I saw enough scary things this year to make me seriously doubt that Mangini can turn around this mess to the point where the Jets will contend for a Super Bowl title under his watch, but I also understand the idea of showing patience. This is a really tough call. If you (and by "you" I mean owners, GMs) think a head coach is bad, you're better off getting rid of him sooner rather than later, but I have no idea if the Jets brass has any idea yet. I'm sure Mangini will return in 2008, but with a significantly different staff of assistants. It'll be a make or break year.
Or you could be so paranoid and so used to losing that its all you expect? And the only way that can change is if a guy wins a Super Bowl in his first season. Herm Edwards outperformed Mangini as a head coach in his first two seasons, and that with a team built to win then and in the future. Or older fans are eternally pessimistic because they've "seen it all before" when no one should ever assume they've seen everything. Even then, theres so many components as to WHY this team sucks this year that you're ignoring that your experience comes off more as hopelessness that I don't feel. I believe I asked you this before: What would you have done differently last offseason? What good D-line player was out there for us? O-line?
Sometimes, a Rookie makes a mistake. If Chad stays on the bench, from Week 2, until the Bye to effectively heal the ankle, we are probably a .500 team right now, maybe a game better.....
Excellent post - this about sums up the way I feel. That is why I posted earlier with a list of varibles that need to be considered when a team has a bad season. I also don't feel there's any difference between 4-12 and 3-13 at this point. There is no magical number that dictates how a successful a coach will be in the future with the team.
I didn't really mean for you to research (that's quite a lot) - I'm merely trying to show that there are many factors that go into a bad season that can't be blamed on the HC himself. I'm also trying to show that when considering these factors it becomes impossible to establish a trend or make a blanket statement about that coaches future success.
I am an older fan, and I can tell you the mistake Mangini made this year, is the same one Walton made back in 85. When O'Brien hurt his finger after the 10-1 start, and the QB play was not good, he should have went to Ryan, salvaging a game or two that would have given the team HFA.... That decision cost them a shot at the championship, but they had already won 10 by then. In this case the injury happened week 1.....C'est la Vie...live and learn. I think what happens with the Coaching staff will tell you far more about Mangini's ability to succeed long term, than anything else. He stuck with Sutton, whom he inherited, and brought along a OC who was junior to himself. Now feeling cemented in, I think he will be more likely to make better choices, going forward....He hasn't shown any lack of resolve with shuffling players out of the lineup, and I think it is reasonable to hope that he will take the same stance towards the Coaching staff.
No hostility was intended - I was simply asking if there was a difference between 3-13 and 4-12 as Brdwy states. I don't think there's any difference. DevilJets made some great points, and I agree Jeff Fisher is a great example of a coach turning it around after a terrible season. At any rate, Woody seems to like Tanny and Manny a lot and I expect they will be given at least 2 more seasons.
IMHO you all are really complicating a very simple thing concerning this season. 1st EM get at best a F & maybe a F minus, minus, minus for his evulation of the talent on the team. Second which you know but are avoiding the real truth which is $hitty players X $hitty coaching X a $hitty FO X a $hitty owner= a shitty team. Really it is that simple & if you all will open your eyes you to will see that the simple equaton I just posted is the reason we are garbage & will continue to be garbage until we get as Randy Cross said good players not semi decent players using R. Crosses words to play for us
What is all this "winning the Super Bowl in the 2nd season" stuff? You're making that up as some kind of magical precondition for dissent being absent at this point. What many of the older fans thought going into this year was that it was a rebuilding year and that the Jets would step back to 6-8 wins or so. I have no idea where that Super Bowl comes from, other than as a strawman argument that you are setting up to knockdown. Older Jets fans have sound reasons for being pessimistic as a general outlook on the Jet's chances. In a few seasons I'm guessing younger fans, having lived through 1998, 2003, 2005, 2007 and what is shortly likely to transpire will have caught up significantly in that regard. It's exactly BECAUSE the team sucks in so many areas that I have a sense of hopelessness at the moment. You can feel however you feel about this Jets team based on whatever factors you choose to factor in. I look at crappy management, crappy coaching and the crappy talent base that results and I make my decisions on that basis. You can make your decisions on whatever basis you choose. I have no idea what I'd have done, but I also know that going 3-12 is the sign that a few other people whose opinions actually count were equally clueless. You don't get paid to run a pro football team and be clueless. You get fired for that and go find a job in accounting somewhere.
