Schefter on WEEI - McDaniels could be hottest coaching candidate next offseason

[cstjohn17]

Again, NFL jobs are plentiful. A highly sought assistant doesn't need to jump at the first job that comes his way anymore. There are plenty of openings every year.

I should let this go, but I can't... last post on this subject, I promise.

HC positions are not plentiful, 7 open spots per year (which above average) is still a very low number. And he was not a highly sought young coordinator, he was an unknown, quiet, obscure BB puppet (I should add funny looking and portly but I won't). I could be wrong but NY was the only team that he interviewed with.

NY is not the perfect spot but better to have one in hand than 10 in bush. If he fails in NY then he is no different than other guys like Petrino, Cameron, Crennell, Nolan, Childress, Jauron, Herm Edwards, Linehan, guys who tried hard but couldn't get it done.

It is hard to wait for the perfect opportunity, the way the NFL is setup it allows for a coach to quickly rebuild, and yo-yo between wild card and top 5 draft pick. Most of the time the coach gets 3-4 years, if that is the case for Mangini he will be a 40 year old with head coaching experience and experience with a winning program (Patriots). He also will have made about $5,000,000 compared to the $800,000 ~ he would have made as an DC.

It he gets the team to the playoffs and they win a game then he will be around 4-6 years. He will learn a lot more about being a HC with the Jets then he ever would as an assistant with the Patriots.

 

[Rob0729]

I should let this go, but I can't... last post on this subject, I promise.

HC positions are not plentiful, 7 open spots per year (which above average) is still a very low number. And he was not a highly sought young coordinator, he was an unknown, quiet, obscure BB puppet (I should add funny looking and portly but I won't). I could be wrong but NY was the only team that he interviewed with.

NY is not the perfect spot but better to have one in hand than 10 in bush. If he fails in NY then he is no different than other guys like Petrino, Cameron, Crennell, Nolan, Childress, Jauron, Herm Edwards, Linehan, guys who tried hard but couldn't get it done.

It is hard to wait for the perfect opportunity, the way the NFL is setup it allows for a coach to quickly rebuild, and yo-yo between wild card and top 5 draft pick. Most of the time the coach gets 3-4 years, if that is the case for Mangini he will be a 40 year old with head coaching experience and experience with a winning program (Patriots). He also will have made about $5,000,000 compared to the $800,000 ~ he would have made as an DC.

It he gets the team to the playoffs and they win a game then he will be around 4-6 years. He will learn a lot more about being a HC with the Jets then he ever would as an assistant with the Patriots.

Seven spots a year over a fifth of the league that turns over. That is alot. Especially where there aren't a lot of qualified candidates.

Look who are getting the jobs. Lane Kiffin? Other than the last name and being a very good OC at the college level, what he done to justify a head coaching spot? Norv Turner? The guy has failed everywhere he has gone. Mike Tomlin? The Vikes' defense sucked under him.

Mangini would have been a hot head coaching candidate and could have had several teams vying for his services. He may have very well ended up in Dallas since he comes from the same system that Parcells coached and Jerry Jones has a lot of admiration for Kraft and the Patriots and doing things the Patriots way. Parcells already put together most of the pieces for the Cowboys to make a run for the Super Bowl and Jerry Jones isn't afraid to open his pocketbook. Dallas is a much better opportunity than the Jets because they have a QB and talent all over the team.

As for the money, what might have been a short term game may hurt him in the long run. If Mangini goes three and out in a bad situation rather than waiting a year and getting a team like the Cowboys which he could have a serious shot at getting to the Super Bowl in what would have been his first season, he will make far less money in the long run. If he waited a year and got the Cowboys job, his future would probably be far brighter than it is now.

 

[JoeSixPat]

I'm not sure where you see that as my contention. Please stop making false arguments. Lying is unnecessary on this board. I realize you're backed into a corner here, but don't cross the line, please.

And the only point I'm making about "ultimately," is that - in that EXTREME context (which YOU introduced) - Bill Belichick has a say, the FINAL WORD in fact, and so blaming Josh the way you have is over-the-top. Life is more nuanced than the one you seem to be leading.

Everyone should go back and look at threads last year.

Tons of folks - many of the same posters on this thread - posted statistics that "proved" our WRs corps was as good as we've had in any other season, and discounted the negative impact the lack of a deep game was having on other aspects of our game - not to mention the non-stop pressure teams would put on Brady.

