Scott Pioli

[TuscanyTile2]

Why is he an assistant GM in Atlanta?  I'd happily take him as GM of the NYJ and I find it hard to believe that many teams in the league wouldn't hire him as GM.

[Larz]

See chiefs, Kansas city 

[Rangers9]

I take Mac over Pioli although he's certainly not incompetent and could do the job. 

[TuscanyTile2]

2 hours ago, Larz said:

See chiefs, Kansas city 

According to Wiki, he was the GM of the Chiefs from 2009-2012 but is currently the assistant GM with the Falcons (and has been since 2014).  Maybe Wiki is incorrect?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scott_Pioli

 

[TuscanyTile2]

This article from July 10, 2017 says Brett Veach is the Chiefs GM.

http://www.kansascity.com/sports/nfl/kansas-city-chiefs/article160576374.html

[Larz]

17 minutes ago, TuscanyTile2 said:

According to Wiki, he was the GM of the Chiefs from 2009-2012 but is currently the assistant GM with the Falcons (and has been since 2014).  Maybe Wiki is incorrect?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scott_Pioli

 

While he was there he was in over his head, the job was too big for him. He may get another shot but probably not 

[JetsFanatic]

18 minutes ago, TuscanyTile2 said:

This article from July 10, 2017 says Brett Veach is the Chiefs GM.

http://www.kansascity.com/sports/nfl/kansas-city-chiefs/article160576374.html

He was fired by the Chiefs.

[Sperm Edwards]

4 hours ago, TuscanyTile2 said:

Why is he an assistant GM in Atlanta?  I'd happily take him as GM of the NYJ and I find it hard to believe that many teams in the league wouldn't hire him as GM.

His name outweighs his accomplishments because he was once Belichick’s pet. 

Sure it’s possible he sucked his first go at it, and then sees where he went wrong, but that’s a guess at best. Even if that ever came to be, being from the Belichick Tree he’s not coming to the Jets. As things stand, so long as they don’t go to the Jets, Beli takes back his pets who were failures elsewhere so they can build their reputations back up again. He’s 52, not 66, so he’s got a few years yet before that door is closed for good. 

[TuscanyTile2]

24 minutes ago, Sperm Edwards said:

His name outweighs his accomplishments because he was once Belichick’s pet. 

Sure it’s possible he sucked his first go at it, and then sees where he went wrong, but that’s a guess at best. Even if that ever came to be, being from the Belichick Tree he’s not coming to the Jets. As things stand, so long as they don’t go to the Jets, Beli takes back his pets who were failures elsewhere so they can build their reputations back up again. He’s 52, not 66, so he’s got a few years yet before that door is closed for good. 

Certainly possible.  It's interesting how the Belichick coaching tree is pretty barren unless we credit Nick Saban to him (who is the GOAT college football coach).  In retrospect, it might be even more of a credit to Belichick that it was HIM (meaning Belichick) who did everything.

@Sperm Edwards - how do you view Bill Parcells knowing what we all now know about Belichick?

[BigRy56]

He was a whack gm 

[jetsons]

6 hours ago, TuscanyTile2 said:

Why is he an assistant GM in Atlanta?  I'd happily take him as GM of the NYJ and I find it hard to believe that many teams in the league wouldn't hire him as GM.

I'm up for giving him a second chance as a GM... Belichick got a second chance as a HC & look how that turned out.

[Philc1]

Pioli was probably on his way to being a HOF’er before he bet big on MattCassell in KC and lost.  Of course he’d be an upgrade over Macagnan he’s built multiple Super Bowl teams and drafted Seymour, Wilfork along with a guy named Tom Brady

[Sperm Edwards]

7 hours ago, TuscanyTile2 said:

Certainly possible.  It's interesting how the Belichick coaching tree is pretty barren unless we credit Nick Saban to him (who is the GOAT college football coach).  In retrospect, it might be even more of a credit to Belichick that it was HIM (meaning Belichick) who did everything.

@Sperm Edwards - how do you view Bill Parcells knowing what we all now know about Belichick?

Thank you for this open-ended question that begs a long answer. And it isn't even my birthday or Christmas or anything.  

Comparatively? An excellent coach. Certainly not as incredible as his reputation once was, and he was outright lousy at "shopping for the groceries" and put all too much weight into the proverbial "Parcells guys" on the field. 

Even the greatest coaches make/made in-game blunders, and he certainly wasn't immune (*cough* Leon Johnson halfback option *cough*). And it's also true that some of the biggest sources of aggravation for Jets fans, since his departure from here, simply didn't apply to him. So we don't ever remember yelling from the stands or watching the TV, things that current  "Jesus H. ****ing Christ, this bastard er can't ****ing count!!!", or "God ****ing dammit, who challenges a 5 yard pass on 1st & 10?!?!" (since there were neither 2-point conversions nor replay/challenges back then).

At the same time we weren't regularly plagued with 12 men on the field; repeated personal fouls; not having control of his locker room; not knowing when to call a timeout and when to save it; not knowing when to punt and when to go for it (and though it didn't always go well, it was fun having a coach who went for it on 4th down so often; it felt like we get 4 downs while the other team only gets 3); and in general he had all the basics down cold.

