Jump to content
  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

Predict the "Rooney" interview


Mr. Scot

Recommended Posts

Why are so many assuming it will be Baker and not Meeks, who has much more experience as a coordinator? It's rare you see a guy go from a position coach to a head coach, even though I do realize neither Meeks nor Baker will get the job anyway.

I like Baker and think he's done a decent job; I'm just a little confused as to why people think he's done more to warrant an interview than Meeks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why are so many assuming it will be Baker and not Meeks, who has much more experience as a coordinator? It's rare you see a guy go from a position coach to a head coach, even though I do realize neither Meeks nor Baker will get the job anyway.

I like Baker and think he's done a decent job; I'm just a little confused as to why people think he's done more to warrant an interview than Meeks.

For me, it's the "dual purpose" thing. They may want to hang onto him if they think he's on the rise.

Of course, it'd require the approval of the next head coach, but they can make recommendations.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Tennessee just fired their coach.  I guess thats good to do before he completely destroys ward.  I dont know though
    • Y'all are funny. and dumb. The argument I am seeing now if he can only be considered good if he WRs are trash or the play call has to make it hard for him? WTF haha
    • No it's not, there isn't a single coach who's only job is to win games, because no coach is going to win games unless they're also improving the quality of play out of their players. For coaches with contending teams, winning is their #1 job, but I think it's a more than reasonable take to say that coaches of not yet contending teams winning comes second to making your players better. We have 11 games left, if you gave me the option of winning all 11 of the games in terribly ugly fashion to where we don't improve the quality of our players vs we lose all 11 games, but do so in spectacular fashion where our players show significant improvement, I'm taking option B every time. Because option B is the path to future and long term success, while option A is a path to short term happiness at the expense of long term franchise stability.   And yes, that is clearly an extreme example that could never actually play out in either way, but you still know what I mean.  And no, it has nothing to do with draft position, it's about how good will these players be a year, 2 years, 3 years, etc, down the line, when you hope to be a true contending team, because nobody actually thinks we're that type of team this year unless you're literally crazy
×
×
  • Create New...