No, I didn't. In fact, in the same sentence later on I pointed out Geno and Pryor as examples of the latter. First of all, the majority thing is irrelevant. Not all decisions carry the same weight. Drafting in the first round is more important than drafting in the 6th, and signing a premium free agent to a major contract is more important than some small deals to marginal players. Second, Idzik WILL get fired if he doesn't produce results, but 2 years in is not the time to do it. A GM needs way more time than that to implement his plan. The Richardson pick was smart not because it worked out, but because he was truly the BPA at that point. Everyone agreed that he had a lot of potential. And smart teams draft BPAs early, not team needs. And the reason people like me support Idzik's decisions over the team's record is because 2 years is too short a time to judge a rebuilding team. If Idzik wanted a winning record this year, he would've resigned Revis and Cromartie and let Vick start from the beginning. And then where would we be? A playoff bubble team with aging veterans and no future, same as with Tanny. Instead, Idzik is correctly building for the future. You can use that against him, but it's the only way to build a championship contender. He is better than either of them at the same stage of their careers. Did either of them win DROY? Richardson is on track to be a Pro-Bowler who is dominant in both pass rushing and run stopping. Keep in mind, he plays in a 3-4 right now, where he's seeing more double teams than either of those guys. Abraham was mostly a pass rusher, not a run stopper, and Ellis was a role player. Metzenburger looks pretty good compared to Geno right now too. What's your point? We are not going into year 3 of his plan. We are still in year 2. Before we go into year 3, we will have a draft with some high picks and an offseason with 50 mil or so in free cap space. I imagine we will have a lot more talent by the time we go into year 3. In the meantime, he has already rebuilt our offensive skill positions from the worst in the league to pretty good (Harvin, Decker, Amaro, Ivory), and added one of the best young players in the league on defense in Richardson. If you look at the team by position/unit: QB: we went from nothing to nothing (Sanchez to Geno), gained nothing yet but were able to give a potential prospect a chance to develop RB/FB: Definite improvement (Shonn Green/Connor -> Chris Ivory/Bohannon) WR: Definite improvement (Hill/Holmes -> Decker/Harvin) TE: Definite improvement (Cumberland -> Amaro) OL: Definite decline (Brick/Slauson/Mangold/Moore/Howard -> Brick/Aboushi/Mangold/Colon/Giacomini) DL: Definite improvement (Wilkerson/Pouha/DeVito -> Wilkerson/Snacks/Richardson) LB: Definite improvement (Pace/Scott/Thomas/Harris -> Pace/Davis/Coples/Harris) Secondary: Definite decline (Revis/Cromartie/Landry/Bell -> whatever we have now) Special Teams: Same So you can see most units improved, a couple stayed the same, and O-Line and secondary got worse. But with those two, most good players we lost were older players (Revis, Cromartie, Brandon Moore, Brick declining), so they weren't going to be part of our future anyway.
I just-- I can't believe this stuff I'm reading. I've been anti-Rex for a few years now and while I've disagreed with people about that I can acknowledge that there is an argument to be made... some body of work if you will. He's at least a coach that having supporters makes some sense. This Idzik stuff just astonishes me though. It's like people want him to be good or something and they are ignoring what they are seeing. Maybe because there was no internet back in the day but I don't remember people trying to claim Richie Kotite had a great thought process or something back in the day at the bars. Its just ridiculous stuff.
You have done a decent job putting lipstick on a pig but in the end we are 2 win team with the worst qb situation in the league.
The human capacity for self delusion is powerful. But that's not the whole story. It's one thing to tell yourself for example that the hottie you have great sex with can't possibly be running all over town as some have told you, because you are thinking with your little head. But what is the basis for all this deference to Idzik? No track record of success. At best a spotty record so far. Woody chose him, but so what? Woody's hardly got a great track record at hiring people, either. So what is it? THAT part I truly do not understand, even recognizing the power of self delusion.
