Kliff Kingsbury to interview with Jets

[Beerfish]

[14 in Green]

Maneesh is on board (and maybe in love), and he said 4 players are pushing for him? I know about Adams, Maye and Herndon, who's the other? You have to admit, Klingsbury is the name that seems to be gaining a lot of steam.

[Barkus]

Kingsbury sucked as the HC of his alma mater and they couldn’t wait to get rid of him. Yet people think he would be a good NFL head coach???!! What am I missing here?? Maybe he can be a good oc but no way should he be an NFL HC. This is group think at it’s worst. 

[Jet Nut]

12 minutes ago, Barkus said:

Kingsbury sucked as the HC of his alma mater and they couldn’t wait to get rid of him. Yet people think he would be a good NFL head coach???!! What am I missing here?? Maybe he can be a good oc but no way should he be an NFL HC. This is group think at it’s worst. 

Pretty sure we'd find that every HC was fired from his first HC gig.  If thats how you judge a HC youre down to guys who never coached anywhere before.

[BettyBoop]

I feel like i'm in a bad reoccurring dream.  This team doesn't need to focus on an offensive or defensive coach.  They don't need a guy with a 'modern' spread offense to light up the league.  They don't need someone with movie start looks.  They need AN ADULT IN THE ROOM.  They need a guy who on the first day will distribute alarm clocks to the entire team and show them how they work.  And explain to everyone that there is simply no excuses to be late for anything.  They need every guy in the room to understand their role and be accountable.  They need someone to explain to them how to be a professional football player.  Does anyone really want Kliff Kingsbury to be the guy telling Mac whom to draft and which free agents to sign?  Seriously?  

McCarthy is not a top tier coach, that's for certain.  But there's no Lombardi, Parcells, Bellichick, or Walsh out there.  McCarthy is at least a guy who can restore order and accountability to the organization.  And I trust him to find the right free agents for Mac to sign and players to draft.  We need a guy who knows the NFL inside and out.  What most concerns me is his defenses have not been stellar and he will need to find a DC to run that show.  Seems to me a younger 'up and comer' defensive coach like Kris Richard would be ideal to be the ying to McCarthy's yang.  McCarthy will find receivers to make Sam better.  

There are so many holes to fill I don't want Mac to be the guy to decide on whom to sign and whom to draft, period.  Find the ADULT who can build and then coach this team to respectability.

[Barkus]

44 minutes ago, Jet Nut said:

Pretty sure we'd find that every HC was fired from his first HC gig.  If thats how you judge a HC youre down to guys who never coached anywhere before.

How about finding a HC who has at least had some success? I read some articles about Kliff’s time as HC at Texas Tech . They are not flattering at all. His defenses sucked, his staff was made up mostly of his old frat buddies and ex-teammates. Let him cut his teeth as an NFL OC first and get some maturity. I don’t think this guy is HC material.

[Spoot-Face]

2 hours ago, Matt39 said:

jesus christ

Did Manish really tweet "Kiss Sexbury"?

 

His 2019 is starting off greaaaaaaaaat.

[Creepy Lurker]

8 minutes ago, Spoot-Face said:

Did Manish really tweet "Kiss Sexbury"?

 

His 2019 is starting off greaaaaaaaaat.

[Spoot-Face]

1 minute ago, Creepy Lurker said:

You're getting good at this.

 

Well, not really, but they're certainly entertaining, so keep 'em coming!

[Creepy Lurker]

Just now, Spoot-Face said:

You're getting good at this.

 

Well, not really, but they're certainly entertaining, so keep 'em coming!

Thans but the quality is sh*t since the app sucks but my brain is filled with all kinds of nonsense that I can crank out. 

[Spoot-Face]

2 minutes ago, Creepy Lurker said:

Thans but the quality is sh*t since the app sucks but my brain is filled with all kinds of nonsense that I can crank out. 

You do that on your phone?

[Creepy Lurker]

Yeah. I don’t think the app is meant for it though. It’s extremely half *ssed. 

