We totally disagree here. Stability for the sake of stability fixes nothing and just results in more of the same insanity/mediocrity. Bowles has not improved in 3 years. He is passive, ultraconservative, thinks he can win with D, knows nothing about offense, is not a disciplinarian, is incapable of making adjustments, and can't even manage the stupid clock. You're right about one thing, however. It won't matter how many HCs the Jets hire as long as Woody is calling the shots. The man is an utter moron. Unless or until he and his brother Chris sell the team or decide to hire a competent football man to run the team and allow him to do his job, there is NO HOPE for this team to ever make any substantial improvements or changes. That's why I'm done with being a Jets fan. Almost 50 years of this ignorant BS is too much.
You're right, but it will never happen. Our only hope is that the Johnsons do something awful and the NFL forces them to sell the team. We're not lucky enough for that to happen. That's why I'm done with this joke of a team. I'm tired of being a masochist and hoping that our clueless ownership make the needed changes. I'm also tired of dealing with blind and asshole fans. I wish you well, my friend.
Except we totally agree here. I don't think Bowles is the guy, either. I just don't think the next coach is going to be able to show anything in just 3 years, either. Unless we hire a retread, which means we hire somebody who already flamed out someplace else. If I quit being a Jets fan, it will go hand-in-hand with giving up on the NFL all together. The rules changes over the last 15 years or so have made the game so much worse. This forum reflects it--the game doesn't matter anymore, only the FQB draft lottery drawing matters.
With the exception of 2006 the Jets have always been built to win for one season, two at the outside in the post-Kotite era. That's why they oscillated from good to mediocre to bad over and over again. 28 year old stars mostly have a year or two left in them at star level. Many of them have just the year in front of them. A few of them will sign and disappoint and then collapse at 30-31 as is the norm in the NFL. You buy free agents at a premium. You trade for vet stars at a premium. The premiums are in cap space and draft picks, which are the most important contributors to building a well-functioning team. This doesn't mean that great draft picks and lots of cap space guarantee a solid build. The worst teams in the NFL often have the best of both worlds and still suck year after year. That's because their management is incompetent from the owner on down. The Jets management through 2010 was canny in picking a year to try to win and then inept at the follow-up of cleaning up the mess afterwards. They did miss some years completely (Jets darkhorse favorites to win in 2005 and 2007 collapsed both years under the weight of aging players, big contracts and the effects that happen when an injury wave hits a poorly constructed roster.) The result of the ineptitude at managing the cap and developing players was the trade-ups that began to happen with regularity in 2007 and beyond. When you can't develop a young player you start trading up to get "better" young players. Then the NFL happens and some of them do not work out anyway and others get hurt. The Jets have a choice (again) in the off-season to come. Do they spend $150 million+ to pick up a good mid-career QB approaching his likely decline phase but not there yet? Do they double down on the draft by maximizing picks and grabbing the best players they can? Do they trade-up again and hope the QB they pick is easily developed and does not get hurt? All of the choices carry risks. The first one could move the Jets into the competitive bracket but is unlikely to make them a leading contender. Cap space will be constrained, injuries will still happen and some of the pieces the Jets may be looking at as key contributors (Bilal Powell as an example) are rapidly approaching obsolescence themselves. The second one requires a better drafting approach than the Jets have managed the last decade or so. Having lots of picks only turns into a strength if you turn them into players at a decent rate. BPA is an important part of that but it is hard to stay disciplined when you have the kind of holes the Jets have typically had. If the Jets had not drafted Leo Williams think where they would have been with the Richardson and Wilkerson blowouts. Still, taking another defensive player - even the edge rusher the Jets so desperately need - will make fans whine and howl this spring. Failing to take a QB in the 1st Round would be a *very* unpopular move with the fan base. To complicate things the Jets need to decide between 1 and 2 in that order. Free agency precedes the draft by more than a month. The QB the Jets may want to sign will not wait around to see if the right QB drops in the draft. Further complicating things is that 1 and 3 are both risky options in terms of building a contender. Signing the big free agent may give the Jets a 2 or 3 year window with some luck but it may also fail brutally in the first season via either an injury to the signee or just the reality that having a good QB guarantees you nothing in the NFL, as the Chargers, Saints, Giants and Lions have discovered often over the last half decade. Kirk Cousins would have been signed long-term by the Redskins 2 years ago if he had been able to deliver consistent playoff spots and wins. It doesn't work like that. The NFL is a team game and unless you have an all-time great the team wins based on roster strength, strategy and a good QB. I'm guessing that option 1 or 3 is what we'll see. The Jets are going to be desperate not to get rolled in the popular perception by the QB pick the Giants will inevitably make at 2. If Josh Rosen declares, as seems likely, there is going to be a collective sigh in the Jets management suite as they try to figure out how to avoid going into the season as an afterthought in the NY/NJ media market. I'm hoping they have a good plan in mind by then. If the Giants get lucky with somebody like Rosen and the Jets build another 2 year window we're all going to be very depressed in the end.
