But why is it 'shit or get off the pot?' Guess who else had that conversation? Philly, with Andy Reid, who won 3 Super Bowls after he left because the right pieces came together. Bill Belichick was determined to be a lost cause in Cleveland and is now the winningest coach in NFL history. Kingsbury today is not the Kingsbury of the future. The absolute best thing we've all seen for a coach is experience. What makes the best coaches different than the ones who get left behind are adaptation. Kingsbury literally had a top 5 rushing offense this season, including one of the best rookies in the NFL in the backfield. Why do we discount adaptation when Jayden gets back? Why do we expect that he is incapable of developing beyond some sort of script that we've all predetermined? The guy wants to win. If we find ourselves believing that being 'right' is more important than winning... sure, send him down the road, but I still don't even believe 2026 will mirror 2025, and i think there are more data points between 24 and 25 to work with... and no matter what anyone believes, he's proven that he's capable of taking this team, with the limitations that we faced in 2024, far beyond ANYTHING we've seen in this town, with BETTER circumstances.
All of that is possible. It’s also possible it doesn’t happen, though. For anyone who doesn’t find it likely, it should be easy to see why they’d want to move on, because you can just imagine feeling the opposite of how you feel.
You don’t get to the top of your field without exceptional drive and ability. Basically every coach in this league is a 99th percentile competitor in their field, and they ALL put in ungodly hours to improve and win. It doesn’t always work.
There’s a reason you can easily name the coaches who stagnated and then rebounded in a big way, or were bad and then became historically good. Because it doesn’t always happen. It usually doesn’t happen, actually. Lots of guys are mediocre or even above average (or even very good!) for a long time and are never able to get over the hump, or at some point the league passes them by, or just plain bad luck ruins their last opportunity before they realized it was their last opportunity. Happens to young guys and old guys. It’s happened to guys more and less impressive than Kliff Kingsbury. It’s not some sort of unique, personal insult to Kliff to think that he might just be what he is, in a general sense.
The people with specific criticisms and skepticism about KK’s offense and his playcalling have posted a lot about it. With details. In fact before this rumor broke today I said recently that I was refraining from posting much about it because I KNOW how unpopular it is to talk about for most people. My question is, other than the normal human optimism of “he can grow and learn and improve” (even though his issues that people are worried about have been consistent features of his game plans) why do you think it’s more likely than not?
Nothing is guaranteed to happen in either direction, this is a discussion about where you draw the line, right? Because if he still has the same (generally agreed upon) flaws that people worry about now (that you think can improve) in three years, then I think most people would be fine with moving on unless Daniels is such a stud that we win anyways. So it’s just a matter of timing and belief. So what makes you believe he is more likely to adapt and grow than not? What makes your position more reasonable than someone skeptical that he will improve, as many who try really hard don’t? It’s easy to say “Belichick failed before he succeeded”, etc. (and I disagree with you about Andy Reid btw, he and the Eagles needed a fresh start after a long period together, it happens. It doesn’t mean they were wrong to fire him. Especially after what happened with his son, he also needed a fresh start and became re-energized in KC. It worked for all involved in the long run).
When I say “shit or get off the pot” with Kliff I’m just referring to the fact that if we’re replacing him after next year, nobody with real potential will come and work for Quinn because he’ll he viewed as a lame duck HC deep into his contract and still trying to get his coordinators right. So it is now or never. The answer CAN be never btw, that’s fine, you seem to fall on that side because you believe. But if you don’t believe, I’m simply saying that now (when you’re already replacing the DC and it’s only been two years under Quinn) is the time to strike if you want real OC candidates to consider working for you (and have guys in mind—I’m speculating with the caveat that I’m assuming a well-thought out process and organizational direction if they move on. If not, all bets are off for this regime anyways).
And again, this is only such a hot topic because of the Russini rumors. Before this, I think most KK skeptics didn’t actually think he’d get fired soon, even if we thought he wasn’t good enough in the big picture. So the whole conversation has more fire behind it now when before it was more about whether he was the best guy for Daniels long term.
 }})
