Mangini: best coaching hire in NFL over the last 3yrs

[Klecko73isGod]

If you think the Bills and Dolphins have the same level of talent as the Jets this year you are completely clueless.

And you clearly have a reading comprehension issue as if you actually followed the thread you would know I was referring to 2006 numbnuts.

[Klecko73isGod]

Nice job adding to this thread as usual. You bring NOTHING to the table.

Neither do you. You can't even follow a conversation.

[CTM]

Yes, you're right as usual Chan. Mangini never deserves any credit whatsoever.

Never mind the fact that Bills and Dolphins played pretty much the same schedule, arguably with the same level of talent or even better, and didn't do nearly as well.

Bullspit...

First off, why must you boil everything down to such childish extremes all the time. Just because I don't agree that he did some amazing coaching job in 2006 doesn't mean I think he gets no credit. He did a solid coaching job.

Secondly, the team in 2005 wasn't as bad as you think. We were SB contenders on paper that year prior to the avalanche of injuries and our actual performance in season even with all those injuries wasn't as poor as you'd think by some standards..

A knuckle scraper such as yourself might not find interest in this, but objective statistical measures of teams performance in the two seasons show that the on field perofrmance was closer then looking at the win totals alone would tell you..

Over at FO our DVOA went from -19.9 in 2005 to -4.3 in 2006, and shows we under performed our estimated wins by 1.2 on 2005 and outperformed them by 2.3 in 2006. Pennington replacing Bollinger alone can account for the 2.5 win discrepancy, not to mention the whole weak schedule thing..

And here's a graph of expected wins versus actual wins from advanced nfl stats. Notice the performance was only a game different. (Incidentally in 2007 our expected wins exceeded our actual wins like in 2005 by both measures..)

[Irish Jet]

Yes, Mangini has a lot of talent to work with, but so does Norv Turner.

This team could have gone in two directions after the Oakland and KC games. Mangini deserves a lot of credit for turning this thing around. A lot of coaches would have gone into panic mode after those performances and changed everything up trying to find a winning combo. Mangini kept his cool and kept that consistent approach and let this team gel and we are seeing the results.

One can only imagine how good this team would be right now had Favre been in camp from day one.

Yeah, Norv Turner though is in a league of his own when it comes to sucking.

[aec4]

Yeah, Norv Turner though is in a league of his own when it comes to sucking.

Norv Turner the OC is quite good.

Norv Turner the HC blows.

It seems as though he loses his balls during the transition from OC to HC.

[aec4]

Yes, aec. you're always right. always! who am I to question you about anything?

Top quality response here..

[Maxman]

Be careful throwing rocks in that glass house of yours.

Be careful you don't get hit with rocks in that ivory tower of yours.

[docdhc]

I still haven't heard a coach mentioned that was hired around the time of Mangini or even a couple of years before that would have been a better choice based on performance. That's why I think Mangini was the best hire at the time.

[BP]

Top quality response here..

Eh, calling Norv Turner an excellent OC is a laughable response at best. he was a good OC ONLY in Dallas with a HOF lineup.

Would you mind backing that statement up a bit?

[Irish Jet]

Eh, calling Norv Turner an excellent OC is a laughable response at best. he was a good OC ONLY in Dallas with a HOF lineup.

Would you mind backing that statement up a bit?

To be fair he made Alex Smith look like a half decent QB with San Fran and he had that offense playing well enough. I always thought he was a good OC.

[CTM]

Yeah, Norv Turner though is in a league of his own when it comes to sucking.

Yup. And Norv Turner has had a tougher schedule and had to come all the way east 4 times this season..

[Klecko73isGod]

Norv Turner the OC is quite good.

Norv Turner the HC blows.

It seems as though he loses his balls during the transition from OC to HC.

I disagree.

Norv got the reputation as an offensive genius when he was the Cowboys OC.

He had Troy Aikman at QB, Emmitt Smith at RB, Moose Johnston at FB, Jay Novacek at TE, Michael Irvin and Alvin Harper at WR and arguably the best offensive line ever assembled.

They didn't do anything unique or different on offense. In fact, quite the opposite. The Cowboys of that era had a painfully simple offense. They only had three formations. It was all execution.

Norv's only real job with that group was ball distribution and keeping all the divas happy.

Anybody could look like a genius with that group of players.

Much like Brian Billick was an offensive genius in Minnesota with a great o-line, Robert Smith at RB, Cris Carter, Randy Moss and Jake Long at WR and Warren Moon and Randall Cunningham at QB.

