The 5 year rule.

[Ivan The Awesome]

There's a statistic chart by football outsiders that new  head coaches and QBs win SBs in the first five years. After that it's up in the air. 

 

Given Tepper's comments to sustained success, do you believe he'll over look this and stay the course if the new coach  doesn't win a championship the first five years?

 

This is strictly analytics. Would he blow it up and try again after the 5 years? 

 

Tepper strikes me as a smart guy but at times I feel he can be emotional and temperamental. I think there's a handful of clubs that have long tenured coaches with super bowl rings. So the odds are not favorable to find one like this. 

 

This is why this search is going to be crucial and I believe it will take more time. 

 

[rayzor]

I think 5 years is plenty of time to decide how a team is going to do with any coach. After that, messages and coaches start to get old. If you can't get it done in 5 years chances are you won't.

No, I wouldn't object to blowing it up again after 5 years if this next one doesn't get it done.

[Tbe]

I posted that chart a few weeks ago. It’s very interesting and I hope Tepper knows about it.

Yes, Tepper should change up the QB or coach after 5 years if they don’t yet have a ring together. 

Doing so is no guarantee of success, but keeping a losing duo guarantees failure. 
 

Rivera Or Cam should have been let go after the 2015 season since that was their 5th year.

[NAS]

You don't blow it up just based on whether you won the SB or not.  But I think it depends on how you're trending.  

[Tbe]

3 minutes ago, NAS said:

You don't blow it up just based on whether you won the SB or not.  But I think it depends on how you're trending.  

Stats say you should replace the coach or QB. 

To rephrase what OP said. Since the 1970 merger, every coach/QB combo to win the SB does so in 5 years. 

There has yet to be an exception.

[rayzor]

10 minutes ago, Tbe said:

Stats say you should replace the coach or QB. 

To rephrase what OP said. Since the 1970 merger, every coach/QB combo to win the SB does so in 5 years. 

There has yet to be an exception.

There likely won't be. I know it flies in the face of a desire for continuity, but we have seen where a pursuit of that has taken us.

[mav1234]

What is important to keep in mind here is that this refers to duos, not the length of time the coach or the QB had been in their particular position.  E.g., Peyton Manning and Gary Kubiak - Manning had been there for a few years before Kubiak.  Or McCarthy, who was hired by GB in 2006 but didn't win it with Rodgers until 2010.

[Tbe]

36 minutes ago, rayzor said:

There likely won't be. I know it flies in the face of a desire for continuity, but we have seen where a pursuit of that has taken us.

Right. This is where JR and Ron got it wrong. Continuity only works when you have a proven winning formula (NE, Seattle, Steelers, Saints). 
 

It’s really rare to hit on a lasting duo. Most teams get one shot every so often if they get a shot at all. Of course, most teams keep coaches and QBs longer than they should which limits their opportunities.

 

[SCO96]

53 minutes ago, Tbe said:

Stats say you should replace the coach or QB. 

To rephrase what OP said. Since the 1970 merger, every coach/QB combo to win the SB does so in 5 years. 

There has yet to be an exception.

That's an AMAZING statistic. Your last sentence essentially says if a QB/Coach duo hasn't hasn't won a title in 5 seasons you're pretty much assured that they'll never hoist Lombardi trophy together.

If you don't have a ring by the end of year 5, history seems to say one (or possibly both) need to go. 

Is that considered an analytical statistic?  

[Tbe]

9 minutes ago, SCO96 said:

That's an AMAZING statistic. Your last sentence essentially says if a QB/Coach duo hasn't hasn't won a title in 5 seasons you're pretty much assured that they'll never hoist Lombardi trophy together.

If you don't have a ring by the end of year 5, history seems to say one (or possibly both) need to go. 

Is that considered an analytical statistic?  

Exactly. One or both need to go after 5 years.

Again, doing so doesn’t guarantee success. You could find yourself in a situation that feels worse than before. However, keeping both guarantees failure.

In our case, We might have been better off if we jettisoned Ron after the lost SB. Cam’s injuries may still have surfaced, but at least we wouldn’t have to suffer through another year of Shula.

[BrianS]

I think we're missing the flip side of this coin.  I haven't seen a stat on how long you keep coach / QB together after a SB win. 

For example, assume we had won it in 2003.  How long then do you keep Delhomme / Fox together?  

What about after a SB loss?  For example, the Marv Levy / Jim Kelly Bills.  The first four years went:  4-12, 7-8, 12-4, 9-7.  The next year they were 13-3 and lost the SB.  Do you break up that combo?  They went on to three more SB's, and lost all three, for an NFL record four SB's in a row lost.

I think the consideration should be:  Are we qualifying consistently for the playoffs (say four out of five years)?  If yes, ride with what you got.  If no, try something else.

[Fox007]

Interesting...makes sense for a few reasons really and one of those is also teams know the HC and how he plays. Rivera was figured out a long, long time ago. They get "tape" on the coaches too so to speak as much as any player.

[Harbingers]

2 hours ago, rayzor said:

I think 5 years is plenty of time to decide how a team is going to do with any coach. After that, messages and coaches start to get old. If you can't get it done in 5 years chances are you won't.

No, I wouldn't object to blowing it up again after 5 years if this next one doesn't get it done.

The one thing to consider with that is had we made the playoffs this year I’m sure Tepper would have kept Rivera around for his last year. He kept him up until the point that we were undeniably out of the playoffs. Tepper doesn’t strike me as a bad dude, just a little out of his realm at this point. I really hope he brings in a stalwart consultant that can teach him and lead him in the direction he wants to go. After all he did make his billions consulting. 

[Tbe]

1 hour ago, BrianS said:

I think we're missing the flip side of this coin.  I haven't seen a stat on how long you keep coach / QB together after a SB win. 

For example, assume we had won it in 2003.  How long then do you keep Delhomme / Fox together?  

What about after a SB loss?  For example, the Marv Levy / Jim Kelly Bills.  The first four years went:  4-12, 7-8, 12-4, 9-7.  The next year they were 13-3 and lost the SB.  Do you break up that combo?  They went on to three more SB's, and lost all three, for an NFL record four SB's in a row lost.

I think the consideration should be:  Are we qualifying consistently for the playoffs (say four out of five years)?  If yes, ride with what you got.  If no, try something else.

The Bills are an interesting case. Made it to the SB on the 5th year just like Rivera/Cam. They were successful after the 5th year but never won.

It depends on your goal. Do you want to play in 4 SBs or X playoffs and never win or win a SB?