JetNation Posted January 25, 2017 Share Posted January 25, 2017 By Glenn Naughton After nothing but radio silence from the New York Jets following the retirement of offensive coordinator Chan Gailey three weeks ago, New York Jets head coach Todd Bowles spoke with the media from Mobile, AL where he’s attending senior bowl week. Bowles made some contradictory statements regarding the time Gailey spent with the Jets, while coming off as cool and calm as it relates to the team’s search for his replacement. According to Darryl Slater of NJ advanced media, Bowles claimed he knew when he hired Gailey, that it was a position he was only going to fill for two seasons. “I knew when I hired him he was doing two years,” Bowles said. “We talked about it. He wanted to do two years, and that was that.” Later, however, Bowles contradicted himself according to Slater, saying Gailey “didn’t say [it was] a possibility when I hired him [that he’d leave after 2016], It was just definitive after the first year.” Either way, Gailey is gone and Bowles is leading the search for his replacement. After Bowles was snubbed by the Philadelphia Eagles in their effort to interview their quarterbacks coach, John DeFilippo, and an interview with Denver Broncos running backs coach Eric Studesville didn’t produce any results, it’s been mostly quiet on the coordinator front. However, multiple outlets have reported that Bowles did in fact interview New Orleans Saints wide receivers coach John Morton who has never called plays at the pro level, but did so for three seasons at USC. Source confirms Jets interviewed Saints WR coach John Morton for offensive coordinator opening, as @RichCimini reported #NYJ — Brian Costello (@BrianCoz) January 24, 2017 Texans offensive coordinator George Godsey is also said to be on the Jets’ radar, but there have been no reports of the team conducting or scheduling an interview as of yet. When asked about how the search is progressing, Bowles simply said “I’m pretty sure where I’m going”. Where exactly that is? We’ll know soon enough. Click here to read the full story... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ASH1962 Posted January 25, 2017 Share Posted January 25, 2017 shrimp salad shrimp toast shrimp stew shrimp skewer shrimp gumbo shrimp sandwich Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beerfish Posted January 25, 2017 Share Posted January 25, 2017 Know that your oc is gone after the next year, draft a long shot QB that needs massive amounts of work. Sounds like a plan. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scott Dierking Posted January 25, 2017 Share Posted January 25, 2017 Does anybody really care about Gailey any more? He is gone. Who cares who knew what, when? It is immaterial. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beerfish Posted January 25, 2017 Share Posted January 25, 2017 1 minute ago, Scott Dierking said: Does anybody really care about Gailey any more? He is gone. Who cares who knew what, when? It is immaterial. No it is not because it sheds a light on the long range plan, or lack there of, of the New York Jets football club and all that goes along with it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scott Dierking Posted January 25, 2017 Share Posted January 25, 2017 1 minute ago, Beerfish said: No it is not because it sheds a light on the long range plan, or lack there of, of the New York Jets football club and all that goes along with it. Chan Gailey has nothing to do with current long range plans. He is gone, and what he communicated to the NYJ hierarchy about plans to retire, or not to retire are moot at this point. He is not here. Nothing long range about that. Football is a year to year sport anyway. You make plans, sh*t happens, and you adjust. No plan goes unchanged. It is the nature of the sport and the world as a whole. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JetPotato Posted January 25, 2017 Share Posted January 25, 2017 2 minutes ago, Beerfish said: No it is not because it sheds a light on the long range plan, or lack there of, of the New York Jets football club and all that goes along with it. Exactly what I said weeks ago. It also speaks to the organizational structure where the coaches report to an owner who is clearly in over his head. This is a massivr failure that falls on Bowles and Johnson. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JetPotato Posted January 25, 2017 Share Posted January 25, 2017 5 minutes ago, Scott Dierking said: Chan Gailey has nothing to do with current long range plans. He is gone, and what he communicated to the NYJ hierarchy about plans to retire, or not to retire are moot at this point. He is not here. Nothing long range about that. Football is a year to year sport anyway. You make plans, sh*t happens, and you adjust. No plan goes unchanged. It is the nature of the sport and the world as a whole. Nope. You always makes plans as far as personnel and coaching. You only hope to move on from a plan (such as a young QB's development under an offensive system) when the plan proves so successful that the OC moves on to a head coaching gig elsewhere. Allowing a lame duck situation in a time of critical development shows cluelessness. