Jack’s Blog

Countless numbers of fans were disappointed and enraged when Norv Turner and Wade Phillips were given contract extensions.  Each coach has been roasted by fans and radio talk hosts alike for their inability to go deep into the playoffs.  The fact that they get to the playoffs doesn’t matter in the slightest.

Listen to a conversation among fans or tune into talk radio and those coaches are getting skewered.  What I find extremely amusing is that the dialogue nearly always consists of a (as in one) play call or a decision or a play not called that, had the fan’s or caller’s suggestion been used instead (always after the game has been decided), the Cowboys, Chargers, fill in the blank with whichever team they’re pulling for, would still be alive and on their way to a Super Bowl.  And these feelings are not limited to the professional ranks.  The rash of college coaching changes that take place each year seems to be on the rise.

We all have heard that fan is short for fanatic, so on this topic, emotions run high.  Which is good because we need something to get excited about and give us feelings of success(when the team wins) or vent over (when they don’t).  But let’s think about what happens to the team when the coach is fired.  I’m not being heartless when I say not to consider the coach’s feelings, family, stress level, etc. when he gets fired.  In this case, I’m focusing on what should be the main concern to the fan - the team. 

In college, when a coaching change is made, there is (usually) a period of time before the new coach is hired.  During that time period, the fans are still giddy because that “SOB who couldn’t get the job done” is finally gone.  However, just as fans have emotions, so do the players. 

Since these are young guys, they tend to make statements or decisions during a time when it probably would be better to sit back, take a few deep breaths and let things play out.  But that type of reaction doesn’t make for good reading or listening, so these young adults (or spoiled kids) shoot from the lip because it’s their right that everyone knows how they feel.  Many of the comments made fall under the “I wish I hadn’t said that” category.  Even worse are the decisions some of them make in haste, e.g. to “un”commit, transfer, or even quit. 

Move on to just as important matters, yet ones that are devoid of emotion and there’s a better reason why several coaching changes that are made are not in the best interests of the team.  One is that with a new coach comes a new system.  No two coaches have identical styles and the players who are at that institution were recruited to play in the now-gone coach’s system.  Some “blue chippers” might not be the best fit for the incoming staff.  It’s not easy to replace good players.  Depending on when the change is finally completed, an entire recruiting season may be lost.

In addition, in college football, most programs like to redshirt many of their freshmen (some coaches have the philosophy to redshirt the entire freshmen class - to get them more familiar with the style of play, to get them stronger - and a year older and more mature, to get them acclimated to college life - especially academics).  Combine the fact that recruiting has got to suffer because the coaches of schools where there was no coaching change are using all this turmoil against a new staff and it becomes an uphill battle.  Sure, the new coaches have been recruiting these kids for quite a while, but you’d better be a slick talker to change your sales pitch - from why where the institution you, the coach, just left was the perfect place, to why your new employer presents an even better situation.  Which is the reason why recruiting seasons are lost.  Another thing that’s often lost is a great deal of money, but that’s another story for another blog.

Finally, take into account the new guy may be worse than the last one.  “Impossible!” the fan claims, yet when the following season kicks off and the fan’s team loses, I defy you to catch that same backer saying, “Well, we might have lost, but at least we don’t have that other guy here - making calls that cause our team to . . .  oh yeah.”

I wonder how the Charger and Cowboy fans would feel if Dallas and San Diego had fired their coaches - and then the Cowboys hired Norv Turner and the Chargers hired Wade Phillips?  What their fans really want is for Norv to coach the Chargers and Wade to coach the Cowboys during the regular season.  Then, replace them with, maybe Bill Cowher and Tony Dungy or better yet, Vince Lombardi and Chuck Noll.  Just remember:

“If the grass is greener on the other side, there’s always a guy on that side who thinks your grass is greener than his.”�

It’s Norv Turner-bashing time.  Once again, a team Turner has led lost early in the playoffs.  Talk radio show hosts will have an absolute field day!

If it seems I’ve been on an anti-talk radio show host kick, it’s probably because I’m waiting for some audiobooks I’ve ordered and have had the radio on while I’ve been driving.  Anyone who knows me will tell you sarcasm is something I’m fairly well-versed in.  Then why is it I get so riled up when I hear talking heads doing it?

While I (immensely) enjoy back-and-forth repartee (if you couldn’t hold your own in my neighborhood, you’d go home crying everyday), I don’t think people should be allowed to make a living doing it.  Comedians are great and I love stand up, but I have a hard time with people who make money by humiliating and making fun of others - especially when the person doing the ball-busting couldn’t do in a million years the job of the person they’re ridiculing.

