Post by giveemthehorns on Dec 9, 2021 13:41:05 GMT -6
Now that a regime change (at least at the HC position) seems more and more likely, I've been trying to find as much information as I can about some of the HC candidates. One of the names I really like is Packers OC Nathanial Hackett.
Here are three articles that are well worth the read on Hackett:
link - from a Bears website
link - from the main SI.com website
link - from the Washington Post (before the GB/WFT game this season)
There are a couple things that seem to jump out about Hackett that I really like:
- He is flexible and plays to the strengths of what he has: he demonstrated that at Syracuse and during his time getting the most out of Blake Bortles (I must say that Jacksonville did have a solid defense back then, but it's also true that Hackett was able to get the most water he could from the Bortles' well, and there certainly wasn't a whole lot of water there to begin with). I do have concerns with Hackett's "tree" - he followed Doug Marrone from Syracuse, to Buffalo and to Jacksonville and Marrone - like Zimmer - does tend to favor a "strong run game" type of offense, but what Hackett was able to do at Syracuse to change the philosophy from "traditional" to "K-gun" was impressive. He grew up on the West Coast as the son of a Head Coach that followed Bill Walsh and the "West Coast" offensive system and while he does carry those principles with him, he's changed courses when called upon and he's helped Green Bay's "blended" offense (quoting the Washington Post article there). So he grew up in "West Coast" principles, followed Marrone and a "strong run game" approach, and picked up the Shanahan wide zone/play-action schemes from his time with LaFleur in Green Bay. The only principle perhaps he hasn't delved to deep into is Air Raid - which a good share of the 2022 QB class seem to specialize in. But nonetheless, even if he doesn't know an offensive system, from what I've read about him, he's not afraid to be flexible/adaptable to it, which is something that is really, really key, IMO.
- He seems to have the respect of the players wherever he lands (the SI article touched on his background and personality which I think contributes to this). Rodgers - as much as most of think he's an egotistical maniac (even moreso than most QB's) - respects Hackett and Rodgers doesn't seem to respect many people in Green Bay these days. Here's a Rodgers quote from the Washington Post article: "“It’s understanding that every player has different motivators and everybody can respond differently to coaching, and figuring out what those buttons are on certain people to push to get the most out of them,” Rodgers said. “That’s what he does really well. He disarms guys and makes them feel really comfortable, and then he’s really good at teaching the game. “I would hate to lose him, but I do feel like he would be a fantastic head coach.”
- He doesn't need to call plays (he doesn't in Green Bay) to have success, and to be honest, after Zimmer not completely focused on situational football and ALL aspects of being an NFL HC, I'd rather not have a HC that's calling either offensive for defensive plays and instead focus on the management of the team, the staff and the game. Hackett seems to be a guy to understand game-planning, fundamental, situational football IQ and has the respect of the players (ie, "players coach").
Regardless of the GM, Hackett seems like a guy who's ready to be a HC, has had success in the challenges during his coaching stops (transforming Syracuse's offense, getting the most out of bad Buffalo/Jacksonville teams and successfully blending his West Coast/Marrone backgrounds with LaFleur's Shanahan play-action scheme in Green Bay to get Green Bay into prime position in the NFC) and would embrace the challenge of getting a Viking organization mired in mediocrity over the hump to consistent contender - a place the Wilfs want to be.
I haven't compiled my personal short list of candidates I'd like to see as HC for the Vikings quite yet, but I believe Hackett will definitely be on there.
I like Hackett but my concern is the same one with Leftwitch. How much of that is him, and how much of it is having Aaron Rodgers to cover up any mistakes. Also, don't the Packers have to give the OK for us to interview him? I believe at one point we put the Kibosh on them interviewing Paton. Not sure if that extends to assistant coaches.