[Jet Nut]

56 minutes ago, Barkus said:

How about finding a HC who has at least had some success? I read some articles about Kliff’s time as HC at Texas Tech . They are not flattering at all. His defenses sucked, his staff was made up mostly of his old frat buddies and ex-teammates. Let him cut his teeth as an NFL OC first and get some maturity. I don’t think this guy is HC material.

You mean like the success of growing a QB?  Manziel, Mayfield and Mahomes all worked under him.  But hey, its more important to talk about a record at Texas Tech, where pretty much no one had a clue who he was.  I'm not sold but I'm also not talking like I have factual evidence that he can or cant coach.  Pretty much the most annoying part of discussing potential HCs 

[ryu79]

Not a fan of Kingsbury? Mayfield.

https://www.cbssports.com/college-football/news/baker-mayfield-details-strained-relationship-with-coach-kliff-kingsbury-while-at-texas-tech/

[Scoop24]

2 hours ago, ryu79 said:

Not a fan of Kingsbury? Mayfield.

https://www.cbssports.com/college-football/news/baker-mayfield-details-strained-relationship-with-coach-kliff-kingsbury-while-at-texas-tech/

But he wasn’t mad about his coaching..

[JohnnyLV]

7 hours ago, BettyBoop said:

I feel like i'm in a bad reoccurring dream.  This team doesn't need to focus on an offensive or defensive coach.  They don't need a guy with a 'modern' spread offense to light up the league.  They don't need someone with movie start looks.  They need AN ADULT IN THE ROOM.  They need a guy who on the first day will distribute alarm clocks to the entire team and show them how they work.  And explain to everyone that there is simply no excuses to be late for anything.  They need every guy in the room to understand their role and be accountable.  They need someone to explain to them how to be a professional football player.  Does anyone really want Kliff Kingsbury to be the guy telling Mac whom to draft and which free agents to sign?  Seriously?  

McCarthy is not a top tier coach, that's for certain.  But there's no Lombardi, Parcells, Bellichick, or Walsh out there.  McCarthy is at least a guy who can restore order and accountability to the organization.  And I trust him to find the right free agents for Mac to sign and players to draft.  We need a guy who knows the NFL inside and out.  What most concerns me is his defenses have not been stellar and he will need to find a DC to run that show.  Seems to me a younger 'up and comer' defensive coach like Kris Richard would be ideal to be the ying to McCarthy's yang.  McCarthy will find receivers to make Sam better.  

There are so many holes to fill I don't want Mac to be the guy to decide on whom to sign and whom to draft, period.  Find the ADULT who can build and then coach this team to respectability.

If McCarthy is not a Top Tier coach, seems like you are advocating settling for mediocre rather than striving to be great.

[fullblast]

8 hours ago, BettyBoop said:

I feel like i'm in a bad reoccurring dream.  This team doesn't need to focus on an offensive or defensive coach.  They don't need a guy with a 'modern' spread offense to light up the league.  They don't need someone with movie start looks.  They need AN ADULT IN THE ROOM.  They need a guy who on the first day will distribute alarm clocks to the entire team and show them how they work.  And explain to everyone that there is simply no excuses to be late for anything.  They need every guy in the room to understand their role and be accountable.  They need someone to explain to them how to be a professional football player.  Does anyone really want Kliff Kingsbury to be the guy telling Mac whom to draft and which free agents to sign?  Seriously?  

McCarthy is not a top tier coach, that's for certain.  But there's no Lombardi, Parcells, Bellichick, or Walsh out there.  McCarthy is at least a guy who can restore order and accountability to the organization.  And I trust him to find the right free agents for Mac to sign and players to draft.  We need a guy who knows the NFL inside and out.  What most concerns me is his defenses have not been stellar and he will need to find a DC to run that show.  Seems to me a younger 'up and comer' defensive coach like Kris Richard would be ideal to be the ying to McCarthy's yang.  McCarthy will find receivers to make Sam better.  

