If Fisher Doesn’t Win this Season, Is He on the Hot Seat?

[RamBill]

If Fisher doesn’t win this season, is he on the Hot Seat? Randy Karraker and Nick Wagoner think unless they go 2-14 that Fisher will NOT be on the Hot Seat. They both think Kroenke likes Fisher A LOT.

Listen to Fisher Discussion
Starts at 8:20

 

[V3]

Fish was brought in in part because of how well he moved the Oilers to Tennessee. Kroenke knew that he was going to move the Rams and wanted someone that knew how to handle it.

So no, he won't be on the hot seat until after the move....that is if they continue to struggle after the move.

 

[blue4]

Fish was brought in in part because of how well he moved the Oilers to Tennessee. Kroenke knew that he was going to move the Rams and wanted someone that knew how to handle it.

So no, he won't be on the hot seat until after the move....that is if they continue to struggle after the move.

Yep. He won't be in any danger until relocation is resolved.

Should he be on the hot seat if he doesn't win this year? The hottest of hot seats IMO.

 

[den-the-coach]

Fish was brought in in part because of how well he moved the Oilers to Tennessee. Kroenke knew that he was going to move the Rams and wanted someone that knew how to handle it.

So no, he won't be on the hot seat until after the move....that is if they continue to struggle after the move.

This^

 

[MrMotes]

Yep. He won't be in any danger until relocation is resolved.

Should he be on the hot seat if he doesn't win this year? The hottest of hot seats IMO.

Totally agree. I don't know if Fisher was brought in to manage a move but i do think that as long as location is an issue, W/L aren't as much of a focus as they would be otherwise. And that's why his job is so secure in spite of his, so far, mediocre record...

 

[Merlin]

Gotta disagree with you guys. If Fish loses this year, say 6-10 or worse, I think he's gone and Snead is given the green light to bring in the right coach.

Moving a losing team to LA with the head coach returning would be foolish. In that event the owner cuts bait and hires someone who will give the fans reason to hope. Kroenke is a businessman, he knows when to terminate a bad investment.

 

[MrMotes]

Gotta disagree with you guys. If Fish loses this year, say 6-10 or worse, I think he's gone and Snead is given the green light to bring in the right coach.

Moving a losing team to LA with the head coach returning would be foolish. In that event the owner cuts bait and hires someone who will give the fans reason to hope. Kroenke is a businessman, he knows when to terminate a bad investment.

I guess we'll see. But Fisher hired Snead so i'm not sure they wouldn't leave as a team too, if it came to that...

 

[Merlin]

I think Stan is a very intelligent owner. Snead has built a very good front office regardless of who hired who and is very well connected and capable. Firing Snead would be dumb, IMO.

Oh and I don't think we'll see. Because this team is going to make the playoffs!

 

[iced]

Not buying the move to LA Nonsense - when Fisher was choosing between Miami and St.Louis, he made it clear he didn't want to go to a team that will move, nor does he want to go through that move again.

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.co...o-l-a-could-be-hangup-in-fisher-to-rams-deal/

Jim Thomas of the St. Louis Post-Dispatchreports via Twitter that it “looks like” the “only possible hangup” for an agreement between the Rams and Fisher “are concerns about [the] team moving to [Los Angeles].”

http://www.stltoday.com/sports/colu...cle_8f426897-8aa1-5f88-935e-4474b0456e3a.html

Fisher wasn't expecting to move to LA, either.

This is the other side of the coaching life.

In particular, this has been Fisher’s coaching life. He’s had to deal with some real misadventures. Not every coach is fortunate to have Tom Brady and superb ownership.

This 2014 season is a potential double-whammy for Fisher.

Remember, Fisher was coaching the Houston Oilers franchise when the team moved to Tennessee to be reinvented as the Titans.

After coaching through that chaos, Fisher never wanted to go through another move again. So as Fisher opens his third season as coach in St. Louis, he doesn’t have his anticipated stability at the quarterback position or the full security of knowing he’s safe from the possibility supervising another franchise move.

Combine that with Kroenke's quote about keeping the team in St.Louis 2 years before hiring Fisher

"I'm going to attempt to do everything that I can to keep the Rams in St. Louis," Kroenke said in a phone interview Tuesday night. "Just as I did everything that I could to bring the team to St. Louis in 1995. I believe my actions speak for themselves.

"There's a track record," Kroenke said. "I've always stepped up for pro football in St. Louis. And I'm stepping up one more time."

"I'm born and raised in Missouri," Kroenke said. "I've been a Missourian for 60 years. People in our state know me. People know I can be trusted. People know I am an honorable guy."

Fisher was hired because he was a veteran coach that knows how to build a program if you let him work his magic. Kroenke knows from his other franchises to hire the right people and let them do their jobs; not to intervene like some owners (Jones, Adams).

IMO Kroenke wanted someone with experience after the last few debacles with younger coaches (Linehan,Haslett, Spags), and there wasn't many options out there that met that criteria then.

 

[FrantikRam]

He will most certainly be on the hot seat. Two more losing seasons and Kroenke will likely move on.

I can't remember the last time a coach had 4 straight losing seasons and coached the 5th year, which I think we can mostly agree would happen with Fisher. If he then had a losing season in year 5.............