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JustInFudge Posted January 25, 2017 Share Posted January 25, 2017 38 minutes ago, Beerfish said: Know that your oc is gone after the next year, draft a long shot QB that needs massive amounts of work. Sounds like a plan. It's unreal. Why even bring him in if you knew you were only getting 2 years? WTF was the point. Long shot project QB be damned. What is the point of having a rental OC when you're trying to build a new winning culture? I hate this team so much. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scott Dierking Posted January 25, 2017 Share Posted January 25, 2017 4 minutes ago, JetPotato said: Nope. You always makes plans as far as personnel and coaching. You only hope to move on from a plan (such as a young QB's development under an offensive system) when the plan proves so successful that the OC moves on to a head coaching gig elsewhere. Allowing a lame duck situation in a time of critical development shows cluelessness. We will agree to disagree. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scott Dierking Posted January 25, 2017 Share Posted January 25, 2017 2 minutes ago, JiF said: It's unreal. Why even bring him in if you knew you were only getting 2 years? WTF was the point. Long shot project QB be damned. What is the point of having a rental OC when you're trying to build a new winning culture? I hate this team so much. Jets should not have brought in Bill Parcells either. They knew it was going to be short term. Even though they had BB lacked and loaded. Long range plans never fail. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sperm Edwards Posted January 25, 2017 Share Posted January 25, 2017 3 minutes ago, Scott Dierking said: Chan Gailey has nothing to do with current long range plans. He is gone, and what he communicated to the NYJ hierarchy about plans to retire, or not to retire are moot at this point. He is not here. Nothing long range about that. Football is a year to year sport anyway. You make plans, sh*t happens, and you adjust. No plan goes unchanged. It is the nature of the sport and the world as a whole. I hear what you're saying, but it's hard to justify drafting total project QBs in back to back years if they knew the OC wanted out after just 2 seasons. It's not reasonable to presume he's going to devote as much time - or even the minimally requisite time - to their development, as would an OC who's going to still be here by the time those guys would take the field. That is, to the extent either of them could/would become good NFL starters with any amount of attention. Hardly a known fact, but the path chosen, with an OC having little to no eye on the future, is not exactly the fast track of assessing what we've got either, as we enter the 2017 offseason (or as we entered the 2016 season before that). Now we're headed into a draft with Hackenberg, for example, arguably having no fewer question-marks (as to future potential) than the day he was drafted. That is, unless they've seen enough in practice to know (read: believe they know) enough to give up on him entirely already. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UnitedWhofans Posted January 25, 2017 Share Posted January 25, 2017 7 minutes ago, JiF said: It's unreal. Why even bring him in if you knew you were only getting 2 years? WTF was the point. Long shot project QB be damned. What is the point of having a rental OC when you're trying to build a new winning culture? I hate this team so much. BIll Parcells says hi Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sperm Edwards Posted January 25, 2017 Share Posted January 25, 2017 10 minutes ago, Scott Dierking said: Jets should not have brought in Bill Parcells either. They knew it was going to be short term. Even though they had BB lacked and loaded. Long range plans never fail. Clearly this is true; maybe we'd have drafted Peyton Manning instead of James Farrior+Leon Washington+Dedric Ward+Chuck Clements+Raymond Austin . And yes, maybe "Tuna Helper" comes here just on his own - and stays here - without the Tuna. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JustInFudge Posted January 25, 2017 Share Posted January 25, 2017 11 minutes ago, Scott Dierking said: Jets should not have brought in Bill Parcells either. They knew it was going to be short term. Even though they had BB lacked and loaded. Long range plans never fail. 5 minutes ago, UnitedWhofans said: BIll Parcells says hi This isnt even a remotely comparable analogy to a first time Head Coach taking over a new team and hiring a rent-a-OC for 2 years without a successor in mind. