But Brees is just one example, and that team was in dissaray for a weird suspension year where they basically had a fill-in HC. There are plenty of examples of the QB 'making' the HC, I'd say WAY more than the other way around. When you say an offensive minded HC makes huge improvements in a QBs game, do you really mean HC or do you mean OC? Well, I know you MEANT HC, but that's where I don't really know what the right answer is. I think it's a lot like in a corporation... if the CEO is good at numbers he'll take more interest in the COOs job, but if he trusts his COO 100% he will just let him do his thing and chime in on occasion. Are HCs supposed to be uber-awesome on both sides of the ball? Chances are they aren't, so you get a strong coordinator to do more of the strategy on the side that the HC lacks. I'm sure there are cases where a great HC was just great gameday coach and overseer but relied on both his OC and DC to come up with gameplans. Basically I'm saying that many of us (myself included) consider MM to be 'the guy' that is now supposed to run the offense as the OC, with input from Rex on strategy if he sees something or wants to go a certain direction. QB development is either up to MM, or the QB coach. That's their job. I'm not going to sell the farm for a HC who's only strong point is QB dev when that skill is not important once you get lucky with a good QB or get one through FA.
Even Cowher ran terrible teams for years until it came good because Pittsburgh stuck with him. We need to do the same. Let MM have cart blance with the offence but Rex needs to get a little involved. I beleive he does as Marty normally does not run this much in his offences and this year he has mixed up the plays well. I think this is Rex's influence. Idzik has to see the players are behind him. The defence is set up to be dominant with a few additions and that is down to rex. Even if we lost against Miami we will have a winning recored overall with REx and that is with 2 rookie quaterbacks and no talent on offence. When have we as the Jets ever had that over a 5 year period. We need to keep him. We have to keep him.
Wait what? i know its JUST two conference finals but when have we ever had it so good over the last 40 years? even the mighty parcells was in trouble when Testeverde went down. I have been a Jet fan since the mid 80's and this is the best we have had it. Maybe that does not say much. But i think those two conference finals give him some leeway. Its not like we have sucked every year he has been here. One losing season so far out of 4.
You're falling into the trap of lowering expectations based on our lack of success. That's how you continue to be mediocre, by setting mediocre expectations. Put Cowhers first 5 years next to Rex's and get back to me. This is incorrect. Pittsburgh stuck with him through 7-9,6-10,9-7 because he had a lot of success first.
I see what you are saying. But if you take the 7 years before he won the superbowl then he had 4 years of not making the playoffs. 2 championship games and divisional. So you are saying they stuck with him in the last 2 years of that 7 year stint as he had done well the first 5 but in the next 5 he had a worse record than Rex currently has. I just dont get that. If i wanted success and most owners do. They would not accept 5 years of mediocrity just because in the previous 5 years to that they had done well. Constant turn over of players, formations and coaches causes years of transition. If we get a new coach in im pretty sure he will change or defence. This in turn will take away our strongest point in the team.
how many of those teams lost talent years 3-5? I would bet NONE, the talent has eroded around him yet he kept us competitive. and most won w/in 5 years but many had previous stops as HC's and maybe they win w/ their original teams if they stick w/ them? Coughlin in jax Dungy w/ TB Gruden in oak BB in Cle Vermiel in Philly(though he left on his own) Shanahan in oak
What? What 5 year stint did Cowher have a worse record than Rex??? Cowher won the division 5 times in his first 6 years, made 3 AFCCG's and one Superbowl. 9-7 was his WORST record during his first 6 years. He did all that with Neil O'Donnel, Mike Tomzak and Kordell Steward at QB.
and an incredibly weak division in an incredibly weak conference. He only made 2 title games in his first 6 seasons
This is the key factor in debunking that "win within 5 years" false argument. If the Bengals win it this year or next, don't be surprised if you begin to see coaches on the 4-5 year hot seat keeping their jobs, the NFL, being the copycat league that it is,
Am I understanding this correctly? The key factor in "debunking the false argurment" is a fantasy projection of the future? I think that's pretty awesome how you can debunk cold hard facts with a projection of something possibly happening in the future. Great job! :up: Not only that but it's the facts that are the "false argument" rather than the fantasy projection. Completely awesome!
I don't understand how something that is FACTUALLY correct, not made up - 100% true using nothing but evidence, and you can with a straight face argue is a "false argument". And we can use your fantasy theory that when Carroll, Fox or Rivera win it this year that it just another example of an ever growing list.
Conversely, if you take away the Colts gift game to us in 2009. Rex has had only one winning season (2010) out of 5, and only made the playoffs once.
Your first sentence of the last paragraph is undeniably true. The last two are not. Idzik doesn't seem like a dummy. His father was a head coach I believe, he's been a coach, and around football a long time. If he does make a change at HC, it's up to him to go with a HC and DC who will NOT change the system or personnel on the DL. If he makes a change and goes with a new HC who will change systems and require personnel shifts (getting rid of some of our few really good players, then I will be as upset as all the Rex supporters and want Idzik gone. IMO intelligent football men just don't do that for the reasons you cited.
Not necessarily. If Rex has been as involved in personnel decisions (draft, FA and the roster) as those of us who want him fired think, then he's equally to blame with Tanny (maybe even moreso) for the lost talent on the roster.
Your argument is not that only one coach who has won a SB has been with his team longer than 5 years. That is a fact in support of your argument which is, as you set forth in your earlier post: "History tells us Rex won't win one here. It just doesn't happen if you are not successful within your first 4-5 years" I believe that is a false argument. Your argument is logically valid, but it could be wrong. And the reason I believe it could be wrong has been set forth by others in this thread. Many coaches quickly won Super Bowls with their new teams. They were Super Bowl caliber coaches, who may well have won if they had stayed with their original teams(e.g. Tony Dungy & Bucs ). Some were placed in situations where any good coach would have won (eg Mike Tomlin, Gruden & Bucs, Barry Switzer, Seifert in '89). Some happened to win in year 5 (Mc Carthy, Holmgren, Harbaugh & Dungy @ Indy) Under your argument, do you fire those guys if they lost the SB? Some got what they were missing at their first jobs ( Bellichek & Brady; Shanahan & Elway). If they had gotten those types of QBs in the fourth year of their original jobs, would you have canned them then? Of course, if you go back beyond your arbitrary 25 year point, you get Landry 11 years, Knoll & Ewbank ( 6 years ) The NFL is not a patient league. And yet, if you look at a guy who got to weather the storm and stay despite numerous calls to fire him, (Coughlin) you did get the SB victory. The jury is still out on Marvin Lewis, but if he does win, watch what happens in the copy cat NFL. There is a basic split on the board between keeping Rex and firing him. But I really get a sense that Rex has a SB in him. Rex wants to win the SB here. I know it would kill Jet fans like me if Rex won somewhere else. I think he needs to stay