Many even asserted that we were "all set" at WR with Gaffney and Caldwell, and there was no need for upgrades going into this season.

Seems like we're back at that point, even though Belichick and Pioli effectively acknowledged the negative impact the lack of a deep threat had.

No question that Caldwell, Gaffney, Gabriel et all are no where near the level o f Moss or Stallworth, but again I assert that innovative playcalling could have created enough of a deep threat to lessen the pressure on the line, even with the personnel he had to work with. I can't remember the last time when a Defensive Coordinator blamed poor performance on the absence of Samuel, Harrison, Ty Law etc.. But apparently we're ok with the OC doing that?

Many might feel that offensive playcalling is not the responsibility of the Offensive Coordinator - and they're entitled to that opinion... but they're wrong.

 

[Rob0729]

Everyone should go back and look at threads last year.

Tons of folks - many of the same posters on this thread - posted statistics that "proved" our WRs corps was as good as we've had in any other season, and discounted the negative impact the lack of a deep game was having on other aspects of our game - not to mention the non-stop pressure teams would put on Brady.

Many even asserted that we were "all set" at WR with Gaffney and Caldwell, and there was no need for upgrades going into this season.

Seems like we're back at that point, even though Belichick and Pioli effectively acknowledged the negative impact the lack of a deep threat had.

No question that Caldwell, Gaffney, Gabriel et all are no where near the level o f Moss or Stallworth, but again I assert that innovative playcalling could have created enough of a deep threat to lessen the pressure on the line, even with the personnel he had to work with. I can't remember the last time when a Defensive Coordinator blamed poor performance on the absence of Samuel, Harrison, Ty Law etc.. But apparently we're ok with the OC doing that?

Many might feel that offensive playcalling is not the responsibility of the Offensive Coordinator - and they're entitled to that opinion... but they're wrong.

I thought Caldwell played way beyond expectations and did a yoeman job last year and Gaffney was great in the playoffs, but I would never say that we didn't need another WR or two. I thought either would be good #2 or #3 WRs, but neither were true #1s.

As for innovative play calling, you need players who can execute the innovative plays. It was quite clear that the receivers struggled for a large portion of the year to understand a lot of presnap adjustments and get on the same page with Brady. Do you really think that McDaniels could add new wrinkles to the playbook making it even more complicated. McDaniels already had to dumb down the playbook because of the learning curve.

As for defensive coordinators hiding weaknesses with innovative play calling. That only works if you have enough people in key positions to help hide them. Do you think we could have done nearly as well with the patchwork secondary in 2004 if we had Chad Brown and Montey Beisel in the ILB spots rather than Bruschi and Phifer? The reason we could hide the fact we were working with to very green CBs and a WR posing as a CB was because the front seven and Harrison and Wilson were disruptive forces putting pressure on opposing QBs.

Who were those great players in key positions on offense last year other than Brady? There was nobody for much of the year McDaniels could rely on to make plays to hide the deficiencies in the WR. Watson was supposed to be the guy, but he dropped too many easy catches. Dillon couldn't be relied on for a full game. Graham had to stay back and block a lot. Faulk wasn't on the field enough. You can't be innovative if you don't have at least some weapons.

Belichick all but admitted that he made a mistake with the WR corp last year. Not that he should have given into Branch's demands, but made a better effort to give Brady more weapons. Everything he did at the position during the offseason supports that. Caldwell was brought in for a supporting role and was thrusted into the lead roll. Gaffney was the best available when everything was going wrong.

 

[Deus Irae]

Everyone should go back and look at threads last year.

Tons of folks - many of the same posters on this thread - posted statistics that "proved" our WRs corps was as good as we've had in any other season, and discounted the negative impact the lack of a deep game was having on other aspects of our game - not to mention the non-stop pressure teams would put on Brady.

Many even asserted that we were "all set" at WR with Gaffney and Caldwell, and there was no need for upgrades going into this season.

Seems like we're back at that point, even though Belichick and Pioli effectively acknowledged the negative impact the lack of a deep threat had.

No question that Caldwell, Gaffney, Gabriel et all are no where near the level o f Moss or Stallworth, but again I assert that innovative playcalling could have created enough of a deep threat to lessen the pressure on the line, even with the personnel he had to work with. I can't remember the last time when a Defensive Coordinator blamed poor performance on the absence of Samuel, Harrison, Ty Law etc.. But apparently we're ok with the OC doing that?

