It's not dysfunctional. It has proven itself effective and to work. It hasn't worked here because our owners over the last 40 years have been complete and utter boobs. The GM doesn't have to know about coaching. If he knows that he traded for a vet player of signed him as a FA and he was a very good player previously, and suddenly can't play any more, unless he's injured or older, that's a pretty clear indication, that the coach isn't doing a good job in making good use of the player's talents. If he drafts players that the scouts and he have vetted, and those players consistently fail to develop and the team doesn't play well, then he has a good indication that the HC isn't doing a good job. This is even more true when one considers that most GMs solicit their HCs opinion, and usually try to get the players the HC wants and says he needs. If the team had a team President who was a competent, experienced, knowledgeable football man, I'd have no problems with his being over the GM and HC and determining who was doing a good job, and who wasn't. The problem with advisors as I see it is twofold. One, that they have no allegiance to the team. They're hired guns, and may not like Woody or the team and could intentionally mislead him, or could be paid more by another team, so may not be around for long. Two, since they are only "advisors" and have no connection with the team, Woody could easily think that they don't really know what's going on with the team behind the scenes (and he could be right in this situation), and may not be in a position to really know who's right and who's wrong. He could also opt to ignore their suggestions, whereas, imo if he's paying someone 6 figures a year to run the team, he's gonna be more likely to listen to him. Also if you have two advisors, what happens when they have opposing positions? Then it's a stalemate, and it leaves Woody making the decision again.
I agree. If Bowles isn't a leader, and doesn't command the full attention of the players, then what good is he? That's the one thing I thought he'd be and be a HUGE improvement over Rex in that area.
lol who would want to work for an organization that gives a coach/gm only two seasons to fix all systemic issues. if part of the issue is not having the right personnel the odds of fixing that in two seasons is nearly impossible. this forum is full of irrational whiners and makes being a Jets fan even more painful to endure.
Who would want to work for an organization that has no clue and sticks with losers for years on end? It shouldn't take a quality HC more than 2 years to get his team's attention, focus and get them playing sound football. That should be accomplished in his first few weeks with the team. That's when the relationship is formed. Part of the job of the HC is covering for talent deficiencies. No team is perfect. Every team has weaknesses, holes, lack of depth at some positions, etc. The team has better talent this year than last, and much better talent at some positions than when Tuna took over the team. Also, how do you account for the fact that Bowles did a much better job last year than he's doing this year? How does regressing fit into your timetable? There's nothing irrational about this thread and discussion. If you can't see the sense in it, then YOU are the one with the problem. If this forum is so bad and full of irrational whiners, then why do you read and post here? I invite you to go sign up on another forum and read and post there. That will solve both our problems. Find out where Ray-Ray is posting. You two are peas in a pod. You'll be very happy there.
no it's fans like you who have no insight of the internal operations of a team and making statements like "Doesn't have the team's attention". Based on what? your analysis? did you interview the players? let's wait for that quality HC to leave their current team they have success with to coach the Jets. Which quality head coach has turned around a team with the wrong personnel in two seasons. I'll wait.
You obviously have reading comprehension issues. I wasn't the one who made that statement, but I do agree with it based on the fact that after every loss Bowles has said that they have to fix the problems, work harder, etc., and yet there have been no changes. The team is still playing undisciplined football, committing stupid penalties, making mental errors, blowing coverages, dropping passes, running wrong routes. That's nothing but lack of focus and commitment. That is solely the province of the HC to get and hold their attention and demand that they execute and focus, and if they don't take steps to remedy it. Parcells turned this team around his first season and he didn't have a fraction of the talent this team has. The one thing he did have was CuMar and Testaverde, who even with all his faults, was better than any QB we have at present. Mangini turned the team around his first season. There have been countless others. You just aren't paying attention because you think you know it all.
I am very unhappy with the game plans, the intensity of the team and the lack of in game adjustments. Also time management.That said if the Jets were to fire Bowles after 2 years I would not renew my season tickets after 36 years. Sink or swim this is the coach Woody picked so he needs at least 3 years before I even think about finding a new coach. As said many times, losing organizations change HC and QB's every 2 years. Now Fitz was a one year stap gap, we did not invest in him past this year, but the HC is a long term investment and I would bet my life that he's not going anywhere after this year. We have holes all over the place starting with the most important position so lets fix the talent first. My biggest concern with Bowles is time management. He's suppose to get better with experience not dumber but regardless I don't want him fired, I want him to get smarter. Maybe he needs to upgrade his positional coaches?