So . . . that means I have no issues whatsoever with someone like Tony Dungy, Bill Cowher or Jimmy Johnson taking shots at someone like Turner.  And therein lies my point.  Those former coaches (as well as current coaches) never do - because they know how hard the job is and all the factors that go into winning in the playoffs.

Players (current and former) who criticize coaches are a little different story.  Granted, they have been in the arena and that alone gives them a great deal of credibility.  Before basing a whole lot of credence on what they say, though, what needs to be taken into account is what are/were they like as players?  I mean, should Baron Davis (switching sports here to make the point crystal clear) ever get a commentators job, I would expect nothing less than critical comments directed at coaches.  What else would we expect from someone whose nickname in NBA coaching circles is “CK” (”Coach Killer”)?  Keeping it in the NFL, would you think TO would be impartial when it came to whose fault it was - the quarterback or the receiver?   

Yesterday, the Chargers had a field goal kicker who had made 69 in a row inside 40 yards miss three kicks (two that he normally makes).  Their QB had three uncharacteristic turnovers.  Can you blame those on Coach Norv?  Talk radio hosts somehow, in some smart ass way, will.

Now, I don’t know Norv Turner.  But, undoubtedly, I feel the way I do because, while not in the NFL,  I coached for a long time - and I’ve heard some asinine comments made by people who’ve never coached.  Former coaches have opinions I respect because they’ve been there.  That doesn’t mean they’re the only ones who should be allowed to voice an opinion.  Everyone’s entitled to one.  At the very least, however, the criticism should be based on facts.  Bring up how many times he’s been there - with his team as a favorite - and his teams have gone down, fine.  But don’t make it sound like he’s a total incompetent and . . . that you could have done better.

Count the number of times that he’s gotten teams to the playoffs and research how many other coaches in history there are that have accomplished that feat?  Compare that to how many guys have ever coached.  Because he’s been in that position that many times means he’s in the top whatever percentage of coaches.  Maybe these talk show guys ought to equate that to whether they (or others) consider themselves in that same elite group of talk show hosts.

Many certainly will.  Then they need to ask themselves, “If I’m that good, why am I stuck in the market I’m in?  Shouldn’t I (since there are only 32 NFL teams) be in the top 32 markets?”  If they’re taking shots at college basketball coaches, they only need to be in the top 347.  There’s more wiggle room in that group.  Yet, when rating their own expertise, they need to remember the line attributed to Emmy Cosell when her husband, Howard, asked her how many truly great sportscasters she thought there were:

“One less than you think.”

The New York Yankees won this year’s World Series and did it with help from everybody in their organization (with the possible exception of George Costanza).  Included in that group are Alex Rodriguez and Joe Girardi, probably the two most popular pinatas in the Big Apple, if not the entire sports nation.

A-Rod finally buried his past postseason woes and Girardi, possibly the most criticized manager ever - who won it all, can now go to bed knowing, whether or not he was leading the highest paid, most talented baseball team in history, that no one else could have done any better than he did. 

Critics, from the broadcasters and color commentators to the journalists (both electronic and print) to the average schmuck on the street (if there’s any way for a schmuck to be average) have to now find another player and manager (or coach, depending on the sport) to berate for doing well (even great) but not winning the Big One.

The first guy I ever heard wear this crown (since my background is in college hoops) was Dean Smith who made numerous trips to the Final Four before finally winning one.  Wilt wore the player’s version for a while until he finally got one (even though there’s never been an athlete who’s caused so many rules changes in his game).  Count John Elway and Brett Favre in that group too.  Throw in Kevin Garnett too - a guy who might just win another one this year.

The title of “Best Coach to Never Have Won The Big One” (until each of them did) is a pretty exclusive group - considering that each of the following is a member.  It’s not bad company to keep: Tony LaRussa (started managing in 1979, hailed as a genius, yet didn’t win a World Championship until ten years later, Jim Leyland (started in 1986, won a title in 1997), Bill Cowher (went from 1992 until 2005 before he won a Super Bowl and retired a year later - it probably took a year for it to sink in that he’d actually won one).  Let’s also not forget Joe Torre, who, believe it or not, was in jeopardy of having the crown named after him for a while. 

