Jump to content

Doug Marrone Opts Out - MERGED


JetsFanatic

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 1k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Um...just now when you said it was "silly math"

 

It's statistical fact that refutes your opinion of Rex, who by the  way, is gone now.

 

I've moved on, I wish you and the others could do the same.

Your math may be right, but the analysis you provide it in being something of importance is silly.

 

Woody Johnson has tried to play the "beat only the Patriots' game, and it failed miserably in Mangini.

 

You don't build a team by what they do against one coach or qb only. That is stupid. 

 

If we were to do that, as I said, hire Tom Coughlin. He knows how to beat BB better than RR ever dreamed of.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Your math may be right, but the analysis you provide it in being something of importance is silly.

 

Woody Johnson has tried to play the "beat only the Patriots' game, and it failed miserably in Mangini.

 

You don't build a team by what they do against one coach or qb only. That is stupid. 

 

If we were to do that, as I said, hire Tom Coughlin. He knows how to beat BB better than RR ever dreamed of.

With Defense..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Your math may be right, but the analysis you provide it in being something of importance is silly.

 

Woody Johnson has tried to play the "beat only the Patriots' game, and it failed miserably in Mangini.

 

You don't build a team by what they do against one coach or qb only. That is stupid. 

 

If we were to do that, as I said, hire Tom Coughlin. He knows how to beat BB better than RR ever dreamed of.

 

I think it's a good idea to be able to beat the best team in your own division.  If  you can do that, you should be able to beat other teams en route to the playoffs.  That's just me though.  I guess it'd be cool if we beat a bunch of mediocre teams to get in the playoffs then get steamrolled by Brady and co.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Your math may be right, but the analysis you provide it in being something of importance is silly.

 

Woody Johnson has tried to play the "beat only the Patriots' game, and it failed miserably in Mangini.

 

You don't build a team by what they do against one coach or qb only. That is stupid. 

 

If we were to do that, as I said, hire Tom Coughlin. He knows how to beat BB better than RR ever dreamed of.

 

That the Jets played the patriots significantly more than any other team in the league during that tenure is the biggest problem.  There's also no consideration for other teams in the argument.  Coughlin, as you say, probably has a better percentage.  I'd imagine Harbaugh does too.  But the overall math is destroyed by teams that played the Pats once, maybe twice, and lost that small sample size.  Further, I'd bet there are teams that have played them once or twice and won at a better "rate" than the Jets, and there's no effort to find those coaches or put forth that argument either.  Only once you've looked at each team/coach individually vs. the Pats, and controlled for number of times played, home field advantage, etc. could you make that kind of argument, at which point, we'd reach your above point of "who cares?"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think it's a good idea to be able to beat the best team in your own division.  If  you can do that, you should be able to beat other teams en route to the playoffs.  That's just me though.  I guess it'd be cool if we beat a bunch of mediocre teams to get in the playoffs then get steamrolled by Brady and co.

Look at all the divisions that Rex won, with that stellar BB record

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's all in this thread Scott....stop focusing only on what I say and listen to what the Marrone supporters are saying.

This is what I said. Jesus. Talk about cherry picking:

If you're basing a decision just on a record Parcells & Walsh would have been fired after 2 years.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hey guys, Eric Mangini was 3-4 against Bill Bellichick and Tom Brady.

 

The answer is right under our noses.

 

I know you loved and miss Mangini, but the guy couldn't do as much as Rex did and he had a HOF QB.  Rex beat the Pats in route to the playoffs and then beat the Pats in the playoffs in their yard.  Sorry...Rex was better than him too.  I know it doesn't make sense, but it's true.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I know you loved and miss Mangini, but the guy couldn't do as much as Rex did and he had a HOF QB.  Rex beat the Pats in route to the playoffs and then beat the Pats in the playoffs in their yard.  Sorry...Rex was better than him too.  I know it doesn't make sense, but it's true.

I was not overly obsessed with EM. He had his chance and failed. YET, he has RR in the all important "recored vs BB and TB".

 

Yup, Rex's hardware assortment is difficult to argue against.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I know you loved and miss Mangini, but the guy couldn't do as much as Rex did and he had a HOF QB. Rex beat the Pats in route to the playoffs and then beat the Pats in the playoffs in their yard. Sorry...Rex was better than him too. I know it doesn't make sense, but it's true.

You're like one of those Japanese soldiers on a tiny island in the Pacific who still think WWII is going on.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That the Jets played the patriots significantly more than any other team in the league during that tenure is the biggest problem.  There's also no consideration for other teams in the argument.  Coughlin, as you say, probably has a better percentage.  I'd imagine Harbaugh does too.  But the overall math is destroyed by teams that played the Pats once, maybe twice, and lost that small sample size.  Further, I'd bet there are teams that have played them once or twice and won at a better "rate" than the Jets, and there's no effort to find those coaches or put forth that argument either.  Only once you've looked at each team/coach individually vs. the Pats, and controlled for number of times played, home field advantage, etc. could you make that kind of argument, at which point, we'd reach your above point of "who cares?"

