J
JoeyStylez
Guest
No one knows more about being wrong about the NY Jets than you, that's for sure.
BTW here is the hard truth: it takes a certain bit of luck to be consistently good in the NFL. NE was lucky that a HOF QB was there to be taken in the 6th round (and with their SECOND 6TH RD pick, at that!). Denver and Carolina were lucky to suck enough in 2010 so they could draft Cam Newton and Von Miller, 2 elite players at the 2 HARDEST positions to find elite players at. Miami finds Dan Marino just sitting there with the 27th pick, which is like finding a Ferrari for sale on Craigslist for $2,000. Drew Brees hits FA right after hurting his shoulder, scaring off teams and allowing NO to sign him to a bargain 6 year $60 million contract. Hell, we were in the same position in 1965 with Namath, where we were lucky enough to have an owner who had the foresight to see what was needed and was willing to spend the money. Otherwise, Broadway Joe becomes Gateway Joe in St. Louis. I know that sucks to admit, but the truth is the truth. Of course hard work, preparation, coaching, etc all matter as well. But it does take a little bit of luck, too.
So let me get this straight - you're saying, as we sit here days after the Super Bowl (a/k/a, the end of a full NFL season that started last off-season, when Macc & Bowles were hired), that we don't have enough info to form an opinion on Macc and/or Bowles? Via a draft, a season's free agents etc., a training camp, pre-season and a full NFL season, you find it unfathomable that one could have formed a favorable opinion of one or the other, let alone both of them?
And what's even more absurd, is that in spite this, that YOU have seen enough to have galvanized your opinion of Bowles as Woody's latest mistake?
Does that even make sense to you? Can you explain that? Are you just that much smarter than the rest of us? Is that what you're saying?
Sent from my SM-N920V using Tapatalk
M
Mainejet
Guest
What the hell are you talking about? This is a football message board. On this board, we post what our opinion is on various issues pertaining to the team.
My post refers to WHEN THEY WERE HIRED. Get it?
After one season, my opinion is the following:
1) Mike MacCagnan did a nice job putting talent on a team that was severely lacking talent at least in year one. Now, the hard part comes. He can't go on a shopping spree now. Now, he needs to find the "under the radar" players that can help this team. He needs to continue shooting aces in the draft. So, yes, AT THIS TIME, I think Mac has done a nice job up until now.
2) I have serious reservations about Todd Bowles. Todd Bowles absolutely sucked in the middle part of the season and he ultimately failed to win a gimme game against a horrible Buffalo team to seal the playoffs. That's a serious disappointment. What grieves me even more is that he failed to make any in game adjustments that would have potentially changed the outcome.
I know you love the guy, so go right ahead. But quite frankly, for me, I'm not sure if he's a decent hire or a BUM. I still have hope for the guy. But I'm not going to confess my eternal love for the guy (like you obviously have), when I've seen a lot to be disappointed about.
So there you have it. That is my current thinking of the status quo with this team. And if you don't like it? Don't read it.
My post refers to WHEN THEY WERE HIRED. Get it?
After one season, my opinion is the following:
1) Mike MacCagnan did a nice job putting talent on a team that was severely lacking talent at least in year one. Now, the hard part comes. He can't go on a shopping spree now. Now, he needs to find the "under the radar" players that can help this team. He needs to continue shooting aces in the draft. So, yes, AT THIS TIME, I think Mac has done a nice job up until now.
2) I have serious reservations about Todd Bowles. Todd Bowles absolutely sucked in the middle part of the season and he ultimately failed to win a gimme game against a horrible Buffalo team to seal the playoffs. That's a serious disappointment. What grieves me even more is that he failed to make any in game adjustments that would have potentially changed the outcome.
I know you love the guy, so go right ahead. But quite frankly, for me, I'm not sure if he's a decent hire or a BUM. I still have hope for the guy. But I'm not going to confess my eternal love for the guy (like you obviously have), when I've seen a lot to be disappointed about.
So there you have it. That is my current thinking of the status quo with this team. And if you don't like it? Don't read it.
Ah, so then it's a writing skills issue - you wrote in the wrong tense (you say we "don't" have any evidence, if you meant what you say you meant, you needed to say that we "didn't" have any evidence, at the time they were hired). See the difference, and how one could mistakenly think that you were being critical of someone who, after a full season, was optimistic? Had you written it the way you should have, that makes it a whole different conversation, and one that I doubt anyone would take issue with. Not nearly as much drama in that corrected statement. Y'know?
I'm happy with what I perceive to be Macc's strategy regarding building a roster, and even before the season, I wss happy that we went with a 'scout' type rather than a 'cap' type guy.
I'm cautiously optimistic about Bowles. I think he's got the right temperament to succeed here, long term. He's making a lot of the same in-game mistakes that Rex and Herm made as Rookie HCs. I didn't see Herm or Rex improve on those issues over their time here though, and I went from "all in" to "he's gotta go" over the course of both of thier tenures. That's probably partially responsible for my caution here. Maybe the same will happen, of course I don't know, but at this point Bowles seems more astute than either, and obviously less blustery than Rex - so I hope that he will learn enough to cover his deficiencies, and that his teams will not be as temperamental - subject to extreme peaks and valleys. Next year will tell us a lot, I think.
M
Mainejet
Guest
Thank you very much to the English Nazi
It's not about English (grammar?) - it changes the meaning. Under your new explanation, your post is only talking about how people felt a year ago. Which I don't think anyone would even care to talk about now, it's pretty much meaningless now that we have a year of data with which to analyze. Wouldn't you agree?
Getting back to the topic of the thread, if I may, I have been thinking about Peyton's contributions to the Broncos winning the SB. Does anyone think he was anything more than a game manager? After all, the Broncos only scored 2 TD's, and both can mostly be attributed to the defense. One them was actually scored by the defense. And the other was a running play that was set up by the strip caused by the defense. So here's the real question that should be of interest to anyone who thinks the Jets can't go to the SB and win it with Fitzpatrick: If Fitzpatrick was playing in place of Manning in the SB we just watched, would the outcome have been any different? And if you think so, please point out the contributions that Manning made that were so much better than what Fitz could have contributed that it would have led to a Panthers win if Fitz were in there instead.
i understand what you're getting at & i've let it be known many times here at JFU how big a fan of fitzpatrick i am..
but the broncos "all world" defense played at an "all universe" level against the panthers..
i/we all can rattle off competent enough QB's who could/should have won that game with the exact same results that defense gave last sunday..
Fitz performed at a far greater level than Manning in just about every game this year, with one notable, season-ending exception.
I think we're on the same page, although I don't think I'd say the Broncs' D was all universe. Best in the league for sure, but not really as good as, say, the '85 Bears. And that's good news. It says if the Jets can strengthen the D enough and fill in some holes on the O, we can win a SB. And we don't have to turn our defense into the '85 Bears to do it. There are those who would say that even the '85 Bears could not win a SB today with the likes of Jim McMahon at QB, with the rules being tilted so much in favor of the passing game now. But I think SB 50 proved them wrong.
I think you're right. So why do so many think we can't win a SB with Fitz?
I don't know why anyone would think that after this year. We'd need to have a top 5 D, for sure, but we could definitely win one similar to the Broncos road map. Of course, we don't have Von Miller.
My concern about Fitz is that we're flirting with disaster off err don't have a top 5 backup QB as well. I'll be pleasantly surprised if he plays all 16 regular season games next year. It would buck a serious trend for him. And injury-prone guys usually don't start reverse trending at his age.
we mostly agree.. i do feel in today's game denver played about as well as a defense can against NE & carolina..
& yes, i believe fitzpatrick can be a SB winning QB..