Cards Hire Jonathan Gannon as New HC

[daves]

Slow day at work, but in 2011 (chosen at random), here is my count of offense vs defensive head coaches (Playoffs in bold):

OFF (13): BUF (Gailey), CLE (Shurmur), TEN (Munchak), IND (Caldwell), SDC (Turner), OAK (Hue Jackson), HOU (Kubiak), NYG (Coughlin), GB (McCarthy), PHI (Reid), DAL (Garrett), NO (Payton), SF (Jim Harbaugh), ARI (Whis)

DEF (14): NE (Belicheck), NYJ (Rex Ryan), PIT (Tomlin), CIN (Marvin Lewis), JAX (Jack Del Rio/Mel Tucker), DEN (Fox), DET (Schwartz), CHI (Lovie Smith), MIN (Leslie Frazier), ATL (Mike Smith), CAR (Rivera), TB (Morris), SEA (Carrol), STL (Spagnuolo)

It's complicated (3): MIA (Sparano-OFF, Bowles (DEF), BAL (John Harbaugh-ST), KC (Haley-OFF/Crennel-DEF)

It's odd that you "randomly" picked 2011, but as I'm sure you know there's been a shift toward offensive HC's in the last decade - especially when you consider the proportion who, as of today, would have their teams in the playoffs (bold) or in the hunt (*):

OFF (17; 10 would be in playoffs if they started today with 2 in the hunt):
ATL Smith (OC TEN) *
CAR Reich (OC PHI)
CIN Taylor (QBC LAR)
CLE Stefanski (OC MIN)
DAL McCarthy (OC SF)
DEN Payton (OC NYG)
GB LaFleur (OC TEN)
IND Steichen (OC PHI)
JAC Pederson (OC KC)
KC Reid (QBC GB)
LAR McVay (OC WAS)
LV McDaniels (OC NE) [Pierce LBC LV]
MIA McDaniel (OC SF)
MIN O'Connell (OC LAR) *
NYG Daboll (OC BUF)
PHI Siriani (OC IND)
SF Shanahan (OC ATL)

DEF (13; 2 would be in playoffs if they started today with 4 in the hunt):
ARI Gannon (DC PHI)
BUF McDermott (DC CAR)
CHI Eberfluss (DC IND)
HOU Ryans (DC SF) *
LAC Staley (DC LAR) / Smith (OLBC LAC)
NE Belichick (DC NYJ)
NO Allen (DC NO) *
NYJ Saleh (DC SF)
PIT Tomlin (DC MIN) *
SEA Carroll (DC SF) *
TB Bowles (DC TB)
TEN Vrabel (DC HOU)
WAS Rivera (DC SD)

It's Complicated (2; both would be in playoffs if they started today):
BAL Harbaugh (ST PHI)
DET Campbell (TEC NO) [OC=Ben Johnson, DC=Aaron Glenn]

So to @RON_IN_OC's point in the post to which you were replying, there are "going to be fewer defensive HC's, overall", and based on this year, the proportion of offensive HC's who make the playoffs is MUCH higher (10-12 / 17) than for defensive HC's (2-6 of 13).


EDIT: Going back to 2022, the numbers support @RON_IN_OC's point even a bit more, with a 3:2 ratio of offensive to defensive HC's, 1/2 of the offensive HC's making the playoffs, and 1/3 of the defensive HC's.

OFF (18; 9 in playoffs):
ARI Kingsbury (OC TAMU / Houston)
ATL Smith (OC TEN)
CAR Rhule (OLC NYG / OC Temple)
CIN Taylor (QBC LAR)
CLE Stefanski (OC MIN)
DAL McCarthy (OC SF)
DEN Hackett (OC GB)
GB LaFleur (OC TEN)
IND Reich (OC PHI)
JAC Pederson (OC KC)
KC Reid (QBC GB)
LAR McVay (OC WAS)
LV McDaniels (OC NE)
MIA McDaniel (OC SF)
MIN O'Connell (OC LAR)
NYG Daboll (OC BUF)
PHI Siriani (OC IND)
SF Shanahan (OC ATL)

