Okay you have the blueprint and timeframe that it should take a team to be sucessuful. What are you expectations for the Jets. What is acceptable and non acceptable in mangini era( Jets had one bad year already) So your saying Jets don't make playoffs next year, they are embarrassment. BTw The goal of anyteam shouldn't be, just be good enough to make playoffs every year, but you want to win a superbowl .
The Jets should at least seriously compete for a playoff spot in 2007. In 2008 they should be a serious Super Bowl contender. If that doesn't happen, this coaching staff will have underachieved. This is the 21st century. Five-year plans worked in the 1960s, but not anymore. It is okay for a team to have two consecutive lousy 4-12 type seasons, particularly if there is a transition to a new coaching staff between said seasons. Three consecutive 4-12, 5-11, 4-12 seasons is inexcusable.
No matter how you manipulate the numbers, the fact that Raiders ended Jets season twice (In those playoff appearances) Carry alot more weight. ALso they severly damaged the myth of C Pennington(Never has been the same QB after that 2002 playoff game) Raiders have went through more coaches, than baby goes through diapers. IT embarrassing. Than I look at Jets , who didn't fire coaches, the coaches elected not to finish out their contracts. ( rather be someplace else) Parcells, Bellichik Groh, and H Edwards. Note to Woody fire Mangini befofre he fires you.
Well B Callahan was fired after the 2003 season. (4-12) Raiders hired N turner and change both offensive scheme(WCO To deep vertical offense) and defensive schemes (from 4-3b to 3-4 defense). IS that correct. SO Raiders are allowed to have two conscetive bad season, under your scenario. (right) Raiders hire art shell.(new coach) So I guess Raiders are allowed two more years. Do you get the point , how silly your theory is.. There is no set time frame for sucess. IT can happen in first year(highly unlikely) or it can take three to four years.
It was inexcusable because Turner was bad for two seasons and the Raiders had already been rebuilding the season before Turner. Turner was appropriately canned. The Raiders were done in early 2003. They didn't just start to suck at the very end of 2003.
Yes I quoted myself... This about the Raiders direction NOW!!!! Stop bring up your past!!! Who give a rats ass that you beat Herm 2 times!!! The fact is the Jets are going to be better with their moves, and the Raiders continue to be on the decline!
Comeon Man are you reading what you are writing. BIll Callahan ran a WCO offense(short passing) and 4-3 defense. NOrv Turner a Deep vertical offense and 3-4 defense. HOw can you already be rebuilding when players that might have been good fits for WCO are ill suited for Vertical offense . That why T browns and J Rice were pushed out the door. . likewise on defense. Players that have only played in 4-3, now have a way diffrent role in 3-4(need whole diffrent type of personal) You need a NT , diffrent type of DE and alot of lbs. (not exactly a team strength) REread what I just wrote at least five times and maybe you will grasp how hard it is to completely changer your offenseive and defensive mind set. (its going to take time)
You really think Jets are farther along than Raiders in their development. (They are going to be better team sooner) You really think they are a better team than raiders next year. Go list your projected roster ,compare the age and talent at their respective position and compare it to the Raiders. Sorry its not even close. Mangini has a major rebuilding job ahead of him. WOW lay off the koolaid.
I understand what you are talking about, but I am not taking it to those lengths because it is not necessary. Turner showed no improvement. Are you suggesting Turner should still be the Raiders coach?
YES it is necessary because you can't be already rebuilding when new scheme calls for diffrent set of personal(thats not on roster) Turner did some good things(incorporated alot of youth into starting Lineup and targeting players in their prime in FA(d Burgess, LJordan, Renaldo Hill), than the older player, with one or two years left in tank . HE did set the foundation as the roster does have alot of emer NO Turner should not be Raiders coach because you win only one divisonal game in two years, than you need to go. Also when opposing rookie Cb's are jumping the routes, because you ran three straight weeks, the same patterns, without changing the look out of that formation. Thats unacceptable. Theres no excuse with as much talent on offense for Raiders, the offense to be that porous. Biggest mistake he made was changing the blocking scheme from man on man, that was so sucessful in 2004 to a zone blocking scheme that raiders personal was ill suited to play. Everyone that saw that OLine in 2004 was predicting it to be one best in all of football in not too distant future. That didn't happen and scheme was as much the problem. N Turner left Shell with alot of young talent. Shell not the X and O's of Turner, but hes a leader. Hes going to do a better job communicating what he expects from each player.(everyone will know their role) Every GUY that Shell drafted or signed on OLine are described in Draft Biio.- Nasty. Raiders team will have identity again. BIG and Physical on both sides of ball.
Did I start this thread. Someone took one writer opinion and tryed to justify their point. Anyone that says Raiders aren't going in the right direction are crazy. The team is loaded with young talent everywhere. IT just when does that young talent mature.
He just posted an article... the Raiders fans on this site would have one believe that they're on the cusp on a playoff run. All signs say otherwise. Just a little dose of reality, that's all. The fact that we haven't been to a SB doesn't discredit anything said in that article. So while you can point and laugh at us for our misfortunes, you're not much better off right now.
A Jet fan posted an article laughing at the RAIDERS misfortune and I shot back a little, don't make it sound like I come on here with wild predictions and trash talk. I have never started a thread on this site hyping the Raiders or pushing some "Jets suck" agenda. But when people start in on the Raiders lack of direction, etc., I have to speak up a little. Some people act like anyone with a contradictory point of view shouldn't bother posting.
Take a look at my post, #35. EVERY WORD of your post is shown. You thought you were proving me wrong by pointing out that the Jets have won their division ONCE this decade. I was pointing out the Raiders have won their division THREE times this decade and that was one more thing they've done that the Jets haven't. So where did you show I was wrong?
Oh, that's a fact? Even Ira Miller isn't crazy enough to call his article "factual". It's an opinion, just like yours or mine. By the way, Vegas has the Jets at 100-1 for the Super Bowl next year. The Raiders started at 60-1 and are now at 45-1. Doesn't that suggest that somebody without a rooting interest in either team thinks the Raiders ARE going in the right direction? I don't take Vegas odds as gospel, but they're just as valid as the opinions of Ira Miller, me, or you...
Aaron Brooks is pretty good if he gets some help from the running game Oakland will have a potent offense. I don't know about that defense though.
