Either way most fans will be happy. What? Surely you must be joking. What kind of Jets fan are you? Someone must find . . . a way . . . to somehow . . . be unhappy . . . even about . . . Sam Darnold . . . Coaching change. Wait for it. It's like the X-Files, man. The truth may be out there, but Jets fans are never happy about anything even if they get hit in the face with gold bricks from Fort Knox.
Of course not. If this is a serious discussion my thoughts are that coaching opinions are mostly from people who have never coached. If you ask someone who coached at a high level he or she will tell you to get better players if you want to win.
Except nobody argued even the best coach could win with the worst players, so needing good players does not equate to what you argued — that the importance of good coaches was overrated, the logical conclusion to such an argument being that good players could win even with bad coaching because coaching isn’t as important as the players. Coaches needing good players doesn’t mean good players are therefore more important than the coaching. It could be a 50/50 balance — you need both relatively equally. The only logical course of such an argument is that all the things coaches do — game planning, play design, breaking down the opponent’s strategies, practicing plays until they are run perfectly, etc, are less important than the physical ability of the players and thus the players don’t need all of those things the coaches contribute to the game and therefore could just run out on the field and win based solely on their physical ability. Since you do not agree with such a conclusion of your argument I have to doubt you actually believe your own argument. The only other conclusion I could draw is that you are reducing success and failure simply to the actual game play and you don’t believe any of the game planning and practice, which is led by the coaching, impacts the game. If that’s the case you wouldn’t need all the practice and game planning and the players could just go out and play, which comes back to my original conclusion to your statement, which is a curious argument from someone involved in the game for 40 years.
While I agree 100% with your point, and that coaches ARE necessary, I also believe that in football, coaches have become too involved, trying to micromanage every facet of every play. It's gotten almost to the point where it's a video game played with live bodies. I really think they should limit the ability of coaches to affect every play - go back to the way it used to be where QBs called their own plays, etc.. And for god's sake, get rid of the radio in the helmets! Limit substitutions as well, so that the coach can't send in plays, and speed up the game. In soccer there are strict limits on managers interacting with the players on the field. The manager's primary job takes place during practices, getting the players ready to play their opponent, but when the whistle blows, it's the players who play. I realize going back to how things were is nostalgic, but sometimes the old ways were better.
The bold section could be the next course of the Jets. FLORHAM PARK, N.J. -- The months-long fascination with Sam Darnold has provided cover for New York Jets coach Todd Bowles, who has lost 22 of his past 32 games. Ordinarily, a coach with that kind of record feels his tush getting warmer, but there isn't much chatter outside the organization about his job security. Or inside it, for that matter. Part of that is the Darnold phenomenon. That Bowles received a two-year contract extension at the end of last season also is a factor, along with CEO Christopher Johnson saying there's no playoff mandate for Bowles and general manager Mike Maccagnan. From all indications, Bowles has the full support of his bosses. He's certainly not operating like a coach worried about his job. Would he start a rookie quarterback if he were panicked about his victory total? Bowles knows he could be sacrificing a couple of wins by opting for Darnold over the experienced Josh McCown, but he recognizes there's a long-term plan, and Darnold's development is a big part of it. Mitchell Trubisky (No. 2 overall pick) for 12 games. The Chicago Bears finished 5-11 -- a two-game improvement over the previous year -- but they fired Fox anyway. In 2016, Jeff Fisher waited half the season before inserting Jared Goff (No. 1 overall) into the Los Angeles Rams' lineup. Goff struggled, the team bottomed out on its way to 4-12 and Fisher was fired with three games to go. In 2015, Lovie Smith made Jameis Winston (No. 1 overall) the Tampa Bay Buccaneers' starter from day one. Winston showed promise, but the team finished 6-10 and Smith ... well, you know. What do these three situations have in common? In each case, an old-school, defensive-minded coach was replaced by a so-called offensive guru -- Matt Nagy in Chicago, Sean McVay in Los Angeles and Dirk Koetter in Tampa. The hires were made with the quarterbacks in mind. The marching orders were clear: Make our guy a star. Essentially, that is Bowles' mandate. The Jets invested $30 million and four draft picks in Darnold, and the boss -- Johnson -- came out after the draft and predicted the former USC star would lead the franchise to greatness. Not only did he put pressure on Darnold, albeit unwittingly, but he set a high bar for Bowles and the coaching staff, especially offensive coordinator and resident quarterback whisperer Jeremy Bates. What Steelers offense looks like without Bell • What to expect in Barkley's debut • No team needs 1-0 more than Browns • Jaguars still all in on Bortles • Mack now semiannual menace for Packers • Evans-Lattimore is must-see TV If Darnold is struggling by season's end, showing no signs of improvement, it probably will be curtains for Bowles, who is 20-28 in three non-playoff seasons. That contract extension, through 2020, provides financial security, but it doesn't make him bulletproof. Is he worried? "Same pressure I felt when I came here," Bowles said Thursday. "I don't go into every season feeling any less or any more. It's the same pressure. Get to a Super Bowl; that's all I'm here to do. I'm not here to collect a check. I'm not here to go 8-8. I'm here to try and get to a Super Bowl." A realistic expectation is the 2016 Philadelphia Eagles, who went 7-9 with rookie Carson Wentz starting every game. Doug Pederson survived the growing pains, but unlike Fox, Fisher and Smith, it was only his first year on the job. He and Wentz began together, the ideal way to rebuild a franchise. Bowles doesn't have that kind of timeline in his favor. ADVERTISEMENT Neither does Maccagnan, who was hired the same time as Bowles. Maccagnan, too, received a two-year extension, creating the perception they're joined at the hip. One of Bowles' closest confidantes, former NFL coach Bruce Arians, brought up the coach-GM partnership when he was asked a specific question last week about Bowles' evolution as a coach. "He and the GM are now working. ... As you work together longer, you get better at what I'm really looking for in a player," said Arians, now a CBS game analyst. "I see that all jelling better." It's a quote that provides fodder for those who like to read between the lines. This is a big year for Bowles, who has an improved roster, but one with obvious flaws. At the same time, he must coach better in certain areas. There were too many fourth-quarter hiccups and too many penalties last season. Another bad year on special teams also will reflect poorly on Bowles, who's on his second coordinator. In the end, it will be about the quarterback. Bowles' fate is controlled by a 21-year-old. Some might argue that starting a rookie will provide political cover, but let's be real: If the product on the field looks bad, rookie growing pains or not, the owner probably won't have much sympathy.
