That's what Sporting News thinks. Are they onto something or on something?
The team has gotten better every year under his watch, and last season he got the Vikings to the playoffs without a viable quarterback.
Why they're onto something:
Under Childress, the Vikings have indeed shown consistent improvement -- they've gone from 6-10 to 8-8 to 10-6, and just as the record has improved, so has Chilly. He's certainly not as distant of a presence as he once was -- Marcus Robinson's criticism of the coach's communication with the locker room may have been perfectly valid two seasons ago, but I certainly don't get the impression that it'd be equally valid today. Minicamp displayed that Chilly is becoming more willing to mix things up offensively, signaling that his rigid execution-oriented meat-and-potatoes coaching style is evolving. And hey, ridicule the Culture of Accountability all you want, but he has cleaned the place up.
Why they're on something:
You're telling me a guy with a 0-1 playoff record in three seasons belongs in the upper echelon of NFL head coaches? Sure, viable quarterbacks have been few and far between during Chilly's run in Minnesota, but that's largely been of his own doing -- simply put, he's been too dang stubborn in his commitment to Tarvaris Jackson. And true, drafting Percy Harvin and giving the Loki formation a test drive could be perceived as signaling a more creative approach to the offense, but let's see this creativity in September before we offer Chilly too much praise.
Your thoughts?