Why a NFL head coach and Head of Marketing job looks so similar
I'm a big NFL football fan and a life-long, die-hard Denver Bronco fan. Whether the Broncos are good or bad, I’m always a fan wearing a jersey on Bronco Sunday. Our dog has a jersey too!
The end of the regular season happened two weeks ago, and as expected, it came with a slew of coaching changes on what’s become known as“Black Monday”, the first Monday after the regular season ends.
This got me thinking about the similarities between NFL head coaches and Head of Marketing roles.
Both are highly talented individuals in their craft.
Both get about one year to produce results.
Both will lose their job if expectations are not met.
Both are vulnerable to misalignment with ownership / leadership vision.
And in both cases, there’s a deep talent pool of potential replacements because leadership wants quick results.
Why does this happen?
1. The NFL and the Head of Marketing are “results now” roles.
A team or an organization rarely has patience for long rebuilds. Leaders and fans expect visible progress immediately, not in a year (for marketing) or “year 3” (for the NFL).
For an NFL coach, there are activities that are considered “rebuilding” and have a slower payoff. Such as installing a new system for offense or defense, developing a young quarterback, or building a new culture.
For a Head of Marketing, the rebuild is often repairing or improving the system that produces growth such as:
Repositioning and messaging reset for ICP definition, value prop, and proof points.
Brand rebuilding for trust and awareness through consistent thought leadership, PR and credibility building, and consistent storytelling.
Fixing the funnel foundation through website restructure, landing page conversion improvements, SEO cleanup, and setting up analytics and tracking to monitor progress and do quick pivots as needed.
Content engines that produce content on a cadence and repurposes it across multiple channels.
Investing in community and ecosystem growth via community programs, partners, and events.
This work matters but it takes time to compound. And time is rarely what these roles get.
2. They are judged on flaws they didn’t create.
NFL coaches and Heads of Marketing are often blamed for “roster flaws” they inherited.
For an NFL coach, it could be weak QB situations, bad cap situations, aging cores, poor drafting history, to name a few.
For a Head of Marketing, it’s things like:
Lack of product / market alignment
Strategy that doesn’t reflect market need
Sales process issues and follow-up
An unclean CRM or undefined lifecycle stages
Lack of cross-functional ownership across product, SDR, CS, and partners.
In both roles, the leader is accountable for outcomes even when the system needed improvements long before they arrived.
One position dominates the scoreboard
In the NFL, quarterback performance dominates everything. If you don’t have a strong QB, the coach almost automatically looks like a bad coach even if the defense is good, the scheme is sound, or injuries wrecked the season.
In B2B, sales execution dominates everything. Closed revenue is the scorecard. If conversion rates regress, marketing looks like they are failing, even when the upstream work is strong, product / onboarding is misaligned, or market conditions are outside anyone’s control.
NFL careers are short, and owners want hope.
When there is a change in the head coach position, it’s not only about performance. It’s a signal that “we are not settling”, “the culture is changing”, or “we are serious about winning”. It reassures the fan base and can help with ticket sales and team revenue.
Marketing is similar. When growth slows, investors and Boards want hope too. Replacing the Head of Marketing can be more about signaling than marketing performance. It sends an immediate message that the org is “taking growth seriously”, “we’re fixing the go-to-market”, or “we’re changing direction”. It’s the fastest, most visible lever leadership can pull.
Misalignment ends the job
In the NFL when the GM and coach aren’t aligned, this signals a temporary contract for the coach. The GM controls the roster, timeline, and long-term direction. The coach is expected to execute on that vision, even if they believe a different approach could win.
Marketing has a similar dynamic. If the CEO or CRO aren’t aligned on the go-to-market fundamentals, marketing becomes unstable fast. These can be things as simple as the importance of brand marketing vs. growth marketing, upmarket vs. PLG, community-led vs. paid demand, or the most common tension of all - “we want pipeline now” vs “we’re rebuilding”.
In summary Both roles have rebuild work that matters and they’re judged on short-term outcomes.
The NFL coach gets measured on wins.
The Head of Marketing is expected to do the background work necessary while still delivering the pipeline.
That’s why the job is so hard. These are leadership roles where performance isn’t fully within their control but accountability is.
If you’re a Head of Marketing reading this: you’re not imagining it. The job is that hard. It’s the same pressure loop the NFL head coach feels: expectations set at the top, outcomes measured at the bottom, and a single highly visible leader standing in the middle.
Go Broncos!