There are so many holes to fill I don't want Mac to be the guy to decide on whom to sign and whom to draft, period.  Find the ADULT who can build and then coach this team to respectability.

Nailed it.

[BettyBoop]

4 hours ago, johnnysd said:

If McCarthy is not a Top Tier coach, seems like you are advocating settling for mediocre rather than striving to be great.

Not at all.  Lots of teams have won the SB without a HOF coach, including the Packers.  Jon Harbaugh is not a HOF coach. Brian Billick was not a HOF coach.  McCarthy is not a HOF coach but I think he is what the team needs right now.  He has won a SB and he has worked with a HOF QB who was/is a diva.  Given what the Jets have been through over the last 50 years stability and professionalism is what is needed right now.   If they hire a guy like Kingsbury and he flames out the Jets will be an even bigger laughing stock.  

Some times perfection can be the enemy of the good.

[Warfish]

10 hours ago, Jet Nut said:

You mean like the success of growing a QB?  Manziel, Mayfield and Mahomes all worked under him.  But hey, its more important to talk about a record at Texas Tech, where pretty much no one had a clue who he was.  I'm not sold but I'm also not talking like I have factual evidence that he can or cant coach.  Pretty much the most annoying part of discussing potential HCs 

Developing a QB to play in college is not the same as developing a QB to play at an elite level in the NFL.

A College Coach's win/loss record as a Head Coach, given he is responsible for the performance of the entire team, not just the QB, is also relevant.

His record is factual evidence, as is the statistical performance of his offense, defense, and players.

[BettyBoop]

In all likelihood Johnson and Mac have their plan already set.  They likely have their primary, secondary and tertiary guys in place.  I'm guessing it's McCarthy, Bienemy and maybe Gase.  Interviewing guys like Kingsbury is window dressing to appear as though they are out-of-the-box thinkers.

[sec101row23]

2 minutes ago, Warfish said:

Developing a QB to play in college is not the same as developing a QB to play at an elite level in the NFL.

A College Coach's win/loss record as a Head Coach, given he is responsible for the performance of the entire team, not just the QB, is also relevant.

His record is factual evidence, as is the statistical performance of his offense, defense, and players.

I was about to post the same exact thing.   These college coaches aren’t really concerned with the long term development of their QBs.   They only have them for maybe 3 seasons and are concerned with winning games and championships.  They get what they can out of them and then it’s on to the next recruit.   There simply isn’t enough time to work on development, mechanics etc.. It’s all game prep and X’s and O’s    

[rillo]

I'll take him as an OC, but as a head coach not so much.

[BigRy56]

There's no way I could sit through 4 years of Kiss Sexbury. Just no way

[Jet Nut]

5 minutes ago, Warfish said:

Developing a QB to play in college is not the same as developing a QB to play at an elite level in the NFL.

A College Coach's win/loss record as a Head Coach, given he is responsible for the performance of the entire team, not just the QB, is also relevant.

His record is factual evidence, as is the statistical performance of his offense, defense, and players.

How does it make sense that development is different for a 21 year old vs a 22 year old?  Youre starting with less, presumily, in college than you are with a pro who you would think has more of the game experience and knowledge to fall back on.  

College programs are highly dependent on recruitment.  Some schools never can bring in talent.  Not saying it cant be relevant but if you start off at the wrong school your record doesnt necessarily prove a thing about someones coaching and abilities.

None of this is my real point, hes being looked at because of his rep as an offensive mind, his work and development of 3 QBs, whether people want to credit him or not.  Not coming close to saying this makes him a slam dunk or close to a safe pick.  Im just saying it doesnt make him someone who shouldnt ever be considered, shouldnt be an option if he impresses.  I'm tired of all those who slam others over who they are talking up as if they know the option is a wrong.  Its not like someone is making a case for a NFL failure, a Kotite/Bowles type with a failed NFL resume.

