Coaching Comparisons: How Does Haley Stack Up?

Haley bashing has reached a new hieght... or low... depending which side of the fence you're on. Here's a list of some famous coaches and their won/loss records in their first year of coaching (all of the  coaches on this first list have been a head coach in an NFL Championship game):

1-15... Jimmy Johnson- 1989 Cowboys

1-13... Chuck Noll- 1969 Steelers

2-14... Bill Walsh- 1979 49ers

3 - 9... Weeb Eubank- 1954 Colts

3-12... Bill Parcels- 1983 Giants

0-11-1...Tom Landry- 1960 Cowboys

3 - 6... Mike Ditka- 1982 Bears  (strike shortened season)

3 - 8... Bud Grant- 1967 Vikings

4-12... Marv Levy- 1978 Chiefs

4-10... Dick Vermeil- 1976 Eagles

5-11... Dick Vermeil- 1997 Rams (2nd go round in the NFL)

6-10... Dick Vermeil- 2001 Chiefs (3rd go round in the NFL)

6-10... Bill Belichick- 1991 Browns

6-10... Tony Dungy- 1996 Bucs

8 - 8... Mike Shanahan- 1995 Broncos

8 - 8... Joe Gibbs- 1981 Redskins

7 - 5... Vince Lombarrdi- 1959 Packers

8 - 6... George Allen- 1966 Rams

8 - 6... Don Shula- 1963 Colts

8 - 6... Hank Stram- 1960 Texans

This not a comprehensive list but it does show that many of the greatest coaches of all time did not have a winning season their first year of coaching. Bill Walsh was 8-24 in his fiirst two seasons. Jeff Fisher didn't have a winning season until his 6th year. In Bill Belichick's first season with the Patriots (his 2nd head coaching job in he NFL) he was 5-11 which is the same record as his last year with the Browns... the very year before that. In fact, he only had one winning season in his first six years of being a head coach.

Also... according to this list.. the fewer wins you have in your first year... the more Super Bowls you will eventually win. Ha! (The top three losers each won 2 or 3 or 4 Super Bowls).

Here's another list of coahes and their won/loss records during their first year in the NFL (overall record is listed at the end in parentheses):

10-6... Herm Edwards- 2001 Jets-  (54-74)

12-4... Barry Switzer- 1994 Cowboys-  (40-24)

7 - 9... Butch Davis- 2001 Browns-  (24-34)

12-4... Art Shell- (first full year) 1990 Raiders-   (56-52)

10-6... Rich Kotite- 1991 Eagles-  (40-56)

10-6... Ray RHodes- 1995 Eagles-  (37-42)

Would you rather have a coach off of the first list or the second list? Which begs the question... which coaches will project to be the best coaches? The answer to that question can't be answered by looking to the coaches' first year record alone. Barry Switzer may have an overall winning record but I never hear his name in conversations for open NFL coaching positions. Plus, Art Shell may just have been a victim of Mr. Davis but he probably won't be considered for a head coaching postition any time soon.

I think it might be wise, in the Chiefs case, to wait a couple of years before passing out grades for Todd Haley as a head coach... at least based upon his won/loss record anyway.

I agree. Everyone knew this was going to be a tough year where 4-5 wins would be considered a good year. Now 7 games in when were 1-6 the coach is a moron and the GM doesnt know anything. I understand it can get frustrating but its not like were the titans coming off a playoff year and now 0-7

Chief24 wrote: I agree that everyone should sit back and wait..but this list is quite flawed..i'm sure you can find equally bad numbers for other coaches that didn't turn out well.

Sure you can but I think his overall point is that there is no way anyone can have an educated opinion of Haley at this point, because some great coaches werent real good their first year. Especaly the ones that took on rebuilds like Haley did

ryansublett wrote:

 

Chief24 wrote: I agree that everyone should sit back and wait..but this list is quite flawed..i'm sure you can find equally bad numbers for other coaches that didn't turn out well.

Sure you can but I think his overall point is that there is no way anyone can have an educated opinion of Haley at this point, because some great coaches werent real good their first year. Especaly the ones that took on rebuilds like Haley did

I agree that's what he's trying to prove..i just don't think it proves much. He took the best coaches in his mind, are we saying that just because they did it, Todd Haley will?

