And this is something that I think they should go back to. The guy on the field has more of a feel for the flow of the game - who's doing well; who's sucking wind; etc. - than anyone on the sidelines or in the box. That said, with today's technology of the QB headsets (which I'm personally against because it violates the "purity" of athlete vs. athlete competition), you can have the "best of both worlds". This is what allows Brady to surgically dissect a defense: his on the field awareness, coupled with the "eye in the sky" perspective is almost unbeatable, as we know only too well. Also, I hate the way coaches micromanage - or try to - a game. Honestly, it's only a few short steps to just having coaches "duel" each other with video games! Let the players play! Limit the coaching interference. One way to do this is to limit substitutions, so they can't send in every play. I know this won't happen, but it should. It would cut down on the time of games, and open them up by allowing the players more freedom. In soccer for example, you only get three subs per game - and this includes injuries. And the coaches are expected to no coach from the sidelines (of course they do, but it's far less than in our football). I know, I'm just an old timer, longing for the "good old days", but just because something is "old" doesn't mean its not useful.
I disagree regarding Tanny. I think he was pretty awful. Really, the best players he got were Revis, Harris, Mangold and Brick. Revis and Harris were no-brainers. They met needs in a lousy draft, so it made sense to trade up to get them. Mangold and Brick came along in a year when the Jets desperately needed OL help. Otherwise, Tanny ignored the OL and many other positions in the draft. He pretty much ignored the offense aside from trading up for a QB who had only started for one year in college and was not ready to play in the NFL. He wasted a LOT of picks trading up almost annually and missed on a number of picks. The only thing that makes him look "decent" is the fact that his predecessors were so God-awful.
This quote by Tom Brady is exactly why you need to make getting a FQB the #1 priority: OFFENSE is what wins games in this era of football, which is why the Jets obsession with "D" is ass-backwards.
Who was better? The next guy up was pretty bad in Idzik. Mac has some work to do, but so far Tanny has done the most with the least.
Yup which is why giving extensions to Luck, Wilson, and Brees have made those teams instant contenders. Nothing else matters on a team. Getting a QB will always be a priority, but I mentioned it last time to you, it doesn't start and end with this draft. It won't be the end of the world, if the Jets don't draft a QB this year.
Was Tanny better than Bradway and Idzik? Yes, thanks to Mangini. The problem is that just because no one has been better recently doesn't mean he was decent. Even though some shit stinks worse than others, in the end, it's all still shit, and shit still stinks!
I beleive 101 specifically saud the tanny/mangini draft team was decent. i mean that was in the oost you quoted and anyway you try to rationalize it those were some good drafts. even with gholston weighing the grade down, in 3 drafts they selected 2 h.o.f players another 2 going to the ring of honor and the core of the 2009/2010 playoff run.
Read much? I'm not rationalizing anything. IMO Tanny was NOT a decent GM. Period. You think he was. Fine. We disagree. So what else is new? Move on.
I agree. I would like to see what they have in Hack for 1 yr. No progress? Draft another QB next draft. Rinse and repeat
so hostile, nobody said he was a decent g.m. it was said that he and mangini were decent drafters. not sure why you didn't follow that.
Those draft picks got us to those conference games. Plenty of pros and cons. Heaven forbid Vernon actually did something, maybe we get to a SB.
I found them to be decent drafters. That's it. Tanny and Mangini created a core with elite level players. 2 regimes have lived off those picks. I can't discount them for that.
With Mangini's help or input, Tanny did a decent job, but on his own, he didn't imo, but that's cool. No one said we had to agree. I can understand why you think he was decent. I just didn't like all the trading up he did and only trading down once, I think.
I didn't like the tradeups either, they did get us good players, a lot of gambles paid off but ultimately it burned him in the ass.