talented roster given to him?

 

Logically speaking, which of these scenarios seems closest to reality?

 

If you assume the elite coach is the exception not the rule (hence the "elite" designation), then by definition, the most likely scenario is he is the the run of the mill head coach.

 

My question is how does one discern the difference at this stage?

 

Consider Bill Walsh.  http://www.pro-football-reference.com/co...alsBi0.htm

 

His first year with San Francisco (1979), he went 2-14.

 

His second year, he went 6-10.  http://www.pro-football-reference.com/te...o/1980.htm

 

After the same 20 game period Gus Bradley has had here, he was 5-15-just one game ahead of where Gus Bradley is now.

 

For the purposes of discussion, let's also consider Jimmy Johnson.

 

His first year with Dallas (1989), he went 1-15.  His second year with Dallas, he went 7-9.

 

After the same 20 game period Gus Bradley has had here, he was 2-18...or two games below what Gus Bradley has achieved here.

 

Looking solely at the W-L records after 20 games, if you had to guess, all were likely run of the mill coaches at best.

---