DEF (12; 4 in the playoffs):
BUF McDermott (DC CAR)
CHI Eberfluss (DC IND)
HOU Smith (DC STL)
LAC Staley (DC LAR)
NE Belichick (DC NYJ)
NO Allen (DC NO)
NYJ Saleh (DC SF)
PIT Tomlin (DC MIN)
SEA Carroll (DC SF)
TB Bowles (DC TB)
TEN Vrabel (DC HOU)
WAS Rivera (DC SD)

It's Complicated (2; 1 in the playoffs):
BAL Harbaugh (ST PHI)
DET Campbell (TEC NO) [OC=Ben Johnson, DC=Aaron Glenn]

 

[TheCardFan]

You must be registered for see images attach

 

[CardNots]

xc_hide_links_from_guests_guests_error_hide_media

I like him

 

[kerouac9]

I think a better statistic would be, of the Defensive HCs, how many make the playoffs on average vs Offensive HCs. There are traditionally going to be fewer defensive HCs, overall.

This is the point I highlighted and wanted to investigate.

It's odd that you "randomly" picked 2011, but as I'm sure you know there's been a shift toward offensive HC's in the last decade - especially when you consider the proportion who, as of today, would have their teams in the playoffs (bold) or in the hunt (*)

It’s not odd. I had PFR’s seasons open and chose one from the past but not recent past to see if “traditionally” there are more offensive coaches than defensive ones. There are a lot more offensive head coaches right now — a point no one made or disputes. But that’s not some historical fixture, it’s a result of short-term trends.

 

[slanidrac16]

I like him.

 

[Crimson Warrior]

During the PHI game, one of the announcers, Daryl Johnston I think, said:

"Jonathan Gannon gets every ounce (of performance) from his players"

When was the last time we heard that said about a Cardinals coach? Ever?

There's mounting evidence he's a disciplinarian. Simmons being traded for peanuts. Clark riding the bench for a stretch. Strong getting cut. That S who seemed to be playing pretty well getting cut after week four or five. It sounds like JG is making them toe the line.

But they keep showing up each week.

The way a team runs the ball is perhaps a reflection of the coaching staff's personality. Well lately our running game has kind of been kicking other teams @sses all over the field.

And a horribly overmatched defense is still finding ways to get a stop here or there when it needs one.

Going to give JG an A (sorry @phillycard !) . Wins over DAL, PHI, PIT, all good teams, were not accidents. We were the better team on those days.

I don't know how long the players will keep buying what he's selling, but so far I think it's working.

 

[football karma]

Charles Davis called one of the recent games and said (generally): "sometimes when you talk to players on teams that are playing out the stretch, you sense some low energy -- but that wasn't the case with the players we talked to -- they were high energy and engaged"

it seems every week the people calling the games have positive things to say about the staff (with the provision that they arent going to rip the staff) -- but some of the stuff has been pretty positive.

Michael Carter in his video thing this week talked about how tight the team was and how much he enjoys the atmosphere (again: recognizing that he isnt going to rip the team on team sponsored media and that he wants a home next year) -- but he could have spit out a bunch of cliches but went beyond that

 

[PJ1]

Seems to be a positive vibe with the players. He has people looking forward to next year. Not sure how much better he could have done with the personnel he had. Next year will be a better one to find out just how good he can be. Looking forward to it.

 

[Totally_Red]

Charles Davis called one of the recent games and said (generally): "sometimes when you talk to players on teams that are playing out the stretch, you sense some low energy -- but that wasn't the case with the players we talked to -- they were high energy and engaged"

it seems every week the people calling the games have positive things to say about the staff (with the provision that they arent going to rip the staff) -- but some of the stuff has been pretty positive.

Michael Carter in his video thing this week talked about how tight the team was and how much he enjoys the atmosphere (again: recognizing that he isnt going to rip the team on team sponsored media and that he wants a home next year) -- but he could have spit out a bunch of cliches but went beyond that

That Michael Carter interview was fascinating. It was hard to tell if he was over the moon about the Cardinals and Arizona or just enchanted by Dani. Probably both.

 

[ajcardfan]

During the PHI game, one of the announcers, Daryl Johnston I think, said:

"Jonathan Gannon gets every ounce (of performance) from his players"

When was the last time we heard that said about a Cardinals coach? Ever?

There's mounting evidence he's a disciplinarian. Simmons getting cut. Clark riding the bench for a stretch. Strong getting cut. That S who seemed to be playing pretty well getting cut after week four or five. It sounds like JG is making them toe the line.

