"Mangini Guy"

they think we will be the patriots next season and are DEMANDING a superbowl win 3 times in 1 season.

 

Name one coach in this league that isn't going to want a good character players. Some more than others. The fact that Mangini seems soft, and confined to himself means that he probably isn't going to want loud obnoxious players because he simply can't handle them.

It's a similar case for near all rookie coaches. Put T.O. on a team with a rookie coach and TO would tear that coach up.

Stop being a douchebag, assuming that you are higher than everyone, because you clearly don't know what you are talking about. Not everyone works hard, there are a lot of slackers in the NFL, and it's very evident if you'd pay attention. You think someone off The Parcells tree is going to take a guy like Gabe Watson? No, because they know better than to take a fat lazy slob who only plays hard when it could be beneficial to him.

Now quiet, while people who know how to infer continue on the board.

 

uhh... post count doesn't mean anything guy

 

"His attention to detail and tireless work ethic has earned him the respect of his players and fellow staff members," Bradway added of Mangini. "He will tell you shortly what he wants in his players: he wants them smart, hard-working, tough, and with great character. Those were among the qualities that we looked for in the selection of our head coach."

Mangini, a coaching veteran of 14 seasons, will be entering his 12th season in the NFL and his first as a head coach. He has been a part of five division titles, three conference titles and three Super Bowl championships in his career. "This is an outstanding opportunity," Mangini said. "I’m excited to be head coach of the New York Jets. We have a great front office; we have a committed owner, and we all share the same beliefs. We share the same values: it is team-oriented approach. We have core players here that also share our values and have the characteristics that we are looking for.

DOES THAT ANSWER YOUR QUESTION AS TO WHAT KIND OF PLAYERS HE WANTS!!!!
http://www.newyorkjets.com/news/articles/show_article?article_id=527&short_name=news

 

Are you intentially trying to pick a fight? It sure seems that way to me. Fact is, nobody here cares if you don't like people talking about Mangini guys or not, and nobody has to prove anything to you. Get over yourself already.

Sheesh.

 

Here's your link but if you were really a fan you wouldn't need it because you would already know what kind of a player he wants! He says it during every interview I've ever seen him do!

http://www.newyorkjets.com/news/arti...hort_name=news

 

So we should assume he is a liar? We should assume that all the stuff he said about the type of players he looks for is bullshit? You should watch the press conferences and read the interviews before you start making posts like you know what the hell you're talking about. I guess the sorts of players he used with the Pats are no evidence either, right? Think about the logic of your posts, if you're capable of logically evaluating what you are saying, because right now you are speaking as if nobody knows a damn thing about this guy and for some reason he became an NFL head coach.

What coach doesn't like character guys? Who in the hell coaches a team and discounts the characters of the players he picks? That's a bad coach, that's a guy who doesn't deserve his job, and people like you who think someone is mistaken by thinking a coach may not prefer high character guys, are idiots. Fans who know things about football and NFL players, (assumingly not you based on the ignorance of your post) are able to tell the character of players based on their pasts and the publicity they have received. As for guys already on the Jets, it is not hard for Jets fans to find out what they are like.

Mangini told us he wants team-first guys with good character, willing to work hard. That, to me, sounds like a pretty damn good approach to team building. If the head coach says he likes a certain type of guys, then I would say that players that have displayed the said qualities can be considered "Mangini guys". But you apparently did not know he said that, and started a thread while misinformed, far less informed, in fact, than the majority of members on this board.

You have 8 posts, and I know at least one of them is stupid. Pick up your game fella, or you probably won't be around for long.

 

Okay all, let's take it easy. He wasn't aware of what Mangini has said. It happens. We clarified it, he asked for proof, and it was provided. Let's all just move on now. Let's all have a :beer: and go back to debating who to take at #4...

 

Jesus, god forbid somebody question the Great Mangini

Mangini did tell us what kind of player he wants, but to be fair what kind of a coach says that he's scouring the free agent market for a few clubhouse cancers to add to the roster? We're all giving Mangini the benefit of the doubt and that's fine, but he's going to find soon (next time the Jets are legitimate players in the free agent market) that "Mangini guys" aren't the kind of guys that get cut often.

 

The point is that you don't come out criticizing people who know what they're talking about when you don't.

 

Every coach has types of players he favors. Some coaches like size, other speed. Some like verstaile guys that can do a lot of things well, other slike a stud that is tough to beat at one thing.Wrestling teams I coach against, year after year, seem to put guys on the mat who share similar characteristics.
Mangini is defining the kind of players he wants. Seems to me he is letting us know what we can expect his lineup to be. Don't look for the TO types.... expect the boring businesslike Bruschi types.