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scott Dierking Posted January 25, 2017 Share Posted January 25, 2017 2 minutes ago, Sperm Edwards said: I hear what you're saying, but it's hard to justify drafting total project QBs in back to back years if they knew the OC wanted out after just 2 seasons. It's not reasonable to presume he's going to devote as much time - or even the minimally requisite time - to their development, as would an OC who's going to still be here by the time those guys would take the field. That is, to the extent either of them could/would become good NFL starters with any amount of attention. Hardly a known fact, but the path chosen, with an OC having little to no eye on the future, is not exactly the fast track of assessing what we've got either, as we enter the 2017 offseason (or as we entered the 2016 season before that). Now we're headed into a draft with Hackenberg, for example, arguably having no fewer question-marks (as to future potential) than the day he was drafted. That is, unless they've seen enough in practice to know (read: believe they know) enough to give up on him entirely already. Football is a short game plan proposition. If you feel you are getting the best man for the job, and he is number one on your list and no one is close, then you temper long range plans with short term expected gains. Now, I can't tell you that Gailey was that by and large best candidate, as only Bowles knows that. We also have to quibble with the results, although season 1 has to be moderated as at lest a small term win. I have no problem bringing on short term candidates, if they make your team better now. That is the life of sport, and football coaches. Bowles, when he hired Gailey, had no idea he would have a red-shirt qb on his team after 2 years and the position would feel void. You just don't have crystal balls like that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scott Dierking Posted January 25, 2017 Share Posted January 25, 2017 2 minutes ago, JiF said: This isnt even a remotely comparable analogy to a first time Head Coach taking over a new team and hiring a rent-a-OC for 2 years without a predecessor in mind. The moral of the story is that the story changes in scope every year. You can't predict the future, even with best laid plans. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sperm Edwards Posted January 25, 2017 Share Posted January 25, 2017 Just now, Scott Dierking said: Bowles, when he hired Gailey, had no idea he would have a red-shirt qb on his team after 2 years and the position would feel void. You just don't have crystal balls like that. And if the GM knew it when he drafted each of them? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UnitedWhofans Posted January 25, 2017 Share Posted January 25, 2017 Just now, JiF said: This isnt even a remotely comparable analogy to a first time Head Coach taking over a new team and hiring a rent-a-OC for 2 years without a predecessor in mind. Successor. Predecessor is before the person.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JustInFudge Posted January 25, 2017 Share Posted January 25, 2017 Just now, Scott Dierking said: The moral of the story is that the story changes in scope every year. You can't predict the future, even with best laid plans. Ummmmm...this entire article is about how Bowles just admitted he knew Gailey was leaving after 2 years. So in fact, he did know the future. lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JustInFudge Posted January 25, 2017 Share Posted January 25, 2017 Just now, UnitedWhofans said: Successor. Predecessor is before the person.. Thank you sir. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UnitedWhofans Posted January 25, 2017 Share Posted January 25, 2017 Just now, Sperm Edwards said: And if the GM knew it when he drafted each of them? Did he though? That's the question. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beerfish Posted January 25, 2017 Share Posted January 25, 2017 22 minutes ago, Scott Dierking said: Chan Gailey has nothing to do with current long range plans. He is gone, and what he communicated to the NYJ hierarchy about plans to retire, or not to retire are moot at this point. He is not here. Nothing long range about that. Football is a year to year sport anyway. You make plans, sh*t happens, and you adjust. No plan goes unchanged. It is the nature of the sport and the world as a whole. Nonsense, when the oc has told you he is leaving that is not 'sh*t happens' it is a total lack of planning and a total lack of development of your prize 2nd rounder you just took as QB. If you know your OC is moving on then a solid plan to replace him seamlessly and at least dedicate resources to the future instead of just this year is sound football management. This is as far from 'sh*t happens' as you can get. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scott Dierking Posted January 25, 2017 Share Posted January 25, 2017 1 minute ago, JiF said: Ummmmm...this entire article is about how Bowles just admitted he knew Gailey was leaving after 2 years. So in fact, he did know the future. lol And that is a calculated gamble. As I said, If you feel you have the best candidate, and he leads everyone else, you bring him on, regardless of how long he may stay. Stuff happens and people change their mind. In football with coaching, it is rare to have vision beyond 2 years. The nuances of the sport do not allow it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UnitedWhofans Posted January 25, 2017 Share Posted January 25, 2017 Just now, JiF said: Thank you sir. As to your point, I think the comparison is more about the principle. I was always under the impression that when Fitzpatrick left, Gailey would leave too because I considered them a package