I'm glad that we agree. The thing with a retread is that he might have enough cache that he can demand that Woody step back and allow the professionals to run the team, but I doubt it. Yes, I'm sick of the NFL and the stupid rules changes, the ugly ass color burst uniforms (or whatever they're called), and the parade of clueless HCs and GMs that the Jets owners have hired over almost the last 50 years. I believe the game brings the worst out in people anyway. It brings out our aggressiveness, violence, and incivility. I've seen and felt it in myself and see it routinely in others here.
And to you as well! I have my fishing to keep me occupied along with other forms of entertainment. I've long since started to detach from the Jets as it does appear things will never change until Ownership does. Woody has been at this ownership thing now for almost 20 years and he still doesn't get it. I don't have another 20 years to give him.
It’s less confusing than fans who think keeping bad coaches will create a dynasty, as if coaching ability is less important than simply having the same coach for a long time. If you can’t recognize that a coach is doing a poor job that’s your own inability not an indictment of the decision making that does recognize it and doesn’t want to accept it. keeping a bad coach for five years instead of three doesn’t solve the problem of hiring a good coach.
hate to disagree, but the jets were not better than people think. vegas line was 4.5 over/under for wins. if winning 5 counts as better, than people are burdened by rose colored glasses. the team was totally unprepared in denver and tampa bay games. they had all summer to prepare, yet opener at buffalo was a disaster. couldn't hold leads in 4th quarter, shows lack of coaching to make in-game adjustments. way too many penalties and continued saga of mo wilkerson do not project " better team".
Not true. How many previous Super Bowl winners showed significant improvement within three years of a coaching change prior to winning the Super Bowl?
Hold everything!!! Do you mean to say Bowles(king of the 8th grade Chess club) goes head to head with Belichek (Bobby Fisher) this Sunday??? Ahahah lmao
They were "better" because many, if not most, posters, and many in the media thought the Jets would only win 0-2 games and be one of the all-time worst offenses.
Plus the Lottery Gotta be one of your best posts..especially describing Bowles Am I happy you and I want to leave this mess?? It's bittersweet but you get the idea how bad you feel when Jets come up in conversation You are to smart a guy for the same nonsense year after year...I think we both want something to cheer about..sigh
I agree we need higher standards but we get lambasted by other posters and writers saying that we need to be more patient. The only reason I have been patient is that I don’t want us to look like the Cleveland Browns where we fire someone every other year.
Thanks. We're both too smart and too emotionally, mentally healthy for this insanity. I wish all other Jets fans were as well. As far as I'm concerned the best thing that could happen to Jets fans is for the NFL to fold the franchise.
Great historical analysis Brad ..btw did you teach in school? I see and agree with what you said over 3 choices It's a shame you left off with " I hope the Jets make an informed decision" because I would actually would have liked to hear your real opinion
The Jets are going to have to think outside the box to make things really work next year. The predictable paths are all risky and uncertain. Solving the QB problem is perceptually the most important step the Jets could take. The question is how? Maybe 1965 gives us the best roadmap? Maybe looking hard at 1983 and figuring out how the best QB dropped to 6th taken? Lots of stuff to ponder here.
I don't know what the best option is. I'd just rather not see us go down the beaten path and wind up with similar results. I'd rather the Jets get better year over year and round into a contender than try to go for broke and wind up prostrate in a few years again.
Well, Let's take a look: The Pats have only really had 1 bad year since Parcells took over in '93, and that was BB's first year. They've won 5 super bowls since then. I don't know if that analogy works for the Jets at this point, since the Pats were already good. The Broncos were only 2 years removed from a Super Bowl Appearance under John Fox, so they don't really compare, either. The Seahawks went 7-9 each of Carroll's first two years, but have 6 consecutive winning seasons and one ring since. The Ravens were immediate winners under Harbaugh, but they were winners under Billick, (their records as HC of the Ravens are almost the same). The best example of your point may be Tom Coughlin. Disciplinarians seem to have an immediate impact, forcing talented players to actually perform as a team, and they are successful early. It seems to wear thin, though, as he ended both his HC gigs on a 3-year slide. Still, Fassel had the Giants in a Super Bowl, and they won 10 or more games in 2 of his last 4 seasons, so it's not like he took over a shit team. McCarthy took over a team that Mike Sherman had lead to 5 winning seasons out of 6 years, including 3 division championships. Sean Payton looks like a good example, but the QB change probably had the bigger impact. The Saints under Jim Haslett were consistently good, but not great. I suspect the difference between Aaron Brooks and Drew Brees is a lot bigger than the difference between Sean Payton and Jim Haslett. Dungy was a fine coach, but he inherited a generational FQB and team that was 1-year removed from back-to-back playoff runs. Cowher had instant success, but it's not like Noll left the cupboard bare, either, as he had been rebuilding that team from '88-'91, during which time he had two winning seasons, won coach of the year, and made the playoffs. Gruden? Same deal, inherited a good Dungy team. Bilick is the other good example I see for your argument. 8-8 the first year, VLT the second. Fairly consistent after that. Dick Vermiel is the odd duck here. He took over a bad Rams team, went 5-11, then 4-12, then won a QB lottery and got a VLT for his trouble. We can dig further back if you want, but here's the problem I'm seeing: I can't tell if these teams showed much improvement, because they were mostly pretty good already. The Jets aren't.
