A Very Good Question

[Stout]

Because many would argue that you have to walk before you can crawl. We are going to the playoffs for the 6th time in 39 years. Late season collapse or not, you aren't going to fire your 42 year old HC who is doing it in his 3rd year and to dismiss that fact is also an error.

I get it that the details matter, but here is the blind resume.

42 year old HC who has won more games every season as a coach and gets to the playoffs his third season. Has coached his young QB to a ROTY and two Pro Bowls in those three seasons. Has done this in arguably the toughest division in football.

That is the dream of most franchises in the NFL.

Absolutely NOT in the NFL. Looking at that blind resume, the question would be "Why did it take 3 years to barely squeak into the playoffs?" And that's not just me; that's most of the NFL. This league is a "turn it around immediately" league now, with modern FA and with top draft picks expected to be stars right out of the gate (unless you're the Cards lol). You don't GET time to inch forward year by year. Harsh, but this is the reality of the NFL.

And, honestly, with his late-season collapses now a trend and not just a troubling one-time thing, how much faith is there that he keeps getting better as a coach and takes us on a deep playoff run? I don't have that faith.

 

[Harry]

Harry, adore your football insight but geez... I get you do not like the guy, chill lol

I guess you mean Murray. I don’t dislike him. I think he’s a great athlete. I’m just skeptical he wants it bad enough to do what it takes to go all the way. He moved forward this year. Can he continue? If you mean Kingsbury, I think he stays but I would change.

 

[TheCardFan]

Absolutely NOT in the NFL. Looking at that blind resume, the question would be "Why did it take 3 years to barely squeak into the playoffs?" And that's not just me; that's most of the NFL. This league is a "turn it around immediately" league now, with modern FA and with top draft picks expected to be stars right out of the gate (unless you're the Cards lol). You don't GET time to inch forward year by year. Harsh, but this is the reality of the NFL.

I am not sure the facts back up this statement. I went back to 2010 for teams that had the worst record in the NFL like us and then how long it took them to make the playoffs.

2012 Chiefs - 2 years
2 wins in 2010 and then 11 wins in 2011

2019 Bengals - 3 years
2, 4, 9

2013 Texans - 3 years
2, 9, 9

2018 Cardinals - 4 years
3, 5, 8, 10 (so far)

2014 and 2015 Titans - 4 years (they had the worst record 2 years in a row)
2, 3, 9, 9

2010 Panthers - 4 years
2, 6, 7, 12

2015, 2016, 2017 Browns - 6 years (worst record 3 years in a row)
3, 1, 0, 7, 6, 11

 

[DaHilg]

I am not sure the facts back up this statement. I went back to 2010 for teams that had the worst record in the NFL like us and then how long it took them to make the playoffs.

2012 Chiefs - 2 years
2 wins in 2010 and then 11 wins in 2011

2019 Bengals - 3 years
2, 4, 9

2013 Texans - 3 years
2, 9, 9

2018 Cardinals - 4 years
3, 5, 8, 10 (so far)

2014 and 2015 Titans - 4 years (they had the worst record 2 years in a row)
2, 3, 9, 9

2010 Panthers - 4 years
2, 6, 7, 12

2015, 2016, 2017 Browns - 6 years (worst record 3 years in a row)
3, 1, 0, 7, 6, 11

I think one could argue that these teams for the most part improved as a result of picking top draft picks - esp landing ‘franchise’ QBs/franchise altering players…

Panthers - Cam (can’t stand him, but facts are he was an MVP and force in his early years)

Cardinals - Kyler and Hopkins was essentially a draft pick being we traded a 2nd rounder for him.

Browns - Baker (sucks but played well last year)/Chubb

Bengals - Joey B/Chase

Chiefs - Acquired what was at the time their ‘franchise’ QB in Alex Smith.. along w HOF Coach Andy Reid.

Texans - have no idea how they improved with the run of QBs they had in that stretch. It’s literally comical the QBs that started for them on 14’ and 15’ yet won 9 games each year. (6 diff QBs)

Titans - Mariota. Was suppose to be a franchise QB, but was average at best and injured.

So the 2 with least success Titans and Texans didn’t find their franchise QB during that stretch. Bengals will make the playoffs and Joey B is the real deal so their success during these span will trump Titans.

Point is, I’d argue that the success is more contingent on how quickly one can land a franchise QB on their roster than crediting a coach for the turnaround.

 

[DVontel]

I think one could argue that these teams for the most part improved as a result of picking top draft picks - esp landing ‘franchise’ QBs/franchise altering players…

Panthers - Cam (can’t stand him, but facts are he was an MVP and force in his early years)

Cardinals - Kyler and Hopkins was essentially a draft pick being we traded a 2nd rounder for him.