He didn't need a clock manager; he was a defense guy first and foremost, yet he was clearly very active on coaching his QBs (with some unexpectedly positive effects, from Vinny to Lucas to Romo) and other offensive skill positions. A story that comes to mind was Martin, back when they were both with the Patriots: he had a nice gainer along the sideline and instead of giving him a congrats/nice-going as he came off the field for the next play, Tuna instead barked at him (and may have taken him out of the game for a while) because he was carrying the ball in his inside arm. Think Bowles would do that? Is there anyone who thinks there's the slightest chance Bowles - or most head coaches - would even notice? Parcells certainly knew how to assemble a competent staff, and wasn't afraid to take control of any/all playcalling even from the best of them; he could do it because he actually knew what he was doing on both sides of the ball (almost as much as he thought he knew, lol). Was he really "nothing" without Belichick? I think in light of everything above (and more), that's way overstating, and all those good coaches wouldn't follow him around if he was an empty suit (an empty fat suit with that gross pelvic bulge. Ewww). But it's also clear by now that he got a lot of credit for some successes better attributed to others over the years. 

Then there's the GM-side, and frankly he was horrible at it. The guy must have had the worst poker face - even by tone of voice on the phone - because no GM has gotten so badly fleeced as he repeatedly got during the 1997 draft. He makes Maccagnan look like a master negotiator in comparison. And yes, the nonsense about Manning wasn't coming out anyway is just that: nonsense. If the great Bill Parcells says to Archie that he wants his son, then his son comes out instead of waffling until March; of all the things Archie feared for his kids it was that they'd waste their prime career seasons on a bad team and/or playing for a bad coach (see Eli's later refusal to play for the Bolts). Any crap he said about his not wanting to tamper because Peyton was just a junior...come on, the only reason he was on the Jets in the first place was his tampering while he was still the Pats' HC (in the middle of the playoffs no less), plus he and Archie were friends who knew each other for years & years so nobody's ratting on him. He didn't want Peyton because he came here on a 3-year plan and he didn't want a rookie QB (let alone a rookie QB who skipped his senior season, Manning name or no).

Then he picked up a lot of has-beens and in some cases, on his way out, gave them going away presents (Bryan Cox being the most egregious IIRC). For all the complaints about other coaches' rigidity to their scheme, he force-fed young demon pass rusher Hugh Douglas as a 3-4 DE where he was neither a good run stopper nor a good pass rusher taking on 2 OLmen every down. A year later he dumped this 10 sack/season kid in favor of 30 year-old Anthony Pleasant. Then with 2nd rounder he got for Douglas, instead of taking one of the many productive players there (Surtain among them), he arrogantly traded down for Hackenberg-level bust Dorian Boose and some other future nobodies. The next round, he didn't take Leonard Little because he wanted to add another 7th round pick, so he traded down 2 spots and we got Scott Frost instead. Yecch. Loads of stuff like that.

So it goes without saying he didn't have the greatest eye for young talent, and perhaps that's why he leaned so heavily on "his" guys and brought them in wherever he went. Hey, plenty of coaches would want good players they already know, but with him it was ridiculous. And it's no wonder he would go on to say you lose a game for every rookie you start. Yeah, certainly if he's the one drafting those rookies.

2000 was a nice haul, but that's because of moving Keyshawn and the extra #1 for Belichick more than shrewdly finding talent throughout the draft. He hit on 3 of 4 round 1 picks and also picked up Coles in round 3, but absent 3 extra #1 picks there would have been no Abraham and no Ellis (and no Becht, lol). I mean look at those 3 prior drafts; just a disaster. 31 draft picks, 5 starters, 0 pro bowlers (until Farrior finally made it with the Steelers). 

Incidentally, the player who saved his Manning-less tenure with the Jets - Testaverde - wouldn't have even been on the team if not for Belichick and their history from Cleveland. Even after he was here Parcells still stubbornly went with Glenn Foley instead for a month, and Foley - or some other castoff he'd otherwise find so he could dump O'Donnell - would have been our QB all season if not for lucking into both VT's availability and connection with his most-trusted assistant coach.

Parcells was the most obvious reason for the turnaround with the Jets, and we still talk of the the team's history in terms of pre-Parcells and post-Parcells. He was a very good coach for a long time. It's hard to say exactly how good because he left his last 3 stops abruptly. Would the teams all have collapsed under him or would they have remained (or in Dallas' case, would they have become) contenders? Might he have taken Manning if he wasn't on a 3-year plan with the Jets? Would Belichick have come along with him to the Jets in the first place if he wasn't on a 3-year plan, and without BB+VT would we have even sniffed at contention without him? At the same time, might we have won a SB with him here - even in that 3 year span - if he wasn't the GM and let someone else shop for the groceries instead of Tuna arrogantly Peter Principle'ing himself into about draft 2 dozen busts in his first 3 Jets drafts? We'll never know. 

[nyjunc]

has anyone ever noticed all these guys connected w/ Brady fail when Brady isn't around?