On reading my post I should have been more clear - as I mentioned I DO think that opposing D's would have figured out Chad sooner or later, as Oakland did. We've seen this kind of thing many times before in the NFL - a new Qb transforms a team's offense to something the opposing defenses are not prepared for. Or sometimes this happens with a new overall offensive scheme. But DC's are paid to figure this out, as Oakland did in 02. My poorly stated point was if Chad had played earlier, it might have merely meant another team would have done so earlier in the year, having more to work with to figure the Jet offense out. But I did not mean to say that this would have meant that the Jets would not have won more games that year if they had not played Vinny at first. I can see the argument they might well have. It is a bit speculative to look back and assume they would have. That's all I meant.
I can't. A collage of crap-- err, I mean, Junc: Whenever I read your entire posts, no matter what you write, this is what it all sounds like:
What isn't at all speculative is that Hackett was calling the game and running his O. Chad in 02 was significantly better in ever facett of that O than Vinny was. Of course it's speculative but what isn't speculative is that Vinny was done and in fact had to be benched a quarter into the season. Chad once he got some playing time showed himself to be extremely good at running the O and once the team got comfortable the team started playing very well. You can argue that not giving your young QB the ball the reps and the work didn't matter. You can argue that coming into a game cold without the work with the O didn't matter. You can even argue that not having the confidence of the HC and the Staff didn't matter to the team the first few weeks Chad played. I don't agree with that argument but hey it's just my opinion I'm not claiming facts.
Do you understand that Vinny led us to 10 wins the year before? It wasn't crazy to start him going into 2002 and as it turned out it's good he did so Chad wasn't destroyed before he got a chance to succeed. People kill Chad after all his success here so imagine what would have happened had he come in and we were 1-4 like we would have been?
Instead of wasting your time on nonsenical posts put some time into countering my points that you disagree w/. We'll have a much better time on here and the board will be better off for it.
We had the 29th ranked passing 0 in 01 and the 4th ranked rushing O. Vinny didn't lead us to squat in 01. You want to have this both ways. Herm protected Chad because he knew we would have all the injuries yet it made sense to start Vinny yet it made sense to bench Vinny when it wasn't his fault we lost it was the teams. Why didn't Herm protect Chad and Curtis in 05 when he should have known how crappy the OL was. Joe Montana was unloaded when he had a better record was younger was a multiple SB champ and much more left in the tank than Vinny T and it was the right move. It's not like Vinny lead us to the SB, he basically managed a running game and came in third place in the division with a very good team behind Curtis Martin having one of his best years as a pro.
Ah...that was until he lost all that weight. He was huge his rookie season when we made the PO's with a 10-6 record. He lost all that weight the following year and the team went 4-12. He lost his hunger. Then next season he put on some of the weight back and we finished with a 9-7 record. Ryan is much, much bigger than Mangini. The Sopranos is over, and Rex Ryan and diets never really got along. I feel good about next year.
We barely passed, our ranking would have been much better had we actually passed the ball but wisely we rode Curtis unlike 2000 which cost us our season. You do realize it's hard to win 10 games in this league, right? We couldn't do it w/ more talent and the "great" Brett Favre last year. Vinny wasn't great like 1998 but he was a key player on that 10 win team.
Only 38% of the teams in the AFC won at least 10 games in 01 60% of them were in our confrence. It's practically impossible to win 10 games in the NFL.:rofl: Teams with winning records better than 10 wins move ahead all the time in this league.
Only 38% from the AFC won 19 but 60% were in our conference? Can you explain that? In nearly 50 years of football the New York Jets/Titans have won double digit games NINE times.
Hey, I enjoy it; it's not wasting my time. It's futile to make any counterpoint against you because you'll just retort with some excuse, like, "48% of our team was injured during those two weeks, not to mention, you do realize that one of those games was a night-game in which there was a full moon, right?"
