Jump to content

Jets select Adam Gase as HC


YoloinOhio

Recommended Posts

3 minutes ago, GunnerBill said:

 

Agree. It wouldn't surprise me if in three years the Jets feel pretty good about Darnold but are still stuck between 6 and 9 wins and ditch Gase to move on.

 

That's pretty much where I am on this. Gase should help Darnold develop, but I am not sold on him being a HC. Honestly seems like one of those guys that is just a much better coordinator than HC.

  • Like (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, eball said:

 

Not quite sure why you're beating this drum, but if you can't see the difference in the culture McD has established in Buffalo and what Gase "established" in Miami I just can't help ya, kid.  McD kept the Bills competitive with perhaps the least talented roster in the league.  Gase lost his locker room, his team imploded, and he got himself canned.  Still having trouble seeing who is the better leader?

 

I am firmly with you here. Gase doesn't such as a football coach. He sucks as a leader.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, teef said:

oh my.  i didn't say gase was terrible or mcdermott was good.  i just felt that comparing win percentages of a coach that was beginning the third year of a rebuild to a coach that had his chance, coached multiple year and failed, wasn't correct or honest.  i guess you just can't understand that.  since you have no argument and are coming off looking a bit foolish, you fall back on calling people homers, and nonsense comments that were never actually said.  you easily prove my point.  

 

edit:  to be fair, i'm not even saying gase is a bad coach.  he may do well and you may be right.  i just was shocked that you think comparing win percentages is an intelligent, reasonable way of comparing the two.  it's not, and either you don't understand that, or you just can't admit you look a bit foolish after all of this.

He's just tilting at windmills again. That's pretty much his thing.

  • Thank you (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, billieve420 said:

Gase would have been better off in a place like Greenbay or Arizona. I don't think he has what it takes to be in NY and see this move backfiring on the Jets.

 

quite plausible

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, dave mcbride said:

LOL. My take: Bills fans think they hate the Pats more than anyone else, but I can assure that Jets fans hate them more than we do. Who is the one coach who has given Belichick fits the last few years? Adam Gase. This is at least in part about the Pats. 

What about the other teams on the schedule?  Rex was said to give the Pats trouble too.  What happened to him, twice? ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

48 minutes ago, LABillzFan said:

 

I never understand why calling someone a homer is perceived as a bad thing.

 

What the hell is wrong with being a homer? The difference between a homer and other fans is that a homer KNOWS they can do NOTHING to change the trajectory of their team's successes. Not one damn thing. So instead of pretending we're smarter than NFL execs and instead of pretending our thoughts matter, we just enjoy the ride...win or lose? The only other option is to not follow the team, and that's not an option for me.

 

So I willingly choose to watch and cheer and be a homer.

 

I'm LABillzFan and I'm a homer. Wouldn't you like to be a homer too?

 

I think you know this but I spent years being called a homer.  It’s funny to do to others.

 

i will say being a “realist” makes watching games so much easier.  I used to get so mad when they lost when I was a homer. Now, I get pleasantly surprised  when they win.

  • Awesome! (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, C.Biscuit97 said:

I think you know this but I spent years being called a homer.  It’s funny to do to others.

 

i will say being a “realist” makes watching games so much easier.  I used to get so mad when they lost when I was a homer. Now, I get pleasantly surprised  when they win.

 

personal simple test:

 

am i willing to put $1,000 on the Bills to win this game?

 

If not, relax and look for good things for the future in the game

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, row_33 said:

 

personal simple test:

 

am i willing to put $1,000 on the Bills to win this game?

 

If not, relax and look for good things for the future in the game

 

 

I already decided if the Bills, god willingly ever make the SB, I’m putting $1000 on the other team. A win-win.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, C.Biscuit97 said:

I already decided if the Bills, god willingly ever make the SB, I’m putting $1000 on the other team. A win-win.

What if the other team's starting qb, wr, rb and oline has the flu and can't play due to dehydration?  Do you still not put money on the Bills? ?

Edited by loyal2dagame
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, C.Biscuit97 said:

I already decided if the Bills, god willingly ever make the SB, I’m putting $1000 on the other team. A win-win.

 

It was fun waking up on Sundays with a 95% certainty the Bills would win or play like hell out there, and easily stomp a visiting team.

 

Probably never happening against since the early 90s....

 

 

  • Like (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, WhitewalkerInPhilly said:

I honestly think he's overrated. I never feared the Dolphins under him, and Darnold is hardly a lock to even match Tanny.

I would take that bet. And I never fear a coach.  But I think a big reason we never feared Miami is because they have Tannehill.  He’s not good enough but Gase was forced to have him.

 

Darnold is most talented qb he has had since Manning.  SD may turn out to be a bust but I won’t just brush this off.

Edited by C.Biscuit97
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Steptide said:

Probably not, but there's been other times they've beaten the Pats with gase. Last year on Monday night comes to mind 

Actually yea in all seriousness tho,  the Dolphins have been really good vs the Pats when playing in Miami. I think Brady is like 7-9 down there. Maybe it’s the heat? 

 

http://www.espn.com/blog/miami-dolphins/post/_/id/28282/how-miami-has-been-a-danger-zone-for-patriots-and-tom-brady

Edited by Idandria
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, eball said:

 

Not quite sure why you're beating this drum, but if you can't see the difference in the culture McD has established in Buffalo and what Gase "established" in Miami I just can't help ya, kid.  McD kept the Bills competitive with perhaps the least talented roster in the league.  Gase lost his locker room, his team imploded, and he got himself canned.  Still having trouble seeing who is the better leader?