I think Bowles off the field has ran a tight ship and I think his perceived style of being likable to players but not a push-over is the perfect bled, so for this reason I like him off the field. However, it is fair to say there's reason to be skeptical when it comes to Bowles on the field with time management and play decision blunders in the past. Though I'm willing to excuse all of that and chalk it up to inexperience and say he has learned from his mistakes if he comes out of this year having not shit the bed. That said I think based on what we've seen it is going to take a strong OC in tandem with Bowles to make this staff work, and there's nothing wrong with that so long as we can retain said OC. I do think Bates is good but we'll have to wait and see. I think we'll know week 1 just what sort of OC we have. I predict the Lion's and Patricia to assume there will be a conservative game plan, I expect a contrarian plan that is aggressive in the 1st half that may get dialed back in the 2nd. Excited all the same.
ANY HC that will give Kacy Rogers son a a roster slot after being cut from the CFL Bowles should have immediately been fired if Chris had any stones
He signed him to the practice squad when we had a 90 man roster. He was cut. Who gives a shit who is signed to the practice squad in pre season?
Well, its really hard to justify signing someone who couldn't make it in the CFL especially if its the son of a member of the coaching staff. This just doesn't pass the smell test and would have been a terrible optic. Good thing is, he wasn't good enough to play in the NFL either at this time so there's always that. I know Kacy is Bowles' BFF but he can't risk the appearance of nepotism and even entertaining the thought of Kacy Rodgers Jr. shouldn't have been a consideration especially since the kid had gotten cut from the CFL.
the fat bearded rapist should stack the box and force Darnold to throw it against disguised coverages and blitz packages. But...he also should have played Malcolm Butler in the Super Bowl so who knows what the latest no-talent hack from Belicheat's coaching tree will actually do. Maybe he will make his players run gassers at halftime and we run away with it in the 2nd half.
I can't fuckin wait until Darnold lights it up and Bowles gets an extension. I can't fuckin wait to watch so many on here go into hiding or freak the fuck out!
He's not on the roster and you don't have a clue if he can play or not. The whole comment is pretty pointless,
You have to be one twisted fan to find encouragement that Fox or Fishers firings would lead to our HC being fired. You would think you would want the Jets to win. No the clueless actually believe negligible improvement and a CS overhaul is a good thing. That starting over again, setting the program back a couple of years with new defensive and offenseive schemes is good for all. Sometimes I'm not sure what's worse, rooting for a team that isn't a perennial winning or being part of a clueless fanbase. This should have been in the other doom and gloom thread discussing possible HC replacements.
I think his choice of "encouragement" is misplaced, it's more that the front offices woke up and realized they needed a change. I don't dislike Bowles I just don't like him as a head coach. We have 4 years of history on him with no improvement in clock management, no improvement in play calling, no improvement in in-game situational decision making (i.e. punting down 2 scores with little time left), no improvement in player discipline, no improvement in in-game adjustments etc. Just like Geno, Petty and Hack didn't pass the eye test neither does Bowles imho. He's not look like HC material and hasn't shown enough improvement to warrant staying beyond this year unless all of the above mentioned coaching short-comings get dramatically improved. The one potentially positive is that the vets that didn't give a damn (Richardson and Wilkerson) are no longer on the team so the defense for the most part is young and impressionable without those piss poor attitude guys. If Bowles recognizes this and uses it to his advantage he may be able to turn this D around. If not, it's just more evidence its time to move on.
Going to be some really disappointed folks here come the offseason. Bowles and/or Mac aren’t going anywhere.