Me, Id be happy with a HC with experience.  McCarthy or Gase would be fine.  Still think if Dorsey wants his friend he goes to Cleveland.  If we go the assistant route I'd like them to check into LaFleur or Monken.  But I'm not telling anyone their guy is dead wrong

[Jet Nut]

15 minutes ago, sec101row23 said:

I was about to post the same exact thing.   These college coaches aren’t really concerned with the long term development of their QBs.   They only have them for maybe 3 seasons and are concerned with winning games and championships.  They get what they can out of them and then it’s on to the next recruit.   There simply isn’t enough time to work on development, mechanics etc.. It’s all game prep and X’s and O’s    

How do you teach differently for the short term?  That makes no sense.  Youre teaching development in the short term, to beat just the teams on their schedule? 

The work they put in, what they learned in college, the work that got them drafted, isnt as important to their development?  The ground work that is the foundation of their development

 

[sec101row23]

Just now, Jet Nut said:

How do you teach differently for the short term?  That makes no sense.  Youre teaching development in the short term, to beat just the teams on their schedule? 

 

College coaches are far less concerned about mechanics and footwork and spend little time on trying to change a QBs flaws.   That’s why these kids come out with the flaws that they do.  Colleges work with their natural abilities, they spend their time implementing game plans and game prep.  They have 20 hours a week to work with these kids.  They aren’t spending time overhauling mechanics and worrying about preparing their QBs for the NFL.  

[ryu79]

Thinking on this. The best thing the Jets could do would be to get a veteran like McCarthy AND add a Kingsbury as his OC.

In that scenario, McCarthy refreshes his ideas with fresh thinking and takes on a more executive role, while getting to exchange ideas with a thoughtleader - from the article about his QB school he seemed to be quite philisophical about this stuff.

Kingsbury has an incentive to take the OC job because he will be working for a Superbowl winner, who like himself has a pedigree in developing QBs. We would be a huge springboard for him to legitimately pursue HC roles in the league by adding NFL experience and time under a respected member of the fraternity.

The Jets get a coordinator who looks like Gosling, talks like McCaugnahey, and developed Patrick Mahomes, with less worries about the veteran HC they want to right their ship going stale.

[Jet Nut]

9 minutes ago, ryu79 said:

Thinking on this. The best thing the Jets could do would be to get a veteran like McCarthy AND add a Kingsbury as his OC.

In that scenario, McCarthy refreshes his ideas with fresh thinking and takes on a more executive role, while getting to exchange ideas with a thoughtleader - from the article about his QB school he seemed to be quite philisophical about this stuff.

Kingsbury has an incentive to take the OC job because he will be working for a Superbowl winner, who like himself has a pedigree in developing QBs. We would be a huge springboard for him to legitimately pursue HC roles in the league by adding NFL experience and time under a respected member of the fraternity.

The Jets get a coordinator who looks like Gosling, talks like McCaugnahey, and developed Patrick Mahomes, with less worries about the veteran HC they want to right their ship going stale.

That would be great, IF KK is interested in starting as an OC.  

[CotcheryifyouCan]

prolly gona interview him to see where he thinks offenses are going and to pick his brain. doubt hes hired as a hc

[sourceworx]

Manish is such a cornball.

[Adoni Beast]

1 hour ago, sec101row23 said:

I was about to post the same exact thing.   These college coaches aren’t really concerned with the long term development of their QBs.   They only have them for maybe 3 seasons and are concerned with winning games and championships.  They get what they can out of them and then it’s on to the next recruit.   There simply isn’t enough time to work on development, mechanics etc.. It’s all game prep and X’s and O’s    

Couldn’t disagree more. They care about long term development. What better recruiting tool than having QB’s with long term pro careers? 

[Warfish]

45 minutes ago, Jet Nut said:

How does it make sense that development is different for a 21 year old vs a 22 year old?  Youre starting with less, presumily, in college than you are with a pro who you would think has more of the game experience and knowledge to fall back on.  