 

Ya exactly, so then maybe when we talk about players we'll say "He's a real any coach in sports history guy"......Mangini said what kind of players he likes, I think it's safe to take his word for it.

Regardless, you started the tread before you know the information out there and now you're backpedaling to try and cover your ass.

 

Well, how many guys do you know of in the NFL who Don't work hard, or don't want to win? Thats BS. I agree with the thread poster on this one- I am tired of us signing some former backup like chatham, and having half the people talking about what a key signing it was, and how this is a real mangini guy- oh, and my personal favorite-- how solid he is. Now everyone thinks we are the Pats- and all of a sudden, nobody wants a high priced FA. I think its BS that we didn't look at Bently, or Lavar- we had plenty of cap room after Aberaham left, and with the number of draft pics we have- we could actually have a nice team if we signed Dyson, Lavar, and Bently. Dyson and Baker are the only signings I liked this season. Everything else seemed like a depth move-- that would be fine, but we don;t have a good starter to put them behind. Olehoffen is really old- pope is a backup, Chatham is a ST player, who will backup, teague is a 31 year old stop gap, that I think may be OK, and that White LB from Tennesse is some average player who would be a backup on half the teams in football. Not very impressed guys.

 

Is Rodney harrison a character guy? Shit no- he is one of the dirtiest players in football, and he was arguable the best player on their D the last coupler years. Thats why I hate all this BS-- besides the obvious guys like Moss, Owens ext- how many NFL Players do you really ever hear of in regards to character good or bad? YOU DON"T. What does anyone on here know about Popes Character? How about Cassel? NOTHING! because you have never heard of them!

 

I'm with you brother-- I can't stand that BS about not being an experienced poster on this site. WHO CARES that means nothing in regards to your football opinions.

 

Thats crap though- bruschi was a huge playmaker- this whole "Blue collar, lunch-pail, meat and potatoes" thing is such BS started by the media. Some of the guys were like that from the SB teams, but they also had about 20 probowlers in that run-- Law, Milloy, bruschi, harrison, McGinist, Brady, Dillon, Seymore, Washington -- with very good, deep talent at WR and TE. They didn't win SB's because of Matt Chatham, or any other "solid" backup they had-- they won because they DID HAVE STARS. The media plays that angle that they are a "Team" and thats why they are good, not because of their star players. Well, in my opinion- thats BS. Their Stars won them SB's. You can plug in a mediocre guy here and there, but assembling an entire team like that, as the jets seem to be doing is just not going to work. How many probowlers will we have out of VonOlehoffen (36 years old) chatham, Cassel, Dyson, teague, pope or ramsey? none-- none of those guys will ever be a Ty Law, Tom Brady, Willie McGinist type of player.

 

My god am I glad you are on this site! I argee 100% with your points-- to bad nobody else will-- most of this site will argue with you the same way they did on this thread. Love the comment about guys with no talent automatically being character guys.

 

Can anyone make an argument regarding Character without using TO? besides him, moss and maybe a few other guys who had issues, you really can't name too many guys who are not "character guys" I think the whole thing is BS. This guy is right.

 

My God, I don't expect everyone to be analytical of what they say but you have to be a little more reasonable than this. Guys without talent are called character guys? Please. Yes, this happens, but you can't extrapolate it to represent all the less talented players. Favre is a character guy, so is Curtis Martin, so is John Lynch...they are not talentless. On the other hand there are a bunch of players that don;t start or aren't great and don't have great character, like James Reed for example, or Freddy Mitchell.

Regarding the top quote, that's your opinion, exactly. By the way, I have never heard a reporter say, "The don't have many stars or alot of talent but they are a team, and therefore they are good." You're either misunderstanding the point or taking it out of context to support your argument, because when team chemistry is emphasized as a factor in team success it does not in any way discount player talent.

By the way, I was not attempting to criticize the fact that he had less posts than me or anyone else. My point was that of the 8 posts he had, I had read one and it was misinformed and vindictive towards those who are. To defend those that use the word "noob" and cut down people with less posts: they do it because fairly new members who are rude in their posts, and target long-tenured members, are not very well-received. If people want to be respected on the board they need to respect other people and prove that they know what they're talking about. From that perspective, the opening post of this thread could, to me, could legitimately face criticism.

I defend the members of this board that use the number of posts people have against them when the cause is justified. And mentioning it in a rebuttal to a poster who is new and is degrading the posts of people who have been here for a while, and on top of that posts incorrect or misinformed information, is totally justified in my mind. I know that when I was new here I faced my fair share of comments when I made weak posts or attacked a posters opinion without legitmate arguments. You learn the way it works quickly.

Lastly, did you notice how I have referenced a number of posts in one reply instead of creating seperate posts to reply to each particular comment? You should try that...