Today is known as Black Monday around the NFL. The day after the NFL regular season ends always results in the firing of some head coaches which opens jobs at the top of franchises as well as positions such as coordinators around the league. As of this morning, two teams have fired the coaches who were on their sidelines yesterday:
- Commanders fired Ron Rivera
- Falcons fired Arthur Smith.
Given that three teams had interim-head coaches on the job yesterday – – Chargers, Panthers, Raiders – – that means there will be a minimum of 5 horses to ride on the NFL’s head coaching carousel in 2024. It will be interesting to see if the Patriots join the party here. Reports say there will be a meeting this week between owner Robert Kraft and coach Bill Belichick.
- If losing 13 games in a season is a good reason to “move on” from a coach, then the Pats might be “in the market”.
- If adhering to the idea that Mac Jones is a franchise QB for an NFL team is a good reason to “move on” from a coach …
- If losing three consecutive regular season games where the defense never gave up more than 10 points in any of those games is a good reason to “move on” …
And …
- If winning 6 Super Bowl titles for the Pats and leading 9 Pats’ teams to the Super Bowl is a good reason to retain a coach …
The Chargers, Commanders and Raiders at a minimum will definitely be in the market for new GMs in this “hiring season” since the previous incumbent has either been fired previously or – in the case of Rivera was serving double duty. What makes the most sense in such a situation is that the team should either:
- Hire the GM and tell the GM to hire the coach he is comfortable working with – – or – –
- Hire the GM and the new coach as a tandem.
What makes little sense in such a situation is for the owner to hire a coach and a GM as separate events leading to confusion and potential conflict over roles, responsibilities, authorities and the like. As you read the ongoing reports about various teams going about their business of seeking new GMs and coaches, always keep a focus on the commonality of the candidate search for both positions.
Switching gears … Just out of curiosity, how many folks here remember who won the first of the NBA’s In-season Tournaments from about a month ago? I’ll save you the trouble of Googling; it was the LA Lakers. And after their trophy winning game, the Lakers proceeded to lose 10 of their next 13 games. There are lots of conclusions to be drawn here such as:
- See, a mediocre team (current record is 18-19) won this tournament meaning the players on other teams did not take it so seriously.
- See, the Lakers proved that games involving qualifying for the Elimination Round of the Tournament were more important to them than any garden-variety regular season games.
Rather than try to psychoanalyze an entire team from afar, let me reject those explanations as perhaps fitting this famous observation by H. L. Mencken:
“Every complex problem has a solution which is simple, direct, plausible – – and wrong.”
Rather, I think the Lakers as a team are not nearly as motivated by an 82-game grind of a regular season as they are by an immediate challenge that has some recognition attached to it. Winning a regular season game against the Raptors as part of a 4-game East Coast road trip is a grind; there is no recognition to come from winning that game or losing it. The only thing the Lakers care about in the regular season is making it to the playoffs where every game in every series matters and recognition/affirmation is directly attached to winning as opposed to losing.
In the NBA, 20 out of the 30 teams will make it to the playoffs – – including the play-in rounds of the playoffs. That being the case, I think the experienced Lakers’ roster only cares about finishing 10th or better in the Western Conference such that they get to be part of the NBA playoffs in April/May/June. For those games, I would expect the Lakers to be focused on strategy and tactics game by game because every win and every series win adds to the overall reputation of the franchise and its players.
I am not nearly convinced that the majority of NBA players care a whole lot about the In-season Tournament nearly to the extent that the teams who finish in the standings in the “play-in zone” for each conference care about those play-in games. I think that the Lakers have a roster made up in a way that will make them formidable in any sort of playoff/tournament situation and less-than-formidable in a random regular season encounter.
Now before anyone here can hit the “comment button” at the bottom of this rant, let me say clearly that my explanation fits the “Mencken Observation” very well. It is simple and direct and plausible – – and perhaps wrong…
Finally, just because I enjoy doing so, let me close today with another piece of Mencken’s wisdom that sadly may portend much of the news in 2024:
“The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed (and hence clamorous to be led to safety) by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins, all of them imaginary.”
But don’t get me wrong, I love sports………
Hi Jack,
Any thoughts on whether Sirianni’s job is in jeopardy? If Lurie can’t see that Sirianni has lost the respect of his players, he should listen to what his players aren’t saying.
I always considered Sirianni to be a hot dog. A clownish kind of guy pretending to have gravitas.
Willie [Puddinhead] Jones
Willie Jones:
I have no inside info of course. I would definitely think that the first year offensive coordinator and the first year defensive coordinators should be looking for jobs relatively soon.
If indeed Sirianni is axed, the Eagles should look closely at Frank Reich…
You mention three interim-head NFL coaches for the Chargers, Panthers, and Raiders–but you do not name them. Yet you name the two head coaches recently fired. Do you think “interim” is just that? Do you think the Raiders’ Antonio Pierce will be hired as head coach?
TenaciousP:
There was no intended “hidden message” in naming the two recently fired coaches and not naming the three previous;ly fired ones who had been replaced with “interims”
Yes, I do believe they are “interim-head coaches” – – all three of them. If any of the three has earned serious consideration for being hired permanently, it would be Antonio Davis with the Raiders. But I suspect that Mark Davis will want someone much “splashier”.