On the college basketball level: Mike Krzyzewski, Rick Pitino, Gary Williams, Jim Boeheim, Roy Williams and Bill Self are all members, one succeeding the other once his predecessor took home a National Championship.

The moral of this story comes from a recorded postgame tirade (unbeknownst to him) by Tommy Lasorda after losing a game and having his strategy questioned by sportswriters:

“This (bleepin’) job’s not that (bleepin’) easy!” �

Win. 

It’s that simple.  Let’s look a few cases. 

Barack Obama has been in office for less than a month and already there are people criticizing his every move and strategy, mainly sore losers and partisans who are more interested in their own agenda than what’s good for the country.  I don’t claim to know much about politics. As a matter of fact, I admit to knowing next to nothing about it - except that it is derived from the Latin words, poli, meaning “many” and tics, meaning “blood sucking creatures.”  But I do strongly believe I know many times more than the average resident of this country does about what it takes to make a powerful, successful, winning team - and it’s not because I’ve always been associated with powerful, successful, winning teams, but because I’ve been part of some of those as well as some average, run-of-the-mill clubs and, more importantly, some big-time losing outfits. 

I’ve always considered myself a deeply focused observer of people and that trait, coupled with my diverse experiences, has enlightened me as to what it takes to assemble a winner.  And, if the president can improve the economic condition of this country, even a little, he’ll be hailed as one of the greatest presidents ever - especially if he helps enough people get back on their feet.  Throw in some type of closure regarding the Iraq War, he’ll be on the receiving end of yet more praise.  Give the country a greener future and we’ll have to find room on Mount Rushmore for a fifth honoree.

Jack Welch was a rotten SOB to many at, or no longer at General Electric, but he’s generally regarded as a winner for all he accomplished there.  There are still some who claim he received too much credit for GE, that it was the managers of individual segments of the company, in particular GE Capital and NBC, that was the reason for the turnaround of the parent company.  But the company, whether good or bad when he took control of it, flourished like never before after he assumed command.

In the field of sports leadership, some people doubted whether or not Mike Tomlin was a good coach.  The Pittsburgh Steelers were one of the classiest organizations in all of professional sports, he was joining a club that was on cruise control, all he had to do was let “the team run itself.”  Chuck Noll, Bill Cowher and, of course, the Rooney family had everything running in perfect order and all they needed was a caretaker.  Most “football people” thought, while the Steelers were a model organization, the job of coaching any professional football franchise took a special man to be successful.  After the Super Bowl, there was no longer a doubt of Mike Tomlin’s coaching ability.

One of the prominent defensive players on the club, linebacker James Farrior ( a veteran of 12 years in the NFL) made the statement, “We all understand that when you’re coming in as a new coach, you have to do it your way.  We didn’t like it sometimes, and it was tough sometimes, but it was something we had to deal with.”  Tomlin doesn’t deny for a minute imposing his will on the Steelers.

If there are people out there who think this type of leadership is a some kind of revelation, read the quote from Aeschylus, supposedly made around 478 B.C.:

“Every ruler is harsh whose rule is new.” �

With two weeks in between the NFC and AFC Championship games and the Super Bowl, it can’t be an easy task to be a sportswriter, burdened with the task of coming up with, in some cases, a story a day.  Still, some of the storylines - all the way back to the time one scribe asked a player, “If you were a tree, what kind of tree would you be?”  Or was it an animal? - seem to show how difficult (as far as imagination regarding sports stories) some writers find the fortnight.

One question that has been asked and written about has to do with the opposing coaches.  When Bill Cowher stepped down as coach of the Steelers, nearly everyone thought Ken Whisenhunt, or maybe Russ Grimm, two very capable Steeler assistants would be promoted - especially with the Steelers history of being a “family” type organization.  Ironically, the rule passed that mandated any team that had a coaching opening to interview at least one minority candidate (many in, and out of, the business look at it as just a token gesture) is referred to as the “Rooney Rule,” due to the proposal made by owner Dan Rooney (the Rooneys own the Pittsburgh franchise).

The candidate selected for that interview was the defensive coordinator of the Minnesota Vikings, Mike Tomlin, a not-so-well-known (outside of coaching circles) assistant.  Whisenhunt, allegedly, feeling uncertain regarding the direction the process was heading, withdrew and accepted the head coaching position with the Arizona Cardinals, considered a wonderful place to live, but no such a terrific team to coach, certainly nowhere close to the Steelers and the tradition (5 Super Bowl championships) of the team in a football crazy city.