Browns - Baker (sucks but played well last year)/Chubb

Bengals - Joey B/Chase

Chiefs - Acquired what was at the time their ‘franchise’ QB in Alex Smith.. along w HOF Coach Andy Reid.

Texans - have no idea how they improved with the run of QBs they had in that stretch. It’s literally comical the QBs that started for them on 14’ and 15’ yet won 9 games each year. (6 diff QBs)

Titans - Mariota. Was suppose to be a franchise QB, but was average at best and injured.

So the 2 with least success Titans and Texans didn’t find their franchise QB during that stretch. Bengals will make the playoffs and Joey B is the real deal so their success during these span will trump Titans.

Point is, I’d argue that the success is more contingent on how quickly one can land a franchise QB on their roster than crediting a coach for the turnaround.

Not so sure about the Bengals making the playoffs.

 

[DaHilg]

Not so sure about the Bengals making the playoffs.

Pretty darn good odds even if they lose this weekend..1 game up in the division

Browns vs Steelers and ravens vs rams Thais weekend. Big Ben’s last home game, Huntley starting for Ravens. Steelers and Rams win seals the division for them.

 

[DVontel]

Pretty darn good odds even if they lose this weekend..1 game up in the division

Browns vs Steelers and ravens vs rams Thais weekend. Big Ben’s last home game, Huntley starting for Ravens. Steelers and Rams win seals the division for them.

I think the Browns beat the Steelers & Bengals while the Bengals lose against KC this week.

 

[DaHilg]

I think the Browns beat the Steelers & Bengals while the Bengals lose against KC this week.

Ya that would be the only way Cinci doesn’t get in barring Huntley beats the Rams somehow. Still odds are in Cinci’s favor as where it stands today..I like Joey B, he’s got that IT factor.

 

[DVontel]

Ya that would be the only way Cinci doesn’t get in barring Huntley beats the Rams somehow. Still odds are in Cinci’s favor as where it stands today..I like Joey B, he’s got that IT factor.

Well we’ll see about that since he’s not going up against a team full of practice squad players these last 2 weeks like he did vs Baltimore.

 

[Ouchie-Z-Clown]

I think one could argue that these teams for the most part improved as a result of picking top draft picks - esp landing ‘franchise’ QBs/franchise altering players…

Panthers - Cam (can’t stand him, but facts are he was an MVP and force in his early years)

Cardinals - Kyler and Hopkins was essentially a draft pick being we traded a 2nd rounder for him.

Browns - Baker (sucks but played well last year)/Chubb

Bengals - Joey B/Chase

Chiefs - Acquired what was at the time their ‘franchise’ QB in Alex Smith.. along w HOF Coach Andy Reid.

Texans - have no idea how they improved with the run of QBs they had in that stretch. It’s literally comical the QBs that started for them on 14’ and 15’ yet won 9 games each year. (6 diff QBs)

Titans - Mariota. Was suppose to be a franchise QB, but was average at best and injured.

So the 2 with least success Titans and Texans didn’t find their franchise QB during that stretch. Bengals will make the playoffs and Joey B is the real deal so their success during these span will trump Titans.

Point is, I’d argue that the success is more contingent on how quickly one can land a franchise QB on their roster than crediting a coach for the turnaround.

But stouts point was you don’t have to crawl and walk before you can run in the nfl for a variety of reasons and he’s right.

Not sure why TheCardFan included the bottomed out year in the counts, but what he shows is teams pretty routinely turned around their program from worst to playoff fairly quickly. 6 within 3 years, 3 within 2 years, and one the very next season. The browns being the big outlier.

 

[DaHilg]

But stouts point was you don’t have to crawl and walk before you can run in the nfl for a variety of reasons and he’s right.

Not sure why TheCardFan included the bottomed out year in the counts, but what he shows is teams pretty routinely turned around their program from worst to playoff fairly quickly. 6 within 3 years, 3 within 2 years, and one the very next season. The browns being the big outlier.

Ya, I agree completely with Stout’s perspective on that. I’m compounding that saying history says it doesn’t really matter whose at coach, you’re are going to improve dramatically from worse to ‘success’ if you land that franchise QB. I don’t believe this teams success is a product of Kingsbury ‘coaching’ the team to victories, but a product of landing a franchise QB/franchise altering players. Thus making KK completely expendable at this point.

 

[TheCardFan]

Not sure why TheCardFan included the bottomed out year in the counts,

I included them because it applied most to our situation.

In my mind, there are 2ish unique scenarios on "turnarounds".

