Not exactly sure what you’re asking, but off the top of my head, Rodgers and Roethlishberger went through regime changes.
Cowher retired... not exactly a franchise deciding to get rid of a coach. Aaron Rodgers was a backup till 2007, and McCarthy has been the head coach since 2006. I want to know if a franchise decided to fire a coach after their rookie franchise QB had a successful debut. I think it would have been stupid, especially with Watson himself praising how comfortable he was working with BOB, and how he helped the transition from college to the NFL. Maybe Cleveland this year serves as a pseudo-example? But it was Mayfield's possible stifling of development that had the front office most concerned.
He does get more blame if he can't keep his O-line healthy... 2nd game in a row Watson regresses after O-line injuries x 2.
If we win out, we'll ride a 13 game win streak to be 13-3. Has there ever been another NFL coach who won 13 in a row after dropping their first 3? No? Then BoB for COTY!! /s
Are you having a stroke? That might explain your logic. Off the top of my head - Steve Young. If I search through NFL history, you will look even more foolish. You said coaches are tied to their Franchise QB's so I gave you two examples in just the last year where teams fired their coaches after drafting a franchise QB. And yes I am aware of Smith's history. A successful QB who the team dropped - again showing that coaches are not tied to QBs. So that is three examples in 1 year.
Seifert was Young's coach for the SB years... c'mon. Its pretty simple... when a franchise invests in a young QB expected to be the franchise, the coach is largely responsible for their development. In the case of Goff, they jettisoned the coach after year 1 because he sucked. Similar case with Trubisky (even though the current Bears regime wasn't really enamored with Mitch going into this year). Teams can certainly make a move in order to try and "save" their franchise QB... the Texans did exactly that thinking Kubiak could fix David Carr (he couldn't). Watson wasn't in need of saving after last year... if you thought so, its bullshit. Not sure why Alex Smith even applies, unless you're asking the Texans to move on from Watson in favor of a younger backup... something that's now happened to Smith for two different franchises.
I say throw money at Kubiak. The owners loved him, he loved the city, and he's apparently willing to be an OC again. I think this team could really be elite with Kubes as OC, Romeo as DC, and BOB just being head coach. I think we'd have the best ACs in the NFL if we did that and it would be worth the money. Kubiak has rings to show for it.
For some reason I just can't picture Kubiak working for Bill O'Brian. I would much rather have Kubiak running the offense, but it just seems like BOB and Kubiak would butt heads.
Lets take a step back. You argue that BoB should not be fired because it will hurt Watson's development. I pointed out two cases where QBs and teams vastly improved due to better coaching. Would you rather have BoB or Sean McVay? I think its obvious McVay is a better coach and the Texans would be a better team with him as coach.
I said he was not going to be fired after last year because of how great Watson looked under his development. Same was not true for Goff, Trubisky, or Mayfield... had those QB’s looked great, those teams wouldn’t have changed coaches either. Basically, u don’t f with a young QB having success... ever. Like I said earlier, let Watson decide... if they clash, the franchise will stick with the one that’s harder to replace. If they’re getting along and winning games, they won’t change It.
And then have another coach handle time management because BoB is bad at that too. Then hand BoB some pom-poms because he seems to be a good cheerleader and the players like him.
I'm not sure the point of this discussion, but Peyton Manning, Big Ben, Philip Rivers, and Drew Brees all changed head coaches within their first 3 or so years in the league. All had early individual success; some had team success, while others didn't. Brees obviously changed teams. All were phenomenally successful post-coaching-change. That covers all of the recent likely-HoF track QBs outside of Brady and Rodgers. You could add other successful QB's like Romo and Luck to that list too. I'm sure there are plenty more.
We already covered Rothlesberger. Rivers literally supplanted Drew Brees as part of the regime change, and that whole process basically cost the old regime their job. Jim Mora was Manning's coach for his first 4 years before a change was made....maybe that counts as part of his still formative years, but its still quite as disrupting. Now, lets look at guys like Winston, Mariota, Blake Bortles, ... even to some extent Derek Carr and Andrew Luck. QB development is not a sure-fire science. Variables abound, from the team personnel to the division makeup to simply the coaches ability to adapt the system. And, its really only critical during the formative years... mainly years 1-2 while the QB is still figuring out the transition from the college game to the NFL. Watson having as much success as he did in his debut, and then limiting the sample size with the injury, literally allowed BOB to keep his job. We'll have plenty more sample after this season... but if they keep winning, its hard to envision them eating the rest of that contract while paying for another head coach.
One offensive TD. The offense basically scored 13 points (1 defensive TD and one forced fumble in field goal range) against Washington. Watson didn't look great, although he made some key plays including completing 67% of his passes for over 8 y/a. The high scoring offense from 5 games last year (the whole rationale for keeping O'Brien) is a distant memory at this point. Only in the Miami game did he look like the original Deshaun Watson. I can only conclude that O'Brien is holding back Watson and the offense.
I'm not exactly sure where we got to this idea that regime changes destroy QBs, like they are so fragile. I mean, there are so many examples of new coaches doing much better job with young QBs. I think at this point we should be afraid of O'Brien ruining Watson. Besides O'Brien's offensive lines practically getting him killed, he just isn't scoring as many TDs as he did his first year.
I would guess Kubiak has no interest in working for McNair again the way he was treated. Also, O'Brien doesn't want to give up control of the offense. They have completely different offensive systems. There wouldn't be any point in keeping O'Brien in that scenario, it's not like he's good at calling timeouts or using the challenge flag.
The Parcells and Walsh systems are like oil and water. It's different philosophies, different personnel. There's little overlap and you can't run both on the same team. Think about the differences between BOB needing a hulking, physical OL where Kubiak preferred the agile players for a zone blocking line. Remember that O'Brien is a disciple of Belichek who in turn learned from Parcells. Kubiak was a disciple of Shanahan who learned from Walsh. There's a lot of evolution as you go down rungs of the coaching tree, but in essence it's still almost like yin and yang.
I agree with this for the most part except this offense has been running some zone scheme lately and for the most part, it's been working. I'd love to see Kubes bootlegs with Watson. I think the two systems could meet in the middle and be great - the common denominator being Watson. I jus don't think the personalities would work together.
How was Kubiak treated poorly?? McNair said firing him was one of the hardest things he's ever had to do in his life. Kubiak wouldn't come here, but it wouldn't have anything to do with the McNairs.....it would be because him and O'Brien would clash.