First of all, two years is MORE than enough time to learn how to do things like in game adjustments. Todd Bowles is a pathetic failure at it. Quite frankly, I think Todd Bowles should be fired at the end of this season. There are plenty of experienced HC's that have gotten even less than two seasons. Ray Rhodes got fired from the Packers after only one season as HC. But with that said, I don't he will get fired. Woody listens to the fans, but he's not going to right away. Bowles will get fired after the 2017 season. If by some strange chance Bowles was fired? I would want a very experienced replacement. I want a guy with a proven track record even if that means firing Mac also. I would chase Bill Cowher and Jimmy Johnson. Try to persuade them to come out of retirement. But the guy at the top of my list would be MIKE WESTHOFF. Westhoff was a EXCELLENT coach for us for years and he has always deserved an opportunity IMO.
GM's sign shiny new FA pieces all the time, that end up not fitting due to scheme, etc.... They also draft guys like Gholston, who look great but can't play football. That's not a clear indication that the coach isn't doing a good job on those examples. Quite the contrary. But in that type of linear setup, you give the FO an easy scapegoat for their own shortcomings, rather than being accountable for overpaying the wrong type of player, or for drafting duds. That is why that type of organizational setup makes no sense to me. I'd be ok with a team President with the right credentials being the top layer or top advisor to the owner, or even a Head of Football Operations if you want to separate the business side. That's not much different than what i'm suggesting. By advisors, i mean guys on the payroll with allegiance to the team, around for the full year, with knowledge of what's going on. It could be a President, Head of Football Operations, or a Board of Directors specifically assembled for football strategy and performance reviews. Even really strong owners have trusted people in place. That's how they maintain continuity imo.. They don't let a single person define the entire organization, and then flip the script when that person fails, and then repeats the process, etc..
Yes, GMs sign FAs all the time that don't fit their schemes. Sometimes they hope the player can be flexible enough to adapt to their scheme, and other times those GMs just made stupid decisions, perhaps out of desperation. I may be wrong, but I think the better GMs avoid those kinds of mistakes. With draft picks it's harder to tell because they've never played in the NFL, and players who were great in college fail in the NFL all the time and players who were not even standouts in college become solid starters in the NFL if not stars. Time will clarify what kind of GM Mac is, but at least for now, I think he's doing a good job. Some GMs miss on draft picks because they fall in love with workout numbers, speed, and/or aren't very good judges of talent. Even the best miss some. We all know that the draft is a crap shoot and an inexact science. Thanks for the clarification. When you mentioned Wolfe and Casserley, I thought you meant asking outside colleagues or hiring outsiders to serve as advisors. IMO if one has "advisors," there have to be an odd number of them so there are not the same numbers disagreeing. More than 3 would also be too cumbersome and too many opinions, and even three could be very confusing. I like your thinking outside the box on this, and think it could work in some situations, but I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree on this, because I still think there should be only one person running the football operation. Committees are an inefficient way to do anything most of the time. IMO the best way still involves finding the most experienced, best qualified man you can find and trust him.
It was more than the losing, he was treating his players like college kids and running them into the ground.
Todd Bowles isn't getting fired if he has a losing season in year 2. But just for fun... I would want an offensive minded HC. We never hire them. I want to develop a franchise QB
When the regression comes after a season where they had the 2nd or 3rd weakest schedule in the league? I don't take that in to consideration at all. I think the Jets benefited greatly last year from the schedule and with salary cap considerations and draft needs I expected at least a 2-3 year rebuilding process. I also expected a regression from Fitzpatrick this year, but that also has to do with what looked to be a much tougher first part of the season than the Jets faced at any point last year. Fitz and the Jets benefited by playing some of the worst pass defenses last season, not to take anything away because you still have to execute but I always kept last season in context with who they were facing and how those teams played over the season. The team and roster were in a mess when the new regime took over and the team still has some very big holes, specifically the secondary and a suspect QB situation and an O-Line I'm not 100% sold on. The strengths of this team going in were the WR's, RB and Defensive line. the Weaknesses of the team were the LB corp, though they did make some moves to improve there but it will take a season or two for that to sort out. Safeties aren't good in coverage, neither are the LB's and the CB situation isn't as strong as hoped, Revis is clearly in the decline and the young guys need to step up because the island isn't there anymore shutting down a side of the field. the O-line is a question mark as a whole. I said that it was going to be a 3-4 year project to rebuild the roster properly so I'd say at least 4 years.
Coates has been very shaky today, he's a guy I was pretty high on but right now at this point in time I'm glad the Jets didn't take him...that opinion may change over time as he's still learning the pro game. That said, James was my favorite TE in this years draft.....