Chief24 wrote:

 

ryansublett wrote:

 

Chief24 wrote: I agree that everyone should sit back and wait..but this list is quite flawed..i'm sure you can find equally bad numbers for other coaches that didn't turn out well.

Sure you can but I think his overall point is that there is no way anyone can have an educated opinion of Haley at this point, because some great coaches werent real good their first year. Especaly the ones that took on rebuilds like Haley did

I agree that's what he's trying to prove..i just don't think it proves much. He took the best coaches in his mind, are we saying that just because they did it, Todd Haley will?

Thats not what I take it to mean at all. I take it to mean that theirs no way to know at this point. Im sure if the internet was around for those guys people would of called them morons to. The point he is making is that just because you have a bad year one doesnt mean your a bad coach. Hes not trying to say Haley WILL do that. There is no way to know that at this point.

I do know his Parcelles has had alot of assistants go on to be good HC's... just saying

Who gives a **** what list Haley is on...

I want a coach and team that ******* wins.  End of story...  Win is ALL I want.

Haley will be fine but god dammit get us some wins Haley

Chief24 wrote:

 

ryansublett wrote:

 

Chief24 wrote: I agree that everyone should sit back and wait..but this list is quite flawed..i'm sure you can find equally bad numbers for other coaches that didn't turn out well.

Sure you can but I think his overall point is that there is no way anyone can have an educated opinion of Haley at this point, because some great coaches werent real good their first year. Especaly the ones that took on rebuilds like Haley did

I agree that's what he's trying to prove..i just don't think it proves much. He took the best coaches in his mind, are we saying that just because they did it, Todd Haley will?

No.. I didn't just make them out of MY mind... I got them from a 50 Greatest  Coaches list. Yes... their are many coaches who had a first season with a winning record. But... and this is THE point... there are many who did not!

Of equal importance... there are many BAD coaches who had good or even winning records their first season. Is any of that information helpful in determining who would make a good coach?

No.

So let's stop it. The judging. The deciding one way or another. It's not helpful or useful. It doesn't do anything... except maybe allow a few frusrtrated couch QBs to blow off some steam.

I'm sure there are 5 times more coaches who started out bad and it did not get any better.

They were in over their head, and did not know how to be a Head Coach.

Just because Haley knew a couple of good Head Coaches does not mean he will be one.

It is more than likely he will still not suceed as a Head Coach.

balto wrote:

Who gives a **** what list Haley is on...

 

I want a coach and team that ******* wins.  End of story...  Win is ALL I want.

 

Haley will be fine but god dammit get us some wins Haley

Really Haley can only do so much for that. At some point the players gotta get their jobs done. Thats why I hate theads that start "this loss is on"  no im sorry football is a team game, and although the coach takes the bame he can only do so much. With a diffrent coach we MAY have 1 more win, but thats it

crazy1will wrote:

I'm sure there are 5 times more coaches who started out bad and it did not get any better.

 

They were in over their head, and did not know how to be a Head Coach.

 

Just because Haley knew a couple of good Head Coaches does not mean he will be one.

 

It is more than likely he will still not suceed as a Head Coach.

he might not. but he has to have time  to show if he can or can't.   this draft coming up should give us a better feel for what he will be about. they now have a fuklly year under tehre belt to have tehre own scouts an for them to judge teh talent on this team. so we will see how they address it. that will give us an idea of the future of things

crazy1will wrote:

I'm sure there are 5 times more coaches who started out bad and it did not get any better.

 

They were in over their head, and did not know how to be a Head Coach.

 

Just because Haley knew a couple of good Head Coaches does not mean he will be one.

 

It is more than likely he will still not suceed as a Head Coach.

Based on what? LOL quit trying to pull stuff out of your ***...

Now does working for a great coach always mean success. No but it is a good start. Look at the guys that Parcells, Walsh, Holmgren have sent on to be HC's

I think the part thats pertinent that wasnt listed was what these guys walked into.

Cowboys the year before JJ  3-13

Steelers the year before Noll 2-11-1

Niners the year before Walsh 2-14

Colts the year before Ewbank 3-9

Giants the year before Parcells 4-5

Cowboys were an expansion team when Landry started

Bears were 6-10 the year before Ditka

Thats just the tip of the iceberg.  None of this means Haley will turn into them, but the point is that these guys all had bad first years not because they were bad coaches, but because they took over bad teams, and it takes time to change them.  Most of them had equal or worse records in their first seasons than the team had the year before, because it does take time to get it turned around.  When you evaluate a first year coach, you have to consider what he has to work with.  Those coaches werent working with all of their own guys in their first year, and neither is Haley now.

moonshot314 wrote:

I think the part thats pertinent that wasnt listed was what these guys walked into.

