Jump to content

Sonny Werblin

  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

  1. Oh wait.... I get it now. Posters don't "discuss" the Jets on this board, they "argue" about the Jets. Now it makes sense. Ok, I'm up to speed now, I think.
  2. LOL. You can just admit you do not have a good counter argument rather than make an outrageously silly assertion. No one was comparing Bowles to Bill Walsh. And anyone that thinks that Bowles is on the level of Rich Kotite is absolutely clueless. Kotite is on every list of worst coaches ever. My assessment of Bowles might be incorrect and he may very well legitimately be a bad coach, but by comparing him to Kotite, you lose any credibility you may have had.
  3. Nothing to do with the offense. You are a funny man. http://www.nj.com/jets/index.ssf/2017/03/jets_todd_bowles_says_hell_have_much_bigger_role_w.html ps. I apologize if I offended you by assuming your gender.
  4. Sorry. I misread the first line. But, to be fair, I dion't think I said every poster. I think I said "many" posters (at least that's what I meant). And, perhaps, it's not many, and rather just a vocal few who post a lot. Like I said, I'm new here. I'm not familiar with all of the posters. But, I stand by my view that their are lots of posts (maybe by just a few posters) that unfairly attack Mac and Bowles based on revisionist history, misinformation, conjecture, etc... just to make it fit their narrative. Don't get me wrong, there are plenty of fair criticisms, and they are warranted. 1. I'm trying to arrive at an opinion based on what I see. What assumption did I make? That it is Rogers D? Did I assume he is the DC? Did I assume he calls the D plays? I think we call those things facts. You are the one assuming that because Bowles used to be a DC, the Jets must be running his D. What evidence do you have? That the Jets run a 3-4? They ran one before Bowles and so do most teams. Please enlighten me as to my "assumptions". 2. Really, that is just stupid. Bowles was a top 2 HC candidate when hired, and I acknowledge that he may fail. So, he was a good hire at the time but only time will tell if in the end it was a good hire. 3. I'm really not sure what your point is here.
  5. You make some good points, but I still don't know what my agenda is? Are you conflating my opinion with the concept of an agenda?
  6. Just curious what is my agenda? 1. Yes, Bowles picked Rogers and stuck with him -- which disappointed me. And Rogers failures are Bowles. If Bowles sticks with Rogers for the entire season, I do not see the D improving, Bowles should be fired. The most important quality of a HC is the ability to identify good Co-ordinators and position coaches in the hiring process. I fear Bowles puts his friendship with Rogers over his obligation to the Jets to have the best DC possible. 2. Not sure I get your point. My point was that Rogers never ran a D scheme designed by Bowles. Are you agreeing with me? 3. He is being a HC. Not sure how all of you people know what Bowles does as a HC or how he interacts with his players. It seems like your assumption that Bowles is doing nothing if he is not running his own D, is more like a belief or guess, than a fact. People who have seen his interaction with the players -- Willie Colon and Chris Johnson -- have flat out stated in the past two days that Bowles has a great relationship with is players and holds players accountable. Since they see it, I'll believe them over your guess. 4. This is a simplistic view. The only player chosen that was arguably chosen to fit Bowles scheme is Darron Lee since he seemed to fit the way Bowles used Buchanon in Arizona, but then again, Lee was compared to Shazier... Does that mean the Jets are trying to run the Steeler's scheme. I use my eyes when I evaluate. Bowles D played man to man and brought extra pass rushers, and when in a 3-4 D bringing a 4th pass rusher in the form of one LB is not an extra pass rusher. So, based on what I see, this is not Todd Bowles D. Rogers is the DC. Not Bowles. Rogers call the D plays. Not Bowles. It is Rogers D. When the Jets hired Bowles they hired a HC, not DC. I, for one, want a HC who coaches the whole team, not just one side of the ball. And I also want a HC that holds his assistants accountable for performance. Sadly, Bowles has not done that with Kacy Rogers.
  7. I think Kacy Rogers is the main problem with the D because Bowles wants to be a HC, not a DC who is HC. He doesn't coach the D or call the plays. In fact, other than it being a 3-4 base D, I'm not sure how much of this is really is Bowles' D. In Arizona he played a lot of man and sent extra pass rushers. I've seen none of that in the first two games. It seems like it would have been a smart tactic against the Bills since they don't have great WRs, and while it may have been suicidal against the Raiders so was giving Carr all day in a clean pocket. Also, I don't think Rogers ever coached with Bowles when Bowles was the DC, so I'm unclear whether Bowles would instruct Rogers to learn and then run Bowles D rather than his own. Frankly, based on the lack of extra pass rushers, I'd say the D is more of Rogers design than Bowles.