If you look at the numbers there is a direct correlation between being under 4 wins and getting fired very shortly as a result. For whatever reason 4-12, (4-10 under the old system) gives a bit more leeway in terms of opportunity to redeem yourself moving forward. No idea why this is the case, maybe it's just a psychological difference in the way people view numbers, with 3 seeming small and 4 somehow significantly bigger. We don't really need to argue this though. Cakes and I have both come up with a significant sample size that shows 3-13 as a fallthrough point. You could always go sift the numbers and find the large number of coaches who survived 3-13 or worse for more than a season. You won't find them, but you could go look to satisfy yourself on that issue.
I agree with you that a large percentage of the coaches that go 3-13 or worse are fired shortly thereafter. As a result IMO, there isn't a large enough sample to go by to make a blanket statement or come up with a magic number for losses. I also think that DevilJets and I provided good examples of where a coach has turned things around after a terrible season and/or insignificance of loss total (3-13 versus 4-12), as well as other factors determining a terrible season. I really don't see where there will be any difference whether or not we win next week. Tanny/Manny eventual success or failure is not going to be determined by the outcome of this weekend's game. That's pretty much what I have been debating, not whether or not they are or going to be a great duo. As you said, we should agree to disagree. One things certain though - Woody will be keeping them around for at least another season if not two, so will we find out if they are the real deal or not.
I totally agree with the first poster..this team could of been a playoff team this year if he did something with the o-line..worst move ever not keeping pete and secondly by not upgrading the right side..how much sense does it make to get rid of your most seasoned and by the looks of it best o lineman .. bring in a power running back and not upgrade the line..oh yeah i forgot we got moore till 2012 .. wow way to solidify that line...
I love you guys but you're all nuts. The past draft was pretty F'in weak, and they managed to get a couple of real good players out of it. They had Penny and Vilma....both big names in NY....NY... but not fitting the scheme. So maybe Mangini should have consulted tgg.com to see where to point his team. Give it a rest already. You all got sucked into the hype that nobody but your minds created. Mangini never once said this year would be as good or better and anyone who thought it would was clearly delusional.
All things considered, I think the 4-12 vs 3-13 debate seems a little flukey to me. I mean we have three active coaches (Fisher, Crennel, Gruden) who appear in line to win 10 or more games after losing 12 or more games in 05 or 06. Marty Schottenheimer also recovered from a 4-12 year in his second season with the Chargers. I think it's a lot easier to recover from a 4-12 or 3-13 season in 2008 than 1988 just because of how much more potential for roster turnover you have with free agency and the salary cap. For that reason, I'd have a tough time comparing a Walt Michaels to Mangini. Maybe there is a major psycholigical difference between 3-13 and 4-12, but when you have four coaches coaches from the past five years that have rebounded from 4-12, I'd be very hesitant to use the data you and Cakes have come up with. Especially when most of it is from a pre-salary cap NFL.
Cowher went to a Super Bowl before he ever had a losing record. He never had a worse record than 6-10.
Most of it is pre-salary cap era because that would cover 73 years. The salary cap only covers the last 15 years. C'mon, that's common sense. You can shove the history and data aside if you want. That's your prerogative. However, you will see it is very damning. Earlier in the thread, I explained why I am using a cutoff of .200. I am not actually making as huge a deal over the difference between .188 (3-13) and .250 (4-12) as some of you seem to think I am doing. I'll play along with this difference-between-1-game thing for a moment, anyway. Let's see what the 2007 Dolphins, Titans, Browns, Vikings, Redskins, and Saints feel about 1 game.