Many might feel that offensive playcalling is not the responsibility of the Offensive Coordinator - and they're entitled to that opinion... but they're wrong.

The team was the #7 offense in the league, AFTER losing its #1 receiver to a holdout and trade, and only signing its eventual #2 receiver during the middle of the season. Your argument continues to make no sense at all.

 

[richpats]

same thing that was said about mangini

And Mangini truly did suck at his job. McDaniels was better at polishing turds.

 

[JoeSixPat]

The team was the #7 offense in the league, AFTER losing its #1 receiver to a holdout and trade, and only signing its eventual #2 receiver during the middle of the season. Your argument continues to make no sense at all.

Well, thank goodness it made sense to Belichick and Pioli, who went out and got not one, not two, but three WRs and cut last year's #1 WR, recognizing that stats like "#7 offense" in the league didn't do much to address the negative impact the lack of a deep threat had on the team.

I'd give Charlie Weis much more credit for his playcalling, finding ways to spring guys who weren't necessarily the fastest or most skilled guys on the field deep every now and then, like Givens and Patten for example, so as to keep D's honest.

I think Reche had one and only one catch for more than 40 yards all last year. That's indicative of a guy who is not as skilled as other WRs but also indicative of the fact that he was almost never sent deep.

 

[Terry Glenn is a cowgirl]

Not a big loss if he goes elsewhere... all Belichick will say is "NEXT!!!!"

 

[PatsRI]

Here's the interview link, click on D&C, then Schefter interview, if you don't want to listen to the whole thing just click on the 13:07 mark on the right.
http://www.weei.com/pages/268228.php

 

[BelichickFan]

Interesting to listen to. He stated it as FACT several times. There were no "maybes" or "could bes" or "I thinks" there until right at the end when he said "I believe".

 

[Crazyeechrispats1]

I really think their are only 2 teams that would be interested in Daniels as a head coach, Rams, and Giants, They both have talent on offense but barely have shown it.
I can't see anyone else going after him except maybe a College like Michigan.
I think we have a chance to retain him which I hope we do!
He seems like a smart guy and the Offense seems to really respond well with him especially BRADY!

 

[Keegs]

if this is true, then somewhere, NEM's brain might have exploded.

 

[Deus Irae]

Well, thank goodness it made sense to Belichick and Pioli, who went out and got not one, not two, but three WRs and cut last year's #1 WR, recognizing that stats like "#7 offense" in the league didn't do much to address the negative impact the lack of a deep threat had on the team.

I'd give Charlie Weis much more credit for his playcalling, finding ways to spring guys who weren't necessarily the fastest or most skilled guys on the field deep every now and then, like Givens and Patten for example, so as to keep D's honest.

I think Reche had one and only one catch for more than 40 yards all last year. That's indicative of a guy who is not as skilled as other WRs but also indicative of the fact that he was almost never sent deep.

What does this have to do with your argument about the O.C. This, in fact, strengthens everyone who is telling you that you are wrong. It's why your argument makes no sense. As for the Patten argument, he was a speed guy.

 

[MoLewisrocks]

Don't they have another intern training to call plays?

A defensive coordinator with extensive position coaching experience is much more ready to be a head coach than a guy who draws up plays and talks to the quarterback.

Simply compare his overall experience to Mangini or Charlie Weis.

Only in NEM's dreams...

OK, sure, I guess that explains why all offense guys like Petrino and Kiffin (both right out of college) and Cameron and Whisenhunt landed the majority of the HC vacancies last season along with an OC retread like Norv...while only 2 defensive minded coaches landed HC jobs. And one of those was a retread Jerry Jones could manage and the other was coming off his 6th year in the NFL and 1 year as a DC not to mention the epitome of the Rooney Rule.

Most owners don't want to hire Bill Cowher for lots of reasons including cost, control issues and profile. What they want is the next potential Cowher, who when the Steelers hired him, though he had played for a couple of teams, had only a few years as an assistant for Schottenheimer under his belt before he followed him to his next job as his DC for a couple of more years. In other words, a young gun ownership can retain and control (not to mention claim credit for identifying) inexpensively if he pans out but jettison fairly easily if he doesn't.