The Rooneys’ decision to interview Tomlin was either brilliant or lucky, as they found out early on.  The phrase most used when describing the Rooneys’ feelings toward Tomlin’s interviews is “blown away,” the same phrase that many (who didn’t know Tomlin) felt when it was announced that the young (34 at the time he was hired), black coach who’d never played in the NFL.  The results he’s put up over his first three years has continued to blow away NFL insiders and outsiders alike.  

Meanwhile, when the president of the Cardinals, Michael Bidwill, and their general manager Rod Graves set out to bring coaches in to consider for their top spot, what they were looking for was someone who could turn the Cardinals into … a team like the Steelers.  Both franchises got their men and now they’re about to square off in the Super Bowl.

The storyline that was inevitable in this day and age of stirring up controversy whenever possible (hey, it stinks sells) is the one of revenge for the Whisenhunt/Grimm duo or the “now you know why they waited to hire me” feeling that people (sportswriters?) think Tomlin must (ought to) have (since that’s how most people beneath the stature of a Mike Tomlin believe). 

The coaches have dismissed it, as anyone thought they would.  Maybe I’m wrong because I haven’t spoken to any of the three men, nor do I even know them, but if there is someone, somewhere in the world who thinks that set of circumstances, three years ago, will serve as extra motivation for any of the three involved, I only have this to say to you. 

It’s the freakin’ SUPER BOWL!  Do you really think ANYBODY needs EXTRA motivation? 

And, if they actually still believe this way, exactly when do you think that feeling’s going to come into play?  While they’re breakling down video edits, trying to find some weakness they can exploit offensively or defensively (or on special teams for that matter)?  Imagine Tomlin, Whisenhunt or Grimm saying, “Hey, look guys, there’s an area we can hit where they have no answer.  That could win us this thing and give me the redemption I’ve been searching for these past three years.  Make note of that.” 

Running through his head at that time would undoubtedly be: Yeah, forget about the new contract, job security, place among all the great coaches who’ve won Super Bowls, endorsement deals my agent will be sifting through.  Who cares about getting the winner’s share and even the ring, vindication will be mine!  

Remember this bit of advice:

“Always give your best, never get discouraged, never be petty; always remember, others may hate you.  Those who hate you don’t win unless you hate them.  And then you destroy yourself.”

The speaker was Richard M. Nixon.

Herm Edwards of the NFL’s Kansas City Chiefs just got fired, becoming the most recent professional head coach to lose his job.  It was about time for a coach to be fired.  After all, it was a entire day since Mark Iavaroni was pink slipped by the Memphis Grizzlies of the NBA.

People think the reason for firing a coach is he did a poor job and lost too many games. And they’re correct -partially.  However, there are other factors that come into play.  The reason it can’t just be losing is that many of the teams that just fired their coaches wouldn’t have won if Vince Lombardi or Red Auerbach, in their heydays, were coaching them.  Plain and simple, they were bad teams whose rosters were filled with bad players, players, for the most part, selected in the draft, free agency or through trades by the general manager.  Firing the coach “buys time” for the GM, shifting the blame to the head coach - and blame is what the fans, i.e. buying public, is most interested in.  “Oh, he was the culprit?  You know, I always thought so.  Off with his head.  Boy, now I can’t wait until next year.”

Another reason for the coach being fired, in several cases, is that his lack of success can be pinned on someone else - the owner, who simply made a poor management decision, by hiring the guy in the first place!  Every year, there are certain hires that raise the eyebrows of those “in the know,” i.e. the guys who have been around the game seemingly forever (mainly former coaches and, in some cases, media members) and can give a laundry list of reasons why the new man was the wrong man.  In all my years, I’ve yet to see these wise old vets wrong. 

Next up on the “reasons coaches get fired list” is the coach couldn’t get along with the players, or at least the players who had the owner’s (and possibly GM’s) ear.  The tag “franchise player” doesn’t refer only to playing skills.  This isn’t a new concept (unless you consider what Magic Johnson did to Paul Westhead as recent).

Another factoid, albeit one less frequent - a proven winner becomes available, i.e. the GM or owner hears from, say, Bill Cowher’s agent that his client is worried that his jaw is unclenching which can only mean he’d better get back into coaching and is there any truth to the rumor your coach’s contract won’t be renewed?  There is now.

