Tom Coughlin and the HoF

[bachslunch]

Tom Coughlin just stepped down as the Giants' head coach and may likely be retired. Might be interesting to assess his HoF case.

He currently stands at 170-150 (.531 pct.) with two SB wins, which ranks him tied for 12th all time in wins. There are only three other coaches with more wins not in: Marty Schottenheimer and Chuck Knox, who never went to a SB, and Dan Reeves, who went to four SBs and lost them all. Not holding my breath until any of those three are elected.

And while Coughlin's numbers look a lot like Mike Shanahan's (2 SB wins, 170-138, .552 pct.), I don't think he has anywhere near the level of toxic reputation Shanahan has. There are two active coaches coming up on Coughlin, but neither has had any postseason success: Jeff Fisher (169-156, .520) and Andy Reid (161-110, .594). Am hard-pressed to see a HoF case for either thus far.

Am thinking Coughlin will also be seen as better than Mike Holmgren despite a worse win percentage (Holmgren ended up at 161-111, .592, 1 SB win in three tries).

My guess is Coughlin's case hits just enough sweet spots compared to the competition that he gets elected, though definitely not right away. Holmgren arguably has the second best case of all these folks mentioned, especially given some GM credit, and he might get in very eventually.

[BD Sullivan]

Supposedly, Holmgren's "just collect the paycheck" approach in Cleveland hurt his chances.

[Saban1]

With two Super Bowl wins, I think he probably gets in.

[JohnH19]

Combining his two championships with the Giants with his immediate success with the expansion Jaguars, Coughlin has my vote.

Holmgren and especially Shanahan are a no vote for me. Holmgren blew it when he left GB even though he had some success in Seattle. He could have been a legend working with Brett for another 10 years.
I think I saw Shanahan make more bad in-game decisions than any coach I've seen enough of to form an opinion on. Totally overrated by the media.

Marty is an emphatic yes! Bad luck should not keep this tremendous coach out of Canton.

Reeves and Knox each had success turning more than one team around but both of their careers ended with a lot of losing. I'll say yes to Reeves because he did take teams to four SBs and no to Knox.

[Rupert Patrick]

With two Super Bowl wins, I think he probably gets in.

He won with two of the weakest SB winning teams, both major upsets of New England. I think the fact he won them in NY will probably help him, and the fact that he built Jacksonville into a SB calibre team in five seasons, only to watch them fall apart quickly for reasons I've never really understood. I think he will get in eventually, but I don't know how he stacks up against guys like Cowher and Dungy.

[Bryan]

He won with two of the weakest SB winning teams, both major upsets of New England. I think the fact he won them in NY will probably help him, and the fact that he built Jacksonville into a SB calibre team in five seasons, only to watch them fall apart quickly for reasons I've never really understood. I think he will get in eventually, but I don't know how he stacks up against guys like Cowher and Dungy.

I agree with all of this. The fact that both of his SB teams were mediocre (10-6 & 9-7, with point differentials of +22 and -6) is interesting...I don't know if this helps him (average team wins super bowl due to great coaching!) or hurts him (average team lucks out and wins super bowl) in the eyes of the HOF voters. I think it does set him apart from other multi-title winning non-HOF coaches...Buddy Parker's Lions teams were incredibly talented, and George Seifert's two Niners champion teams were arguably the two greatest teams in NFL history. Shanahan won back-to-back with Denver. Tom Flores won two titles with good-not-great Raider squads, but he could be seen as inheriting a lot of talent whereas Coughlin had to build his Jags and Giants teams.

I think in a roundabout way, Coughlin's success in Jacksonville might be the deciding factor in his enshrinement. Flores and Seifert got dinged for having failed tenures with other teams (and they also occurred after their title-winning tenures); Coughlin had success in two places. Much like his Giants teams, his tenure in Jacksonville is hard to quantify. Huge upset over Denver in the 1996 playoffs, a gradual build to the 14-2 season of 1999...then losing for a third time in 1999 to a Jeff Fisher-coached team (looks even worse in retrospect), immediately followed by 3 pretty terrible seasons. Its weird to me that Coughlin coached for 12 years in New York, 8 years in Jacksonville, and in each place he ended up with the exact same .531 winning percentage.

I really don't think Coughlin is a HOF coach based on the eye test. I never considered him being a great coach amongst his peers. His teams were too inconsistent from year-to-year, and he has two four year stretches on his resume where he didn't make the playoffs and essentially went 7-9/6-10 each year. Guys like Knox and Schottenheimer had terrible luck in the postseason, but they almost always had their teams playing consistent good football. Perhaps if Coughlin retired after winning his second Super Bowl, I would view him differently...I don't know. That said, I would guess that he does get enshrined in Canton.

[JWL]

Without the two Super Bowl wins as a head coach, does he garner serious consideration? Probably not. Aside from the Super Bowl records (2-0 vs 0-1), Coughlin's career looks as choppy as Jeff Fisher's coaching career.