But didn't McDermott "lose his locker room" when he went to Peterman (twice!) only to recover it?  My point here is not which coach is objectively the better "leader of men." Rather, it's that we simply don't know anything about these things that would give us any predictive value. Look at the Dolphins' situation: Tony Sparano: "leader of men." They outperformed under him, until they didn't.  Remember interim coach Dan Campbell? He was a classic "leader of men." When he took over mid-season, the impact of the change was obvious. They played harder and better. Until they didn't.

So my point it this: we don't know a damn thing about "leaders of men" vs. "not being head coach material." We creative a narrative after the fact: if a coach succeeds over a significant period of time, well, then, he must be a good leader.  If not, but he otherwise succeeded as a coordinator, he must not be a "leader of men." It has next to no predictive value. Frank Reich has made the divisional round; just a year ago he was a "good coordinator, probably not head coach material." Mike McCarthy - two years ago - was a good coach and a strong leader; now he's out of a job. So my objection is to fans labeling things based on little or no objective information. You might as well just say, "Gase had a meh record with a league-average talented team; hence he is not a leader." But then what about, say, Chuck Pagano? Just a few years ago he was an inspirational leader; now nobody wants him. It's fan talk. It's not reality.

  • Like (+1) 1
  • Awesome! (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, The Frankish Reich said:

But didn't McDermott "lose his locker room" when he went to Peterman (twice!) only to recover it?  My point here is not which coach is objectively the better "leader of men." Rather, it's that we simply don't know anything about these things that would give us any predictive value. Look at the Dolphins' situation: Tony Sparano: "leader of men." They outperformed under him, until they didn't.  Remember interim coach Dan Campbell? He was a classic "leader of men." When he took over mid-season, the impact of the change was obvious. They played harder and better. Until they didn't.

So my point it this: we don't know a damn thing about "leaders of men" vs. "not being head coach material." We creative a narrative after the fact: if a coach succeeds over a significant period of time, well, then, he must be a good leader.  If not, but he otherwise succeeded as a coordinator, he must not be a "leader of men." It has next to no predictive value. Frank Reich has made the divisional round; just a year ago he was a "good coordinator, probably not head coach material." Mike McCarthy - two years ago - was a good coach and a strong leader; now he's out of a job. So my objection is to fans labeling things based on little or no objective information. You might as well just say, "Gase had a meh record with a league-average talented team; hence he is not a leader." But then what about, say, Chuck Pagano? Just a few years ago he was an inspirational leader; now nobody wants him. It's fan talk. It's not reality.

 

I agree that often fans have very little to base those assumptions on. However with Gase..... wow.... watch the body language, listen to the press conferences. There is a mountain of evidence when it comes to Gase that suggests he is ill suited to being a leader of men. He is a sulker. You can't sulk and lead. I actually said this the year they made their run and reached the playoffs too. So this isn't fitting a narrative to results.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, LABillzFan said:

 

I never understand why calling someone a homer is perceived as a bad thing.

 

What the hell is wrong with being a homer? The difference between a homer and other fans is that a homer KNOWS they can do NOTHING to change the trajectory of their team's successes. Not one damn thing. So instead of pretending we're smarter than NFL execs and instead of pretending our thoughts matter, we just enjoy the ride...win or lose? The only other option is to not follow the team, and that's not an option for me.

 

So I willingly choose to watch and cheer and be a homer.

 

I'm LABillzFan and I'm a homer. Wouldn't you like to be a homer too?

 

 

I am incapable of being a homer. My brain doesn't really work that way. I can't just buckle up and enjoy the ride. I am generally and optimist (I think) but I have an in built need to try and work things out so my brain always overrides. My actual predictions of the Bills final record at the start of seasons have been pretty spot on for the past decade. The only year I was more than a game out was the first Rex Ryan year when I predicted 10-6 and we went 8-8.  Other than that.... within a game every year. I feel like I normally have a pretty good handle on where the team is at.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, GunnerBill said:

 

I agree that often fans have very little to base those assumptions on. However with Gase..... wow.... watch the body language, listen to the press conferences. There is a mountain of evidence when it comes to Gase that suggests he is ill suited to being a leader of men. He is a sulker. You can't sulk and lead. I actually said this the year they made their run and reached the playoffs too. So this isn't fitting a narrative to results.

 

People change though... it's not immutable.  Maybe he'll grow up a bit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Coach Tuesday said:

 

People change though... it's not immutable.  Maybe he'll grow up a bit.

 

Hmm. In my experience that sort of thing doesn't tend to change. I played soccer for a sulker. Tactically and technically he was streets ahead of most of the other semi-pro coaches I played for. But you'd come in after a loss and he'd hardly say a word and sulk in the corner of the locker room and it is extremely demotivating. I think that is hard to change.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, GunnerBill said:

 

Hmm. In my experience that sort of thing doesn't tend to change. I played soccer for a sulker. Tactically and technically he was streets ahead of most of the other semi-pro coaches I played for. But you'd come in after a loss and he'd hardly say a word and sulk in the corner of the locker room and it is extremely demotivating. I think that is hard to change.

 

Coughlin did it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, MrEpsYtown said:

Vance Joseph was the early rumor, but it looks like the Cards and Browns are after him. Personally, I think they should try to hire Chuck Pagano. 

 

Seen the Bears linked to Joseph too. They are looking for a 3-4 guy to replace Fangio.

  • Like (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...