Tennessee Titans: Coaching breakup anything but mutual

The Tennessee Titans mutually parted ways with their now former head coach Mike Mularkey, or so the story goes. Its never mutual and this breakup was anything but.

Mutually parting ways is exactly like a mutual breakup of a relationship. It’s only mutual when asked about it in public, but if you catch one party behind closed doors, someone certainly wanted to continue the relationship. Look no further than the Titans for evidence as such.

The latest parting of the ways in the NFL occurred in Tennessee between Mike Mularkey and the Tennessee Titans. The two sides couldn’t agree on a new contract extension or a “path to greater success”, and thus each side moved on. Yet its obvious that this was far from mutual, so what exactly derailed a seemingly successful partnership?

Two brothers from New York, Dan Salem and Todd Salem, debate the Tennessee Titans in today’s NFL Sports Debate.

Todd Salem:

Public opinion seems to be that the Titans were the breaker in this scenario, with Mularkey being the breakee. Ignore the press release. It wasn’t mutual because the team refused to offer the coach an extension at market value.

This is where things get tricky, and it’s hard to tell who is to blame or who really wanted to move on. Obviously, in some respect, the parting was mutual if an extension of any kind was offered. Mularkey made the decision that he was worth more money and decided to go elsewhere. The team decided he wasn’t worth more money and decided to look elsewhere. That is mutual. But we know there is more behind a contract offer. Low-balling Mularkey is implying that the team doesn’t want him back. And since he was officially under contract for the 2018 season, the team had to make the call to jettison him.

Mutually parting ways is just saving face publicly, but to whose benefit? Are future employers going to think more highly of Mularkey because he wasn’t officially fired here? Are potential head coaches going to respect Tennessee more because they didn’t fire the coach that just brought it back to the postseason and won a game in round one?

Maybe those things are true, but in a larger scope, it would seem like a better look for the Titans if they, in fact, fired Mularkey. They obviously feel that he isn’t the man to lead their team and, specifically, their Marcus Mariota-led offense moving forward. That decision is okay to make, even if the team found reasonable success this past season. It actually speaks to their conviction and determination to be great. Overachieving isn’t an excuse to make a decision that would otherwise not be made.

More from NFL Spin Zone

This reminds me of baseball’s most recent managerial firings, specifically Joe Girardi on the New York Yankees. The Yankees overachieved in 2017 and had a magical season, but that didn’t stop the front office from firing him in favor of an approach more suited to its future. The move is risky but logical. If Girardi or Mularkey, or whomever, isn’t the answer, there is no reason to extend something simply adequate.

Dan Salem:

While I agree that this parting of ways is anything but mutual, the situation with the Tennessee Titans is infinitely more confusing than what transpired in New York with Joe Girardi. The Yankees were one game away from the World Series and while they overachieved, its not like this team is going to fall back to earth. New York is likely better in 2018, so the only reason Girardi is gone is because he did not get along with management or the media. Styles clashed and the organization always wins. Can we say the same thing about Tennessee?

Mularkey also did more with less this past season, overcoming injuries to his star quarterback and fierce competition from division rivals. His Titans advanced in the playoffs, winning on the road to do so. That is a major accomplishment for a team that most people agree did not deserve to make the postseason in the first place. Tennessee had an easy schedule. The Titans got lucky. All of that noise comes from haters, or fans of rival teams. We can not take away what Mularkey’s team achieved. He was successful.

Looking even further, its hard to argue with Mularkey’s demand for a raise. Its my opinion that he wanted out, because getting underpaid as an NFL head coach is unacceptable. He took over the team in Mariota’s rookie year, 2015, inheriting a bad football team that finished 3-13 that season. In his two subsequent years as head coach Mularkey posted winning seasons of 9-7, getting his team to the playoffs this year and winning in the wildcard round. I can’t come up with an argument for his failure to develop Mariota into a winner, or turn around a floundering franchise into a playoff team. He did both and earned a raise.

Without knowing the Titans offer, its easy to just peg this as legitimately mutual. I hear what you are saying. Tennessee and Mularkey must not have gotten along. They disagreed with how he was running the team. Overachieving is not a legitimate reason to ignore making a change that is still necessary… except that it was not necessary. A coach’s job is to get more out of his team than is otherwise possible. Overachieving is literally the epitome of coaching success. Why make a change when your team did better than expected?

Next: 20 Bold predictions for the Conference Championship Games

Its not ownership’s job to like its coach. Its their job to hire a coach who will win. Mularkey did that in Tennessee and will likely be rewarded elsewhere for his efforts. Who do the Titans now hire? Mularkey lasted 2.5 years. Before him Whisenhunt lasted 1.5 years and before that Munchak got 3 years to prove himself. Searching for the next Jeff Fisher is foolish. He coached this team from 1994 through 2010. Many of those were losing seasons, so why the short leash all of a sudden?

Home/Tennessee Titans