Both the game, and coaching, is fundamentally different at the college and professional levels.  Hence why so many great college QB's turn out to be complete failures at the Pro level.  The offenses, skill sets and most of all how QB's are managed by college coaches are different.  Development of those players (as laid out by sec101row23 above) is for different purposes.  A College coach has 4-5 QB prospects for a maximum of four years, often much less time.  The college coach's only concern with them is winning games now, not long term skill-improvement and QB development.  They will take whichever one of their multiple QB's in any given moment is best and play them, then bench them for another, with no concern for them if thats what is best for winning that single game.  They will run offenses that are pure "minor league level" type-offenses if that works in their conference, with no concern for future pro-level issues it may cause that QB.  The idea of college coaches "developing" QB's is a myth in many ways, any development is purely a side-effect of the college coaches desire to maximize his short-term return on his short-term asset of that kid QB. 

45 minutes ago, Jet Nut said:

I'm tired of all those who slam others over who they are talking up as if they know the option is a wrong.

I've had you on ignore for a very long time now, because I generally have found you to be intolerant of other opinions, and how people post their opinions or choose to debate an issue online.  I was hoping you might have mellowed with time, but this line speaks to why I put you on ignore in the first place.   

This a a forum for debate, and we debate, often passionately and vigorously.  People will tell you that you are dead wrong (or much worse)  a hundred times in a day.  This is the internet, and it shouldn't be new to any of us at this point.  No one cares if you're tired of it, and the internet, and how people debate on the internet, isn't going to change for you.  You can either roll with it or get angry, but getting angry just makes you worse then them, because now you're fighting about each other, and not the topic.

My 0.02 which I presume will elicit the same reaction it used to get way back when, sadly.

45 minutes ago, Jet Nut said:

  Its not like someone is making a case for a NFL failure, a Kotite/Bowles type with a failed NFL resume.

Me, Id be happy with a HC with experience.  McCarthy or Gase would be fine.  Still think if Dorsey wants his friend he goes to Cleveland.  If we go the assistant route I'd like them to check into LaFleur or Monken.  But I'm not telling anyone their guy is dead wrong

No one knows for sure.  Period.  I think everyone knows that, even if they post opinions that say "this guys is the guy" or "that guy is not the guy, definitely".

With that said, expecting fans to be passive and vulcan-like logical in debate on the topic is unrealistic.  I do not prefer Kingsberry for reasons I have laid out.  I prefer McCarthy of the current available options for HC, again for reasons previously laid out.  Do I know I'm right?  Nope.  Do I think I am right?  of course I do.  But for all I know Kingsberry is the next offensive genius who will revolutionize the pro game, and McCarhty a worn out Shottenheimer-style old man whose productive time is over.  I don't think so, but if someone wants to passionately make that argument, even if they tell me I'd dead wrong and stupid, so be it. 

That's the internet, that's fan(atics) being fan(atics).  A forum full of "we don't know" posts would frankly be boring.

 

[Jet_Engine1]

This is my take from another thread on why I don't think Kingsbury is ready to be a HC candidate for the Jets, and why I dont want him tasked with Darnolds development. JN called me "Brain Dead". LOL. Solid poster....

 

Quote

Manziels game was streetball. His success was because his wild, undeveloped play coupled with an Elite WR and good Oline was good enough in to win at the NCAA level. He was an undeveloped player whos rawness combined with personal issues led him to failure. He wasn't developed as a passer at all, and thats not only on KK because he only coached him for ONE YEAR. But YOU are using Manziels college success as a plus for Kingsbury. Defend the position.

Mayfield was NOT offered a scholarship to TT, so did Kingsbury miss there? And KK couldn't wait to sh*tcan Mayfield (an eventual Heisman winner and #1 Pick). Kingsbury then went the needless extra mile to fight Mayfields transfer. You are using Kingsburys supposed work with Mayfield as a positive when in reality he didn't even RECOGNIZE the talent. So defend that arguement. 