[BP]

To be fair he made Alex Smith look like a half decent QB with San Fran and he had that offense playing well enough. I always thought he was a good OC.

For one year? He sucks as a HC. and he's an average OC.

[victorjets]

Mangini just has an incredibly talented team. I'm not saying he's a bad coach but you can't say he's better than other coaches due to results when he quite simply has a much better team.

The Head Coach deserve credit for building the roster. Look at what Mangini inherited and look at the team now.

[Klecko73isGod]

Bullspit...

First off, why must you boil everything down to such childish extremes all the time. Just because I don't agree that he did some amazing coaching job in 2006 doesn't mean I think he gets no credit. He did a solid coaching job.

Secondly, the team in 2005 wasn't as bad as you think. We were SB contenders on paper that year prior to the avalanche of injuries and our actual performance in season even with all those injuries wasn't as poor as you'd think by some standards..

A knuckle scraper such as yourself might not find interest in this, but objective statistical measures of teams performance in the two seasons show that the on field perofrmance was closer then looking at the win totals alone would tell you..

Over at FO our DVOA went from -19.9 in 2005 to -4.3 in 2006, and shows we under performed our estimated wins by 1.2 on 2005 and outperformed them by 2.3 in 2006. Pennington replacing Bollinger alone can account for the 2.5 win discrepancy, not to mention the whole weak schedule thing..

And here's a graph of expected wins versus actual wins from advanced nfl stats. Notice the performance was only a game different. (Incidentally in 2007 our expected wins exceeded our actual wins like in 2005 by both measures..)

You put too much faith in that stuff.

I am am much more interested in what actually happens on the field.

You can't hold a coach responsible for the schedule in that way. Mangini didn't choose his opponents. His job is to beat them.

Much like giving Norv a pass for all the 1 p.m. east coast games, he knew he had four of them, he knew it put his team at a disadvantage, it's on him to make the proper adjustments to put his team in the best position to win. Something he has failed miserably at this year.

[CTM]

You put too much faith in that stuff.

I am am much more interested in what actually happens on the field.

You can't hold a coach responsible for the schedule in that way. Mangini didn't choose his opponents. His job is to beat them.

Much like giving Norv a pass for all the 1 p.m. east coast games, he knew he had four of them, he knew it put his team at a disadvantage, it's on him to make the proper adjustments to put his team in the best position to win. Something he has failed miserably at this year.

Ok, but my own eyes saw a very weak team in 2006 that caught a bunch of breaks. The fact that the stats back me up only strengthens my beliefs..

Just like this season, if we had a tougher schedule for the first 8 games we'd probably have went 3-5 or 2-6. Now the team is playing solid football but if the scheduling gods didn't look favorably on us earlier in the year, it might of been for naught..

[Klecko73isGod]

Ok, but my own eyes saw a very weak team in 2006 that caught a bunch of breaks. The fact that the stats back me up only strengthens my beliefs..

Just like this season, if we had a tougher schedule for the first 8 games we'd probably have went 3-5 or 2-6. Now the team is playing solid football but if the scheduling gods didn't look favorably on us earlier in the year, it might of been for naught..

Them's the breaks.

Mangini didn't ask for this schedule. It was given to him and he's done his job. This isn't college football. Strength of schedule is meaningless to the big picture.

I could care less if we get to the playoffs and we get "lucky" and don't have to go on the road to Pittsburgh and get to play a weak team in the conference game and then get a "break" and get to play Minnesota in the Super Bowl.

The point is taking the schedule you've got and winning the majority of the games to get yourself into the tournament and give yourself a chance to win it all.

[CTM]

Them's the breaks.

Mangini didn't ask for this schedule. It was given to him and he's done his job. This isn't college football. Strength of schedule is meaningless to the big picture.

I could care less if we get to the playoffs and we get "lucky" and don't have to go on the road to Pittsburgh and get to play a weak team in the conference game and then get a "break" and get to play Minnesota in the Super Bowl.

The point is taking the schedule you've got and winning the majority of the games to get yourself into the tournament and give yourself a chance to win it all.

Some people like to look at the league with a little more depth then Klogic allows for..

[docdhc]

Ok, but my own eyes saw a very weak team in 2006 that caught a bunch of breaks. The fact that the stats back me up only strengthens my beliefs..

Just like this season, if we had a tougher schedule for the first 8 games we'd probably have went 3-5 or 2-6. Now the team is playing solid football but if the scheduling gods didn't look favorably on us earlier in the year, it might of been for naught..