1 - worst to first. How long did it take the worst team in the league to make the playoffs?
2 - Consistently bad (4-7 wins) - I think this can be a 1 year turnaround. New coach, add a couple of pieces, etc...you can be in the playoffs the next year.

I agree with what Stout is saying but I think it only applies to scenario #2. Teams just don't go worst in the NFL, to immediate playoffs, or to Super Bowl champs (unless that bad year was a total fluke). There is usually a reason (lack of talent) that a team is the worst in the NFL and it take some time to fix the roster.

 

[Ouchie-Z-Clown]

I included them because it applied most to our situation.

In my mind, there are 2ish unique scenarios on "turnarounds".

1 - worst to first. How long did it take the worst team in the league to make the playoffs?
2 - Consistently bad (4-7 wins) - I think this can be a 1 year turnaround. New coach, add a couple of pieces, etc...you can be in the playoffs the next year.

I agree with what Stout is saying but I think it only applies to scenario #2. Teams just don't go worst in the NFL, to immediate playoffs, or to Super Bowl champs (unless that bad year was a total fluke). There is usually a reason (lack of talent) that a team is the worst in the NFL and it take some time to fix the roster.

Your list literally just showed teams that went from worst to playoffs in 1 or 2 seasons.

 

[TheCardFan]

Your list literally just showed teams that went from worst to playoffs in 1 or 2 seasons.

1 year? The outlier is the Chiefs at 2 years.

IMO - we seem to be going at a good pace based on history (could have made it last year technically).

Stout's point was this:

You must be registered for see images attach

Which I disagreed with for us (worst record) but agree with in relation to a 4-7 win team that can make a couple of changes and turn it around in one year . If you have the worst team in the NFL - then history says you have to crawl before you walk (unless its a fluke situation). "Why did it take 3 years to barely squeak into the playoffs" is not valid for a worst place team.

I gave 7 of the most recent examples of this...feel free to dispute it with your own research. How many teams have gone from worst in the NFL to playoffs in 1 year?

 

[slanidrac16]

We have a conflicting dilemma.
Q 1.A team that has gone from 5 to 8 to 10 wins( so far), how can that be bad?
A. Well yes, but looked how we’ve finished last year and this year?

Q 2. We’re all in. Best roster in years. Built to win now. Really?
A 2. We’ll if we can’t win a playoff game with this roster is it Kingsbury’s fault or it really not an “ all in “ roster.

Q 3. This roster is not set up to build on. One year contracts, contracts coming to an end, high priced free agents like Watt that will have to perform next year for more than 6 or 7 games.
A 3. Can Kiem rebuild this roster better than this “all in” year?

Q 4. Is the Kyler/Kingsbury combo a winning combo? Is Kingsbury holding Kyler back or has Kyler just very good but not great?
A 4. Not really an answer. I don’t know. If Kingsbury can’t get Kyler to excel can another head coach? Does it mean we have to start all over? Does it mean Kyler would regress before excelling beyond where he is today?

Big dilemma on the horizon.

 

[Ouchie-Z-Clown]

1 year? The outlier is the Chiefs at 2 years.

IMO - we seem to be going at a good pace based on history (could have made it last year technically).

Stout's point was this:

You must be registered for see images attach

Which I disagreed with for us (worst record) but agree with in relation to a 4-7 win team that can make a couple of changes and turn it around in one year . If you have the worst team in the NFL - then history says you have to crawl before you walk (unless its a fluke situation). "Why did it take 3 years to barely squeak into the playoffs" is not valid for a worst place team.

I gave 7 of the most recent examples of this...feel free to dispute it with your own research. How many teams have gone from worst in the NFL to playoffs in 1 year?

No the chiefs went from worst to playoffs in one year. You don’t count the worst year because it can’t be the worst until the end of the year. The turnaround happened in a year. Then you listed two more that happened in a mere two years. And a couple more in three. The nfl is not a league that requires lengthy crawl-walk-run turnarounds anymore. That’s pre-free agency years.

 

[Ouchie-Z-Clown]

1 year? The outlier is the Chiefs at 2 years.

IMO - we seem to be going at a good pace based on history (could have made it last year technically).

Stout's point was this:

You must be registered for see images attach

Which I disagreed with for us (worst record) but agree with in relation to a 4-7 win team that can make a couple of changes and turn it around in one year . If you have the worst team in the NFL - then history says you have to crawl before you walk (unless its a fluke situation). "Why did it take 3 years to barely squeak into the playoffs" is not valid for a worst place team.

I gave 7 of the most recent examples of this...feel free to dispute it with your own research. How many teams have gone from worst in the NFL to playoffs in 1 year?

Dude I don’t have to do my own research, you’re research provided the answers. Turnarounds from worst to playoffs in 3 or less years is commonplace now.

