How the Chicago Bears fumbled their hiring process for a Head Coach (and what they could have done better)

Coming off a 5-12 season in which they fired their Head Coach, Matt Eberflus, after Thanksgiving, the Chicago Bears are in the thick of the hiring process for their next Head Coach.

And, for an organization that has been depicted in turmoil with their last playoff win coming ~15 years ago, let’s just say they’re not off to an ideal start.

Let me be clear, I don’t have insider insight into what has happened behind closed doors regarding hiring the next Chicago Bears’ Head Coach.

However, I do have some perspective on the hiring process based on what has been portrayed in the media and press conferences with hiring committee members, and what I have learned in my 13+ years in the HR tech industry.

Context on the Situation

According to a 2023 article on NFL.com, the average time to hire an NFL Head Coach is 26 days. This is important to know before we continue.

In case you’re not familiar with the situation, here’s a quick overview:

• The Chicago Bears fired their former Head Coach, Matt Eberflus, on November 29, 2024.
• Due to NFL rules, in-person interviews couldn’t start until January 6, 2025, giving the Chicago Bears five weeks to prepare for in-person interviews and shortlisting candidates.
• There are anti-tampering rules which impact timelines as well, including:
• Teams with head coaching vacancies can hold in-person or virtual interviews with internal candidates or coaches not currently employed by another NFL team at any point.?
• Once the regular season ends, franchises with an opening have the ability to request interviews with candidates employed by other teams.

Hiring Criteria: The Ideal Candidate Profile

According to the Chicago Bears, Ryan Poles, the General Manager, is looking for a coach with "clear vision, a developmental mindset, really good game management, and a plan to develop a quarterback.”

In addition to these criteria, I added a layer for Overall Fit and “Creating a culture of accountability” because this has been mentioned repeatedly by players and staff within the organization as the downfall of the previous coaching regime and something that must be fixed.

Using AI, I defined these criteria.

Clear Vision

The ability to articulate a compelling, forward-looking strategy for the team, including a clear philosophy for success, measurable goals, and a detailed plan to achieve them.

Developmental Mindset

The ability to prioritize and foster growth—for individual players, staff, and the team as a whole—through coaching, mentorship, and continual improvement.

Really Good Game Management

The ability to make effective, real-time decisions during games, including clock management, play calling, and situational awareness.

Plan to Develop Quarterback

A clear, actionable plan for developing and maximizing the potential of the team’s young quarterback, Caleb Williams.

Creating a Culture of Accountability

The ability to foster an environment where players, staff, and the team collectively take ownership of their roles, responsibilities, and performance, ensuring the highest standard of behavior and achievement.

Overall Cultural Fit

Alignment with organizational values, communication style, and ability to lead in high-pressure situations.

Hiring Committee

The Chicago Bears have identified seven key stakeholders involved in the hiring process

Candidates

The Bears are being blasted nationally for having an extensive list of coaches they plan to interview.

Given the average time to hire of 26 days, which is probably much shorter for the top coaching candidates, how do the Bears plan to run in-person interviews with 14 coaches on a time crunch?

Note: I’m aware that the Dallas Cowboys rejected the Bears’ request to interview Mike McCarthy, making this list 13, but rumors about a few more people being added to this list are also circulating...

Evaluation Process

The Bears defined their Ideal Candidate Profile, which is a great start and means they aren’t “aimless” as the media suggests, but how are we 5+ weeks removed from the firing of the previous coach and not down to a shorter list than 14 candidates?

What they could have done differently

It all comes back to their candidate evaluation process over the last 5 weeks. Starting with these 14 (and most likely more) candidates is fine, but given their Ideal Candidate Profile, they could have eliminated some of these names from the list right away.

If it were me, I would have taken the six criteria, let’s call them core competencies, and come up with a scorecard:

• Clear Vision
• Developmental Mindset
• Really Good Game Management
• Plan to Develop Quarterback
• Creating a Culture of Accountability
• Overall Cultural Fit

For each competency, I would have identified a 1-5 rating and clearly defined each.