That 2006 team was coming off a 4-12 year, a QB who had 2 straight off season shoulder operations, a rookie left tackle and center, a new 3-4 defense without a nose tackle and an undersized lb in Vilma, a secondary that had 2 weak CB's and still went 10-6 beating the Pats on the road along the way. I think that was a remarkable coaching job that transcends the weak schedule excuse. Now, after a setback last year, he is showing he belongs by bringing together a team with lots of new personel including a 39 HOF QB who dropped in half way thru camp. The team is meshing and beating the best teams in the conference. Obviously everything depends on the next five games and the playoffs but again I haven't heard anyone name a new coach with a record over the last 3-4 years I would rather have than Mangini.

[Thor99]

Hey Mike, can you try and make one post, just one, without attacking another poster?

Nope, that's what makes a great poster. Call everyone a moron, and never admit when you're wrong.

Be careful throwing rocks in that glass house of yours.

Yes, BP attacks people all the time.

Nice job adding to this thread as usual. You bring NOTHING to the table.

Pu_xtL5bZlw

I thought that was the line for Thor and Dierking?

I'm a little jealous. He's spending time with other posters.

[madmike1]

Nope, that's what makes a great poster. Call everyone a moron, and never admit when you're wrong.

Yes, BP attacks people all the time.

Pu_xtL5bZlw

I'm a little jealous. He's spending time with other posters.

Speaking of adding nothing.. Look who graces the football forum with his presence...

[Klecko73isGod]

Some people like to look at the league with a little more depth then Klogic allows for..

Ahh, Chan's way of admitting he has no legitimate counterpoint.

I like to look at the league and base my opinions on what actually happens in football games, not by some ridiculous mathematical formula that tells me the Lions are awesome despite the fact that they haven't won a game.

Mathematical formulas don't throw passes and a they don't make tackles Chan, players do.

Mathematical formulas don't devise gameplans and they don't motivate players Chan, coaches do.

[CTM]

That 2006 team was coming off a 4-12 year due to injuries QB who had 2 straight off season shoulder operations and was now healthy, a rookie left tackle and center drafted in the first round, a new 3-4 defense without a nose tackle and an undersized lb in Vilma that Mangini choose to install when we had a top 5 4-3 2 years prior, a secondary that had 2 weak CB's like we did in 2004 Cover 2 when we were a much stronger team and still went 10-6 beating the Pats on the road along the way like blind squirell that waited to lose it's second game to the Pats until the playoffs

The 2006 Jets team was not a good team imo and it was a wasted year that lead to the debacle of 2007

[CTM]

Ahh, Chan's way of admitting he has no legitimate counterpoint.

I like to look at the league and base my opinions on what actually happens in football games, not by some ridiculous mathematical formula that tells me the Lions are awesome despite the fact that they haven't won a game.

Mathematical formulas don't throw passes and a they don't make tackles Chan, players do.

Mathematical formulas don't devise gameplans and they don't motivate players Chan, coaches do.

I didn't know there was a legitimate counterpoint to the "cause I said so" defense...

You like to look at things only at the surface and I cannot argue with you in that space. There's a whole world of context outside of your periphery that I prefer to hang in...

[4HCrew]

and to think most wanted him fired 5 weeks ago

[Klecko73isGod]

I didn't know there was a legitimate counterpoint to the "cause I said so" defense...

You like to look at things only at the surface and I cannot argue with you in that space. There's a whole world of context outside of your periphery that I prefer to hang in...

Oh my dear lord.

Stop overthinking.

You think the Jets are playing great because some nerd with a computer designed a statistical formula to analyze it that way or because Mangini and his staff have taken their players and molded them into a strong team capable of dominating what is thought of as an elite team on the road?

Despite your love for a particular website, the Jets are playing well and winning football games because they have talent and Mangini has devised a gameplan that works.

If we win the Super Bowl, I could care less how your formula ranks us.

The formula still says the Pats were the best team last year, I am certain they took a lot of solace in that when the Giants humiliated them in front of the world last February.

[#27TheDominator]

That 2006 team was coming off a 4-12 year, a QB who had 2 straight off season shoulder operations, a rookie left tackle and center, a new 3-4 defense without a nose tackle and an undersized lb in Vilma, a secondary that had 2 weak CB's and still went 10-6 beating the Pats on the road along the way. I think that was a remarkable coaching job that transcends the weak schedule excuse. Now, after a setback last year, he is showing he belongs by bringing together a team with lots of new personel including a 39 HOF QB who dropped in half way thru camp. The team is meshing and beating the best teams in the conference. Obviously everything depends on the next five games and the playoffs but again I haven't heard anyone name a new coach with a record over the last 3-4 years I would rather have than Mangini.

