I've always had this question: How exactly does a football interview go down? I envision it like this: The candidate comes in with his offensive and defensive schemes, discusses in depth each player and what he believes their role will be in these schemes. Then he discusses his goals and how he would assemble a good draft. If that's even remotely close and Tannenbaum/Woody are interviewing these coaches, how the hell do they know to decipher the good candidates from the bad when their football knowledge has been in question lately?
This is what worries me most about this HC search. I'm not confident that Woody and Tannenbaum know football well enough to select a good coach. When Tanny was asked by Francesca what specific attributes or qualities are they looking for in there search he was unable to give anything. Nadda. I wonder if they even know what they're looking for.
Hmmm quite an interesting post and maybe the best we've seen today. I've often wondered that myself. How can somebody who knows football be interviewed by somebody who doesn't? If I am applying for a job as a pilot I would anticipate the person doing the questioning would have some flying experience?
Why would they tell Francesca? The Jets want smart football players who are good athletes. It's not exactly rocket science. Think Jerricho Cotchery. He's a guy with good size, good strength, good positional skills, a tough attitude, good football smarts, and good character. I'd like to think the way the OP described the interview is in the vicinity of how it goes. Why is it assumed that Tannenbaum knows nothing about football on this board amongst Jet fans? Actually...I'm gonna retract that because there seems to be two guys who don't have flaws on this team...Leon and Westhoff.
Why not? Because I've never heard him speak in a manner that leads me to believe he's much of a football guy. Mangini was a football guy and you could tell by listening to him speak about it. Maybe Tannenbaum really is a smart football guy but just hides it from the public eye. I dunno.
He has gotten some pretty good Football players in here the last 3 years, like it or not. Based on that I do not think it a stretch he can find a good coaching candidate.
Very true, a couple of things though. 1) How much of his identifying good football players in were his doing and how much of it was the CS? No one knows. 2) Identifying talented players and a talented head coach are two completely different things. If he would have just answered some of the questions asked of him about the coaching search I might have some peace of mind, but he completely dodged every question I've heard asked.
Well, we know he can EXECUTE an acquisition, meaning he can get the guy inked and in green. But was he the guy suggesting the player or was it Magnini?
Interesting topic. I think that with anything, in the career field when applying for a position, the main credentials of the candidate that an employee may need to help his decision making, is references. You would think that Woody/Tanny would at the least make some contacts to that candiates present employer or peers in the football area to ask some questions about him. Of course, one couldn't envision Woody/Tanny making phone calls to Billicheck before Manginin was hired, now could one?
Last point is a good one. Some organizations have the relationship with others to call and ask for advice but most don't. That said, if you call another team and ask if their guy is a good fit for your system, you look like an idiot. You have to do it shadily, like as-a-matter of fact..."Hey you wanna play a round of golf...oh by the way Rex Ryan seems like a good fit for us, what do you think?" 2nd, it's not like real life employment where you don't know much more about the candidate in front of you than what a piece of paper HE provides says. NFL coaches' resumes are public domain, no need for further inquisition.
IMO finding a good coach should be easier then finding a player. You can assay Football knowledge and communication skills pretty well in an interview. I cant imagine a great coach...... Parcells, Belichick, Cowher, etc. etc. go down the line, being a lame interview. More to the point, it is possible for a good coach to be a lousy interview but it is way way way more unlikely then the reverse. That being said, sure a guy can come in and speak well and be a total con-artist (like Herm). Really, that would be up to the interviewers bullshit meter and that really ain't about football knowledge or lack there of. It is on the interviewers grasp of people skills, common sense etc. basic psych if you ask me. Just like Poker (which I know you know). Now granted I have no idea how good Tannenbaum is or isn't at the process. The only thing that would worry me about his judgment or lack thereof is the fact he let Mangini keep mediocre/inexperienced Coordinators. That is a death knell for young coaches if you ask me. One of the more over looked facts is, the vast majority of successful rookie coaches had very experienced DC's or OC's or both...... anyway my .02 See above........ Edit: Just to be clear an ideal HC should have great people skills. That should translate in the interview process. That is in addition to and not a substitute for Football knowledge as was the case for a recent HC we had. Perfect world their Football IQ's should be = to their significant communication skills.
BTW I want to thank you Mangold for giving us a very good thread and a great discussion topic. Something that is woefully lacking here ...............
Great points Puck. Mangini's downfall came from his coordinator choice, specifically on D. It also seems like he tried his ass off to fix that, but teams tend to want to keep their good young coaches (Ryan for example). I still think Schotty is fine...a good, young coach with some really good ideas in his head. The standing he's in with his fanbase is not that different from where Josh McDaniels was two years ago. It's a testament to how talented those two guys are/were that both were getting serious future HC talk at such a young age. I think something most fans don't realize is how similar most NFL offenses are...why do you think the Wildcat was so hard for teams to stop? It's cause you don't expect that stuff from a play action league...and this is and has been a play action league. The Jets still averaged 25 PPG this season despite his shittiness.
I do not think it is imperative that the candidates discuss offensive and defensive schemes with Johnson and Tannenbaum. Johnson and Tannenbaum should concern themselves with the following characteristics among others (presented in no particular order)- demeanor attention to detail disciplinarian game day management intelligence teacher will to succeed charismatic personality personnel evaluator confidence tactician ability to adjust (not referring only to game day) Johnson and Tannenbaum, if they conduct the interviews properly, should be able to assess the candidates as to how they rate in each of those categories. Then when the new head coach is brought aboard, Tannenbaum would get more into the actual Xs and Os. The new head coach would work with Tannenbaum and direct him to the types of players needed for success.
If Tannenbaum had given 1/4 of this answer I would be much more comfortable with him helping find a solid HC. He either couldn't answer the question or chose not to. Hopefully it's the latter.