 

Cowboys the year before JJ  3-13

Steelers the year before Noll 2-11-1

Niners the year before Walsh 2-14

Colts the year before Ewbank 3-9

Giants the year before Parcells 4-5

Cowboys were an expansion team when Landry started

Bears were 6-10 the year before Ditka

 

 

Thats just the tip of the iceberg.  None of this means Haley will turn into them, but the point is that these guys all had bad first years not because they were bad coaches, but because they took over bad teams, and it takes time to change them.  Most of them had equal or worse records in their first seasons than the team had the year before, because it does take time to get it turned around.  When you evaluate a first year coach, you have to consider what he has to work with.  Those coaches werent working with all of their own guys in their first year, and neither is Haley now.

yeah I think sometimes people dont understand that when a coach is fired most of the time its because the TEAM is bad. Now occassionaly youll get a good team where the coach was let go or retired like Mike Tomlin or Josh Mcdaniels got but that doesnt happen to offten

Great topic by the poster.

It just goes to show that we need to sit back and ride this thing out because lets face it, this team was in SHAMBLES when Haley took over. This 2nd half of the season should show SOME signs of improvement, however don't expect the Chiefs to win too many of their games.

We're looking for improvement guys, and something to go into the offseason to feel good about. Whether that progress comes in the form of a few extra wins, a breakout player, or statistically improving in parts of the game, we need improvement. Trust in the new leadership.

morsel22 wrote:

Coaching Comparisons: How Does Haley Stack Up?

 

Haley bashing has reached a new hieght... or low... depending which side of the fence you're on. Here's a list of some famous coaches and their won/loss records in their first year of coaching (all of the  coaches on this first list have been a head coach in an NFL Championship game):

 

1-15... Jimmy Johnson- 1989 Cowboys

1-13... Chuck Noll- 1969 Steelers

2-14... Bill Walsh- 1979 49ers

3 - 9... Weeb Eubank- 1954 Colts

3-12... Bill Parcels- 1983 Giants

0-11-1...Tom Landry- 1960 Cowboys

3 - 6... Mike Ditka- 1982 Bears  (strike shortened season)

3 - 8... Bud Grant- 1967 Vikings

4-12... Marv Levy- 1978 Chiefs

4-10... Dick Vermeil- 1976 Eagles

5-11... Dick Vermeil- 1997 Rams (2nd go round in the NFL)

6-10... Dick Vermeil- 2001 Chiefs (3rd go round in the NFL)

6-10... Bill Belichick- 1991 Browns

6-10... Tony Dungy- 1996 Bucs

8 - 8... Mike Shanahan- 1995 Broncos

8 - 8... Joe Gibbs- 1981 Redskins

7 - 5... Vince Lombarrdi- 1959 Packers

8 - 6... George Allen- 1966 Rams

8 - 6... Don Shula- 1963 Colts

8 - 6... Hank Stram- 1960 Texans

 

This not a comprehensive list but it does show that many of the greatest coaches of all time did not have a winning season their first year of coaching. Bill Walsh was 8-24 in his fiirst two seasons. Jeff Fisher didn't have a winning season until his 6th year. In Bill Belichick's first season with the Patriots (his 2nd head coaching job in he NFL) he was 5-11 which is the same record as his last year with the Browns... the very year before that. In fact, he only had one winning season in his first six years of being a head coach.

 

Also... according to this list.. the fewer wins you have in your first year... the more Super Bowls you will eventually win. Ha! (The top three losers each won 2 or 3 or 4 Super Bowls).

 

Here's another list of coahes and their won/loss records during their first year in the NFL (overall record is listed at the end in parentheses):

 

10-6... Herm Edwards- 2001 Jets-  (54-74)

12-4... Barry Switzer- 1994 Cowboys-  (40-24)

7 - 9... Butch Davis- 2001 Browns-  (24-34)

12-4... Art Shell- (first full year) 1990 Raiders-   (56-52)

10-6... Rich Kotite- 1991 Eagles-  (40-56)

10-6... Ray RHodes- 1995 Eagles-  (37-42)

 

Would you rather have a coach off of the first list or the second list? Which begs the question... which coaches will project to be the best coaches? The answer to that question can't be answered by looking to the coaches' first year record alone. Barry Switzer may have an overall winning record but I never hear his name in conversations for open NFL coaching positions. Plus, Art Shell may just have been a victim of Mr. Davis but he probably won't be considered for a head coaching postition any time soon.

