The "rebuild" myth

[Kleckineau]

10 minutes ago, rex-n-effect said:

I believe by "benched for osweiller" you mean out several weeks with an injury.

You are preaching to the choir. I think he is the GOAT.

You can hijack the thread for your defense of Peyton if you want. Go ahead but....

Peyton was healthy week 11 and Osweiller started. Think this was after a 4 int performance.

He stunk last year. I think his QBR was like 70 or something.

Look at the stats..........and they won the trophy. Point being??

 

[bitonti]

the average career length in this league is 3 years

 

the original poster is correct you can't have a multi year rebuild in the NFL when the career length is that short. 

 

there is no rebuild. there's just a reload, every offseason. 

[Jetster]

2 hours ago, Kleckineau said:

The "you cant win without a top QB"  dogma was trashed by the Broncos last year so stop already.

Coaching esp in game and game planning are just as important.

Not true. You have to have the other triangle in place to win. CB... not only did Denver have a #1 CB they had two #1s in Talib & Harris!

They also had not 1 edge rusher but 2 in Von Miller & Damarcus Ware!

Jets almost got to 2 Superbowls with a crappy QB because they had 2 other facets that were great... great CBs & a great offensive line.

Look at the Cowboys. You replace the Cowboys Oline with what Petty played behind last week and Dak Prescott would not be all the rage.

Its all relative. Yes, you can win without a franchise QB but 2 other position groups on your team have to be GREAT!

 

[shawn306]

4 hours ago, LionelRichie said:

 

rebuild is code for finding a new QB who can play.   

Bortles stinks so the Jaguars are still "rebuilding", the Browns are worse than the Jets at finding a QB, Kaerpernick went from all-pro to terrible so the 49ers are rebuilding.   

Then look at the Raiders - now that they have Carr #2 they are rebuilt.

And it only took them 14 years.

[shawn306]

3 hours ago, PCP63 said:

You have to have good players to actually win and create a "winning culture". You rarely get these players (especially QBs) with the 20th pick.

 

Obviously, no NFL player would purposely play bad. But why not give the young guys more PT? You'll probably get a higher draft pick, AND they get live-game experience that will help them (and you) in the future.

 

Play Marshall, Decker less. Give Anderson and Peake more PT. Let Fitz and Geno walk. See what we have in Petty/Hack. Am I saying to let go of all good players? Of course not. But Marshall/Decker/Mangold/Harris are not in our future. They're aging quickly, and will not be around by the time we're competitive. But Anderson, Peake, Jalin, Powell, Jenkins, Burris, etc. will be.

 

We made too many win-now moves when we're not a win-now team. Give the young guys experience, get a high draft pick, build through the draft.

The 96 Jets were alot better talent wise than the 95 Jets but won 2 less games.

When Parcells came here in 97 the change in culture was dramatic. Same QB same offensive weapons, same defense and they won 8 more games then they did in 96. The following year they are playing Denver in the AFC Championship.

To me it is all about the coach and that coach getting the players to play for him. That means giving all out Monday thru Saturday and then even more on Sunday.

[Kleckineau]

28 minutes ago, bitonti said:

the average career length in this league is 3 years

 

the original poster is correct you can't have a multi year rebuild in the NFL when the career length is that short. 

 

there is no rebuild. there's just a reload, every offseason. 

Well stated and despite the constant reloading the Jets and other mismanaged poorly coached teams continue to shoot blanks.

[munchmemory]

1 hour ago, rangerous said:

how about adding johnson, doug williams, mark rypien, joe theisman, to that list.  how about eli manning, flacco?  imo the only qb's who can make plays without players are roethlisberger and maybe rivers.  the rest are very good but depend on the team around them.  even brady. and let's be clear, all of these great qb's have good players around them.

as for the need for a top flite qb, it certainly helps but great teams execute.  they do they same things well over and over.  they tackle, they make blocks, they catch the ball, they don't fumble, they don't take plays off, they are physically fit, they know the game rules, and they want to play for the sake of playing.  it's up to the coaches to make sure the plays play to the team's strengths and they make sure the players are executing.

