How can you conduct an interview when you don't know football?

Probably the latter, since theres 0 reason to discuss organizational hiring processes with anyone.

 

Ditto. They have no clue.

 

Here's an interesting vid of Gruden describing getting interviewed by crazy Al. Say what you want about his sanity, Al does know coaching talent when he sees it.

[YOUTUBE]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PbHRtQ87nHk[/YOUTUBE]

 

This is a good topic, and I obviously have no idea how a head coaching interview goes down. However, I would hope that Woody and Tannenbaum have enough sense to get their football people involved in the interview. At one point, part of the interview should be going over personnel and schemes with Bradway and their scouts. So that they can get input from their football people on what kind of system the new coach is interested in running. And then the actual football guys can give feedback to Woody and Tannenbaum to let them know what they're getting into with a particular coach.

 

What did you say again? I was watching your avatar.

Yeah I know I didn't add to the great discussion here but that freakin avatar........ brb. :lol:

 

I don't think the answer is all that complicated. It's like any other interview.

The owner & GM start by discussing the coach's philosophies on assembling a coaching staff, relationship with the GM, team chemistry, how to deal with FA, how to draft, etc. For many of these they ask for specific examples to back up the points the coach makes:

WJ - So you say you think franchises should be built through the draft. Why don't you give some examples of how you've done this in the past

Cowher - well in 1997 we blah blah blah

A few star players for the Jets franchise might be discussed during this conversation but I'd guess it's the overall concepts that are the most important rather than running through the current roster ad nauseam.

Much of the historic information on the coach is already available in objective form: W-L records, draft picks, defensive schemes, etc. And I'm sure Woody and Tanny have slick brochures to review on these guys to summarize all of these facts, provided by the coach's agent or from their own minions.

From these notes the interviewers can pick some good and bad points to discuss, like "How did you handle the expectations of the media as you got to the Superbowl." Or "the Kendall trade was a difficult situation. How might you have handled it differently". The bad stuff is particularly helpful to see if prospective coaches are honest in evaluating themselves and show some kind of awareness at not making the same mistakes twice.

Being smart guys Tanny & Woody no doubt get the input of many people inside and outside the organization on the candidate. What does a trusted guy like Westhoff think of the new coach ? What do neutral people say about him. Some discreet phone calls around the league are no doubt made to find frank opinions. Thus a network or unofficial committee gives feedback on the candidate.

And finally, like any other interview, you have the gut feeling "would I like to work with this guy on a day-to-day basis". That, no doubt, carries a lot of weight.

 

You do realize that they are also interviewing with our head of pro and college scouting?

 

I've always wondered this myself. I'm sure it gets very technical and it's not your typical "I'm highly motivated, hardworking, blah blah."

I would imagine Tanny would ask very specific questions about what a coach would do to build the Jets into a Super Bowl team, how they'd structure practices, and what strategies they'd utilize. Having said that, I can see how Schotty would have impressed Tannenbaum considering his intimate knowledge of the Jets players and strategy. You can't really expect Spags to blow the interview out of the water without much prep time.

 

this same thing always made me wonder how the fuck did this poindexter get the gig he has?!?!?

 

He completely dodges just about 90% of the questions asked over the years if you haven't noticed.

I'm just not sure why people think someone who's been in the NFL for over 10 years doesn't know anything about the sport. What, fans on a message board know more than him, why exactly? Because they watch it on tv? Give me a break.

Football isn't rocket science. When you're around it as much as they are, you just naturally pick this stuff up. Then add in that Tannenbaum is a pretty smart guy, and he probably knows more about football than most of the people here who THINK they do.

 

Those are the thoughts I've been thinking too, as I read throught this thread over the last couple of days.

Good job articulating what I was thinking.

:beer:

 

I dont think these interviews are real chalkboard sessions, at least not entirely. Its safe to say that while Tannenbaum, and even Woody to some extent, will have some knowledge of what teams do on the field, the idea that either is really in a position to hire or fire anybody based on the plays they draw up and call is laughable. Thats why its usually the coaches who choose their coordinators, not the owner (note I said usually, Im aware that owners occasionally do force that choice on their coaches).

I think head coach interviews are more about organizational and team philosophy and strategy. How hard do you work your players? What sort of team do you believe in building? Say some player is mouthing off in the media, how do you handle that sort of situation? Xs and Os will certainly be discussed, but A, your record shows how much you know (do you think Rex Ryan would need to answer to Woody on that sort of thing? by virtue of being in position to be hired we can assume they know enough to wow the chumps who own these teams), and B, the head coachs role is much more than play design or philosophy even.

 

Let's put it this way: if Woody f's up the Jets any more and can't sell his PSLs, he'll qualify for a government bailout!

 

My point is that I've never got the impression by listening to the guy talk about football or field questions that he knows the game well. I never said or meant to imply that fans on a message board know more than him. If his answers are avoidance by design then he does a good job.

If just being around the game for an extended period of time equated to making sound football decisions, Matt Millen would have been successful as a GM.

 

Although i agreed with KS's post, there is a good argument to be made for what you re saying too. The personnel and CS moves are troublesome, in retrospect. But that assumes he had a big say in who was drafted, traded for, waived, and hired as DC. i dunno the details of all that.

But Clemens hasnt panned out (yet).
Gohlston?
SUTTON?
Pouha?
Pace?
The list of RBs they used after Martin retired, including the RB from cleveland where the trade was nullfied. Bringing Law back, thinking bender could replace Kendall...there are lots of decisions made by Tangini that fell flat.
--

But otoh, the GM doesnt have to know which players shoots which gap in a particular defense, or how many revolutions the ball turns on a long snap.
He doesnt have to make game decisions, he doesnt have to know how to defend the wildcat formation. He needs to trust the guy who is hired to make those decisions.

 

People are making Tannenbaum out to be an idiot, and saying what the Jets' should be doing, and who they should be hiring. That leads me to believe they think they know more than him.

There are a lot of people here who are not only Monday-morning QB's but also Monday-morning coaches, and Monday-morning GM's. They think they know more than the people who run the team.

I'm not saying you specifically, but there are those on this site that most definitely think they know more than the people running the team.

 

You wouldn't be a fan if you didn't think you knew more than the people running the team.

The thing that pisses me off is the shit people make up to get other people to buy what they're saying. All it is is a little careful wording here...a little safe prediction here (and failure is always the safe prediction)...