Mangini had 5 years as a DB's position coach and 1 year as a DC (minus the time at the end of the season when Bill took his headset away...) before he became the HC of the NYJ. While his ego would spin in otherwise, he was a glorified gofer from 1995-1999 (ball boy to offensive QC asst. to defensive QC asst. - in other words breaking down film). If he panned out Woody would have claimed credit for having the foresight to see and act on the early genius while if he fails it was just another shot in the dark gone bad as opposed to another well liked (by the mediots) big name coach like the Herminator to publicly and acrimosiously part with.

Elevated age and perception as career pals and assistants rather than protoges were an issue with both RAC and Charlie. RAC has been hanging by his fingernails in Cleveland almost from the get go as a result. And if we assess Charlie as a HC we have to include all three of his seasons in which his NFL gneius resume doesn't seem to be panning out as a college HC once the novelty wore off. First year he had no defense. Second year he had shaky offense to boot. This year his entire team is a disaster.

I don't doubt Josh coming off his 3rd season (and second official) as the OC of the NEP will field some calls, particularly if we are heading into the playoffs with HFA. The viability of a generation of retreads is dwindling. And the viability of college HC's transitioning to the NFL is at best currently being viewed as a crapshoot. Saban was a debaucle, and Cameron and Petrino are looking thoroughly overmatched at this level.

I don't think Josh is as impatient or ego driven as the always argumentative Mangenius was. I think he will listen to his HC's wisdom and only move on to a better job with his blessing. Belichick isn't inclined to do unto others what his mentor did to him. When they are ready or have earned it or it's too good to pass up, he will let them move on and he will move on as well. I'm sure he's already planning for that day because unlike some armchair OC's who inhabit this message board he apparently thinks Josh is doing an excellent job and likely expects the calls to commence in the forseeable future.

 

[Rob0729]

Well, thank goodness it made sense to Belichick and Pioli, who went out and got not one, not two, but three WRs and cut last year's #1 WR, recognizing that stats like "#7 offense" in the league didn't do much to address the negative impact the lack of a deep threat had on the team.

I'd give Charlie Weis much more credit for his playcalling, finding ways to spring guys who weren't necessarily the fastest or most skilled guys on the field deep every now and then, like Givens and Patten for example, so as to keep D's honest.

I think Reche had one and only one catch for more than 40 yards all last year. That's indicative of a guy who is not as skilled as other WRs but also indicative of the fact that he was almost never sent deep.

How many times did Chad Jackson go deep only to be neutralized because the defender would face guard him (which is legal)? How could Weis done anything different in that case? The fact of the matter is that McDaniels did call plays that did send receivers deep and either Brady over or underthrew them or they couldn't come down with the ball. That speaks to the quality of receivers on the field, not the OC.

Last year, Brady was 6 for 18 for attempts over 41 yards and 39 for 52 on pass attempts for 31-40 yards. In 2004, he was 3 for 3 for passes over 41 yards and 13 for 26 for passes 31-40 yards. In 2003, he was 9 for 11 for passes over 41 yards and 36 for 57 for passes 31-40 yards. So you assertions are incorrect. McDaniels actually had Brady pass for over 40 yards more than Weis did (actually over 30 yards), but because his receivers weren't as good the completion percentage wasn't as good.

Sorry, the numbers clearly do not support your assertions.

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/players/splits?playerId=2330&year=2003
http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/players/splits?playerId=2330&year=2004
http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/players/splits?playerId=2330&year=2006

 

[ALP]

i dont think any other NE coach will go to NY, and the jets especially...for a long, long, long time to come

 

[patchick]

Well, thank goodness it made sense to Belichick and Pioli, who went out and got not one, not two, but three WRs and cut last year's #1 WR, recognizing that stats like "#7 offense" in the league didn't do much to address the negative impact the lack of a deep threat had on the team.

Right. While he kept the same offensive coordinator.

Based on that actual evidence, would you say he "blamed" the WR talent level or the playcaller? Looks pretty clear to me.

 

[unoriginal]

Everyone should go back and look at threads last year.

Tons of folks - many of the same posters on this thread - posted statistics that "proved" our WRs corps was as good as we've had in any other season, and discounted the negative impact the lack of a deep game was having on other aspects of our game - not to mention the non-stop pressure teams would put on Brady.