With the two Super Bowl wins? Yes, Coughlin deserves a serious look.

I am on the fence. His final seven seasons feature six also-rans and the worst champion in the history of the league. To me, it looks disgusting that a league champion was outscored by its opposition in the regular season. It would look similarly disgusting and weird to see a 7-9 team win its division and get hot for four weeks and win a Super Bowl.

[74_75_78_79_]

Having beat Belichick/Brady's Pats in two SBs (making he and Eli's bunch go down as the NFL's equivalent to Gene Tunney), and having done so in...New York, and having had significant (immediate) success with another (expansion) franchise ought to get him in whether soon or in a bit. Just one playoff appearance (SBXLVI itself) in the last seven seasons? A respectable enough counterpoint, but not enough of one IMO considering all I just said.

Good point, Bryan, about he losing to Jeff Fisher three times in '99 but nothing to be ashamed of to me. The '99 installment is not Coughlin's best Jaguar squad. 14-2 was a product of a light schedule. The only non-paper-tiger thing about them was 62-7 vs Miami, and that simply was a case of Jags playing at their very best while Miami playing at their very worst.

Fisher, as much as everyone generally forgets to add up his non-playoff years (and as much as he hasn't been one to win the big one), his '99 Titans were clearly SB-caliber (almost pulled it off) and had the following year's installment (arguably even better) not shot themselves in feet vs Ravens, they all-but-definitely roll over Oak and NYG for the Lombardi. When people generally consider who the 'best teams to never win the big one' are, they tend to leave out that turn-of-century Titan squad; but they should be considered - and Fisher, if only for those two seasons, should get his due for that.

[rhickok1109]

He won with two of the weakest SB winning teams, both major upsets of New England. I think the fact he won them in NY will probably help him, and the fact that he built Jacksonville into a SB calibre team in five seasons, only to watch them fall apart quickly for reasons I've never really understood. I think he will get in eventually, but I don't know how he stacks up against guys like Cowher and Dungy.

I agree with all of this. The fact that both of his SB teams were mediocre (10-6 & 9-7, with point differentials of +22 and -6) is interesting...I don't know if this helps him (average team wins super bowl due to great coaching!) or hurts him (average team lucks out and wins super bowl) in the eyes of the HOF voters. I think it does set him apart from other multi-title winning non-HOF coaches...Buddy Parker's Lions teams were incredibly talented, and George Seifert's two Niners champion teams were arguably the two greatest teams in NFL history. Shanahan won back-to-back with Denver. Tom Flores won two titles with good-not-great Raider squads, but he could be seen as inheriting a lot of talent whereas Coughlin had to build his Jags and Giants teams.

I think in a roundabout way, Coughlin's success in Jacksonville might be the deciding factor in his enshrinement. Flores and Seifert got dinged for having failed tenures with other teams (and they also occurred after their title-winning tenures); Coughlin had success in two places. Much like his Giants teams, his tenure in Jacksonville is hard to quantify. Huge upset over Denver in the 1996 playoffs, a gradual build to the 14-2 season of 1999...then losing for a third time in 1999 to a Jeff Fisher-coached team (looks even worse in retrospect), immediately followed by 3 pretty terrible seasons. Its weird to me that Coughlin coached for 12 years in New York, 8 years in Jacksonville, and in each place he ended up with the exact same .531 winning percentage.

I really don't think Coughlin is a HOF coach based on the eye test. I never considered him being a great coach amongst his peers. His teams were too inconsistent from year-to-year, and he has two four year stretches on his resume where he didn't make the playoffs and essentially went 7-9/6-10 each year. Guys like Knox and Schottenheimer had terrible luck in the postseason, but they almost always had their teams playing consistent good football. Perhaps if Coughlin retired after winning his second Super Bowl, I would view him differently...I don't know. That said, I would guess that he does get enshrined in Canton.

That's a very good summation. I'm pretty much in agreement with you.

[Bryan]

Fisher, as much as everyone generally forgets to add up his non-playoff years (and as much as he hasn't been one to win the big one), his '99 Titans were clearly SB-caliber (almost pulled it off) and had the following year's installment (arguably even better) not shot themselves in feet vs Ravens, they all-but-definitely roll over Oak and NYG for the Lombardi. When people generally consider who the 'best teams to never win the big one' are, they tend to leave out that turn-of-century Titan squad; but they should be considered - and Fisher, if only for those two seasons, should get his due for that.

The 1999 Titans should have lost in the wild card round of the playoffs to a wild-card team quarterbacked by Rob Johnson. They gained less than 200 yards of offense and needed the controversial Music City Miracle to win the game. While you knock the Jags for having a light schedule (2nd easiest in NFL that year), the Titans had the 4th easiest schedule in 1999.