The Odds on a Coaching Change

[jason j]

Since there are a solid half-dozen threads dedicated to Eric Mangini's fate in the coming weeks, I didn't really know where to put this... plus, eh... what's one more?

While listening to what can only be described as a groundswell coming from WKNR Rizzo, Reghi, Roda, you name it.... Well lets say, it was just short of "calling for Eric Mangini's job." It got me to thinking.

Change head coach... sure you're right. Change coaches... When you change coaches, things generally improve. Or do they? Or if they do, by how much?

So I did a little research and a little math and came up with the following:

Since January of 1999, there have been 79 full season coaching changes (I left out interim coaches and split seasons for the purposes of simplicity... and we'll give that figure a +/- 2 because I don't have a research department).

Of those 79 coaching changes, 51 have resulted in an improved record - of at least one game.

On 23 occasions it resulted in a winning record.

And in 16 cases it resulted in a playoff appearance the subsequent season.

However, this may be a good time to point out that of those 23 winning records, 10 of them were at least 8-8 the year before and 4 were coming off of playoff appearances. And regarding the playoff appearances, it may be worth mentioning that three of them actually won fewer games than the previous year and still made the playoffs.

Which is to say the magic turnaround we've come to be so enamored with in woebegone cities across the NFL landscape happen about 11% of the time.

So, the odds of making a coaching change and having it pay immediate dividends are... eh... about 1 in 9.

Which means mathematically, somewhere in the Browns next 5 or 6 coaching changes, they should catch lightning in a bottle... provided no one else catches the lightning they're due and throws off the odds again.

Now, that's not to say that there haven't been good hires made in the NFL since 1999 - there most certainly have. But they are extremely rare.

It wasn't that long ago that to change a coach was a death-blow to an organization. It meant a total upheaval, and years of rebuilding. But something strange happened. Organizations started amping up the pressure, firing coaches much more quickly... "The Coaching Carousel" was born.

Lately, there has been a sentiment of change coaches - get better... "just change coaches." As if there is no risk in changing coaches... or more to the point, that the chances of winning are as good or better with a new coach as they are with the old coach. And it's simply not true.

The national perception is being warped by a clustering effect... as well as the attention paid to those who achieve success. What happened is, in a two year period from 2006 to 2008 when Sean Payton, Tony Sparano, Mike Smith, and John Harbaugh turned franchises around seemingly overnight... You could throw Eric Mangini in there from his stint in New York, but we already know how that turned out long-term.

Two things there... one, nobody seems to remember the Rod Marinelli's, Dick Jauron's, Art Shell's, Jim Zorns and all the rest that couldn't turn their organizations around at all hired during the same period; And, secondly, the teams that Payton, Sparano, Harbaugh and Smith took over posted winning records in half of the 20 combined seasons prior to their hiring. In fact, the teams they took over in 5 seasons prior to the switch had a winning percentage of .447.

Another little interesting mathematical anomaly... if you take out the season directly before the firing/hiring process took place, miraculously our 4 miracle turnaround squads were a combined 130-126 in the remaining years.

One could argue that John Harbaugh has had the best (albeit short) run of the four. Two consecutive playoff appearances - and looks like a lock for a third. Not un-coincidentally, the club he took over was a combined 43-37 in the five seasons that preceded his hire... including the 5-11 debacle that caused it.

Tony Sparano looks to be in the worst shape... no surprise (you probably see where I'm going here)... you guessed it - The team he inherited was historically-speaking the worst of the four. They posted a record of 30-50 in the five seasons prior to his hiring, including a 1-15 abomination in 2007. His rapid turnaround seems to have as much to do with scheduling (and an injury to Tom Brady) as it did with Coach T's personal wizardry.

The other two have been extremely successful but more up and down than Harbaugh. Missing the playoffs 3 times between them, but ultimately improving the fate of both organizations.

The problem with all this is the timing. All of these "turnarounds" happened in such proximity to each other that it leads folks to infer patterns where none exist. This is the same reason that casinos post the results of the roulette wheel. The mind wants to make sense of what it sees. If a number comes up frequently or not at all, our brains want to use that information to make some sort of prediction regarding the next spin.

Interesting thing about that... what are the odds that a roulette wheel hits on say "25"?

1 in 37.

If 25 comes up 3 times in a row, the odds of the wheel (or ball as it were) landing on 25 on the very next spin?

1 in 37

If you spin the wheel 500 times and it never lands on 25... what are the odds that 25 will show up next?

1 in 37....

You see it doesn't matter how many times you get it right or wrong. The numbers are the numbers.

The odds of changing a head coach netting 1-2 more wins for the Browns in 2011 are about 5 in 8... pretty good, I'd say.

The odds that they have a winning record? About 1 in 6

The odds that they make the playoffs? About 1 in 9.