But they keep showing up each week.

The way a team runs the ball is perhaps a reflection of the coaching staff's personality. Well lately our running game has kind of been kicking other teams @sses all over the field.

And a horribly overmatched defense is still finding ways to get a stop here or there when it needs one.

Going to give JG an A (sorry @phillycard !) . Wins over DAL, PHI, PIT, all good teams, were not accidents. We were the better team on those days.

I don't know how long the players will keep buying what he's selling, but so far I think it's working.

A minor point, but Simmons was traded. It doesn't take away from your argument.

Also, we don't really know why those guys were cut. We can think it is due to discipline and team chemistry, but there is no proof as no one has ever explained them.

Getting the players to buy in year one is the bare minimum of what should be accomplished. Now, it's time to win.

 

[Stout]

During the PHI game, one of the announcers, Daryl Johnston I think, said:

"Jonathan Gannon gets every ounce (of performance) from his players"

When was the last time we heard that said about a Cardinals coach? Ever?

There's mounting evidence he's a disciplinarian. Simmons getting cut. Clark riding the bench for a stretch. Strong getting cut. That S who seemed to be playing pretty well getting cut after week four or five. It sounds like JG is making them toe the line.

But they keep showing up each week.

The way a team runs the ball is perhaps a reflection of the coaching staff's personality. Well lately our running game has kind of been kicking other teams @sses all over the field.

And a horribly overmatched defense is still finding ways to get a stop here or there when it needs one.

Going to give JG an A (sorry @phillycard !) . Wins over DAL, PHI, PIT, all good teams, were not accidents. We were the better team on those days.

I don't know how long the players will keep buying what he's selling, but so far I think it's working.

Agreed with everything except the final grade. I'll also add that a lot of his coaching staff is doing well developing the team's philosophy, especially with the run game. That said, there have been coaching blunders. Ertz over McBride is the glaring one. There have been a lot of head scratching decisions in-game. I'll go with a C+ with definite signs he can improve, and say I am happy with how he is trending. I will also add the caveat that a lot of what I and others might ascribe to Gannon may be Monti's choices--playing time, decisions to coach a certain way to experiment and test players, etc. If so, a C+ is harsh, and I would provisionally make it a solid B. But who can say for sure?

 

[Crimson Warrior]

A minor point, but Simmons was traded. It doesn't take away from your argument.

Also, we don't really know why those guys were cut. We can think it is due to discipline and team chemistry, but there is no proof as no one has ever explained them.

Getting the players to buy in year one is the bare minimum of what should be accomplished. Now, it's time to win.

Thank you for that correction! Post edited.

 

[TruColor]

Agreed with everything except the final grade. I'll also add that a lot of his coaching staff is doing well developing the team's philosophy, especially with the run game. That said, there have been coaching blunders. Ertz over McBride is the glaring one. There have been a lot of head scratching decisions in-game. I'll go with a C+ with definite signs he can improve, and say I am happy with how he is trending. I will also add the caveat that a lot of what I and others might ascribe to Gannon may be Monti's choices--playing time, decisions to coach a certain way to experiment and test players, etc. If so, a C+ is harsh, and I would provisionally make it a solid B. But who can say for sure?

I wonder if they were trying to give Ertz a chance to show other teams he still had worth - knowing that McBride was the eventual starter. Backfired though.

 

[Stout]

I wonder if they were trying to give Ertz a chance to show other teams he still had worth - knowing that McBride was the eventual starter. Backfired though.

That would be a fire-able offense, for me. Stunt the development of your future to be nice to a washed vet? Dumb-de-dumb-dumb-DUMB.

 

[Krangodnzr]

That would be a fire-able offense, for me. Stunt the development of your future to be nice to a washed vet? Dumb-de-dumb-dumb-DUMB.

Another explanation is that Ertz still showed more in meetings and in practice. Sometimes the young guys have to get on the field do to injury to show everyone they are worth PT.

While McBride showed flashes in 2022, you'd still think Ertz was better because he was before he was hurt in 2022.

 

[Stout]

Another explanation is that Ertz still showed more in meetings and in practice. Sometimes the young guys have to get on the field do to injury to show everyone they are worth PT.

While McBride showed flashes in 2022, you'd still think Ertz was better because he was before he was hurt in 2022.