  8. Last year I felt it was the fault of the veterans in the locker room. This season, if the team does not improve in the areas you mention, that's on Bowles. Time will tell.
  9. To be fair, I do believe that every NFL team with exception of the publicly owned Packers has the Owner hire the coach. Of course, for many of the teams the GM leads the search, conducts the interviews and makes a recommendation. In this instance, Charlie Casserly and Ron Wolf, provided the services the GM would provide in the coach search. Plus, Casserly and Wolf are the same tandem that recommended Macagnan -- who used to work for Casserly. You don't think they have the same criteria for a HC? And, how quickly people forget that Bowles and Quinn were the hot candidates for HC. So, do people really think Macagnan would take his first GM job and make a "surprise" hire as HC? I'm new to this board, but I've got to say, there is a ton of of unfair agenda driven criticism. Many have developed their own narrative of the team, management, or coaches and bend the truth, miscast past occurrences, and use hindsight as a weapon to attempt to prove the truth of their opinions. The truth here is that Bowles was a great hire "at the time". Some have decided he is not a good coach based on the play of the team (they apparently forget the 10 win season with Fits at the helm) and his in game decisions, and that's fine, they are entitled to that opinion and, more importantly, they have a rational basis for it. I am of the belief that Bowles has the qualities to be a successful HC who sticks with one team for 10 to 15 seasons. I want long term stability. Very few HC's are the difference makers between wins and losses (good players are the reason teams win) -- and I don't see a HOF HC walking through the Jets door -- so I'd rather accept that Bowles will do some on the job learning because I believe he possesses the innate qualities that make a successful NFL HC. Any attempt to argue that Bowles was a bad hire because he was hired before Macagnan is just plain silly, but sadly it is emblematic of a lot of the arguments posters make here.
  10. I'm a little tired of the notion that Woody and his brother Chris are some dimwitted cartoon characters, and I'm unclear why any rational thinking adult would hold that view.
  11. WTF. Can the press make up their minds please. One day the owner is too involved, the next not enough.
  12. Can't stop the run because of Crappy ILB play combined with an undersized NT, a lazy Mo, and with a little mix of rookie safeties. All of the successful runs are between the tackles. If you can't stop the run, you can't stop teams from scoring. Bowles can't make Guards stop throwing Lee around like a rag doll, or put 80lbs on Mclendons frame. When guys are overmatched, teammates leave their assignment to help and the whole scheme falls apart. It's a talent/ability problem, more than a coaching problem.
  13. Did you even read the article? I know a lot of people don't like Bowles. I do. I think he is exactly the type of coach that wins in the long haul. He's not a disciplinarian. He's not a players coach. He's a football coach plain and simple. He doesn't give a crap what people think about him. He deadpans every vanilla answer he gives to the press, and keeps everything between him and his players. IMO Bowles didn't make shel and Marshall into the assholes they are. Those two dickheads would have torn apart Vince Lombardi's locker room. I know you disagree. Everything is Bowles fault. Every missed assignment. Every missed tackle. Every missed block. Every errant pass. Etc..... Cause this team would be great if they only weren't being held back by their coach.
  14. The guy you see at press conferences and interviews is not the Todd Bowles the players know. http://nypost.com/2017/08/11/the-caring-side-to-todd-bowles-jets-fans-never-get-to-see/
  15. If the D continues to perform this way, I would expect Bowles to can or demote Kacey Rogers, and either take over the D or promote someone from within. The problem is that it does not appear to be an issue of scheme or play-calling, it has more to do with blown assignments and intensity. Rogers just does not seem to be able to get a lot out of these guys. I've always felt that OC's can be cerebral low key types, but DC's have to be intense and inspirational --- playing D in the NFL is like having to jump on a grenade, and if your players will not jump on a grenade for their DC, they will lack the effort and intensity to do well. Perhaps the Jets can offer Matt Forte to the Saints for Mike Nolan. He's had success as a DC in a number of places (even with the Jets) but has been coaching LBs for the past few seasons. He's definitely an upgrade over Rogers.