Mahomes (who's talent he did see) played in a shotgun Air Raid, single read Offense. Coming out, the knocks on him were "rawness....poor fundamentals, inability to read Defenses, and poor footwork". Mahomes graduated High School with a crazy arm and amazing athletic ability. He graduated college with the same skill set. How did Kingsbury "develop" Mahomes? Defend your position.

Sometimes just critiquing other posters opinions isn't enough. Put your big boy pants on and formulate a coherent arguement on why you're arguing these positions and why you are apparently Pro-Kingsbury instead of just whining about what others say. Try to convince me instead of just saying, "You're an idiot because I say so"

 

[MS jets Fan]

THIS GUY CAN'T WIN AT THE COLLEGE LEVEL.  ENOUGH SAID.

HE'S NOT THE ANSWER

[Jet Nut]

13 minutes ago, Warfish said:

Both the game, and coaching, is fundamentally different at the college and professional levels.  Hence why so many great college QB's turn out to be complete failures at the Pro level.  The offenses, skill sets and most of all how QB's are managed by college coaches are different.  Development of those players (as laid out by sec101row23 above) is for different purposes.  A College coach has 4-5 QB prospects for a maximum of four years, often much less time.  The college coach's only concern with them is winning games now, not long term skill-improvement and QB development.  They will take whichever one of their multiple QB's in any given moment is best and play them, then bench them for another, with no concern for them if thats what is best for winning that single game.  They will run offenses that are pure "minor league level" type-offenses if that works in their conference, with no concern for future pro-level issues it may cause that QB.  The idea of college coaches "developing" QB's is a myth in many ways, any development is purely a side-effect of the college coaches desire to maximize his short-term return on his short-term asset of that kid QB. 

I've had you on ignore for a very long time now, because I generally have found you to be intolerant of other opinions, and how people post their opinions or choose to debate an issue online.  I was hoping you might have mellowed with time, but this line speaks to why I put you on ignore in the first place.   

This a a forum for debate, and we debate, often passionately and vigorously.  People will tell you that you are dead wrong (or much worse)  a hundred times in a day.  This is the internet, and it shouldn't be new to any of us at this point.  No one cares if you're tired of it, and the internet, and how people debate on the internet, isn't going to change for you.  You can either roll with it or get angry, but getting angry just makes you worse then them, because now you're fighting about each other, and not the topic.

My 0.02 which I presume will elicit the same reaction it used to get way back when, sadly.

No one knows for sure.  Period.  I think everyone knows that, even if they post opinions that say "this guys is the guy" or "that guy is not the guy, definitely".

With that said, expecting fans to be passive and vulcan-like logical in debate on the topic is unrealistic.  I do not prefer Kingsberry for reasons I have laid out.  I prefer McCarthy of the current available options for HC, again for reasons previously laid out.  Do I know I'm right?  Nope.  Do I think I am right?  of course I do.  But for all I know Kingsberry is the next offensive genius who will revolutionize the pro game, and McCarhty a worn out Shottenheimer-style old man whose productive time is over.  I don't think so, but if someone wants to passionately make that argument, even if they tell me I'd dead wrong and stupid, so be it. 

That's the internet, that's fan(atics) being fan(atics).  A forum full of "we don't know" posts would frankly be boring.

 

A college coach lays down the fundamentals, molds the player from his rawest form.  To make it insignificant because its not the NFL is wrong.  Thats the point.  

The next point is interesting and puzzling.  I wrote that I have an issue with some who seem to think they have the answer to whos the HC prospect that needs to be, are to strong in their opinion, acting as if their opinion is fact is a problem?  Because I've said over and over that its just my opinion, that I dont know for sure and am just voicing that opinion.  Thats why I should be ignored, proof I'm intolerant?  OK, your opinion, I guess.  Dont know how any of this translates to expecting Vulcan like logic or being intolerant.  You write what you think I've said, then pretty much repeat everything I said about KK, McCarthy and opinions, not getting that either