The Jets job will be an envious job for coaching candidates

[Adoni Beast]

14 hours ago, jetstream23 said:

I would also think that agents and potential HC's see the Jets as a patient (too patient?) organization.  The Jets kept Rex a year too long.  They kept Bowles at least a year or two too long.  Guys get the benefit of the doubt around here.

Look what the Giants did with McAdoo.  One and done.  They knew and they acted decisively.

Let's also remember that Macc does not seem to do the hiring here.  He has a loud voice in the decision but the Jets have interestingly chosen to keep the GM and HC in separate reporting structures.

McAdoo was there for 2 years. But I agree with everything you said.

[jetstream23]

11 minutes ago, Adoni Beast said:

McAdoo was there for 2 years. But I agree with everything you said.

Ah, my bad.

In reality, I think the Bowles got 3 1/2 years.  They'd fire him today if they could but they can't because of the pure vacuum of leadership and capability below him to take over on an interim basis.  I think the decision is made, they just won't do it until January. 

[Adoni Beast]

1 minute ago, jetstream23 said:

Ah, my bad.

In reality, I think the Bowles got 3 1/2 years.  They'd fire him today if they could but they can't because of the pure vacuum of leadership and capability below him to take over on an interim basis.  I think the decision is made, they just won't do it until January. 

Agreed. I just hope Mac is gone with him. 

[jetstream23]

13 minutes ago, Adoni Beast said:

Agreed. I just hope Mac is gone with him. 

I'm 50/50 on that.  Not a huge Macc fan but I haven't seen the level of incompetence with him that I've seen from Bowles.  Macc has had mixed results over 4 years.  I'd understand if they didn't terminate him at the end of the year.

[jetstream23]

38 minutes ago, jeremy2020 said:

Told ya'll this guy was gonna be the next coach

 

We're hiring Bobby Valentine???

[lounap23]

2 hours ago, flgreen said:

LOL

C'mon man.  Besides the much better talent Sanchez had around him, Darnold hasn't had a C that  can snap the ball to him in 4 out of the last 5 games.  15 bad snaps in the Fins game alone.

I don't think Mangold had 15 bad snaps in his career 

FACTS.....  Anyone that thinks Darnold is a bust after his first 8 games shouldn't be allowed to post....   

[lounap23]

15 hours ago, Jetsbb said:

Franchise QB? All Darnold has proven so far is that he is a worse rookie QB than Sanchez was.

A little early to make this assessment..

[UntouchableCrew]

Posted this in another thread:

The positives: Darnold has franchise potential and I'm sure many offensive minds think they can make him a star. Tons of cap space. A top three pick. Some valuable pieces on defense.

The negatives: Bad ownership, a roster without much talent and lots of holes to fill. Tough media market and an irritable fan-base that doesn't show up to games.

In a vacuum there are elements (QB if you like Darnold, cap space, top pick) that make it an appealing job but there are constants (bad ownership, tough media/fans, no homefield advantage) that make it less desirable.

It's the type of job you could sell somebody on but if you have options I'm sure most would rather go elsewhere. Our hope should be that jobs like Baltimore open don't open up.

 

[jetstream23]

15 hours ago, Jetsbb said:

Franchise QB? All Darnold has proven so far is that he is a worse rookie QB than Sanchez was.

Yikes.  This is one of the worst takes I've seen here.

Did you know how bad Aaron Rodgers is?  His team is 4-4.  That guy is barely average.

[JetsYanks13]

There are only 32 head coaching jobs in the nfl. With that being said, when one becomes available there are tons of guys who are interested. However, guys like harbaugh and McCartey can pick and choose where they want to go.


Sent from my iPhone using JetNation.com mobile app

[jetstream23]

15 minutes ago, UntouchableCrew said:

Posted this in another thread:

The positives: Darnold has franchise potential and I'm sure many offensive minds think they can make him a star. Tons of cap space. A top three pick. Some valuable pieces on defense.

The negatives: Bad ownership, a roster without much talent and lots of holes to fill. Tough media market and an irritable fan-base that doesn't show up to games.

In a vacuum there are elements (QB if you like Darnold, cap space, top pick) that make it an appealing job but there are constants (bad ownership, tough media/fans, no homefield advantage) that make it less desirable.

It's the type of job you could sell somebody on but if you have options I'm sure most would rather go elsewhere. Our hope should be that jobs like Baltimore open don't open up.

 

Here's the part I'll disagree with.

Ownership has been bad for the FANS.

Ownership has been great for Head Coaches here.  The team gives a LOT of slack to coaches, kept Rex a year too long, extended Bowles after consecutive 5-11 seasons.  Ownership also wants to win...they just don't know HOW to win.  While we have lots of Cap space ownership hasn't been overly tight with money and threw $70M+ at Johnson this past offseason.  They dropped a chunk of change in Revis' lap two years before that.

