Adam Schefter answers reader questions in his mailbag on Wednesdays during the NFL season. Got a query of your own? Submit it here.
Q: Adam, I realize it's been a bad season, but does it seem a bit soon to fire Mike Munchak? The Tennessee Titans were a surprising 9-7 team last year, and it seems like this year's letdown is based more on the Titans overachieving last year -- it's easy to forget how bad the team he took over for was from 2010. Thoughts?
-- Bill (California)
A: That's one argument, Bill. But the only thoughts that matter belong to Titans owner Bud Adams, who sounded very cranky when he spoke to Jimmy Wyatt of the Tennessean after the Titans' most recent loss to the Green Bay Packers on Sunday. Anyone who read Adams' comments could tell he is unhappy with the way this season has gone and will consider making changes, even if it includes firing Munchak. It's difficult to predict the thinking of a man who turns 90 years old next month, who wants to win now and feels the way Adams does. But I will say this: He hardly made it sound as if Munchak's job is secure.
Q: Which coaches are on the hottest seats in your opinion? Will Chan Gailey remain in Buffalo? What about Mike Mularkey or Jason Garrett?
-- Herb (Texas)
A: Herb: Every year there are about six, seven, eight head coaching changes, and this year will be no different. There probably are three places where the coaches are in the most danger: Andy Reid in Philadelphia, Norv Turner in San Diego and Pat Shurmur in Cleveland. After those three, there are a handful of coaches who might or might not be in trouble: Gailey in Buffalo, Munchak in Tennessee, Romeo Crennel in Kansas City and Ken Whisenhunt in Arizona. And there are some coaches who are worth watching: Garrett in Dallas, Mularkey in Jacksonville, Sean Payton in New Orleans. Plus there always is a coaching surprise. When all is said and done, I think we'll get about six or seven head coaching changes, as usual.
Q: I don't know which team has been more disappointing this year, the New York Giants or New York Jets? That performance on Sunday by the Giants was pathetic. Did they just get beat by a better team or are the Giants simply mediocre?
-- Kyle (New York)
A: What's interesting is that the Jets have been blasted for their performance all year, Kyle, while the Giants have drawn little criticism -- and rightfully so. The Giants have won two Super Bowls the past five years, so they have earned the benefit of doubt on many things that don't go their way. But the truth is, both teams have disappointed. Both teams thought they would be in the playoffs -- the Jets are not and the Giants are going to need a lot of help to get in. The Giants' performance when the season has been on the line has been as surprising as it has been disappointing. People expected more out of them.
Q: Would Tim Tebow be a viable backup in Washington? They play an offense with Robert Griffin III that sort of fits Tebow's style. The Jets would probably love to get Kirk Cousins. You think a trade like that could work, assuming the Jets gave up some picks?
-- Dave (Rhode Island)
A: There's as much chance of Tebow winding up in Washington as the backup as there is of me backing up RG III, Dave. While your concept of getting a backup for RG III might make some sense, the Redskins have zero interest in dealing Cousins for Tebow. I'm not even sure how interested they would be in dealing Cousins for anything less than an attractive high draft pick or picks. Short of that, Cousins will be back in Washington, and Tebow will find his way to Jacksonville.