If we had a normal schedule just making the playoffs would be a sign of improvement. But we have the most ridiculous easy schedule in history. We are in the weakest division in the league. We play the second weakest division in our conference and the weakest division in the AFC. Our individual games against teams without the rest of their division are the Giants instead of Philly or Dallas, the Rams instead of SF or Seattle, and the Patriots instead of the Dolphins, Bills, or even Jets. The only conceivable way our schedule could be easier would be if we played the Cardinals instead of the Rams. And with the way every team if havings its QB injured before we play them, the Rams may be without Stafford by the time we play them anyway.

At this point I would keep DA is we win our first playoff game and don't get blown out in our second. Would I expect great things in 2024? Probably not. But firing a playoff winning coach who almost won a second playoff game could put too much pressure on the new coach, and who knows, it could be not impossible for a good defensive coordinator to improve as a head coach after like 5 seasons, just very very unlikely. However, I would not allow DA to mortgage the future to win now in 2024. I would restrict him from trading future draft picks and require that our 2025 salary cap picture not be top 3 in the amount we are over the cap. I would ask him to show he can beat other coaches on a level playing field and not just by burning more future resources in the present than otherwise more talented coaches to get a slight edge.

Dennis Allen isn't the GM. If you actually believe he's making the personnel decisions you are even more less informed than I had thought. It's amazing how you twist everything into your hatred of the accounting philosophy of Loomis and company.

You are wading too been into semantics. This post is a essentially a hypothetical where we are asked to put ourselves in the position of being GM, because that is who would hypothetically fire a coach. So in the context of this question Mickey Loomis does not exist or we 'are' Mickey Loomis. Further, although most head coaches do not make the final decision on player personnel moves, they often do have a lot of influence, can ask for certain players or positions of need, and are often granted those requests by GMs and/or owners. My point is that in the hypothetical context of this question, if I not Mickey or Gayle controlled DA's fate, I would presumably also have other powers, and if DA managed to scrape by enough with super weak schedule to buy himself another year such as say beating the Seahawks 24-21 in a home wildcard game and then losing to the Lions 35-28 in the next round, I would retain him but would not grant any of his requests to stretch the budget too far for 2024. I would make him prove it in 2024 with the draft picks we have and I would still let him spend more 2025 dollars in 2024 than most teams, but not top 3 like we have have been doing. I would make him prove that he can win on his own merits not edge the lowly Falcons and Bucs by a game or so while spending a fortune more than they are spending. You don't win it all by going all in on a coach who can't win on a level playing field, you win it all by going all in and tilting the playing field when you already have a coach who has shown they can win on a level playing field, and I would ask DA to do that.

If you were hypothetically Loomis you would most likely commit Hari Kari given the fact that you would hate yourself so badly.