Just because they didn't win the SB? Excuse me, but the one overwhelming theme here in Jet land is how everyone has figured out the wildcat and Miami will no longer be able to succeed with it. But isn't that exactly what the Giants did to the spread offense? Infact if I remember correctly Tom Brady was laughing when he heard the Giants weren't going to give upo more than 14 points in the SB. All the Giants did was pound Brady into the gound and prevent the spread offense form scoring more than 14 points. Obviously the Pats are just like everyone else, just come up with a gameplan to stop them and the Giants did just that. And you want to talk about hunger? The Pats had the chance to do something no other team had ever done, but rather than win that game and become only the second team in the history of the NFL to go throuhg the entire refular and paost season undefeated, they walked into the SB over confident. Sounds to me like they lost that adavantage because of a GIANT ego! No, the Dolphins added a Center that better fits the system they run with Jake Grove, added a Sfatey that has SB winning experience in Gibril Wilson. The Dolphin re-signed JT who not only brings veterant talent, but he gets to return to a team he never wanted to leave and this team is on the rise. He also has a chip on his shoulder after last years unsuccessful trip to Washington. Miami also re-signed Channing Crowder, Yeremiah Bell and Vernon Carey three more veterans they could have easily lost to FA. Miami obviously felt losing them would do more harm than re-signing them and kept what they felt we important pieces to the success last year. Oh and than there is the rookies, probably the most talented CB in the draft with Vontae Davis, Pat White and his ability to score from nearlky every skill position on offense and Sean Smith a 6' 4" 220 LB CB who just might be the the most important DP of the 09 draft for the Dolphins. Miami's biggest weakness in 08 was the secondary which is now extremely deep with competition. Hmmm, I think what I said was their "DEFENSE" will be worse. But obviously you feel the need twist what people say so you'll have something to complain about. Sorry to bust your bubble, but if every team played with hunger, the Jets wouldn't have lost all the games they lost down the stretch. Obviously you have no idea how important hunger is to the success of teams so closely matched talent wise. I knwo you like to talk as if you know something about football. But when you make hunger something every team has obviously you don't know much about this sport cause that's exactly what the Buffalo Bills lack. Teams like the Steelers have it, teams like the Lions don't. Sometimes having a HC for too no matter how successful in previous years can become complacent. They lose their edge. Teams like, the Cowboys with Tom Landry the Steelers and Chack Knoll the Dolphins and Don Shula Great teams where the coaching was no longer effective. Sometimes changes need to be made. Now I'm not saying the Pats and BB are there yet, but there is a long history in this league where great coaching doesn't last forever and the effectivenss eventually wears off. I think the Pats are getting there. I think the Pats going 18-1 in 2007 were helped tremendously by the fact that the next best team in their division was the 7-9 Buffalo Bills, followed by the 4-12 Jets and the 1-15 Dolphins. Pretty much a god awful division in 2007. I think 3/4 of the AFC east is able to battle for the division and a playoff spot, something the Pats hadn't faced before 2008 in years.
Comparing futility to mediocrity doesn't make Herm a good coach. We played 8 games that year against sub 500 teams that means if you beat the dregs and go 2 and 8 against the better teams you win 10 games.
Instead of writing, "there have been several instances when a head coach lost his starting quarterback to injury, but still found a way to win", I opted to actually note specific cases. By doing so, I would have saved myself time from the inevitable question, "Could you please cite some examples?" I did not compare any of the QBs cited to any of the QBs who worked under Edwards. How you have so very much distorted my posts is beyond me. Not once did I compare Morrall or Ferragamo to Testaverde.