So I'd actually argue that ownership is a POSITIVE for HC candidates even if ownership has sucked from a fan's standpoint.  The Johnsons tolerate mediocrity longer than they should and that's a positive for job security around here.

[lounap23]

2 minutes ago, jetstream23 said:

Here's the part I'll disagree with.

Ownership has been bad for the FANS.

Ownership has been great for Head Coaches here.  The team gives a LOT of slack to coaches, kept Rex a year too long, extended Bowles after consecutive 5-11 seasons.  Ownership also wants to win...they just don't know HOW to win.  While we have lots of Cap space ownership hasn't been overly tight with money and threw $70M+ at Johnson this past offseason.

So I'd actually argue that ownership is a POSITIVE for HC candidates even if ownership has sucked from a fan's standpoint.

I agree with this take on ownership and I think Chris Johnson will handle a coaching and possible GM search better than Woody has in the past

[RJIII]

If I had to rank those I’d put the jets at the top of the list along with Cleveland 

The jets are already at the top of the list with Cleveland.


Sent from my iPhone using JetNation.com mobile app

[UntouchableCrew]

26 minutes ago, jetstream23 said:

Here's the part I'll disagree with.

Ownership has been bad for the FANS.

Ownership has been great for Head Coaches here.  The team gives a LOT of slack to coaches, kept Rex a year too long, extended Bowles after consecutive 5-11 seasons.  Ownership also wants to win...they just don't know HOW to win.  While we have lots of Cap space ownership hasn't been overly tight with money and threw $70M+ at Johnson this past offseason.  They dropped a chunk of change in Revis' lap two years before that.

So I'd actually argue that ownership is a POSITIVE for HC candidates even if ownership has sucked from a fan's standpoint.  The Johnsons tolerate mediocrity longer than they should and that's a positive for job security around here.

There are worse owners for sure that you'd less rather work for but I think Woody has proven over time that he's just not adept at running the organization well. You're right that in theory patient ownership could be a positive but what if they are installing a moronic organizational structure where the GM and HC answer directly to ownership? What if they're bringing back Mike Macagnan or hiring another guy you think is a buffoon? What if they're not willing to pay up for the assistants you want? What if they really like the backpage and pressure you to do things that make no sense?

There is only one constant in the NFL. Players change, coaches change, the front office changes. When a team continues to fail over a long period of time it's always the owner.

[nyjunc]

1 hour ago, Barry McCockinner said:

Good, no one wants to see the thread get junked.

 

I'll educate you another day, keep reading stat sheets though

[nyjunc]

1 hour ago, UntouchableCrew said:

It's actually the opposite -- it's misleading because if they had a halfway decent passing game they would have been more dominant in the run game.

They did have a halfway decent passing game.  Mark had a good rookie year, he had some awful games to skew numbers but overall a good rookie year and he followed that up with a good postseason.

[Barry McCockinner]

18 minutes ago, nyjunc said:

I'll educate you another day, keep reading stat sheets though

no one other than yourself is interested in reading your narcissistic, illogical rants that only make sense to you. literally, no one. get over yourself. 

 

[UntouchableCrew]

32 minutes ago, nyjunc said:

They did have a halfway decent passing game.  Mark had a good rookie year, he had some awful games to skew numbers but overall a good rookie year and he followed that up with a good postseason.

No, he had a bad rookie year. You are just 100% wrong about this by literally any standard.

[Miss Lonelyhearts]

34 minutes ago, UntouchableCrew said:

No, he had a bad rookie year. You are just 100% wrong about this by literally any standard.

What if the standard is conning a whole bunch of dumb Jets fans into prematurely declaring victory on having found a franchise quarterback?

[UntouchableCrew]

2 hours ago, Miss Lonelyhearts said:

What if the standard is conning a whole bunch of dumb Jets fans into prematurely declaring victory on having found a franchise quarterback?

I don't remember it that way. Sanchez was never a good quarterback statistically and I don't remember a significant segment of the fanbase claiming he was "the guy."

[Miss Lonelyhearts]

42 minutes ago, UntouchableCrew said:

I don't remember a significant segment of the fanbase claiming he was "the guy."

This seems like selective amnesia. Seriously no recollection of the Sanchize business and blaming everything on Schottenheimer and weppinz and all that stuff?

[Sperm Edwards]

9 hours ago, Lizard King said:

Hard to disagree with any of that. But at the end of the day Hess fell on the sword and wanted a winner on his way out of this life. Woody continues to meddle in affairs. Until he steps out of operations this team is not going to succeed. 

