Compensation for Losing Coaches

**Sascha** · 01-16-2015, 12:09 AM

It's amazing how, almost every year, the Ravens' coaching staff is raided by other teams. After 2011, DC Chuck Pagano left to become the Colts' HC. After 2013, OC Jim Caldwell left to become the Lions' HC, and secondary coach Teryl Austin went with him to serve as the Lions' DC. Now, there's a chance that Kubiak will leave to become the Broncos' HC, and QB Coach Rick Dennison might join him as the Broncos' OC.

I realize that this is all part of the standard coaching carousel: coaches need to work their way up through the ranks, and when there's no vacancy internally, they need to look to other franchises for opportunities. I also realize that this is generally a good problem to have: other teams want the Ravens' coaches only because the Ravens have been doing well (although it's not like the offense was so great under Caldwell in 2013). But it still seems like the Ravens are losing a lot of coaches without getting anything in return.

I think the Ravens should get something for having to deal with all that turnover. If the Ravens wanted to, I suppose they could prevent these coaches from leaving by refusing to allow them to interview with other teams. But the Ravens (and most other NFL teams) clearly don't want to do that because of the bad blood it would create inside the organization. So I'm wondering whether the NFL should institute some kind of compensatory-pick regime -- like the one that already exists for unrestricted free agents -- for losing coaches. The compensatory picks wouldn't have to be high -- maybe a 4th-rounder for a coach who leaves to become an HC and a 6th-rounder for a coach who leaves to become a coordinator. This would provide at least some compensation to teams that do a good job of identifying and developing coaching talent only to see their coaches poached by other teams.

**Captain Silver** · 01-16-2015, 12:23 AM

Nope, you know why? 2 Super Bowls in 12 years... Most teams never get a sniff and no one is going to cry about the Ravens for that very fact.

**Raveninwoodlawn** · 01-16-2015, 12:42 AM

Originally Posted by Sascha

It's amazing how, almost every year, the Ravens' coaching staff is raided by other teams. After 2011, DC Chuck Pagano left to become the Colts' HC. After 2013, OC Jim Caldwell left to become the Lions' HC, and secondary coach Teryl Austin went with him to serve as the Lions' DC. Now, there's a chance that Kubiak will leave to become the Broncos' HC, and QB Coach Rick Dennison might join him as the Broncos' OC.

I realize that this is all part of the standard coaching carousel: coaches need to work their way up through the ranks, and when there's no vacancy internally, they need to look to other franchises for opportunities. I also realize that this is generally a good problem to have: other teams want the Ravens' coaches only because the Ravens have been doing well (although it's not like the offense was so great under Caldwell in 2013). But it still seems like the Ravens are losing a lot of coaches without getting anything in return.

I think the Ravens should get something for having to deal with all that turnover. If the Ravens wanted to, I suppose they could prevent these coaches from leaving by refusing to allow them to interview with other teams. But the Ravens (and most other NFL teams) clearly don't want to do that because of the bad blood it would create inside the organization. So I'm wondering whether the NFL should institute some kind of compensatory-pick regime -- like the one that already exists for unrestricted free agents -- for losing coaches. The compensatory picks wouldn't have to be high -- maybe a 4th-rounder for a coach who leaves to become an HC and a 6th-rounder for a coach who leaves to become a coordinator. This would provide at least some compensation to teams that do a good job of identifying and developing coaching talent only to see their coaches poached by other teams.

No.

That's what you deal with having a successful coaching staff.

It's not just the Ravens and teams taking some moral approach to not refuse teams to interview coaches...its against league rules to do so when it comes to head coaching promotions.

**Ravenalytics** · 01-16-2015, 08:08 AM

The best talent is the most ambitious because whatever discrepancies in natural ability, the guys who work hardest will be the most successful. So they are attracted to Baltimore because they know it's an opportunity for advancement and showcasing their ability (unlike say Cleveland or Washington).

**HoustonRaven** · 01-16-2015, 08:27 AM

This is not the typical coaching carousel.

It's the coaching carousel of a team that constantly wins.

It's the price of having a successful franchise. I personally wouldn't want it any other way.

**Captain Offense** · 01-16-2015, 08:27 AM

The NFL is a year-to-year competition. Although a coach may sign a multi-year deal, he is working for success this year and getting a promotion, or in the case of an HC delaying the execution for another year. Each year is different, from roster turnover, to injuries, to bad call on talent in the draft, to the bounce of the ball and any other surprise. It would be great to have the same plan and chemistry in place, but it will not always happen, so you have to focus on this year and go "All-in" in getting the best out of everyone. So you have to have a long-range plan for coaches as much as you have a plan for the cap and for personnel changes. If your performance this year has others raiding your coaches, then you just have to re-boot and get to the next year.

I have wondered how much the Pagano experience has influenced Harbaugh's planning. He elevated somebody who was young and talented, and I am sure that he figured it was good for at least another year or two. When he was plucked as soon as he was, I wonder if the idea was that it is better to get somebody who is less likely to move on quickly (if at all). If you look at Austin, he moved up to DC in Detroit and is now a candidate for an HC position.

With all of the movement, it makes the HC far more important. Look at those who have longevity in that spot and you have organizations that are competitive on a regular basis.

**GOTA** · 01-16-2015, 08:37 AM

The Seahawks keep losing coaches. The Giants have lost a ton of coaches. The Patriots have lost not just coaches but front office guys. I know were Ravens fans but we're hardly the only team that loses coaches.

**wickedsolo** · 01-16-2015, 08:47 AM

It's actually a good thing for the Ravens to have so many coaches poached every year.

That just means that the best coaches out there are going to be that much more interested in signing on here under John Harbaugh and Ozzie Newsome because they stand a better chance of being promoted either here or elsewhere.

**Sascha** · 01-16-2015, 10:13 AM

Originally Posted by HoustonRaven

This is not the typical coaching carousel.

It's the coaching carousel of a team that constantly wins.

It's the price of having a successful franchise.

As I said in my initial post, I completely agree with all of this. I'm just saying that, when a team's coach departs for an HC or coordinator position, that team should receive a comp pick like it would if it lost an unrestricted free agent. The coach's new team wouldn't give up anything (except perhaps the right to a comp pick), so this arrangement wouldn't discourage coaches from moving on to higher positions for other teams. It would just provide some small amount of compensation for teams -- like the Ravens and Pats -- that consistently lose coaches.

**lobachevsky** · 01-16-2015, 04:40 PM

When the coaching payroll counts as part of an expanded salary cap, we should discuss compensation for a coach signing on elsewhere, same as for player free agents.

Until & unless that happens (NB don't hold your breath) it's a dumb idea. Pay your staff handsomely, treat them well, give them a chance to be part of a consistent winner, hope they're happy to stick around for awhile, but keep a constant lookout for replacements when the inevitable happens.

**RavensNest** · 01-16-2015, 05:09 PM

Originally Posted by wickedsolo

It's actually a good thing for the Ravens to have so many coaches poached every year.

That just means that the best coaches out there are going to be that much more interested in signing on here under John Harbaugh and Ozzie Newsome because they stand a better chance of being promoted either here or elsewhere.

This is exactly how i feel about losing coaches.