On Sunday, the Arizona Cardinals put an end to their lengthy coaching search, hiring former Los Angeles Rams offensive coordinator Mike LaFleur to become the organization’s 44th head coach.

LaFleur, 38, is a disciple of both Sean McVay and Kyle Shanahan, and called plays to a certain degree of success during a brief stint as the New York Jets’ offensive coordinator.

Arizona was mostly shut out from the high-profile coaching candidates. They were also rejected by Seahawks offensive coordinator Klint Kubiak and newest Titans head coach Robert Saleh. Despite a thinned-out pool, the Cardinals were notably impressed by LaFleur.

So how does this hire look, objectively speaking? I’ll offer my own personal grade of the hire below, but first, we’ll take a look at some of the national-level grades. Somewhat unsurprisingly, the NFL’s national media offers a relatively polarized group of assessments. A relatively unknown (but still promising) hire could easily swing to an extreme — for better or worse.

How National Media Grades Mike LaFleur Hire

Conor Orr – Sports Illustrated: D+

Orr is highly skeptical of the fit, but emphasized his belief in LaFleur as an individual candidate. His criticism lies in the Cardinals’ overall situation, which he posits is not the right place for a plug-and-play coordinator hire in a tough division, and was more suited to the likes of Raheem Morris or Vance Joseph.

Ralph Vacciano – FOX Sports: D-

Vacciano appears to be of the belief that the Cardinals picked the wrong Rams coordinator, citing defensive coordinator Chris Shula. He pointed out the fact that LaFleur did not call plays in McVay’s system, and also seems to think LaFleur’s poor track record in New York is a significant knock.

Tyler Sullivan – CBS Sports: C

Sullivan is more open to the hire than some of the above grades, but pointed out the unfortunate similarities between the Cardinals’ and Jets’ QB situations while LaFleur was tenured in New York. While Jacoby Brissett might still be better than Zach Wilson, LaFleur’s offense did struggle with QB output, and Arizona might not offer a better outlook.

Benjamin Solak – ESPN: B-

Solak calls the hire “run-of-the-mill,” and believes the Cardinals would have preferred Klint Kubiak. He’s a bit more on board with LaFleur than some others, and thinks he comes with a “solid” ceiling.

Christian D’Andrea & Cory Woodroof – USA Today: B

D’Andrea and Woodruff offer a bit of optimism, but point out the Kyler Murray dilemma as an X-factor. Still, they seem to believe LaFleur’s history alongside some of the NFL world’s elites offer him a solid chance to make an impact, though he may not be cut out to man the helm of a team.

NFL Staff – Bleacher Report: A-

Bleacher Report’s NFL staff is bullish on the LaFleur hire, rounding out an extremely diverse group of grades. They call LaFleur a “bright offensive mind,” and think, even with a significant talent deficit between the Rams and Cardinals, that the 38-year-old head coach could easily engineer an offensive turnaround in Arizona.

Mike LaFleur hire: My Grade

My grade: B

To call this hire a failure and offer it a grade in the D range gives far too much credence to the Cardinals’ track record of failure. At the same time, to dub it a home run would be nothing more than unabashed homerism. Graded on the curve of candidates who were ever truly realistic for Arizona to land (and therefore subtracting the Harbaugh, McDermott, McCarthy-type candidates), this hire could elevate close to an A, but in terms of true fit and objective pros and cons, it lands somewhere between average and elite.

Using the Jets years as an argument against LaFleur’s ability as a play-caller is shortsighted. New York’s offense was more creative and fundamentally sound under LaFleur than in the years preceding and following his tenure.

The concern boils down to LaFleur being a relative unknown, which is extremely valid, but it’s also difficult to imagine a young coach who has trained under McVay and Shanahan would be completely incapable of running an offense himself. One does not simply land a coordinator job under McVay immediately after being fired without something tangible to offer.

If nothing else, LaFleur brings a semblance of hope that playmakers like Trey McBride, Michael Wilson and Marvin Harrison Jr. won’t be stifled. In fact — contrary to Orr’s argument — I’d go as far as to say the talent level is very close to being the exact situation that would warrant simply plugging in a dose of offensive innovation.

The lack of a clear plan at QB could ultimately be the factor that sinks the hire into a long list of failed Cardinals experiments, however, so putting the right man under center early in LaFleur’s tenure is of crucial importance. There’s also no telling how a coach will truly gel with his players in terms of leadership and culture; that will have to be revealed with time.

There’s more substance to LaFleur than hypotheticals and potential, but there is still notable risk in going for an unproven head coach in a division of juggernauts and masterminds.