I'm no fan of Woody's, but the main meddling has been the lack of a typical hierarchy where he hires a GM (or hires a head of football operations who then hires the GM) who then hires a HC. That's enough for me to dislike him as owner.

The rest of the meddling is all baseless fan speculation. There have been exactly zero credible leaks in ~20 years that he forced any player or draft pick or strategy onto his GM. Like the idea that he forced Maccagnan to add the veterans he did in 2015; it's nonsense until you hear from someone who was there. Every GM has said, without exception, that he let the GM do whatever he want (except hire his own HC, lol). There was no pressure to spend or to not spend or to do anything specifically other than keeping him in the loop. Not Favre, not Tebow, not Revis, not anyone.

[UnitedWhofans]

1 minute ago, Sperm Edwards said:

I'm no fan of Woody's, but the main meddling has been the lack of a typical hierarchy where he hires a GM (or hires a head of football operations who then hires the GM) who then hires a HC. That's enough for me to dislike him as owner.

The rest of the meddling is all baseless fan speculation. There have been exactly zero credible leaks in ~20 years that he forced any player or draft pick or strategy onto his GM. Like the idea that he forced Maccagnan to add the veterans he did in 2015; it's nonsense until you hear from someone who was there. Every GM has said, without exception, that he let the GM do whatever he want (except hire his own HC, lol). There was no pressure to spend or to not spend or to do anything specifically other than keeping him in the loop. Not Favre, not Tebow, not Revis, not anyone.

Well Sperm now that we are on the precipice of Macc possibly being fired, who is your candidate?

[Sperm Edwards]

1 minute ago, UnitedWhofans said:

Well Sperm now that we are on the precipice of Macc possibly being fired, who is your candidate?

You, obviously.

I think the way you up-vote all your own posts means you know what you are talking about.

I'm sold.

[UnitedWhofans]

Just now, Sperm Edwards said:

You, obviously

Why thank you. I will make you proud

[BurnleyJet]

5 minutes ago, UnitedWhofans said:

Why thank you. I will make you proud

You can start by changing your picture to a better Dr like Tom Baker.

[UnitedWhofans]

Just now, BurnleyJet said:

You can start by changing your picture to a better Dr like Tom Baker.

Sylvester McCoy is my favorite. Tom is great though. But we have to represent the incumbant

[BurnleyJet]

4 minutes ago, UnitedWhofans said:

Sylvester McCoy is my favorite. Tom is great though. But we have to represent the incumbant

No and defo no.

True story I once got drunk with Sylvester McCoy at a convention.

[UnitedWhofans]

Just now, BurnleyJet said:

No and defo no.

True story I once got drunk with Sylvester McCoy at a convention.

NICE!

I just like that dark chessmaster like Doctor. I can see bits of that in Jodie's performance.

[BurnleyJet]

2 minutes ago, UnitedWhofans said:

NICE!

I just like that dark chessmaster like Doctor. I can see bits of that in Jodie's performance.

Not a fan of the virtue signaling BBC. 

[UntouchableCrew]

1 hour ago, Miss Lonelyhearts said:

This seems like selective amnesia. Seriously no recollection of the Sanchize business and blaming everything on Schottenheimer and weppinz and all that stuff?

I mean people were hopeful but nobody declared him a franchise guy. He never even had an above average season.

[hawk]

23 hours ago, bealeb319 said:

I agree 100 percent Sanchez had a better offense at the very least a better line and rb. Still though darnold hasn't proven himself just yet his statline on the season isnt going to make every potential head coach candidates mouth water.

Sent from my LGUS991 using JetNation.com mobile app
 

 Because we want a HC that evaluates based on statlines?

[bealeb319]

 Because we want a HC that evaluates based on statlines?

One that evaluates players based off of something they can see and not some type of made up potential that never seems to come into fruition? Yea that sounds like what we want.

Sent from my LGUS991 using JetNation.com mobile app

[nyjunc]

18 hours ago, Barry McCockinner said:

no one other than yourself is interested in reading your narcissistic, illogical rants that only make sense to you. literally, no one. get over yourself. 

 

don't hate me b/c I understand the game better than you do.

[nyjunc]

17 hours ago, UntouchableCrew said:

No, he had a bad rookie year. You are just 100% wrong about this by literally any standard.

He had a good rookie year w/o a doubt/  again, he had some awful games to skew #s and most fans just look at compiled #s but 11 of his 15 starts were decent to really good.  he had 4 awful games where the bulk of his INTs came from then he had a really good postseason but Jet fans want to hate on anything good that has happened to this franchise.  we prop up guys like Fitz and Favre who have never done anything for us and bash bash mark, Chad, Rex, etc...  It's the Jet fan way! and why we are getting what we deserve as a fan base.