 

Of course the teams that face him once or twice will have guys w/ better percentages.  That's why it does make sense to look at what percentage of their games they win as a whole.  In every game they played in the six years Rex was here, they won 77% of them. That's a lot.  Rex was better against them than the rest of the league combined.  I'm sure Marrone will be a huge upgrade though.  His 0-3 record vs. Brady is a fluke.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Doesn't matter who you take over or what their former status was, to be a great coach, you have to have a great record. No other way it can be.

#logic

Can't agree with this. BB was 36-44 with 4/5 losing seasons with Cleveland. He was a loser before the Pats success. Parcells was 3-8 with Air Force and 12-19 with Giants in his 1st 2 years. Almost quit, got fired after 2 years. Would you have hired Parcells if the Giants released him after 2 years?Would you have hired BB after the Cleveland debacle?. Would you have hired Tom Coughlin after 3 losing seasons with the Jaguars? Agree that the sample size for Marrone is small but I see no evidence he is a loser but do see potential as a winner.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was not overly obsessed with EM. He had his chance and failed. YET, he has RR in the all important "recored vs BB and TB".

 

Yup, Rex's hardware assortment is difficult to argue against.

 

You wished to compare Rex to EM.  I showed Rex was better, so you then want to change the discussion...shocking.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Can't agree with this. BB was 36-44 with 4/5 losing seasons with Cleveland. He was a loser before the Pats success.Parcells was 3-8 with Air Force and 12-19 with Giants in his 1st 2 years. Almost quit got fired after 2 years.Would you have hired Parcells if the Giants released after 2 years. Would you have hired BB after Cleveland. Would you have hired Tom Coughlin after 3 losing seasons with the Jaguars. Agree that the sample size for Marrone is small but I see know evidence he is a loser but do see potential as a winner.

It was sarcasm-Poorly laid out, I understand

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Of course the teams that face him once or twice will have guys w/ better percentages.  That's why it does make sense to look at what percentage of their games they win as a whole.  In every game they played in the six years Rex was here, they won 77% of them. That's a lot.  Rex was better against them than the rest of the league combined.  I'm sure Marrone will be a huge upgrade though.  His 0-3 record vs. Brady is a fluke.

 

What you're saying you shouldn't be doing with other teams is exactly what you are doing with Rex.

 

And, those percentages go both ways.  If you play a better team 1 time and lose, you've got 0%.  If you play them ten times, and win once, you're at 10%.  You're making the argument that 1/10 is meaningfully better (if it's even better at all) than 0/1.  You might not want to be making that argument, but you are based on what you're saying.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wow.  These pseudo- stats make my head spin. I do know that what happened 5-10 years ago in the NFL is not necessary a good prediction of what will happen today.  Teams change, rosters change, coaches change, football changes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So the question is was Mangini better with Chad and Favre as his QB's?? LOL Any playoff wins as a HC?? Didn't think so..

 

I'd take Mangini w/ a healthy Favre.  The Favre that he had at the end of the season, with the torn bicep in his throwing arm, was the one that kept them out of the playoffs.  But that's because of the healthy Favre part, and not the Mangini part.

 

Who is better between Mangini and Rex isn't important anyway.  It's actually quite irrelevant.  The only reason it came up was because SD, perhaps mistakenly (but again it doesn't matter), suggested that by the metrics proposed, Mangini was better than Rex.  A concept few would likely accept.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'd take Mangini w/ a healthy Favre.  The Favre that he had at the end of the season, with the torn bicep in his throwing arm, was the one that kept them out of the playoffs.  But that's because of the healthy Favre part, and not the Mangini part.

 

Who is better between Mangini and Rex isn't important anyway.  It's actually quite irrelevant.  The only reason it came up was because SD, perhaps mistakenly (but again it doesn't matter), suggested that by the metrics proposed, Mangini was better than Rex.  A concept few would likely accept.

I don't accept the metrics either-except in the  silly computations of AFJF

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh, read it wrong, as 1 of 3.

See, just admitted I was wrong. Can you?

I do it all the time. Constantly acknowledge the fact that there are experts who know more than I do about this stuff. As a Jet fan, I'd like to see them win rather than win a MB debate. I'm surprised to see so many people excited at the prospect of more mediocrity, but not surprised to see people continually bring the discussion back to Rex. He's gone, but people can't let go.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


×
×
  • Create New...