 

I think it might be wise, in the Chiefs case, to wait a couple of years before passing out grades for Todd Haley as a head coach... at least based upon his won/loss record anyway.

 

I agree wit hyour timetable. I think it's really important that we show signs of progress by the end of this season especially for the pruposes of drawing interest from higher level free agents and giving them the idea that we are a team on the rise.

Also... your comments about the 3rd and 4th years ring true. When runnign a corporation in the 80's I was able to establish profit sharing for the employees but that wasn't until everyone bought into the way things were to be run. Of course by then the staff was comprised of all new employees.

This will take some time. I hope we can be patient enough for P&H to plan their work... and then work their plan.

Adamixoye wrote: moon and ryan,

I totally agree with you guys. What this list proves is that you have to give a coach time, especially if he walks into a bad situation. I'm not saying Pioli and Haley are above criticism, but you have to give them 2-3 years to see where this goes. For me, the following is a reasonable timetable:

(1) Be more competitive by the end of this year
(2) Be even more competitive next year, maybe push for .500
(3) Compete for playoffs in year 3
(4) Be a serious contender in year 4 and beyond

As a fan, I'm taking these one at a time. If (1) doesn't happen, then I'll start to worry and question if these are the right guys. But if it does happen, then I'll move on to (2) and so on. And I won't really start to criticize these guys heavily until they misfire on at least 2 or 3 of these milestones.

Some people think that's inconsistent with how those of us who didn't want Herm treated him, but if you do, you're looking at it wrong. First, Carl was the big issue. He was here almost 20 years and depending on how you define "serious," we were never really a serious contender, I would argue at least not for the last 15 years and definitely not for the last 5. Then you have Herm, who we already had data on from his time as a Jets coach. Decent coach under certain circumstances, but vastly overmatched in others. Not the right guy for a rebuild. That was obvious when we started tanking in 2007 and couldn't turn it around in 2008.

That's silly to even bring up. Of course the team's previous record was bad or else they would not have hired a new coach!

Also, the point of making the list of coaches was to show that the first year record should not be considered to evaluate a head coach... so you're just making my point for me.

moonshot314 wrote:

I think the part thats pertinent that wasnt listed was what these guys walked into.

 

Cowboys the year before JJ  3-13

Steelers the year before Noll 2-11-1

Niners the year before Walsh 2-14

Colts the year before Ewbank 3-9

Giants the year before Parcells 4-5

Cowboys were an expansion team when Landry started

Bears were 6-10 the year before Ditka

 

 

Thats just the tip of the iceberg.  None of this means Haley will turn into them, but the point is that these guys all had bad first years not because they were bad coaches, but because they took over bad teams, and it takes time to change them.  Most of them had equal or worse records in their first seasons than the team had the year before, because it does take time to get it turned around.  When you evaluate a first year coach, you have to consider what he has to work with.  Those coaches werent working with all of their own guys in their first year, and neither is Haley now.

I do not think moon was disagreeing with you.

morsel22 wrote:

That's silly to even bring up. Of course the team's previous record was bad or else they would not have hired a new coach!

 

Also, the point of making the list of coaches was to show that the first year record should not be considered to evaluate a head coach... so you're just making my point for me.

 

moonshot314 wrote:

I think the part thats pertinent that wasnt listed was what these guys walked into.

 

Cowboys the year before JJ  3-13

Steelers the year before Noll 2-11-1

Niners the year before Walsh 2-14

Colts the year before Ewbank 3-9

Giants the year before Parcells 4-5

Cowboys were an expansion team when Landry started

Bears were 6-10 the year before Ditka

 

 

Thats just the tip of the iceberg.  None of this means Haley will turn into them, but the point is that these guys all had bad first years not because they were bad coaches, but because they took over bad teams, and it takes time to change them.  Most of them had equal or worse records in their first seasons than the team had the year before, because it does take time to get it turned around.  When you evaluate a first year coach, you have to consider what he has to work with.  Those coaches werent working with all of their own guys in their first year, and neither is Haley now.