Let’s talk reality and nothing talks reality better than numbers.  The number of NFL games in a year is 256, i.e. 16 (the number of games played by each team) times 16 (32 NFL teams with two teams playing in each game).  The overall record each year in the NFL is 128 wins and 128 losses.  Note: There was one tie this past year, so call the record 127-127-2.  So … when the Tennessee Titans went 13-3, somebody had to absorb those 10 losses to even out the slate.  Same goes for every other team posting a winning record.

In the NBA the numbers are 82 games played by 30 teams or an overall record of 615-615.  Currently, the Lakers, Celtics, Magic and Cavs are a combined 102 games over .500 and the season just passed the halfway point!  Can you start to understand now why seven of the 30 NBA head coaches have been fired already?  With rumors of possible changes in Detroit, Phoenix, New Jersey and, naturally, the Clippers?     

Former head man for the Houston Rockets and New York Knicks, Jeff Van Gundy, a very cerebral commentator, coach, individual (and being smart in one area does not necessarily mean you automatically qualify in the others) evaluated the current situation of the NBA coach’s life expectancy.  “Unless your name is Phil Jackson, Gregg Popovich, Jerry Sloan or Doc Rivers, if you lose three games in a row, you’re instantly on the hot seat.”  And, until last season, Doc’s seat was mighty warm.

If changing coaches can increase a team’s value, consider it done. Your fans will not put up with excessive losses.  Season-ticket renewals aren’t so easy in today’s economy. 

Yet, while fans must be placated, the people directly involved don’t want to come off as heartless.  Fishing reels aren’t spun as much as press conferences after a coach is let go.  Listen to a portion of the press conference when Tampa Bay fired Jon Gruden (who, although he was the coach when the Bucs won a Super Bowl, it was just too long ago).  “These decisions are never easy. This is the toughest decision you can make for an NFL franchise.  Jon (is a) consummate professional.  (He’s) poured (his) heart and soul into this franchise,” Buccaneers co-chairman Joel Glazer said. “It’s really been an honor to work with (him).”  Or this from the most recently deposed coach: “This was not an easy decision,” the KC’s boss, Clark Hunt, said. “Herm is an outstanding football coach and a man of integrity.”  Other terms of endearment are lines like: “____ is a great human being and we wish him the best in his future endeavors.  We just decided we needed to go in a different direction” (why didn’t they just give this wonderful humanitarian a compass)?  Or the ever popular, “We felt like we needed a different voice.”  Perfect, hire a ventriloquist - or, better yet, Rich Little.  Who has more voices than Rich?  Anytime a different voice is needed, bingo.  Talk about job security.

One item that’s never mentioned is the nice parting gift the outgoing coach receives.  Even if he only has one year left on his contract, like Herm Edwards, it’s usually for what his is - the last year of a 4-year, $12 million deal.  Herm ought to be able to make ends meet for a while - as long as he doesn’t run into a Bernie Madoff protege.

One thing I’ve never understood is coaching is one job where there are an overabundance of applicants (and with the law of averages being what it is, many of them must be highly capable), all of whom like money, but most of whom (the highly competent ones included) would take the position for a fraction of what teams are currently paying.  Sure, no one’s going to get a Bill Cowher at a bargain price, but it doesn’t seem like Mike Tomlin’s doing such a bad job in his absence (at about half the price).  I have no knowledge of this, but I’m pretty certain he would have taken the job for less (than the 4-year, $10 million he’s making).  He obviously (now) was the perfect fit and I’d be willing to bet he knew that - and only needed the opportunity.  Should the Steelers win the whole enchilada, he’ll be in for a new deal and a (BIG) raise.

My strong feeling is that coaches and players (although the union would be up in arms should it even be suggested) ought to be paid based on only two elements: wins and paid attendance.  No other stats will do because players will find ways to pad them (remember Dennis Rodman missing easy shots so he could get another rebound before he scored or the stories of him stealing rebounds from teammates just to up his total number of boards)?

Teams shouldn’t fear the untested coach.  Just make sure the proper research on him is done.  What he lacks in experience, he’ll more than make up for in enthusiasm, work ethic and energy.  “But the players won’t respect a guy who’s not making a ton of money,” the skeptics will cry.  Do you really think there’s a whole lot of respect right now?  Especially on these teams who are making coaching changes?  As former Princeton coach Pete Carril used to say everytime he’d hear the players complaining their coach’s firing was unjustified, that it was them on the floor and that they loved the guy, “If they really felt that way, they should have been playing harder for him during the season.”

It might be a giant risk, but what you’re doing now ain’t working, so as the saying goes:

“Don’t have your goal: to get to death safely.”  