Tannebaum revisted
#1
Posted 08 August 2012 - 04:26 PM
That's it? haha Yeah, to Woody that's plenty! He probably got a bonus for that move. Just doesn't do sh*t for us on Sundays. It's humiliating to be under the same roof as a life-long Giants fan...really.
Our offense was pathetic on the ground last year, but Rex says we are going back to "ground and Pound" how? We have the exact same sh*tty O-line....the same running back and FB, but lost our #2 guy. Our WR's are probably the worst in the league. I understand how and why. Because look at these two clowns, Woody and Mike T. They wouldn't know the difference from one NFL roster to the next.
So, yeah, haven't been around for a while. I don't see any recent posts.....I just assuming that we are all on the same page with that one, right?
Hold on tight, fellas.....this could be ugly. lol
#6
Posted 08 August 2012 - 04:42 PM
#9
Posted 08 August 2012 - 04:53 PM
O/U on someone saying "Come on, guys, it's not Tannenbaum's fault Vernon Carey retired!": Week 6
The Tannenbaum Excuse Cycle (TEC) begins with "Yeah, ______ sucks, but look at that draft class," then it proceeds to "Yeah, I guess Revis and Mangold suck, amirite?," then culminates in "Belichick's drafts are HORRIBLE."
Your Vernon Carey example, fine though it is, will appear in between stages one and two.
#13
Posted 08 August 2012 - 05:26 PM
Hold on tight, fellas.....this could be ugly. lol
I'm far from in love with Mike Tannenbaum, but the fact is that since he took over the Jets have had one losing season and two trips to the AFC Championship Game. I mean, I know times are really tough for Jet fans, but can you point to a better six year stretch in the team's history?
wish you were dead
you bawl like the baby
in Eraserhead
#14
Posted 08 August 2012 - 05:30 PM
I'm far from in love with Mike Tannenbaum, but the fact is that since he took over the Jets have had one losing season and two trips to the AFC Championship Game. I mean, I know times are really tough for Jet fans, but can you point to a better six year stretch in the team's history?
Like having leprosy and embracing that two week stretch in '06 where you didn't lose any fingers.
#16
Posted 08 August 2012 - 05:53 PM
This particular team doesn't look like it's structured for long-term success excepting 2 units on defense. 7 years in and there's still no stars on offense. No quarterback. No one particular thing that the most important unit on the field does particularly well. That's on the structuring of the roster and coaching. He had the balls to fire Mangini, which was awesome, but he also held on to Schottenheimer for 6 excruciating years when the writing was on the wall long before that.
All that said, he struck gold with Revis and Rex' defensive acumen. Pouha's first extension was brilliant and so was Thomas'. Pace was certainly overpaid but still proved to be a good addition. Contracts for guys like LT, Scott, Leonhard, and Woody were very successful. He had the foresight for necessary things like cutting Faneca, Cotchery, Richardson, and Jones; and he also realized that he was better off cutting his losses with guys like Rhodes and Braylon. There have been enough moves to keep the team competitive. But the problem is that aside from the Parcells years, Jets fans have been so abused over the years that 3 playoff appearances in 6 years with 2 AFCC losses constitutes ultimate success; or even worse, provides an inarguable gage of how he can get the team even farther.
Edited by RutgersJetFan, 08 August 2012 - 05:54 PM.
(Chandler)'s a nice piece as long as he's the 7th most important player on your roster....I think they're going to be disappointed when they see he's just a pumped-up Drew Gooden.
#17
Posted 08 August 2012 - 06:25 PM
Tannenbaum is heading into his 7th year, yet our QB situation is still a giant question mark, and the best he did to create a safety net for a worst-case scenario situation is make it so we'd be able to make a move in his 8th or 9th. He hasn't drafted anyone since 2007 that's made a Pro Bowl. On top of that, we've traded away countless mid-rounders for high contract guys, which GM's who've been around a lot longer with more success don't seem to do as consistently as he does.
I don't disagree with any of your post, but pulled this part because it's the part I agree with the most. Particularly The trading away draft picks part. I'd add his penchant for needing to be the guy who paid the most for the free agent of the year for a few years there. I think he either outgrew that, or maybe just dropped it out of cap reality. Either way, it's a good sign.
QB is an issue. I wasn't interested in Sanchez, but now that he's here I tend to agree with giving him a long look. It's a quandary, but I wouldn't want to give up on him and see him succeed somewhere else.
I don't like being in the position of defending Tannenbaum because there's a lot I don't like about the way he does business. Yet, here we are in his seventh year and I definitely expect a winning/playoff type season. Despite my personal feelings, I have to concede that he's gotten results on the field.
wish you were dead
you bawl like the baby
in Eraserhead
#18
Posted 08 August 2012 - 06:54 PM
I don't disagree with any of your post, but pulled this part because it's the part I agree with the most. Particularly The trading away draft picks part. I'd add his penchant for needing to be the guy who paid the most for the free agent of the year for a few years there. I think he either outgrew that, or maybe just dropped it out of cap reality. Either way, it's a good sign.
The problem is that this was the offseason where that guy was clearly needed. We needed a couple of the OL names out there. We needed a legit backup to come in and challenge Sanchez. We needed a legit WR to line up opposite Holmes. We needed long term solutions for 3 positions on the OL and this was an ideal draft class for it in the mid-rounds. All of the things we needed were wholly available. Instead, we traded away almost every mid-round pick for Tim Tebow and Stephen Hill, signed no OL and only drafted one in the 6th; and the only FA WR we went after was a guy who wasn't even in the top 30 available from this class.
QB is an issue. I wasn't interested in Sanchez, but now that he's here I tend to agree with giving him a long look. It's a quandary, but I wouldn't want to give up on him and see him succeed somewhere else.
I don't like being in the position of defending Tannenbaum because there's a lot I don't like about the way he does business. Yet, here we are in his seventh year and I definitely expect a winning/playoff type season. Despite my personal feelings, I have to concede that he's gotten results on the field.
That's the thing. We committed to yet another year of Sanchez, yet didn't give him anything he needed to even get a good gage of if he can just be an average guy for the long term. Same OL, no guys for the future, suspect WR's, and a weakened crop of RB's. The biggest move we made offensively was giving him a fake extension so we have an out in '13 or '14 if he really is this bad. Switching out the coordinator isn't enough to cure all of the things that went wrong last year. No way. So many of those problems were player related, yet here we are with an almost identical, yet slightly weakened, offensive lineup. Why treat Sanchez like he can carry the offense when it's pretty clear he can't?
Edited by RutgersJetFan, 08 August 2012 - 06:57 PM.
(Chandler)'s a nice piece as long as he's the 7th most important player on your roster....I think they're going to be disappointed when they see he's just a pumped-up Drew Gooden.
#19
Posted 08 August 2012 - 06:56 PM
0 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users