I know I know... I'm basing this on first year results. You don't hire a coach for 1 year.... then again, every time I make the argument for keeping Mangini, someone hits me with the "it's a win now league" argument... So if someone wants to chart the longer term results of recent coaching hires, by all means... I'm all ears.

But in a win-now world, you have to ask - What are the odds that the Browns make the playoffs next year under the current regime? Do you think they're better or worse than 1 in 9?

Just some food for thought.

-jj

[YtownBacker]

You mean the problem could actually be as simple as a lack of talent.............................Whooooo

But since this coach has come close to completely rebuilding a down and out of control mess in two years, upgrading the talent and making them a competitive team, it must be time to move on and start over. Hell, there must be another Butch Davis or Romeo Crennel out there somewhere.

Sorry Jason, but the answer has to be "just change coaches". All those trades, FA signings and draftees will certainly fit whomever they bring in and whatever system he installs............of course they will.

[dogpaddle]

Originally Posted by jason j

But in a win-now world, you have to ask - What are the odds that the Browns make the playoffs next year under the current regime? Do you think they're better or worse than 1 in 9?

Just some food for thought.

-jj

Good post. That said, the odds of us making the playoffs could be significantly changed by how we draft. In my opinion, Ward, Haden, and McCoy have been solid contributors in year 1. With another year under their belts, some key players getting healthy, and a few more hits in the next draft...our future could be quite different than if we draft a bunch of bust types this offseason.

[Masters]

Based on what I have seen over last year and this year, I'd probably put those odds of the team getting to the playoffs next season, with the same staff, at worse than 1-9

[jason j]

Yeah I'm not sure where I'd peg it exactly. It's certainly not a slam dunk on either side.

-jj

[Greythan]

I think the point here is the need for continuity of culture and system. Changing coaches changes both of those things at a minimum. Often it leads to a ton of personnel changes as well.

I think our odds of making the playoffs next year are better than 1 in 9 with the current staff. Another off season with the front office bolstering the roster will make a difference. Another year in the culture and system....

We'll see.

[nickers]

but as we all know change or no change a coaches tenure comes down to W-L record...If he loses the last 2...chances are hes toast..."yay were improving yay"...5-11 is 5-11 folks.....weether its last year...or this year.

[Sez.EJ]

HEY!!! Don't you guys come in here and start spewing Logic.. You'll be run out of town..

[DirtyDawg]

Its rather interesting that it always seems that the people making the argument to keep Mangini are the people that have displayed a good knowledge of football for a while on Browns message boards. JJ, Ytown are two of those.

The more emotional, but less knowledgable fans seem to be with the knee-jerk reaction. They want to pick the scab instead of being patient and letting it heal. Pick it again, its only going to get worse and possibly leave a scar for an even longer time.

Unfortunately, what is correct may not matter to Holmgren. He may need to scratch that itch.

I'd like to hear some examples of poorly run teams that were turned around quickly by coaching changes. Don't give me the Cardinals with Whisenhunt or the Saints with Payton... Drew Brees and Kurt Warner had a LOT to do with those turn arounds.

Which goes back to what a lot of us have been saying... it's the talent.

[DawgFan]

JJ, thanks for the statistical rundown.

I guess it kinda supports what I have been thinking/saying.

I am NOT SOLD on Mangini....but I don't see a change at HC as being the answer.

People always point to the great coaches and talk about how they win year in and year out. That is true...but it is also true that most of them had more than a few rough seasons before their 'system' got in place and the winning started.

Continuity seems to be the one constant of all winning teams....not sure if the winning causes the continuity or the continuity causes the winning...but I think that you can't have one without the other.

For that reason alone, I would like to stick it out with Mangini for a couple more years. But hey, my opinion is worth exactly what everyone else's is....NADA!

[sofakingwhat]

I would like to know what the guys who gamble for a living are saying. Anyone know the odds in Vegas?

[Jax Dawg]

Originally Posted by sofakingwhat

I would like to know what the guys who gamble for a living are saying. Anyone know the odds in Vegas?

Speaking of odds and Vegas - Do you know the guys who make a living on betting on football had the 2 win Bills and the 2 win Bengals favored to beat the Browns? Considering this they probably had good reasons to favor those teams over the Browns (homefield advantage, less injuries at key positions, better QB play, etc), so do we really have a good reason to be so upset for losing to 2 teams we were suppose to lose to according to people who make a living betting on football games? Do Vegas insiders know more about the Browns than die hard fans on a Browns forum?

Should we fire Mangini for losing to teams we were suppose to lose to? More from Vegas - the over/under on Browns wins this year was 5.5, I think they got it right. This team needs another great off season of talent infusion just like last year to be more competitive and have a chance at a winning record. Too many years of poor drafts, bad FA acquisitions and coaching and front office turnover takes more than one year to overcome. I want to see what this team - Mangini/Heckert/Holmgren can do with one more year together because it seems like the Browns are finally turning the corner and I expect a winning record next year but I don't want to take a step back with a new coach and another roster turn over that sets us back 2 more years.