Although a day late, I remembered this and wanted to pass it on.
I am just being flippant, of course. I am not using this as a way to endorse, or deride, the hiring of Ken Whisenhunt. I just remembered the article from the magazine; and was curious how Whisenhunt scored based on this criteria. If you don't want to read the article, Wickersham states that:
2. They had at least 11 years of NFL coaching experience.
The Titans are lucky, because Whisenhunt possess three of the four. At 51, he misses the age characteristic by 2 years; which, if I were taking the study seriously, I would think would be the least important of all of them .
As a Titans fan I certainly hope that Wickersham's study is accurate. I personally wanted them to go with a defensive minded head coach, who concedes all offensive control to his offensive coordinator (the inverse of what Sean Payton and Gregg Williams had in New Orleans). However, I do think that there were much worse hires out there.
*cough* Jim Caldwell *cough*
I am willing to give Whisenhunt a chance, and hope that he get this team into the playoffs consistently. Oh, I also want him to beat the snot out of Andrew Luck and the Colts, seriously sick of losing to that team.