Whose fault is that? That 2006 team had a QB they traded for AND a top draft pick that couldn't beat out the QB with 2 straight off-season shoulder operations. They CHOSE to switch to the 3-4 without having all the proper pieces and having several guys that specifically didn't fit the system. The secondary wasn't so bad under Herm and added Dyson (their choice) who had a very nice year. They also elected to roll through most of camp with no RB despite Martin telling them before the draft he wouldn't be ready. The trades they tried to make up for that blunder weren't so hot and neither their handling of Kendall the next season. Mangini did a nice job, but he shouldn't get a pass for decisions that he made.

AZ, Pitt and Atlanta all have coaches they probably wouldn't trade for Mangini. Dolphins too? I'm not sure.

[Irish Jet]

The 2006 Jets team was not a good team imo and it was a wasted year that lead to the debacle of 2007

Who knows, if not for that "wasted year" we may not have the team we have now.

[CTM]

Oh my dear lord.

Stop overthinking.

You think the Jets are playing great because some nerd with a computer designed a statistical formula to analyze it that way or because Mangini and his staff have taken their players and molded them into a strong team capable of dominating what is thought of as an elite team on the road?

Despite your love for a particular website, the Jets are playing well and winning football games because they have talent and Mangini has devised a gameplan that works.

This make no sense, as usual. The stats are after the fact and attempt to quantify why teams win or lose. Due to sample size and the randomness inherent in the game, of course they aren't going to match perfectly with the actual results of a 16 game season.

If we win the Super Bowl, I could care less how your formula ranks us.

As would I, but they'd be interesting to look at when it comes to next years expectations..

The formula still says the Pats were the best team last year, I am certain they took a lot of solace in that when the Giants humiliated them in front of the world last February.

Actually the formulas just took too long to catch up the Giants getting their act together. THe 2007 Pats versus the 2008 Giants would've been a mild upset..

[CTM]

Who knows, if not for that "wasted year" we may not have the team we have now.

And if we followed a more natural progression, we might not have had to trade up for Revis last year or got stuck drafting Gholston this year

[Klecko73isGod]

This make no sense, as usual. The stats are after the fact and attempt to quantify why teams win or lose. Due to sample size and the randomness inherent in the game, of course they aren't going to match perfectly with the actual results of a 16 game season.

As would I, but they'd be interesting to look at when it comes to next years expectations..

Actually the formulas just took too long to catch up the Giants getting their act together. THe 2007 Pats versus the 2008 Giants would've been a mild upset..

Oh, so the formulas are inaccurate and unreliable?

Good to know since I predicted a Giants would beat the Pats in the Super Bowl last year based on what I saw of the teams on the field and paid no attention to the stupid formulas,

[CTM]

Oh, so the formulas are inaccurate and unreliable?

Good to know since I predicted a Giants would beat the Pats in the Super Bowl last year based on what I saw of the teams on the field and paid no attention to the stupid formulas,

I think you predicted the pats to lose about 8 times that year. Kudos for getting it right once..

[docdhc]

AZ, Pitt and Atlanta all have coaches they probably wouldn't trade for Mangini. Dolphins too? I'm not sure.

Not sure about Whisenhunt. AZ is leading a very weak division but has gotten blown out by the Jets, Giants, and now the Eagles. Tomlin has been good with Cowher's team, but still only 2 years, but I agree, they wouldn't trade for Mangini. The Parcell's Sporano tandem is off to a fast start but way too early to tell. Is there anyone from Mangini's year of hire you would rather have?

[Pragmatic Bus]

this argument that easy schedule means more wins and harder schedule means less win is stupid. not every team in the NFL is detroit lions. have you seen oakland raiders players. the most physically gifted team in the nfl, yet they cant do ****.

football is about coaches putting their players in the best position to make the play. and then its up to the player to make that play. it was a 2 way deal before and it is a 2 way deal right now. the jets team that went 10-6 had no offensive line no defensive line no QB no RB no talent watso ever. and they still won 10 games and they beat teams like brett favre's GB packers

[victorjets]

I haven't heard anyone name a new coach with a record over the last 3-4 years I would rather have than Mangini.

Sean Payton and Mike Tomlin have similar records but I think Mangini is a better coach.

I like Payton playcalling and agressiveness, he took the Saints to the championship game but the Jets are a more balanced team.

Tomlin inherited a Super Bowl caliber team. He did the right thing staying with Dick Lebeau's defense but the offense has regressed. Tomlin looks just like a motivator and Mangini beat him with a much worse team.