Why Jerry must hope Garrett is Bill Cowher

[Bobhaze]

Since the Super Bowl started in 1967, 47 of the 52 Super Bowl winning Head coaches won a Super Bowl within their first 5 years as head coach. Two of the early winners, Weeb Eubanks of the Jets and Chuck Noll of the Steelers won Super Bowls within their first 6 years as a HC. Vince Lombardi won in his 7th year (although he won the old NFL championship pre-SB within 3 years) and Tom Landry in his 12th year.

The most recent SB winning coach to win after more than 5 seasons was Bill Cowher of the Steelers who won a SB in his 13th season. With Jason Garrett starting his 9th season as HC, I’m guessing Jerry Jones is hoping Garrett is Bill Cowher. Although in fairness to Cowher, he, Landry, Noll, Eubanks and Lombardi all had won or played in Conference championships in a shorter time than Garrett has exhibited.

Long story short....history has not been kind to NFL coaches who don’t win big in the playoffs their first 5 years. We have to hope Garrett is the exception. Jerry gambling again.

 

[Aerolithe_Lion]

Didn’t Cowher make the super bowl like right away, that’s why he stayed so long?

 

[pjtoadie]

Didn’t Cowher make the super bowl like right away, that’s why he stayed so long?

Yep in his 4th season, he lost to the Cowboys

 

[_sturt_]

Small sample size confounds stats like this one from being all that meaningful.

That is, if we had more head coaches that actually kept their jobs for 5 years or more, then maybe we could reach some strongly supported conclusions.

But not so much.

https://www.businessinsider.com/coaches-managers-tenure-nfl-mlb-nba-nhl-premier-league-2016-12

 

[Ebnorice]

Small sample size confounds stats like this one from being all that meaningful.

That is, if we had more head coaches that actually kept their jobs for 5 years or more, then maybe we could reach some strongly supported conclusions.

But not so much.

https://www.businessinsider.com/coaches-managers-tenure-nfl-mlb-nba-nhl-premier-league-2016-12

Exactly what I was thinking.

 

[Aerolithe_Lion]

Small sample size confounds stats like this one from being all that meaningful.

That is, if we had more head coaches that actually kept their jobs for 5 years or more, then maybe we could reach some strongly supported conclusions.

But not so much.

https://www.businessinsider.com/coaches-managers-tenure-nfl-mlb-nba-nhl-premier-league-2016-12

It should be even worse than that, but Belichick has had his job for 20 years, Tomlin and Harbaugh 10, Payton 13. That skews it tremendously.

 

[StarBoyz83]

To be fair cowher never won a sb. The Seattle sb was the worst games ever if not the worst. Refs completey and blatantly gave that game to the stealers.

 

[SSoup]

Small sample size confounds stats like this one from being all that meaningful.

That is, if we had more head coaches that actually kept their jobs for 5 years or more, then maybe we could reach some strongly supported conclusions.

But not so much.

Unless I'm mistaken, the stat is also choosing to disregard the years of head coaching experience coaches had in previous jobs, right? In order to artificially lower the number of coaches who actually *did* win their first Super Bowl after they'd been head coaches for 5 years?

 

[Bobhaze]

Didn’t Cowher make the super bowl like right away, that’s why he stayed so long?

Well you’re right that he made a SB in ‘95 when they lost to us. They also made several AFC championships too, unlike Garrett. But it was his 13th year when he won a SB.

 

[Aerolithe_Lion]

Well you’re right that he made a SB in ‘95 when they lost to us. They also made several AFC championships too, unlike Garrett. But it was his 13th year when he won a SB.

My point was I don’t feel Cowher is a good parallel. Let me describe a head coach for you, and you try and guess who it is:

He started his HCing career stringing together a bunch of 8-8 seasons, and the team kept bringing him back partly because it was still better than they knew before that, and partly because he was a ‘safe’ choice. He would make the playoffs occasionally, but his biggest knock was he couldn’t get the team out of the divisional round for the first time in decades. He has a QB who puts up relatively pretty stats, but no one outside of that region thinks he’s more than ‘slight above average’ at best. It doesn’t matter how many times he wins 4-8 games, he always seems to win just enough the next year to save his job and keep chugging. His legacy thus far is other fans quoting his total playoff wins and going to his usual january vacation resort while the other teams in his division win Super Bowls on his watch.





Marvin Lewis.

 

[Diehardblues]

Didn’t Cowher make the super bowl like right away, that’s why he stayed so long?

Yep but the OP only measurement of a great HC is winning the SB. Anything short of that and apparently he’s a failed prospect.

That means the Bud Grants , Marv Levys and Don Coryells of the NFL were just failed HC’s never winning a SB. Lol

And apparently Cowher was failed until he win a SB?

 

[CowboyRoy]

Since the Super Bowl started in 1967, 47 of the 52 Super Bowl winning Head coaches won a Super Bowl within their first 5 years as head coach. Two of the early winners, Weeb Eubanks of the Jets and Chuck Noll of the Steelers won Super Bowls within their first 6 years as a HC. Vince Lombardi won in his 7th year (although he won the old NFL championship pre-SB within 3 years) and Tom Landry in his 12th year.

The most recent SB winning coach to win after more than 5 seasons was Bill Cowher of the Steelers who won a SB in his 13th season. With Jason Garrett starting his 9th season as HC, I’m guessing Jerry Jones is hoping Garrett is Bill Cowher. Although in fairness to Cowher, he, Landry, Noll, Eubanks and Lombardi all had won or played in Conference championships in a shorter time than Garrett has exhibited.

Long story short....history has not been kind to NFL coaches who don’t win big in the playoffs their first 5 years. We have to hope Garrett is the exception. Jerry gambling again.

