Why did they wait a week to fire the coaches?

seabowl · Jan 11, 2018

I'm just curious why they waited a week+ to fire Bevell, Cable etc... and not have done it right away to have more of a field of candidates to choose from? Another head scratcher for me as I cant believe that they didn't know they were cleaning house right after the last game.

hawkfan68 · Jan 11, 2018

Maybe they were trying to trade them but there were no takers...

pmedic920 · Jan 11, 2018

IDK.

but I would guess some deliberation needed to take place, and possibly they wanted to let them explore other opportunities without having a dismissal on their record.

Just my opinion, nothing concrete to base it on.

Bigpumpkin · Jan 11, 2018

IMO.....there were discussions between Pete, John and Paul Allen. Paul may not have been available initially.

ivotuk · Jan 11, 2018

Pete is loyal to his coaches and wanted to give them a chance to catch on elsewhere. That way they could say "Darrell Bevell was being pursued by Team X and we wish him well in the future."

As opposed to "Darrell Bevell FIRED!"

Plus, Pete needs to get a line on replacements, which is probably why Kris Richard is still here. Gus Bradley signed with the Chargers, so that idea didn't work.

And Pete probably also needed time to review the game tape to make absolutley sure what direction he wanted to go instead of just making a knee-jerk reaction. He must have seen something in the Defense to prompt him to look elsewhere for a DC too.

I like the way it was handled, and it was all very professional with Pete treating his coaches (and their families) with respect.

Remember how Jerry Jones did it when he bought the Cowboys? Unceremoniously dumped Tom Landry? The fans and football media were upset. Landry deserved better.

Pete's not that kind of guy. He's loyal, to a fault.

Seymour · Jan 11, 2018

Could be Pete's staff was running stats, checks and watching film to be certain they matched gut feelings. Could also be that clock management is not one of Pete's strengths.

I'm just glad it got done at this point.

pittpnthrs · Jan 11, 2018

Bigpumpkin":3jtr1ujn said:
IMO.....there were discussions between Pete, John and Paul Allen. Paul may not have been available initially.

This. Probably took Paul a week to get around to telling Pete to make it happen.

Sox-n-Hawks · Jan 11, 2018

One word.

LAWYERS

This day and age, you cover your hinny.

jammerhawk · Jan 11, 2018

This was a major decision which likely involved some consultation with the owner, an assessment of contractual guarantees, discussions with the respective coaches and even others, perhaps even all of the factors mentioned in previous posts. There can be little doubt it was a measured decision not lightly taken.

It wasn't a Donald "you're fired" situation in the slightest. I think it was handled professionally w/o a lot of negativity too.

seahawkfreak · Jan 11, 2018

ivotuk":3umdz3a1 said:
Pete is loyal to his coaches and wanted to give them a chance to catch on elsewhere. That way they could say "Darrell Bevell was being pursued by Team X and we wish him well in the future."

As opposed to "Darrell Bevell FIRED!"

Plus, Pete needs to get a line on replacements, which is probably why Kris Richard is still here. Gus Bradley signed with the Chargers, so that idea didn't work.

And Pete probably also needed time to review the game tape to make absolutley sure what direction he wanted to go instead of just making a knee-jerk reaction. He must have seen something in the Defense to prompt him to look elsewhere for a DC too.

I like the way it was handled, and it was all very professional with Pete treating his coaches (and their families) with respect.

Remember how Jerry Jones did it when he bought the Cowboys? Unceremoniously dumped Tom Landry? The fans and football media were upset. Landry deserved better.

Pete's not that kind of guy. He's loyal, to a fault.

jammerhawk":3umdz3a1 said:
This was a major decision which likely involved some consultation with the owner, an assessment of contractual guarantees, discussions with the respective coaches and even others, perhaps even all of the factors mentioned in previous posts. There can be little doubt it was a measured decision not lightly taken.

It wasn't a Donald "you're fired" situation in the slightest. I think it was handled professionally w/o a lot of negativity too.

Awesome analysis by both. Key here is the firing of two/three key positions in the coaching staff was a huge move and was going to be a lot of variables involved than just letting someone go. So far it appears the FO has been very calculated and respectful to all whom these moves will affect. Now just have to see who is brought in.

chris98251 · Jan 11, 2018

They went and did a season evaluation and broke it down, compared it to past seasons and had a trend identified, associated that trend to the responsible parties, probably had a year in review meeting and yes Paul may have been there, once the findings were reported were asked what needed to be done to correct the issue. We run this like a business and I am sure that it was not just the product on the field that was evaluated, Marketing and any other aspects Food etc.