I would take Theisman and Eli off that list.  Those guys could play.  But if you look at the great body of SB winning teams, the great percentage had elite QBs.

[kelticwizard]

I can remember when Jerry Jones took over the Dallas Cowboys.  Classic multiyear rebuild.  Although they were pretty classless to the Cowboy legends they were taking over from, they went about the rebuild in an effective way.  First, get the QB you need.  Then parcel all your good players on the previous years' bad teams and get draft choices for them.  Then lose horribly for a couple of years, really bad, until the third year you emerge with a perennial Super Bowl contender and winner.

If you get the right people with your high draft picks and coach them correctly, you've set yourself up for years.  If those people miss or the coaching isn't there, you suck for years.  But you have to take that chance.

[ZachEY]

1 hour ago, Integrity28 said:

I've been saying it here for years. The term "rebuild" is part of a revisionist history strategy for PR teams. It's much more palatable to market the current, or most recent, season as a "rebuild" than it is to call it a failure. Truth is, it's a failure.

Some organizations just tolerate failure so well that it is presented as "constant hope" before the season, and "part of a rebuild" after the season. This is the Jets.

Other organizations don't tolerate failure well at all, so it is presented as a failure, and the term rebuild is different for them. It specifically means that during the unacceptable failed season they realized exactly what parts of their roster they need to turn over, and plan to do so. There is no packaged "hope". There is just returning to the norm of not failing. This is the Broncos, Steelers, Packers, etc.

Perfect example is the Packers this year, they are right smack in the middle of a failed season. 

If Aaron Rodgers was a Jet, we wouldn't be "rebuilding" either.  But, it's also fair to say we suck.  And we will continue to suck until we add more talent.  Especially including a Quarterback.  Which, I think, is kinda what people mean by "rebuilding."  So, really, we're arguing over a label now, no?

[ZachEY]

51 minutes ago, bitonti said:

there is no rebuild. there's just a reload, every offseason. 

You've said this on multiple occasions, outside of semantics, I'm not sure how these things are different.

[phill1c]

Just now, gEYno said:

You've said this on multiple occasions, outside of semantics, I'm not sure how these things are different.

Rebuild suggests that management isn't so worried about immediate results. They've accepted that they will cede the present for the future. Reload suggest that you expect to win.

[UntouchableCrew]

At this point the talk about tanking is pointless. We're bad enough that we don't need to tank for a top 5 pick.

[Beerfish]

There is rebuilding imo.  It is all about how you approach a series of 2 or 3 years in a row with your off season moves.

The New York Jets signaled this past off season that they were NOT rebuilding by their actions.  Forte, McLendon, Jenkins.  No attempt to acquire more picks.

 

[nyjbuddy]

One thing that is often over-looked when evaluating a coach or franchise in this case, is the ability to develop talent.  Finding talent is one thing, but developing talent is another.  Some players come into the league and can step in right away and have an impact.  Joey Bosa, for example, is one player that could be put into this category, at least for this year.  No  preseason, missed a couple of games but when he started to play, he did well.  Not much "coaching" needed.  The majority of players in this league though take time to develop and its most likely not on their own.  It takes the organization, teammates as well as great coaches that know how to develop those players that make great players.  It becomes harder for a player to develop further when those coaches change every other year.  Having coaches that are not just x and o type coaches or motivational coaches, but are coaches that can also develop the talent is very valuable in a franchise's sustained success.  

The term "rebuilding" in terms of an NFL franchise pertains to the time when an organization is making a shift in philosophy.  Its the time when everyone in an organization is either getting on board with the philosophy or people are getting out.  Its not just the roster that can be in a "rebuild" mode but organizationally too.  This may be a coaching philosophy or front office change in how a franchise is built.  For example, the Jets went from draft picks don't really matter ("Tannenbaum"), to getting as many picks as possible ("Idzik") to making the best with what you have ("Maccagnan") in less than 5 years.  Every time a new GM came in or a new coach came in, the Jets were in "rebuilding" mode because the philosophy was changing.  Those were not similar ideas on how to build a roster.  People within the organization needed to get on board with the new ideas of the people in charge.  When you get the right people on board all moving the same direction, then the franchise will no longer be in a "rebuild" mode.  Just like player development, its hard for teams to get out of that "rebuilding" mode when coaches and GMs change so often.