For the sake of time, here’s a rubric for “Plan to Develop Quarterback” generated using AI:

Regardless of whether or not the rubric above is 100% accurate or not, the point is that it provides the hiring committee, and others involved as detailed below, guidance on how to evaluate each candidate.

Speaking of the hiring committee, here are some things I hope they considered:

• Weighting: Decide if one competency or skill (e.g. Plan to Develop Quarterback) is more important than others and weigh them appropriately in your candidate evaluation.
• Consistency: Ensure all candidates are asked the same core questions for fair, unbiased comparison.
• Real-World: Emphasize real-world experience by asking behavioral or situational questions. This could be hypothetical or about things that have happened in their football career and/or with the Bears.
• Roles: What is the role of each member of the committee? No offense, but we don’t need George McCaskey’s input on the future coach’s plan to develop their quarterback. Clearly defining what each committee member is responsible for in the hiring process helps avoid dragged-out decision-making.

One of the things I found most interesting is that Ian Cunningham will be involved “as available” due to his interviewing for other roles. My opinion on this? You’re either involved or not, but you can’t be part of some candidate evaluations and not others.

With the criteria and rubrics in place, there should be a structured candidate screening and selection process in place. What they’re doing now, in-person interviews, is selection, while screening is what they should have done a better job of earlier.

Without the ability to conduct screening interviews with many candidates, it seems the committee has spent the last 5+ weeks preparing for in-person interviews.

The Chicago Bears have almost endless resources that could and should be used in the hiring process for one of the most critical roles within the organization.

Did they properly allocate those resources? I have no idea, although it doesn’t appear so, but if I were tasked with evaluating 14 or more Head Coach candidates, and wasn’t able to speak with them directly, here are some things I would have done:

#1: Determine Knockout Criteria

If the Bears weigh something like “Plan to Develop Quarterback” heavily, would it make sense to consider only candidates you can already start to evaluate based on previous experience??

As George McCaskey said, "I'm not a football evaluator, I'm just a fan" so I don’t know the answer to that question, but it’s worth considering.

#2 Canvas the Market for Candidate Data

All of the candidates have significant coaching experience, meaning they all have a massive number of former players, coaches, etc. whom they’ve worked with.

Why not have your staff gather intel for you in a structured way?

• Build a list of notable and respected former players and staff
• Source their contact information (very easy given the Bears’ access)
• Perform outreach to specifically get input on the 6 competencies the Bears have identified as part of their ICP
• Give people the option to provide insight live (e.g. phone call) or asynchronously (e.g. candidate survey)
• Summarize the information, stack rank the candidates, and determine if there’s a “qualifying” bar that candidates must reach to advance in the process

#3: Look for Real-world Examples

While some staff members are sourcing intel from the market, other team members should be playing the role of “investigative journalist” to find real-world scenarios that relate to the six competencies.

For example, if I’m reviewing “Creating a Culture of Accountability”, I would look at the adversity these coaching candidates and their teams faced (e.g. a losing season). Track down people involved in that real-world situation and get their feedback.

Now, this seems like a lot to do in 5+ weeks with 14+ candidates, but I imagine the writing was on the wall for the previous regime and they knew even more than five weeks ago that they’d be searching for a new Head Coach at some point.

My Final Assessment

Have I mentioned that this is arguably the most important hire in Bears' history?

No resource should be spared.

Ryan Poles has said as much in a recent press conference about the upcoming in-person interviews, but the problem is, that they waited too long to start turning over those stones.

Going into final interviews with 14 candidates, seven stakeholders, including two with higher titles than the hiring manager, and six head coaching vacancies throughout the NFL, is not a recipe for success.

This is simply what I’m observing from the outside looking in and sure, I may be oversimplifying how to hire a head coach in the NFL.

Despite this, as a Bears fan, I REALLY hope they get it right.

If you enjoyed this article...

?? Subscribe to The Speed to Hire Newsletter for more

?? Watch The Speed to Hire Show Podcast