I tend to be risk averse so if I were making the decision I'm sure I'd lean towards someone with prior head coaching experience or had an extensive lengthy career as a coordinator. So I fully understand why I'd be hesitant to go after a guy like Leftwich or Moore who both seem too young an inexperienced. It feels like too big a job for someone with so little experience at all let alone experience being a head coach. On the otherhand, none of us are in the room during these interviews. And ultimately what you are doing is hiring a leader of men. Not just a leader for your players but the other coaches as well as being the face of your organization. Maybe Leftwich or Moore walks into those interview rooms and impresses beyond any expectation with their preparedness, vision for the team/organization, football IQ, etc... And they totally command the room. At some point all these other intangibles would completely override lack of head coaching experience. But none of us can make a truly informed argument because we aren't there.

I know this may be boring because the whole point of a message board is to throw your opinion out there, the arguing back and forth, brag when you're right, sulk when you're wrong, etc... but trying to figure out if the Bucs offense is really commanded by Leftwich or Brady as if that determines whether Leftwich is a great leader is kind of pointless. As fans it's easier to judge with someone who has extensive experience because you already know where they succeed and where they have flaws. So it's easier to pick apart someone like Pederson or Obrien because we've seen it. Whereas it's almost beneficial to be as inexperienced as Leftwich and Moore are because as fans we don't know what those flaws might be yet. It's just all hope.

Everyone we've heard that is in the running and interviewing, Obrien seems like the only obvious "no" to me because he has a spotty track record as head coach. Everyone else I have an open mind.

---