 

[JUMAVA68]

I think after this year he will be on the hot seat if we have a losing record again.Everyone has to remember he had basically nothing to work with on the roster and a hurt quarterback the last two years.Now if Foles stays healthy this year I think we have a winning team that's only going to get better with most of that original roster now gone.

 

[MrMotes]

Not buying the move to LA Nonsense - when Fisher was choosing between Miami and St.Louis, he made it clear he didn't want to go to a team that will move, nor does he want to go through that move again.

I can't find it (so maybe i'm remembering it wrong) but i thought i read Fisher was given assurances the Rams wouldn't move for the first three years of Fisher's tenure.

Also, there's this from JT's latest chat:

You know, you could be on to something. I reported way back when Kroenke interviewed Fisher for the job in early January of 2012 that Fisher was asked several questions about what it was like moving the Oilers to Tennessee. Maybe Kroenke wants Fisher's expertise/experience in that area during the transition period.
by jthomas 11:40 AM

But my point is, whether or not the Rams are moving, as long as location is an issue, there's less focus on wins and losses which keeps Fisher off the hot seat even though most coaches with 3 straight losing season are fired, let alone on the hot seat...

 

[iced]

I can't find it (so maybe i'm remembering it wrong) but i thought i read Fisher was given assurances the Rams wouldn't move for the first three years of Fisher's tenure.

Also, there's this from JT's latest chat:

You know, you could be on to something. I reported way back when Kroenke interviewed Fisher for the job in early January of 2012 that Fisher was asked several questions about what it was like moving the Oilers to Tennessee. Maybe Kroenke wants Fisher's expertise/experience in that area during the transition period.
by jthomas 11:40 AM

But my point is, whether or not the Rams are moving, as long as location is an issue, there's less focus on wins and losses which keeps Fisher off the hot seat even though most coaches with 3 straight losing season are fired, let alone on the hot seat...

Oh I agree his seat should be warming up - and I think if they end up with 5 wins or less, he's out the door. That would be 3 straight years of regressing

 

[A55VA6]

Jeff Fisher is safe unless the Rams have a horrendous season and win only 5 games or less. Even then, he'll probably just be on the hot seat. I'm not so sure he gets fired because Kroenke LOVES Fisher.

 

[beej]

He will most certainly be on the hot seat. Two more losing seasons and Kroenke will likely move on.

I can't remember the last time a coach had 4 straight losing seasons and coached the 5th year, which I think we can mostly agree would happen with Fisher. If he then had a losing season in year 5.............

I don't know about other coaches but here is one example:

from WIKI: Tom Landry
In 1960, he became the first head coach of the Dallas Cowboys and stayed for 29 seasons (1960–88). The Cowboys started with difficulties, recording an 0–11–1 record during their first season, with five or fewer wins in each of their next four. Despite this early futility, in 1964, Landry was given a 10-year extension by owner Clint Murchison Jr. It would prove to be a wise move, as Landry's hard work and determination paid off, and the Cowboys improved to a 7–7 record in 1965.

 

[FrantikRam]

The NFL has changed so much since then....if we're going back to the 60s to find that info....

I really don't think Fisher gets that much leeway, but I could be wrong.

 

[beej]

The NFL has changed so much since then....if we're going back to the 60s to find that info....

I really don't think Fisher gets that much leeway, but I could be wrong.

you might be right, Landry is just always the first coach that comes to mind when i think about how patience can pay off.

things have changed and changed again in the NFL. In the days of the GSOT a lot of really good veterans got released because of the high pay grade of rookies at that time. More and more the veterans you see on the open market seem to be washed up or almost washed up. You almost HAVE to build through the draft. but through the draft you get 7 new players and you know you're not going to hit on all of them. But for kicks and grins, let's say you get 5 starters out of 7 players, in 3 years that would be 15 starters. 10 might be more realistic.

If you are starting at the bottom like Snead and Fisher did, it's just going to take some time. There are some teams that have different circumstances. Every one knew that the 49ers had a lot of talent but nothing to show for it. It didn't take long for Harbaugh to turn it around.

I get the arguments of how you can turn it around faster than 4 years also, but it just always seems to me that patience pays off in the long run and lack of patience costs more in the long run. jm2c

 

[MrMotes]

I don't know about other coaches but here is one example:

from WIKI: Tom Landry
In 1960, he became the first head coach of the Dallas Cowboys and stayed for 29 seasons (1960–88). The Cowboys started with difficulties, recording an 0–11–1 record during their first season, with five or fewer wins in each of their next four. Despite this early futility, in 1964, Landry was given a 10-year extension by owner Clint Murchison Jr. It would prove to be a wise move, as Landry's hard work and determination paid off, and the Cowboys improved to a 7–7 record in 1965.

Yep, you only have to go back like 55 years to a whole other era. Same with Chuck Noll and Pittsburgh.

More recently Belichick with Cleveland had 3 straight losing years to start his tenure (two 7's and a 6 win season just like Fisher) and wasn't fired. His 4th year they won 11 games and made the playoffs. So it's not unprecedented, but it's pretty rare for a coach with Fisher's record to be so secure in his job...

 

[12intheBox]

I think he is safe until the end of 2016 season no matter what.