People have to STOP with the hope nonsense. Garrett has been here for 14 years total. 8-10 as head coach. I stopped counting actually. Its been a total and complete disaster. Even some boob gets lucky and at least gets to the championship game. From a playoff success standpoint, its been about as dry as you could get with Garrett.

From a high standard, proud Cowboy perspective Garrett has ALREADY been a complete failure.

 

[jazzcat22]

Well you’re right that he made a SB in ‘95 when they lost to us. They also made several AFC championships too, unlike Garrett. But it was his 13th year when he won a SB.

Wasn't that another SB handed to them by the refs?

 

[Sydla]

Small sample size confounds stats like this one from being all that meaningful.

That is, if we had more head coaches that actually kept their jobs for 5 years or more, then maybe we could reach some strongly supported conclusions.

But not so much.

year

https://www.businessinsider.com/coaches-managers-tenure-nfl-mlb-nba-nhl-premier-league-2016-12

It's not that small a sample.

And there are plenty of examples of coaches that had long tenures with their teams and won nothing. Marv Levy was given multiple years in Buffalo, never won a SB. Jeff Fisher was given multiple years in Hou/Ten and then 5 seasons with the Rams. Never won a SB. Schottenheimer spent almost a decade in KC. Never won a SB. Reid spent years and years in Philly and never won a SB. John Fox spent almost a decade in Carolina. He never won a SB later. Jim Mora spent well over a decade in NO and never won a SB. Dan Reeves in Denver. You can go back further and look at guys like Bud Grant. And these are just names off the top of my head. What's also interesting is that almost every single one of these guys were far more successful in their first 8 years in that job than Garrett has been and they still never eventually won a SB later.

Thinking that if more coaches were given longer tenures would drastically change the fact that the vast majority of coaches made immediate impacts and won a SB in their first five years seems to be nothing more than an attempt to sell Garrett as a guy who can/will win one well later in his career.

 

[_sturt_]

It's not that small a sample.

And there are plenty of examples of coaches that had long tenures with their teams and won nothing.

To use the same phrase, it's not that simple... from a statistician perspective...

You can have "plenty of examples," but as I figure you know, if the "plenty" is dwarfed by the massive number, in this case, of head coaches who never made it beyond 5 years... then no, it's still confounded by small sample size as a matter of internal validity. It's a matter of ratio, not just a number to which one can arguably assign the term "plenty."

 

[_sturt_]

Unless I'm mistaken, the stat is also choosing to disregard the years of head coaching experience coaches had in previous jobs, right? In order to artificially lower the number of coaches who actually *did* win their first Super Bowl after they'd been head coaches for 5 years?

Actually, re-reading the OP, I only see a conclusion rooted in a generalized account of history. No specific stat was provided.

 

[Diehardblues]

Interesting how this generation and era has developed more of a fan base which is a Super Bowl or Bust mentality. Maybe Jerry has had something to do with creating this madness?

It’s like everything is a failure if you don’t win the Super Bowl.
Utterly ridiculous!!!

 

[Flamma]

Since the Super Bowl started in 1967, 47 of the 52 Super Bowl winning Head coaches won a Super Bowl within their first 5 years as head coach. Two of the early winners, Weeb Eubanks of the Jets and Chuck Noll of the Steelers won Super Bowls within their first 6 years as a HC. Vince Lombardi won in his 7th year (although he won the old NFL championship pre-SB within 3 years) and Tom Landry in his 12th year.

The most recent SB winning coach to win after more than 5 seasons was Bill Cowher of the Steelers who won a SB in his 13th season. With Jason Garrett starting his 9th season as HC, I’m guessing Jerry Jones is hoping Garrett is Bill Cowher. Although in fairness to Cowher, he, Landry, Noll, Eubanks and Lombardi all had won or played in Conference championships in a shorter time than Garrett has exhibited.

Long story short....history has not been kind to NFL coaches who don’t win big in the playoffs their first 5 years. We have to hope Garrett is the exception. Jerry gambling again.

The main difference is Cowher had very competitive teams most of the time he was there. Garrett has 2-3 seasons. This current one is borderline. The 2014 season saved Garrett's job or he'd probably be gone.

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

Small sample size confounds stats like this one from being all that meaningful.

That is, if we had more head coaches that actually kept their jobs for 5 years or more, then maybe we could reach some strongly supported conclusions.

But not so much.

https://www.businessinsider.com/coaches-managers-tenure-nfl-mlb-nba-nhl-premier-league-2016-12

I think there are some pretty strong conclusions you can come to from this data. The biggest and strongest being that most NFL Franchises, in todays game, don't hang on to HCs if they haven't shown the ability to advance the team to a championship level within 5 years. I mean, you don't get much more clear or stronger then that. In sports, not just Football, but in many of the major sports, there is this belief that a HC has about a ten year window. If you buy into that, which I do BTW, then essentially what you have is 5 years to build a team and 5 years to capitalize on investment. If you can't keep it in that window, then you basically are starting over and why would you start over with a guy who could never get you to the promise land prior to? I think that's the take away here and it's hard to argue against it.

 

[Diehardblues]

I think there are some pretty strong conclusions you can come to from this data. The biggest and strongest being that most NFL Franchises, in todays game, don't hang on to HCs if they haven't shown the ability to advance the team to a championship level within 5 years. I mean, you don't get much more clear or stronger then that. In sports, not just Football, but in many of the major sports, there is this belief that a HC has about a ten year window. If you buy into that, which I do BTW, then essentially what you have is 5 years to build a team and 5 years to capitalize on investment. If you can't keep it in that window, then you basically are starting over and why would you start over with a guy who could never get you to the promise land prior to? I think that's the take away here and it's hard to argue against it.

I understand but that’s assuming or creating a narrative that the promise land is the ONLY measurement of success.

You either become #1 at some point or you’re fired?