Will the "keep Bowles" crowd throw in the towel if we lose to the 49ers or do you stay with him if we don't win another game this season?
I would be less inclined to fire him if his post game statements did not deny reality. At least tellt he truth. How about talking about the game plan and where it failed? How about calling someone out once in a while a la Parcells? I am never in favor of dumping a coach early-----unless he shows that he is clearly in over his head. How do I help my franchise by keeping a guy who is in over his head an extra year? I am just checking off months on a calendar, not building toward something. He fails in motivation, game planning, in game adjusrtments and post game explanations. Not to mention basic talent evaluation and putting guys in the right spots. That is 6 for 6. I cannot think of a single positive, frankly. That is reason for dismissal. At this point some positives should have surfaced.
Right now you guys want to keep him (I have no idea why you think this is a good idea). I am asking what he has to do for you to change your mind and come around to the idea that firing him is what this team needs to do to move forward. I would imagine that we can only lose so many games over the next few years before you get fed up with the guy.
Byz, You keep on throwing the "jet fans" on a message board into this equation like we have anything to do with what actually happens, within the jets FO. If our opinions would have any influence, yours included, Revis and Fitz would have not been resigned, Kacy Rodgers would have been fired already, Hack would not have been selected with the 2nd round pick in the draft. Petty would have been named the starter in the offseason and would have taken all the reps in TC. The defense would have been playing a strict 3-4 and Sheldon Richardson would never have been used as an OLB. That's what most of the opinions were on this board, I don't know what other boards are saying as I'm only a member here. We will never know what HC candidate is going to be available. That can't be a deciding factor in Woodys organizational decisions. The fact is that there has been no improvement from the CS or the players, the team has gotten worse. It's their second year, there should be something positive with this team. The only reason I believe TB may not be fired is, and I have said this before, Woody was involved in the decision making of getting Revis and Fitzpatrick back going against the wishes of some of the FO personnel that did not want them back. TB should not be the scapegoat for the owners mistakes.
I don't want him back, however, if Woody does bring him back, he will probably be asked to make some changes to his CS. Something else that we have expressed on this board was TB not being the scapegoat for the owner getting involved in bringing back players that the FO probably did not want back.
Geez Don, I said I don't want him back, but how many HC have been consistently successful with Fitz as their starting QB? Whether you and I like it or not he is probably coming back, so let's just hope that Petty or Hack can get this thing turned around next year.
In my opinion, it's MacCagnan that's on thin ice. How many sketchy decisions can a GM make before he's canned? 1- when he came in, Macc had an enormous boatload of money to spend, and spent in on Revis, Gilchrist, Buster, and Carpenter. As opposed to locking up some of his own home-grown talent (Mo). Gilchrist and Carpenter have been great, but Reivs and Buster have been big disappointments. The Revis catastrophe was foreseeable, and I can't forgive Macc for giving Revis $17M/yr contract. Screen's move to outside DB hasn't worked out, and HAS to be moved back inside (this is a Bowles thing, unless Macc promised Screen the outside DB spot in a year). Grade: C- 2- drafting Leonard Williams was a brilliant move, but ONLY if he used his new talent to move Mo and keep Snacks. Snacks was the top rated nose tackle in all of football, and Mo (and Sheldon) credited their good play to having Snacks in the middle stuffing the run. Instead, Macc cut Snacks and re-signed Mo. We lost the best nose tackle in the NFL, $15M/yr, AND an extra 2nd round pick in the upcoming draft. Lose, Lose, Lose. Grade: F-------- 3- Hackenberg. Grade: F-
To your first point, we locked up Mo anyway. I don't like Maccagnan's moves a ton but he did what you said he didn't. We're the #4 ranked rush defense allowing 3.5 yards per carry, and 90.3 yards per game without Snacks. Last year we were the #3 ranked rushing defense allowing 3.6 yards per carry and 83.4 yards per game. Hardly a drop off. How did we lose an extra second round draft pick? Hackenberg hasn't played a snap yet, so how is his grade an F-? You never fail to be illogical, dude.
Jenkins, Burris and Leo all played great games. Petty came out of the gate rough but settled in by the second half, as did Darron Lee. Anderson and Peake looked good, and Powell is a monster. Brandon Shell came in for an injured Qvale and quietly did a great job on the last drive. Let Hack and Petty compete for the starting job with the new young supporting cast. There is hope here. I didn't want to win this game, but seeing shots of all the young guys celebrating was worth it.
Looks like if Bowles had lost the locker room he has regained it. He deserves to stay and develop all these young players that started to play well and hopefully continue to play well in the last three games. If Jenkins and Lee turn into quality linebackers and Burris can be a #2 corner, we're in much better shape than originally thought. Granted, we beat a one win team in overtime, but we still won. They did play the Pats, Dolphins, Cardinals (x2), and Cowboys tough. They obviously suck, but they're still an NFL team. As much as I initially wanted to lose out for draft positioning, I'd rather see the young core build on this and keep winning. There's no Andrew Luck in this draft to need to lose out for. Bravo Bowles & company.
No, but we just had a regime change not even 2 years ago. Whats the point in going to the next guy, what if they suck? Everyone wanted Woody to bring in football minds to oversee the transition from Idzik and these guys were heavily involved in picking Mac and Bowles. Bowles was heralded as the top candidate for a head coaching position at the time, and we were a Fitzpatrick meltdown away from getting to the playoffs in a 10-6 season. This is not to say I am happy about how badly the team has disappointed this year. Its been soul crushing. But not only would firing Bowles put us with the likes of the Browns and formerly the Raiders in terms of reputation, but also there's no guarantee the next coach would be a sure thing. Might as well see for one more year to decide that all of those people who recommended Bowles were wrong, I did make my exception for a top head coach becoming available this offseason, but its highly doubtful that will happen.
Do you even watch the games? How many 40yrd runs up the gut do we have to give up? Last year team wouldn't even TRY to run against us. This year they can't wait to run it right up the gut. On the other hand, Snacks is giving the Giants a great run stuffer. Announcers can't give Snacks enough credit for turning the G-men's d-line around. Snacks was ours, and we gave him away so we could have 3 guys playing a 2 guy position. Maybe you think this is excellent GMing. I don't.
I didn't say it was excellent GMing. I've actually been quite critical of Maccagnan. But you're nitpicking the wrong things. The run D was terrible today but it's been pretty stout all year as evidence by the stats I provided.
They should be given one more year, and the reason is simple: Hackenberg. And Hackenberg needs to play next year. If he shows promise and plays good, Bowles and Macc (at least Macc) should stay beyond year 3. If Hackenberg flops, or shows no promise (he doesn't need to be prime Elway, but he needs to look better than Goff right now), then you hit the reset button. If you fire Bowles/Macc now, you more than likely have to sign a coach/GM that liked Hackenberg. Who else would take this messy job with a messy QB situation? And I wold rather not have that stipulation when searching for a head coach/GM.
Before the 49ers game the Jets run D was better than the Giants. You are greatly over reacting to the 2 most recent games played, as opposed to the whole season. It's called the recency bias.
If Petty is the real deal or if we draft a QB in the top 10, why would we need Hackenberg to play next year? Also, what does playing Hackenberg have to do with keeping Bowles? Firing Bowles does not necessarily mean that Mac goes too. Maybe we let him pick his own coach and give him more time before judging him. As for Bowles, I have seen enough to make up my mind on him.
