MILF might. But I am not sold on Tanner just yet. I just feel like with the O line we had, we should have done better even with Fields and Taylor. And I know everyone like to shit on Fields, and I joined that club as well, but I studied almost every play he had in 2024, he was not as bad as he was here. I also saw protections allow pressures based on schematics, not because OL lost the battle, some players were not covered at all. Some laughable 3d and 4th and short calls. Not enough Breece. By the same token there was some good as well, he did scheme guys open at times. So, it was a mixed bag IMO. I would not fire him, maybe I give hm C+. Plus he has potential. Maybe we can give him incomplete. But he was no MILF, to be sure. Look at the Bills game. I looked at a lot of Trubisky throws. I think Cook would have made a lot of these too if he were in the same position. You probably make some of the TDs that they threw after having a few drinks. The Bills didn't have great offensive talent on the field, we had better OL. Granted they had better defense than ours, just because any defense is better than ours . But still Tanner was all right 1st year, some good, some bad, enough to be retained, especially compared to others. But I didn't get the impression he was a slam dunk. I wanted to see how he develops. Maybe we will see on another team if he can improve, it would be interesting. But as of now hard to tell if he has good potential to be a HC or not.
The thing with Engstrand and LaFleur is they were both young and from good coaching trees so they had the basics down and would likely improve with time. They ran modern concepts that were creative and good at getting WRs open - basically the exact type of OCs you want. It's just crazy how allergic this franchise is to doing the right thing.
It would be good to see Tanner with a good QB. The problem is even this year how do we get a good QB? Tanner is the right guy for longer term. Glenn needed to get someone to win a few extra games short term so he can convince Woody to stay on.
Ebgstrand came from working with a genius, and to your point he earned about a C+ here. I’m in agreement. Fields was terrible. Receivers were getting open and he had the longest time to throw of any QB in the league, he just sucked as did Cook. Comparing Cook to Trubisky is not remotely fair. Bring honest if there’s a QB that’s poised to have a potential surge, it’s Trubisky. He has had a couple years now working with Brady studying behind Allen. If he had the time to throw that Fields did with receivers getting as open as they had been I think Trubisky would have a solid season. He’s a guy I’d consider bringing here, although not so sure Frank Reich is going to instill much confidence
It's infuriating. And it's such an about face from how Glenn conceptualized how he sees his coaching staff. And not in a good way. It's one thing to fire Wilks, a bad hire in the first place who was already probably near the end of a long career, but another to fire a guy new in the role, who showed plenty of evidence of promise from a good coaching tree. It feels way too much like the MLF fire and think it will be a huge mistake.
There are reports that Woody is staying hands off with this regime (not saying they are true), this seems more like the indecisive randomness Glenn showed all year.
It feels BAD, just like the MLF firing, but the circumstances are totally different. The Jets brought in Hackett in order to appease Aaron Rodgers. Big mistake. That decision damaged the team in my opinion.
Asking for real, do you have links to where you read that? The only thing I remember is him saying that before the year started. A lot has changed since then.
Bart Scott had an interesting perspective this morning on one of the shows. It actually got a little heated, but the man is passionate which is why we love Bart. He was talking about the Eagles new offensive coordinator so it really had nothing to do with the Jets but I'm still drawing parallels. Bart said people are falling for these young "strategic" coordinators all over the league. I guess the eagles hired some guy who has only coached football for 3 years or something. Anyway Bart said teams need to be very careful with these guys... -- Bart's point was that young coordinators who didn't play the game and only have exposure to one system are easily figured out in time by experienced defensive coaches and often struggle with adjusting since they don't have the knowledge of a variety of concepts. That's Engstrand. But that's also like every guy getting hired as OCs and HCs these days, the new "hot stuff".. You think about Frank Reich, that's not him at all. He played 10+ years for probably several different systems, he's had exposure as a coordinator and head man in even more several different systems. If he needs to adjust he could pull out a concept from the run & shoot 90s for all we know, his ability to adjust is far greater than Engstand or the Eagles coach or Bills coach, etc. have.
I don’t know…I would not have fired Tanner…I think, like MLF before him, this stupid ass team scapegoated the OC based on the performance of historically terrible QBs. Now I get you can say that well, as the OC, he owns the QB performance, and yeah OK I can accept that to some extent, but for Fields, he’s been terrible across his whole career, and the HC specifically chose him, so Tanner was dealt that hand and had to deal with it. I do think that Tanner’s play designs did create plenty of open receivers, so a better QB would have made this offense look 1000 times better. So yeah, I would have kept Tanner to see how he would do with a better QB…not that we have many options at QB, but almost ALL or ANY of them would be an upgrade…whatever scrub we would get…Mariotta, Trubisky, Winston, etc. Any of them are clear upgrades. Would have been good to see what Tanner’s growth would look like. This is what makes us a shitshow…we are so quick to fire the exact types of guys that we should be nurturing, and we are way too late in firing the terrible coaches that are clearly not the right guys. Again, just like if I were a player, and ESPECIALLY a QB, I’d stay the fuck away from this franchise if I were a young coach with potential. This is NOT the place to be confident in the team’s ability to nurture my talent. All that being said, I’m not overly distressed if we do in fact get Reich to come here (not sure, but I haven’t yet seen that its a done deal, so until we see that, it could blow up). He’s a former QB, which is good. He’s done the OC and HC thing before, which is also good. Yes he bombed out in Indy and then in Carolina as the HC, so that’s not great, but I still think he’d be a pretty decent hire at OC. Personally I would have kept Tanner and try and see if he would develop, but then I’d also have kept MLF. But as far as available options go once Tanner was fired, I think we could do a lot worse than Reich.
It’s jot even a matter of would you fire Tanner or not. It’s a matter of the fact that our rookie HC took an exorbitant amount of time hiring his staff last year stating that he needed to make sure he got the right guys in the room. Now after one year he’s fired almost all of the “right guys”, including at the two most important positions at OC/DC. So now we’re to assume his “right guys” weren’t the right guys and now he can replace them with better “right guys”, one of which was hired off a virtual call alone and never had an interview with any other teams where 10 spots were available, and the other who’s rumored to be coming hasn’t coached in 5 years and again had not had a single interview with any other team. But they’re now the “right guys”? What are we doing here?
The amount of blinding hate people have and love to place on the HC within the after-the-fact blame game is kinda crazy. Tanner Engstrand was a terrible hire that got hired for reasons/logic that were no less terrible then what fueled the Nathaniel Hackett hire. Lumping in MLF with Engstrand is pretty silly imo. Hackett is the much better comp. Just because that doesn't make for as much of a F you to AG doesn't make it any less true either. Justin Fields is also no Zach Wilson. Fields may not end up being a starting caliber QB at the NFL level, but once he gets released he's going to end up playing somewhere else next season, and his play there is going to end up looking notably better then that rock bottom Tanner managed to get out of him here. You all realize that will happen, right?