I'm still waiting for someone answer a question Why is it right to give up on Geno after 2 years? But not Idzik? Now I'm not saying hand him the starting job next season. I hear some people on here saying draft a QB in the first round( which I don't disagree with),but sit him for a year. So if he comes out his 2nd year and sucks should we get rid of him? Don't forget we did throw Geno into the fire his first season.
I think Geno rides the bench next year. Draft someone you like high, bring in a veteran to compete with Geno to start. If Geno starts, fine. If not, he can ride the bench. Most likely, he will ride the bench. The probability Geno starts and has a good next year is so low, I can't even imagine it happening. We all know the guy is talented, he just doesn't seem to put the work in.
Well that's the circular logic of people who hate Idzik. First they whine about our terrible record this year. When you point out to them that it's year 2 of a major rebuild, they start bringing up his "terrible" moves and how the team has gotten worse. When you counter that with actual data, they go back to talking about our "terrible" record. Because athletes and GMs have completely different responsibilities. An athlete goes out and engages in athletic activities, so you can usually tell in two years how good they are at that. Most things involved in that are under the athlete's direct control. A GM runs an organization, which involves a lot more people, more time (like waiting for contracts to run out or FAs to become available) and more things beyond the GM's direct control (like whether or not a prospect works out or not, or how the coach coaches, etc). An athlete doesn't have to wait 2 years for a bad contract to end, or several years for enough FAs to become available, he can just go out there and perform. That's why GMs get more time.
I have this feeling Vick was lied to when he signed with Jets. I think Idzik told him he would be competing for the starting job.
I think people are using "major rebuild" as an excuse for a horrible record and poor personnel moves. Nobody was screaming major rebuild after we signed Vick, Johnson, Decker and chased DRC and others in free agency. It's only being called that now in order to save face.
Parcells took over after we had the # 1 pick for two consecutive years. In year one he had us at 9-7 just missing the playoffs. In year two we almost beat the Broncos in the AFC Championship game. No excuses from him, no "building through the draft", no "free agents are too expensive" from him. The man did what he needed to do to make this team competitive. While I will admit that a guy like Parcells may only come along once in a lifetime, Jet's fans should know enough to see through the pretender running the team today.
It doesn't matter what people use or don't use. You can look at the team right before Idzik came here, and see that it needed a major rebuild. We had major money tied up in the likes of Sanchez, Holmes, Harris, Brick, a salary cap hell, the worst rated QB in the league, and the only established young player we had was Wilkerson. We had missed the playoffs two years straight, and were getting worse because most starters were getting old. Fans are always going to be optimistic before a season, but that is no reason to fire a GM two years in. Did we win a Superbowl with Parcells? Did Parcells win a Superbowl anywhere else with the "mercenary" approach he used after his Giants days? No, he didn't. He won superbowls with the Giants where they drafted their best players. We tried the Parcells approach, and it didn't get us a championship. Tanenbaum later tried the Parcells approach again, and again made some noise, but didnt get us any championships either. In fact, I can't think of any team that has won the Superbowl in the modern era the Parcells way. The Idzik way though, that seems to be pretty popular among champions.
I'm okay with keeping Idzik and Geno. With Idzik, there's no "starter" to show him the way. I'd lean towards giving another year just to see what he can do now that he's fixed our cap problem. Geno's not going anywhere. He's signed on a cheap contract. If he proves he can play (in games or in practice), then great. Anyone advocating cutting Geno after 2 years is crazy. But as of right now, he does look like nothing more than a backup. That can change, but if we're at the top of the draft and have a shot at a potential franchise QB, I don't see how you pass that up. If Geno turns into something, then worst case scenario is he's trade bait (something that maybe the Redskins should have done with Cousins before it was shown that both of their QBs were frauds).
There's plenty of reasons to fire Idzik two years in,the draft alone is enough not to mention how he sabotaged Rex .We would be gearing up for the playoffs if last offseason was handled diffrently
Funniest thing about this thread is the guy that started it to call people out about giving Idzik's plan a chance, is someone that thought Geno was good. Great call there. No one on this site works in an NFL front office so calling people out because they thought a GM that was hired had a good plan is just fucking stupid. That is to be expected from the OP though.