This all takes time to assemble.

What High Tech people do. Crunch numbers, identify trends find reasons why they were successful or not and why.

AF_BASS_MAN · Jan 11, 2018

Denial...plain and simple

semiahmoo · Jan 11, 2018

pittpnthrs":3eyr9xcx said:
Bigpumpkin":3eyr9xcx said:

IMO.....there were discussions between Pete, John and Paul Allen. Paul may not have been available initially.

Click to expand...

This. Probably took Paul a week to get around to telling Pete to make it happen.

Yup. And when PA says make it so - it gets done.

original poster · Jan 12, 2018

Yeah as others have said they didn't need to rush into it, they wanted to make sure it was the right call.

Just because all the fans were screaming for it doesn't necessarily make it so. Just about every teams fans are unhappy with the OC's and DC's.

Scorpion05 · Jan 12, 2018

Because when you’re running an NFL franchise you don’t react off emotion or go on .Net rants. You evaluate the facts and you deliberate what’s the best decision going forward. You don’t simply cater to the mob and the media, who can run around with their pitchforks but have zero responsibility when it’s all said and done. You make cool and rational decisions so that you don’t become the Cleveland Browns

ukeface:

Fade · Jan 12, 2018

AF_BASS_MAN":h6w8ys6l said:
Denial...plain and simple

It is looking this way right now.

I thought that they wanted to wait to make sure they had their replacements in place first, and that may still be the case, Have to give it through the weekend first.

Right now though it looks like they are just being slow to react to the whole situation. After the Rams game the evals should of kickstarted into high gear, instead of after the season.

It is called due diligence, you get your people on the case so if you don't make the playoffs you're ready for the situation.

As an example Green Bay; they were ready. Hiring 2 failed HCs for OC & DC, and the best internal candidate for GM once they were denied JS. A+ Off-Season so far for the Pack.

It looks like instead the Hawks chose to start this process until well after the fact sitting around for a week+ deliberating whether or not to fire these guys. Better late than never I guess.

cymatica · Jan 12, 2018

Fade":1oqdjnfw said:
AF_BASS_MAN":1oqdjnfw said:

Denial...plain and simple

Click to expand...

It is looking this way right now.

I thought that they wanted to wait to make sure they had their replacements in place first, and that may still be the case, Have to give it through the weekend first.

Right now though it looks like they are just being slow to react to the whole situation. After the Rams game the evals should of kickstarted into high gear, instead of after the season.

It is called due diligence, you get your people on the case so if you don't make the playoffs you're ready for the situation.

As an example Green Bay; they were ready. Hiring 2 failed HCs for OC & DC, and the best internal candidate for GM once they were denied JS. A+ Off-Season so far for the Pack.

It looks like instead the Hawks chose to start this process until well after the fact sitting around for a week+ deliberating whether or not to fire these guys. Better late than never I guess.

This is really what it seems like. Why do they need to spend a whole season to evaluate a downward trend everyone saw? It's already been a year or two late on finding new coaches, what's another couple weeks.

Hasselbeck · Jan 12, 2018

I think partially it was to see if they'd get any head coach love. Firing your coordinator tends to dissuade another team from looking at them as HC.

I also think the guys they wanted, they had to wait and see if they'd get a HC nod (*cough* DeFillippo *cough*) and when it became apparent they were not.. well here we are.

XxXdragonXxX · Jan 12, 2018

A week? More like 3 years.

Hasselbeck · Jan 12, 2018

Fade":lanp0bxe said:
AF_BASS_MAN":lanp0bxe said:

Denial...plain and simple

Click to expand...

As an example Green Bay; they were ready. Hiring 2 failed HCs for OC & DC, and the best internal candidate for GM once they were denied JS. A+ Off-Season so far for the Pack.

For one, Joe Philbin will have very minimum input on their offense. That's still McCarthy's show, don't get it twisted.

Another.. no one in their right mind was hiring Dom Capers to be a HC. Replacing him with Mike Pettine is a modest improvement, but its not like they just landed Dan Quinn :lol:

Why did they wait a week to fire the coaches?

Well-known member

Well-known member

Moderator

Active member

Well-known member

Active member

Well-known member

Active member

Well-known member

New member

Well-known member

New member

Active member

New member

Active member

Well-known member

Well-known member

New member

Well-known member

New member

Similar threads