No you didn't compare the QBs directly but by comparing the situations you actually do compare the backup QBs. The situation was that Don Shula lost Bob Griese for a majority of the 1972 season and Herman Edwards lost Chad Pennington for the majority of the 2003 and 2005 seasons. Your point is to say that Don Shula was able to still win while Herm wasn't able to do so. But you do have to look at the replacements (Earl Morrall, former NFL MVP and Super Bowl QB for Don Shula and Vinny Testaverde and Brooks Bollinger for Herman Edwards). There's a huge difference in the replacements of the QBs that went down. That same Don Shula lost Dan Marino in 1993. He was 4-1 with Marino as his starter and 5-6 without him that year. It is relevent to compare the backups. On the other hand, you are right that Herm did not do enough as a coach to over come the injuries. The biggest issue with Herm was that the backups never seemed to be ready when their time came to play. That's never an issue with the elite coaches. You both are bringing up good points, and I don't want to get in the middle, but you guys should take a step back and re-read your posts. Just my .02
Just my 2 cents: it's kind of useless to try to make comparisons between results achieved by Hall of Fame coaches and results achieved by Herm Edwards because one of the few things I am absolutely positive about at this point is that Herm Edwards will never even merit a glance from the selection committee based on his coaching ability, which is mediocre at best although not as bad as some of his detractors make it out to be. My handle tells you everything you need to know about why Herm failed in New York. The fact that long-time GM Carl Petersen got the heave-ho in Kansas City at the same time that Herm did suggests that there were deep underlying problems there when Herm took over and that although he predictably could not solve those they probably were not mostly of his making.
It's a lot easier to stop the WC than it is the spread offense. You don't need to look any further than this past season. As the year progressed the WC didn't really have much of an impact. With the Patriots in the spread formation, Cassel managed to get 4 or 5-400+ yd games. The Giants stopped them because they had THE BEST DL's in the league. They pressured the hell out of Brady. I know you're not saying this directly, but if you're assuming the Dolphins have the same talent as the Giants did in '07 on the DL for '09, I'd like to see you post proof of that. Sounds to me like they (and Brady) could be back in '09 with a chip on their shoulder. To let a season like that go down the crapper the way it did. Besides, you should have no reason to believe the Pats WON'T come back with a vengence. You said yourself the Dolphins came overconfident to their 2nd meeting last season and you seem to think they're going to build off of that. So why not the Patriots? Why does your logic only fit the Dolphins and not them? It just doesn't make much sense. I hope you're not being biased here. Jake Grove has a history of being injured, no? I'm not 100% sure about this, but I apologize if I'm wrong. Gribril Wilson is a good addition to play the run. Jason Taylor return is a good one as well, but he's also a year older. Take that comment for what it is. As "good" as Crowder was for the Dolphins, the FO showed no interest in re-signing him. Or at least for the price he was asking. He threatened to hit the FA, and the FO was fine with that. But at the last minute, he decided to take the Dolphins offer and stay. Hardly what I would consider a situation where the Front Office felt letting him go would cause more harm than good. Vontae Davis is talented for sure. But his work ethics leave much to be desired. Clearly he's athletically gifted, but he relied heavily on that to make plays and cover WR's. Sure it worked in college, but it's yet to be seen if it will translate at the NFL level. We'll find out for sure. Sean Smith, I can't really say much about. That was a good pick. But again, we'll see if he pans out in the system. Okay you lost me here. I don't know what you're point was. Every team with the new season in the horizon will look to make strides. They're hungry to have a successful season. Every team is in a different level of success for sure. I'm sure the Lions are hungry to have a .500 season. The Cardinals are hungry to return to the SB and win it. The Dolphins are hungry to return to the Playoffs and win a game there. The Bills are hungry for a WC berth. So I don't know what you mean exactly. Again, you say great coaching doesn't last forever and the effectiveness wears off. Even tho BB isn't there there...they're 'getting' there? Okay. Your reasoning for it is by simply calling the 2007 season a 'fluke' between the Division (funny...you want Jets fans to give the Dolphins credit for the '08 season but you won't give any to the Pats for the '07 season) fair enough. Patriots record 2008: 11-5. Tie breaker goes to the Dolphins and win the Division 2007: 16-0. Division Champs 2006: 12-4. Division Champs 2005: 10-6. Division Champs 2004: 12-4. Division Champs 2003: 12-4. Division Champs I fail to see where the great coaching and effectiveness is wearing off. But I'm sure you can see it, so I'm gonna have to ask you to please provide more proof rather than your 'feeling' for as to how they're getting there.