deal. Now, the possible mistake comes down to Kevin Patullo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UnitedWhofans Posted January 25, 2017 Share Posted January 25, 2017 Just now, Beerfish said: Nonsense, when the oc has told you he is leaving that is not 'sh*t happens' it is a total lack of planning and a total lack of development of your prize 2nd rounder you just took as QB. If you know your OC is moving on then a solid plan to replace him seamlessly and at least dedicate resources to the future instead of just this year is sound football management. This is as far from 'sh*t happens' as you can get. Which comes back to the issue of when did they find out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scott Dierking Posted January 25, 2017 Share Posted January 25, 2017 1 minute ago, Beerfish said: Nonsense, when the oc has told you he is leaving that is not 'sh*t happens' it is a total lack of planning and a total lack of development of your prize 2nd rounder you just took as QB. If you know your OC is moving on then a solid plan to replace him seamlessly and at least dedicate resources to the future instead of just this year is sound football management. This is as far from 'sh*t happens' as you can get. Bowles will bill be judged how his teams perform in the future, not what happened in the past. sh*t does happen and you adjust. How you adjust is how you are measured Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JustInFudge Posted January 25, 2017 Share Posted January 25, 2017 1 minute ago, Scott Dierking said: And that is a calculated gamble. As I said, If you feel you have the best candidate, and he leads everyone else, you bring him on, regardless of how long he may stay. Stuff happens and people change their mind. In football with coaching, it is rare to have vision beyond 2 years. The nuances of the sport do not allow it. Well, we just disagree here my man. They took a QB project and red shirted him..their vision is way beyond 2 years. Just now, UnitedWhofans said: As to your point, I think the comparison is more about the principle. I was always under the impression that when Fitzpatrick left, Gailey would leave too because I considered them a package deal. Now, the possible mistake comes down to Kevin Patullo. It's totally different. A Head Coach who's been to 2 SB's taking over a 1-15 team compared to a first time Head Coach trying to build a foundation? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
munchmemory Posted January 25, 2017 Share Posted January 25, 2017 1 minute ago, Scott Dierking said: Bowles will bill be judged how his teams perform in the future, not what happened in the past. sh*t does happen and you adjust. How you adjust is how you are measured I disagree with your statement. I think he will be judged on the totality of his performance, which includes past seasons. Doesn't look good for Todd. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scott Dierking Posted January 25, 2017 Share Posted January 25, 2017 1 minute ago, JiF said: Well, we just disagree here my man. They took a QB project and red shirted him..their vision is way beyond 2 years. I am speaking entirely to the initial hiring of Gailey, and any understanding of how long he may be coach. Any actions beyond that point are on Bowles and the Jets Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UnitedWhofans Posted January 25, 2017 Share Posted January 25, 2017 Just now, munchmemory said: I disagree with your statement. I think he will be judged on the totality of his performance, which includes past seasons. Doesn't look good for Todd. In that sense, he has had one good year and one bad year Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scott Dierking Posted January 25, 2017 Share Posted January 25, 2017 2 minutes ago, munchmemory said: I disagree with your statement. I think he will be judged on the totality of his performance, which includes past seasons. Doesn't look good for Todd. Hey, I don't believe he will make it myself. But, it will not stop me from hoping for the best Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
munchmemory Posted January 25, 2017 Share Posted January 25, 2017 Just now, UnitedWhofans said: In that sense, he has had one good year and one bad year Right. Although I might characterize last year as cataclysmically bad. It looked like he had lost control of the team in all phases. Like he was sleepwalking through his responsibilities. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UnitedWhofans Posted January 25, 2017 Share Posted January 25, 2017 Just now, munchmemory said: Right. Although I might characterize last year as cataclysmically bad. It looked like he had lost control of the team in all phases. Like he was sleepwalking through his responsibilities. i can't call a 5-11 season as cataclysmically bad. 1-3 wins, yes but not 5. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
munchmemory Posted January 25, 2017 Share Posted January 25, 2017 1 minute ago, Scott Dierking said: Hey, I don't believe he will make it myself. But, it will not stop me from hoping for the best Wouldn't dream of wanting you to lose your positive attitude. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.