Sorry, no. It was crystal clear Ertz was done, yet it took forever for the coaches to make a switch. And this is in a season where they were going young to get some of the kids game time. It was a mistake, plain and simple.

 

[kerouac9]

Sorry, no. It was crystal clear Ertz was done, yet it took forever for the coaches to make a switch. And this is in a season where they were going young to get some of the kids game time. It was a mistake, plain and simple.

It’s okay for him to learn on the job in a purposefully non-competitive season.

Nate Tice with the Athletic LOVES what Gannon and the staff are doing.

 

[Stout]

It’s okay for him to learn on the job in a purposefully non-competitive season.

Nate Tice with the Athletic LOVES what Gannon and the staff are doing.

Which is why I don't hate Gannon and haven't given up on him despite some bad decisions. Same with Monti. Mistakes have been made--more so with Monti--but it doesn't mean Gannon is a bad coach overall. I have faith in him moving forward.

 

[ajcardfan]

Which is why I don't hate Gannon and haven't given up on him despite some bad decisions. Same with Monti. Mistakes have been made--more so with Monti--but it doesn't mean Gannon is a bad coach overall. I have faith in him moving forward.

This season was not conditional on the record. They got complete freedom this season to do as they wish. Yes, even knowing that, some things I questioned, but I obviously am rooting for them.

 

[WisconsinCard]

Sorry, no. It was crystal clear Ertz was done, yet it took forever for the coaches to make a switch. And this is in a season where they were going young to get some of the kids game time. It was a mistake, plain and simple.

As others have said it's more than game day. It's practice, game film, study habits, learning the playbook, and meetings. It's something none of us get to see. So to say it took forever who knows. What we do know is the TM has excelled when given the opportunity. So who knows what he does with that opportunity it was given at the start of the season. So one could say that Gannon played it just right. Who knows?

 

[Stout]

As others have said it's more than game day. It's practice, game film, study habits, learning the playbook, and meetings. It's something none of us get to see. So to say it took forever who knows. What we do know is the TM has excelled when given the opportunity. So who knows what he does with that opportunity it was given at the start of the season. So one could say that Gannon played it just right. Who knows?

Meh, I'm confident it was a bad decision at the time and it's been shown to be a bad decision if we're only talking in retrospect. Like I said, however, Gannon has shown he has promise and will help add a little excitement for next season.

 

[phillycard]

During the PHI game, one of the announcers, Daryl Johnston I think, said:

"Jonathan Gannon gets every ounce (of performance) from his players"

When was the last time we heard that said about a Cardinals coach? Ever?

There's mounting evidence he's a disciplinarian. Simmons being traded for peanuts. Clark riding the bench for a stretch. Strong getting cut. That S who seemed to be playing pretty well getting cut after week four or five. It sounds like JG is making them toe the line.

But they keep showing up each week.

The way a team runs the ball is perhaps a reflection of the coaching staff's personality. Well lately our running game has kind of been kicking other teams @sses all over the field.

And a horribly overmatched defense is still finding ways to get a stop here or there when it needs one.

Going to give JG an A (sorry @phillycard !) . Wins over DAL, PHI, PIT, all good teams, were not accidents. We were the better team on those days.

I don't know how long the players will keep buying what he's selling, but so far I think it's working.

CW. I'm not mad at you at all. There's no denying that despite the perceived schtick, the players are in tune with him. I have to tip my cap to that alone, and give you zero problem with your assessment. I'm not there yet, but I can finally say I do like him more than the day we hired him.

 

[ASUCHRIS]

CW. I'm not mad at you at all. There's no denying that despite the perceived schtick, the players are in tune with him. I have to tip my cap to that alone, and give you zero problem with your assessment. I'm not there yet, but I can finally say I do like him more than the day we hired him.

The proof is in the pudding...guys tried hard for him all year long. The contrast between that and the KK era is jarring.

 

[football karma]

in the broadcast yesterday, it came up again: broadcast team noted that in their meetings with Cardinal players that it didnt feel like a 4 win football team

 

[blindseyed]

The proof is in the pudding...guys tried hard for him all year long. The contrast between that and the KK era is jarring.

the fact that the team played yesterdays game with nothing on the line and coming within 1 second of winning while playing hard like it was a playoff game tells me they're buying in and that there's something to look forward to. Unlike the last few years that were mailed in at the end