[kevinc855]

8 minutes ago, nyjbuddy said:

One thing that is often over-looked when evaluating a coach or franchise in this case, is the ability to develop talent.  Finding talent is one thing, but developing talent is another.  Some players come into the league and can step in right away and have an impact.  Joey Bosa, for example, is one player that could be put into this category, at least for this year.  No  preseason, missed a couple of games but when he started to play, he did well.  Not much "coaching" needed.  The majority of players in this league though take time to develop and its most likely not on their own.  It takes the organization, teammates as well as great coaches that know how to develop those players that make great players.  It becomes harder for a player to develop further when those coaches change every other year.  Having coaches that are not just x and o type coaches or motivational coaches, but are coaches that can also develop the talent is very valuable in a franchise's sustained success.  

The term "rebuilding" in terms of an NFL franchise pertains to the time when an organization is making a shift in philosophy.  Its the time when everyone in an organization is either getting on board with the philosophy or people are getting out.  Its not just the roster that can be in a "rebuild" mode but organizationally too.  This may be a coaching philosophy or front office change in how a franchise is built.  For example, the Jets went from draft picks don't really matter ("Tannenbaum"), to getting as many picks as possible ("Idzik") to making the best with what you have ("Maccagnan") in less than 5 years.  Every time a new GM came in or a new coach came in, the Jets were in "rebuilding" mode because the philosophy was changing.  Those were not similar ideas on how to build a roster.  People within the organization needed to get on board with the new ideas of the people in charge.  When you get the right people on board all moving the same direction, then the franchise will no longer be in a "rebuild" mode.  Just like player development, its hard for teams to get out of that "rebuilding" mode when coaches and GMs change so often.

Yes which means if Woody is truly committed Bowles and Mac deserve at least 5 years. I think next years record will be very telling for Todd's future though. A seventh season with no playoffs may set Woody over the edge. Man is getting older.

[Matt39]

As far as "finding" talent goes:

• Stop trading picks for players
• Stop negating comp picks by signing free agents- these are free draft picks
• Utilitze FO's QBase for selecting a QB
• There are thousands of draft sites that do the dirty work for scouting.
• Take edge rushers with sub 3 cone drills etc

It's not that hard anymore. The only thing the team really has to do with regards to scouting college players is find out if they like the sport, are coachable and make sure they arent serial killers. The more picks you have the better chance you have of fielding a competitive roster, obviously.

Take a look at the Seahawks drafts- this is basically the model they follow. They dont hit home runs on every pick- but they're giving themselves the best odds to do so. The Jets had what 6 picks last year? That's horrible and basically forces our dumb owner to overcompensate via free agency.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seattle_Seahawks_draft_history#2013_draft

 

[kevinc855]

3 minutes ago, Matt39 said:

As far as "finding" talent goes:

• Stop trading picks for players
• Stop negating comp picks by signing free agents- these are free draft picks
• Utilitze FO's QBase for selecting a QB
• There are thousands of draft sites that do the dirty work for scouting.
• Take edge rushers with sub 3 cone drills etc

It's not that hard anymore. The only thing the team really has to do with regards to scouting college players is find out if they like the sport, are coachable and make sure they arent serial killers. The more picks you have the better chance you have of fielding a competitive roster, obviously.

Take a look at the Seahawks drafts- this is basically the model they follow. They dont hit home runs on every pick- but they're giving themselves the best odds to do so. The Jets had what 6 picks last year? That's horrible and basically forces our dumb owner to overcompensate via free agency.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seattle_Seahawks_draft_history#2013_draft

 

Hate to break it to you but its not that simple. Moreover, a lot of draft picks aren't good if you don't have good picks! See 2014 and our 12 picks we had. Sometimes though losing a pick for someone like ohhhh Brandon Marshall is a good deal. Its not that black and white.

