Stereotypes are made to be broken .There is always a first time.I think it would depend on the age of the coach involved.I am sure someone like Gruden or Tomlin will eventually win a SB with two teams.

I will guarantee it will happen eventually .

 

An evidently false argument doesn't become true just because Jason Cole repeats it.

 

Jeff Fisher?

 

Depends on the situation. If I tell you that Jon Gruden took the head coaching job for the Pittsburgh Steelers, he'll win the Super Bowl less than 3 seasons.

 

I promise not to cry if you promise not to repeat the same silly argument again and again even though you've been proven wrong countless times. I admire your tenacity but it gets tiresome to read the same logical fallacy over and over and over.

 

There was this girl in my math class at school, who, when asked to calculate her chances to win the lottery, emphatically replied with "fifty-fify": either you win or you don't. When the ensuing hilarity eventually died down, she adamantly refused to acknowledge that there was anything wrong with her logic and today she's into politics. Go figure.

 

I think part of the problem is that when a coach leaves a Superbowl Title winning team he takes control of the next franchise, has 100% say in the roster, etc, they have a lot of leverage in their next job. I wouldn't give Cowher or Gruden final say on who we pick up or draft, they should have final say on who plays though. I don't know if they are the best guys for the job but dismissing someone because they've had success is about the dumbest thing I've ever even heard of.

 

Still with this nonsense? And he still doesn't understand the Fallacy in his argument. Anyone see that south park episode where jonnie Cochran uses the "chewbacca defense" in court.

 

I think it's unfair to lob Vermeil in with the others. He went to the superbowl and lost. then he went to another team and won the superbowl.

and Parcells won multiple superbowls with the G-men, came back and might have won the superbowl with patsies if it wasn't for the heroics of D Howard.

So, if you had the choice to take one of these coaches knowing it could get you to the superbowl with a chance (win or lose) to win the big one, would you really be stupid enough to say no?

 

THis clinches it. Bring in Butch Davis :shifty:

 

I think when you have coaches that have been to superbowls with different teams, the argument that it can't be done loses steam imo, because when you can get to two superbowls with 2 different teams, you obviously have the grit, the work ethic, and the passion to achieve the ultimate big game, which is the theory usually used asmto why it can't be done in the first place, Then the game itself is just a game, it can go either way based on talent and variables, not whether the coach has some mysterious curse hanging over them keeping them from functioning mentally..

 

There have been only what 46 Super Bowls played? That means only 46 coaches have been Super Bowl winners. Less than that given that several have repeated. Now how many men have coached in the NFL during that time span? I have no idea but it is surely a big number. You can safely say that only a small percentage of NFL head coaches have ever won a Super Bowl, period. This argument saying that because they have done it before they'll never do it again has no substance. History says that the odds of any man you hire winning a Super Bowl are very low. To use a sample size of 12 men out of the scores who have coached in the NFL during the Super Bowl era is silly. You hire the best coach you can find, bottom line.

 

Why exactly would we need to listen to Jason Cole? Or Don Banks? Or any one of probably dozens of individuals who have notated that in the past.

The fact that it hasn't been done isn't proof that it can't (or won't) be done, especially given the size of the sample and the simple fact that it's been done in other sports.

 

aren't you coming home soon from over there?

 

That's a ridiculous wager. The odds of any coach winning a Super Bowl are very low. You're trying to prove a point with a wager that has little risk for you and still won't mean anything.

 

There is a saying that goes around in Science circles that centers around the causes of results

"Correlation does not equal Causation"

meaning, that just because something correlates to a result, such as 'Coaches who have won a Super Bowl have not won another on with a second team', does not mean that the event caused the result. For example, I drink Sobe Lizard Fuel drinks everyday, I have never had cancer, Sobe Lizard Fuel prevents cancer! Now we can see that this is utterly ridiculous. There are other reasons why I haven't had cancer such as, no family history of it, not old enough to have developed one, ect. Drinking Sobe was not the cause, but it correlated.

With Super Bowl coaches, other factors have kept them from winning another super bowl. Giving them total control, not finding the right quaterback, ect. Them winning the super bowl was not the cause. Only a correlation.

 

If we hire say, Gruden or Cowher, I cant believe it will actually make you happy to root against them winning a Super Bowl just to stick it up our collective.......

 

God is love
Love is blind
Therefore we can conclude that God is Ray Charles.

 

No person has ever won the Florida state lottery more than once therefore it is impossible for somebody who has won the state lottery to win it again if he continues playing it. If you don't believe me I will make you a wager. If within the next five years someone wins it twice I will leave the site. If a different person wins it each week I win and you have to forfeit your account

Any takers? Cmon be a man and prove me wrong

 

Give one of those guys Andrew Luck and see where it goes from there.

 

Different fallacy

 

Glad Indy didn't think like you when no Black coach had every won a superbowl....

 

Ill take that...

 

Bull****. There's no physical law that prevents a HC from winning SBs with two different teams. Might just as well go all-in on the immutable power of horseshoes or four-leaf clovers.

It's an interesting stat. That's all.

 

Wow. Simply ridiculous.

You want to know the truth? The odds are heavily in your favor should anyone be foolish enough to take it.

Not because a coach who has won a superbowl has a worse chance as a coach who hasn't, but because IT'S ****ING HARD TO WIN A SUPERBOWL!

Just because the media is crazy enough to report fallacies as data doesn't mean you have to be crazy enough to buy into it.

 

Yup I might too. What nonsense, 40 years of statistics, the sheer difficulty of winning a SB in the first place, and somehow this is the all empowering statistic that proves everything? Phil Jackson retired undefeated in any series that he won the first game. He came four points away from losing that. Do you realize what four points is? Four points is a ticky-tack foul on Pau Gasol in that game 7 leaving him in foul trouble early.

The ebb and flow of history and the odds are so fluid so dynamic that you may see two HCs that have won SBs before win them again in the next five years. There is nothing in the real odds, the actual difficulties you have to overcome that says they can't do it.

 

If ignorance is bliss this thread must be Eden.

 

Yep. Going by ops logic, carolina were crazy to draft cam newton because no black qb has ever won a super bowl with the original team that drafted him. I'm right I'm right. Look it up