Before I begin, I would like to make it clear that I did not support the idea of Fisher being our next coaching candidate. Although there are many variables that go into creating a successful head coach, some within the coaches actual control, many out of his control (i.e. the GM, owner, personnel decisions, division, etc.), 16 seasons are 4 or 5 times longer then the average NFL coaching stint; therefore, odds are that out of 32 teams, a single Superbowl appearance is extremely probable over a long enough time line. Out of his 16 full seasons as coach, 5 were losing, 6 were winning, and 5 he broke even, this is the epitome as average; and as we know in the NFL, unless you are in an ultra garbage division (see Denver this year and Seattle year), 8-8 will not give you a chance to get to the playoffs. Therefore, 8-8 has the same practical effect as going 1-15, but may actually be worse then going 1-15 because you don't get a shot at a real good draft pick (see Miami Dolphins circa 21st century).
With that being said, I am troubled by the reaction of our local media and many of our fans who consider the non-hiring of Jeff Fisher as "strike two" as I have read, and another failure of Ross and Co. However, I do not share this opinion. I have been very skeptical of Ross and even more so of Ireland, but I do not consider Fisher choosing St. Louis as a failure. There are two main things an employer can offer a prospective employee, 1. money and 2. control. From what I understand, Ross offered a ton of money to Fisher but did not offer the level of control Fisher sought, which he received from St. Louis. Fisher, who already has financial security, does not need money like another potential employee may need. Fisher is obviously more interested in control and decision making then the financial aspect. Don't get it twisted either, even though Miami likely offered more money, I'm sure he will be well paid by St. Louis nonetheless. An easy example analogous to this situation is when a person leaves a well paid position at a company to start his own business, or work for a smaller company with a better job title but less salary. Do you call the original employer a failure for someone making a legitimate and understandable career choice? No of course not, it is understandable from both sides. Ross, to his credit stuck to his guns but not cracking on the whole "give Fisher more control thing."
By no means am I big Ireland fan and would not lose an ounce of sleep he was let go. But in all fairness to Ross, offering Fisher a bunch of money is one thing, I get it, does Fisher deserve it? In my opinion no, but others would say he does and that's fine. But what has Fisher proven in 16 seasons that he deserves more power, more control? To me, nothing. Nothing at all (see above). Ross clearly felt that Fisher was good enough to be a well paid coach, but not more of a decision maker. So, if this was the offer, and Fisher didn't take, then fine. We move on. If an employee at a firm leaves the company to work for a new start up company as an officer, even if he is offered more money to stay, is the employer a failure? incompetent? no! Assuming Ross was unwilling to bend on the whole "control" aspect, the only other thing he could have done was offer more money. But how much money does Jeff Fisher truly deserve? Does he deserve to be far and away the most well paid head coach? If you believe he does then what do you base it on? I mean seriously, what? Don't get me wrong, Ross may be incompetent for a whole bunch of other reasons, but not for this. And It really bothers me reading articles from dipshits like Armando Salguero who gets his jolly's off shitting all over other people's decisions and mistakes and somehow gets paid to do so as if he is some genius. I am also deeply annoyed by some fans who think Jeff Fisher has shown that he deserves anything more then to be treated like an experienced, yet mediocre NFL head coach.