[Matt39]

2 minutes ago, kevinc855 said:

Hate to break it to you but its not that simple. Moreover, a lot of draft picks aren't good if you don't have good picks! See 2014 and our 12 picks we had. Sometimes though losing a pick for someone like ohhhh Brandon Marshall is a good deal. Its not that black and white.

You're bringing up one occurrence when the Jets actually had a ton of picks. You basically need to repeat this multiple times to see any sort of meaningful result. 

The Marshall trade was fine I guess. We don't have anything to show for it though.

[joewilly12]

Every season we suck the pacifists put us in the 'rebuild mode" its just another excuse for not winning and the one i love the best is "theres always next year" 

[phill1c]

2 minutes ago, kevinc855 said:

Hate to break it to you but its not that simple. Moreover, a lot of draft picks aren't good if you don't have good picks! See 2014 and our 12 picks we had. Sometimes though losing a pick for someone like ohhhh Brandon Marshall is a good deal. Its not that black and white.

Yeah, but it's close to black and white. You say Brandon Marshall was a good deal. Well, why? He's a talented WR but, really, what has he brought to the Jets? He's a crutch for Ryan Fitzpatrick, has AT LEAST one critical drop every two games and has never reached the playoffs on any of his teams. So, sure, on the surface it seems like a good deal. But in the end, all he's doing for the Jets is taking reps from a younger player who may have more potential down the road.

As a long-time Jets fan, I have often advocated taking the long route: drafting players, even if it means losing more in the present, because after the Parcells tenure, I felt that the team never did have the elite talent a team needs to win the Super Bowl.

One thing that does complicate things is that, for years, the Jets probably had one of the worst scouting departments in the NFL. You mentioned the 2014 draft class. Well, imagine if Jerry Jones had that class or even Mike Maccagnon. I think the difference would be easily seen. But, yes, one does have to develop talent, too. And that does require some patience and having coaching able to do that. It's unclear that the Jets currently have that. But it's also clear that a lot of the measureables on the Jets roster really aren't up to the elite class of talent that teams like the Cowboys, Seahawks, and others seem to have.

[ZachEY]

1 hour ago, phill1c said:

Rebuild suggests that management isn't so worried about immediate results. They've accepted that they will cede the present for the future. Reload suggest that you expect to win.

Ok, fair.

I don't have any insight into the mind of the front office, but I certainly didn't expect to win this season.

[phill1c]

4 minutes ago, gEYno said:

Ok, fair.

I don't have any insight into the mind of the front office, but I certainly didn't expect to win this season.

I didn't expect Fitzpatrick to be as bad as he was. Nor did I expect the defense to be as impotent as it is.

That said, I did think that the they had a surplus of DL and that the OL was suspect. I think the talent has been upgraded in several areas but I think maybe this season is probably the best season--for the team's near-term future--that we could have hoped for.

Fitzpatrick is fools gold. So, that's been exposed. the WR position has been significantly upgraded. We are likely going to have a very favorable draft position. So, a lot of the areas where we need help, now and in the future, can be addressed with draft capital instead of FA retreads.

[southparkcpa]

32 minutes ago, Matt39 said:

As far as "finding" talent goes:

• Stop trading picks for players
• Stop negating comp picks by signing free agents- these are free draft picks
• Utilitze FO's QBase for selecting a QB
• There are thousands of draft sites that do the dirty work for scouting.
• Take edge rushers with sub 3 cone drills etc

It's not that hard anymore. The only thing the team really has to do with regards to scouting college players is find out if they like the sport, are coachable and make sure they arent serial killers. The more picks you have the better chance you have of fielding a competitive roster, obviously.