Many even asserted that we were "all set" at WR with Gaffney and Caldwell, and there was no need for upgrades going into this season.

Seems like we're back at that point, even though Belichick and Pioli effectively acknowledged the negative impact the lack of a deep threat had.

No question that Caldwell, Gaffney, Gabriel et all are no where near the level o f Moss or Stallworth, but again I assert that innovative playcalling could have created enough of a deep threat to lessen the pressure on the line, even with the personnel he had to work with. I can't remember the last time when a Defensive Coordinator blamed poor performance on the absence of Samuel, Harrison, Ty Law etc.. But apparently we're ok with the OC doing that?

Many might feel that offensive playcalling is not the responsibility of the Offensive Coordinator - and they're entitled to that opinion... but they're wrong.

As one of the people you're discussing, I'll re-insert my opinion into this debate. The primary assumption of the off-season for the pro-Caldwell crowd was that the Patriots would be unable to acquire a better wide receiver than Caldwell/Gaffney because other wide receivers that had previously been targeted (Mason et al) wouldn't come here for even market price, and we'd need to get elite wide receivers at below market price.

We ended up stealing Welker and Moss at far lower trade/contract value than almost anyone had any right to expect (Miami tendered Welker at the same offer we did to Billy Yates!) and we also had Stallworth arrive at a pretty attractive "try out" price because he wanted to stick to a winner. Curtis, a less accomplished receiver, signed a contract with the Eagles that gave him much more money up front. Bennett, another favorite, got similar money to Curtis up front from the Rams.

From that basis, the logic dictated that another year of seasoning in the system for Caldwell, Gaffney, and whatever 2nd tier wide receivers brought in would lead to a dependable offense the following year. And when you consider we were #7 the previous year with Doug Gabriel starting half the season, well...

There's no reason to poop on a good scoring offense just because you've now got a historical one. Are you going to go back and call Antowain Smith a ****ty running back just because the Pats later got one monster year out of Corey Dillon?

 

[The Boston Patriot]

1)Most coaches are not successful in their first attempt (see BB) but the circle within professional sports is to give coaches 2nd, 3rd and even 4th chances (see Norv Turner)

I hate the derogatory references to BB's tenure in Cleveland. Granted it wasn't
his finest hour but suffice it to say his success there wasn't chopped liver either.

Fact:

1990 - Team before BB took over: 3-13

BB’s record:

1991 - 6-10
1992 - 7-9
1993 - 7-9 (Kosar benched)
1994 - 11-5 (WC playoff win over NEP – Loses to Steelers in AFC divisional game)
1995 - 5-11 (Modell blows up team in November – 3-1 before announcement,
BB gets canned at end of season)

He started off with a team that had the talent of a 3-13 record and dug it
out of the abyss showing steady improvement over the four years until Modell
canned him after the year in which Modell blew up the team and moved it to
Baltimore. This after a 3-1 start before the announcement.

Cleveland (Baltimore) should have been so lucky to have kept him. I have no
doubt that we would be talking about the famous Baltimore dynasty had he
stayed on and Modell left him alone to build the team. Their loss is our gain
thankfully.

 

[JoeSixPat]

Right. While he kept the same offensive coordinator.

Based on that actual evidence, would you say he "blamed" the WR talent level or the playcaller? Looks pretty clear to me.

Just one question to answer your question:

When was the last time you heard a defensive coordinator blame injury or the lack of personnel on poor performance?

They don't. They adapt and innovate covering up deficiencies with their playcalling. That's what sets McDaniels apart from a typical Patriots coordinator.

Or do you really think his success with Moss, Brady, Stallworth, and Welker proves he's a good OC? Do you think he'd be as successful with a mediocre QB and mediocre WRs? Because chances are that's what he's walking into.

The offense's #7 ranking was due in part to the fact that they completed a ton of short passes. By giving up on the long game McDaniels accepted the fact that Brady would be under intense pressure and that DBs would play the line of scrimage and double cover Watson and Caldwell.

I think others might not have given up so easily. And if you really want a stat, look at the YPC for our "deepest" deep threat last year - Ben Watson at 13.1 ypc.

If some feel the OC bears no responsibility for that, like I said, they're entitled to their opinion. Of course, these are many of the same people who felt that there was no need for an upgrade at WR last season too.