 

[Ouchie-Z-Clown]

We have a conflicting dilemma.
Q 1.A team that has gone from 5 to 8 to 10 wins( so far), how can that be bad?
A. Well yes, but looked how we’ve finished last year and this year?

Q 2. We’re all in. Best roster in years. Built to win now. Really?
A 2. We’ll if we can’t win a playoff game with this roster is it Kingsbury’s fault or it really not an “ all in “ roster.

Q 3. This roster is not set up to build on. One year contracts, contracts coming to an end, high priced free agents like Watt that will have to perform next year for more than 6 or 7 games.
A 3. Can Kiem rebuild this roster better than this “all in” year?

Q 4. Is the Kyler/Kingsbury combo a winning combo? Is Kingsbury holding Kyler back or has Kyler just very good but not great?
A 4. Not really an answer. I don’t know. If Kingsbury can’t get Kyler to excel can another head coach? Does it mean we have to start all over? Does it mean Kyler would regress before excelling beyond where he is today?

Big dilemma on the horizon.

I love that your #4 is prefaced with “not really an answer” yet your “answers” for 1-3 were . . . questions.


Btw, all valid.

 

[slanidrac16]

I love that your #4 is prefaced with “not really an answer” yet your “answers” for 1-3 were . . . questions.


Btw, all valid.

Lol. See…dilemma! Lol

 

[Stout]

Ya, I agree completely with Stout’s perspective on that. I’m compounding that saying history says it doesn’t really matter whose at coach, you’re are going to improve dramatically from worse to ‘success’ if you land that franchise QB. I don’t believe this teams success is a product of Kingsbury ‘coaching’ the team to victories, but a product of landing a franchise QB/franchise altering players. Thus making KK completely expendable at this point.

I definitely agree with this. It's even more egregious that he has a franchise QB.

 

[TheCardFan]

You don’t count the worst year because it can’t be the worst until the end of the year. The turnaround happened in a year. Then you listed two more that happened in a mere two years. And a couple more in three.

First of all - it was my analysis and I can choose to analyze it however I want bro. I chose to use the year a team finished worst. Do your own analysis if you don't like it.

THANK YOU for making my point below. It seems as though 2-3 years (your math) is the normal amount of time it takes a worst place team to turn it around and get to the playoffs.
Not what Stout said below: Why did it take 3 years to get into the playoffs? As we have just discussed - that is how long it takes for worst place teams to do it. We are on track people.

You must be registered for see images attach

 

[eastcoastDave]

I’m hoping for some long-term consistency within the coaching staff and the team. However, I’m unsure whether the GM is the right fit for the Cardinals. I don’t like his drafts (wonder if he would have drafted Klyer if Kingsbury were not the coach) or many of his FA signings. And I don’t like the fact that two of the past 1st round LB selections have had to spend a year on the bench. Other than QB, first-rounders should play in year one. A lot. Otherwise you’re shortening a player’s playing lifetime by a year and robbing the team of plugging needs elsewhere. Not worth it. And I don’t like that the team is so thin in defensive backfield for the past decade. Winning, I think, starts with the QB, which we have, and the offensive and defensive line, which we don’t have consistently. My bottom line is keep the coaches, replace the GM.

 

[Crimson Warrior]

I got an email from a newspaper guy asking the following. If the Cards lose their last 2 games, do I believe Kingsbury will be fired? I‘ve already indicated on the board I would fire the entire staff. However, I believe they will retain Kingsbury. In my mind the only way things might get better in that eventuality is if they mandated changes. Maybe if they required hiring an Offensive Coordinator and a QB coach that might fix the offense if Murray accepts changing. Finally they’d need to fire Joseph. I do not see those changes happening, but sadly I believe Kingsbury stays. The Cards will be so thrilled about making the playoffs, nothing else will matter. Plus if they fired the coach then didn’t make the playoffs, the blowback would be unreal.

What if they win their last two Harry? Go 12-5?

Do we start talking extension for either Kliff of Murray?

Does Vance keep his job with a defense that participated in a 12-5 season?

 

[Cheesebeef]

What if they win their last two Harry? Go 12-5?

Do we start talking extension for either Kliff of Murray?

Does Vance keep his job with a defense that participated in a 12-5 season?

At 12-5, if they make any decent showing in the playoffs, it’s hard not to see the whole staff coming back.

Or argue that hard against it.

 

[ajcardfan]

What if they win their last two Harry? Go 12-5?

Do we start talking extension for either Kliff of Murray?

Does Vance keep his job with a defense that participated in a 12-5 season?

Don't bring KK back as a lame duck. Fire or extend are the only choices IMO.