Take a look at the Seahawks drafts- this is basically the model they follow. They dont hit home runs on every pick- but they're giving themselves the best odds to do so. The Jets had what 6 picks last year? That's horrible and basically forces our dumb owner to overcompensate via free agency.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seattle_Seahawks_draft_history#2013_draft

 

 

27 minutes ago, kevinc855 said:

Hate to break it to you but its not that simple. Moreover, a lot of draft picks aren't good if you don't have good picks! See 2014 and our 12 picks we had. Sometimes though losing a pick for someone like ohhhh Brandon Marshall is a good deal. Its not that black and white.

Well... what Matt39 states is pretty strong. We have gotten no where with FA etc.  reason we go for so many FAs is we suck at drafting. We need picks, lots of them.  Youth wins, not FITZ, Decker and Marshall.   On balance a few FA signings are needed but drafting is the answer without a close second. 

[Integrity28]

4 hours ago, UnitedWhofans said:

I disagree with that to an extent. You do hear the word rebuild around some of those teams. And part of their "rebuild" is trading their QBs. This has been the case with Brees and Rivers especially. I think another bad year next year and Green Bay will start to have that chat.

There has even been at times a faction of Pats fans that have suggested moving on from Brady. Nuts, but it's true

Regardless, I think its a big question whether to have a good team around you then you get the QB or the other way around. If you do it the other way, you could end up like Indy and San Diego

 

Eh, I don't think it's an exact science. There's no one way to do it.

 

[Lupz27]

5 hours ago, Kleckineau said:

The "you cant win without a top QB"  dogma was trashed by the Broncos last year so stop already.

Coaching esp in game and game planning are just as important.

So once every 16 years a all time great D comes along, and wins a SB.  If you don't think it's about the QB your just not paying attention.

[rex-n-effect]

3 hours ago, Matt39 said:

As far as "finding" talent goes:

• Stop trading picks for players
• Stop negating comp picks by signing free agents- these are free draft picks
• Utilitze FO's QBase for selecting a QB
• There are thousands of draft sites that do the dirty work for scouting.
• Take edge rushers with sub 3 cone drills etc

It's not that hard anymore. The only thing the team really has to do with regards to scouting college players is find out if they like the sport, are coachable and make sure they arent serial killers. The more picks you have the better chance you have of fielding a competitive roster, obviously.

Take a look at the Seahawks drafts- this is basically the model they follow. They dont hit home runs on every pick- but they're giving themselves the best odds to do so. The Jets had what 6 picks last year? That's horrible and basically forces our dumb owner to overcompensate via free agency.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seattle_Seahawks_draft_history#2013_draft

 

 

Some guy with a blog watching ESPN vs. tenured scouting department.

 

Equal probability of success.

[Matt39]

1 minute ago, rex-n-effect said:

 

Some guy with a blog watching ESPN vs. tenured scouting department.

 

Equal probability of success.

Compared with the Jets? Take the guy with the dartboard.

[Larz]

Welp, they need to rebuild the leadership first. having a GM and coach that both report to the owner is really stupid

They need to weed out the check collector's and get young hungry animals in here.

It has to start with that  this team needs leadership, heart and desire.

Bowles does not provide that

Bowles and Revis have to go, throw out gailey and Rodgers too.

Then you go young and coach them up

Smells like a rebuild to me

[RoadFan]

9 hours ago, LionelRichie said:

 

rebuild is code for finding a new QB who can play.   

Bortles stinks so the Jaguars are still "rebuilding", the Browns are worse than the Jets at finding a QB, Kaerpernick went from all-pro to terrible so the 49ers are rebuilding.   

Then look at the Raiders - now that they have Carr #2 they are rebuilt.

Andrew Luck and the Colts?  Phillip Rivers and the Bolts?

Derek Carr has a quality O-Line that the Raiders built over three or four years?

See the difference?

So no... "rebuild" is not code for finding a QB.  It is the biggest piece, but there are other moving parts that take years to fix.

The goal is to win a SB.  You can't do that without the other pieces or an all-time great defense.  Not make the playoffs. Win a SB.