I don't know about start, but once released he's 100% catching on as a more sought after backup somewhere. I said it 50x here last offseason. I liked the Fields flyer isolated in itself. The Fields pairing with the Jets/Tanner was essentially chasing the worst possible of the 32 potential outcomes on the board for him. Which we indeed got, and which shouldn't of shocked anybody with a reasonable probability outlook. Someone else out there who believes they are actually capable of achieving a better then 32 out of 32 outcome is already waiting on that cheap FA flyer to emerge.
I absolutely disagree with the premise that Fields shitty performance was on the OC. Like it or not the OC had a system that allowed for a lot of WR separation and even higher open rate. Fields couldn't process it and find the receivers, nor reads defenses. He was dreadful. Not even Tomlin could cure his incompetence.
I don’t think Engstrand was as bad as you make it out, as evidenced by the constant post game films showing receivers running open, couple with the fact that Fields had plenty of time to throw. Fields just can’t read a defense, dude just stands there flatfooted. He should be a wishbone/option QB at most, and Fields himself stated arrogantly he doesn’t feel that’s the type of QB he is. If we had a more traditional passer I think our O would have been worlds better. For sure Engstrand had some rookie growing pains but by far he showed out to be the most competent person on our coaching staff. Aaron Glenn has absolutely zero integrity and is throwing everyone under the bus to save his own ass. We’ve been relegated to an acting DC that never even interviewed in person with us nor did he interview anywhere else at all with an unprecedented 10 spots open. Our presumed OC hasn’t been in the league for 5 years and hasn’t been contacted by any other team as well. Not to mention we’ll be scraping the shit off a shoe to fill our vacant position coach spots. Glenn was a terrible decision as a hire, a terrible decision to keep him as coach, and frankly he’s now embarrassing the franchise at levels that are even beyond some of our most embarrassing moments in history.
When are we going to accept the fact that we did not, not by a long shot, had an acceptable NFL able QB in our roster. No OC could be successful. The root cause was the leadership insistence in going for war on the first year without a remotely capable QB. spot on
By and large this board didn't recognize, or just flat out refused to see, the incoming disaster that was Nathaniel Hackett. This follow up OC situation with Engstrand was really no different. That post and most of this thread reads a lot like the fire Saleh threads that couldn't see or refused to acknowledge he was the best coach in that building right after that went down too. With the AG hate just bleeding in everywhere. There will be no MLF revival for Engstrand. i won't bet a penny on him ever seeing another OC gig again either. Detroit showing zero interest in offering him the OC gig as the natural in-house replacement to Ben Johnson leaving last year should have been one of the easiest red flag warnings ever. Maybe next time if looks like a duck, and appears to quack like a duck, we shouldn't spend an offseason trying to irrationally explain that concern away like lots did with the whole "you don't need a real OC with 41yo Aaron Rodgers as your QB" stuff. (As a random side note - generally speaking a lots of those new trendy "let's take a still frame photo showing guys wide open" posts popping on twitter every week can be very misleading, and don't actually hold up well with game speed turned on. Not to say Fields did good last year by any stretch, mind you.)
No, that’s not true at all. The board mostly thought Hackett was a bad hire but was somewhat enthused if and only if it enticed Rodgers here. Go back and read through the thread. You’re just trying to bloviate about being right about something as usual lol.
Hackett was a 2 year hire. This board ain't that big and that general conversation took place over a ton a different threads that offseason. As well as all throught the 2023, and spilling over into 2024. But of course you already knew that. I do at least kinda appreciate the backhanded acknowledge in there that I was right on Hackett though
You were right on Hackett, and there were actually a lot on this board…I’d even say most…that did not like that hire. Many of us saw him for the coattail riding hanger on that he was. Much like many of us saw the same in Gase riding Peyton’s coattails. And honestly, I think there were some (@Borat comes to mind) who also made that exact same comment about the fact that the Lions didn’t hire him as their OC when Johnson left was a red flag… Honestly, I think MANY on this board would make better decisions than the Jets have actually made….kinda sad but very much true
Yeah I don’t know what he’s talking about. Just like when posters claim they were the “only ones” that wanted to keep Darnold years ago. https://forums.theganggreen.com/threads/nathaniel-hackett-hired-as-oc.98623/ Most hated it. Some were ok with it if it meant we brought Rodgers on but still didn’t like him as an OC. That sentiment didn’t get better as the two years went on, it only got worse.
I thought Tanner hire was just fine given the options, I preferred the guy from McVey who I think went to Houston who was originally rumored, but Tanner was as good a shot as any available. I liked the idea of giving a shot to younger guy from good coaching tree. My biggest issue was hiring a defensive coach (who was only averagish on defense anyway), where we now had to basically get lucky with a good OC if we want to go younger unproven route. I really wanted someone who proved he called good offense as a HC, and then we could have brought someone like Tanner as OC who does not call plays. Basically similarly to what Jax did. But I don't think we can write off Tanner just yet. The season was a mixed bag, hard to evaluate. I don't think he deserved to be fired and at the same time, he wasn't some clearly good OC either. Let's see where he ends up and how he does going forward, the jury is still out.
Fun facts! 1. The thread you posted predates my joining the board by like 6+ months. 2. I never went on to post in that thread 3. I still literally have 100's of past posts here debating this topic. Again spanning over many many different threads during that 2 year time period. 4. Some of that above in #3 which included various direct exchanges and debates about how good we could/should expect a Hackett/Rodgers offense was going to be with you. Guessing you aren't posting links to any of of those though for the same reason you seemingly decided to just try and move the goalposts away from my initially quoted claim here of "By and large this board didn't recognize, or just flat out refused to see, the incoming disaster that was Nathaniel Hackett".
How did the board not see the incoming disaster when the thread where he was initially announced shows the majority of the board thought it was a shitty hire with the silver lining of getting Rodgers? Your statement is unequivocally false and it just shows you desperately seeking attention to boast about being correct about something as if you were the only one who was right (when you weren’t). I don’t really care when you joined the board, don’t make statements that aren’t correct. The majority of your posts are centered around beating your chest about being right about something that happened three years ago. You just brought it up unprompted in a thread about Tanner Engstrand. Edit: I also don’t really care about admitting I was wrong about things. I’ve admitted I was wrong about a billion things on this board so I wasn’t defending my own personal stance.
