OT: Things looking to be getting worse for Mangini

[Rob0729]

The Title of the thread is "things could be getting worse for Mangini.....

"More importantly, he can ill-afford to further cripple his already strained relationship with the team. Mangini’s authoritarian coaching style is detested by his players,"

Which is similar to :


"His players don't like him, the media doesn't like him, and his inflexibility is tiring."

So, all I am saying is, things were not all rosy for BB in the early years, but he has succeeded. Mangini looks like he is in a similar boat.

That's all, nothing more, nothing less. Just simply making a comparison.

You are going on one source by a known Patriots hater though. I have never seen a journalist actually say that there were actually rumblings that players did not like Belichick other than this one line with nothing to support it.

I don't see the situations being the same. Belichick had a history with many of the Patriots players and brought in a lot of players from his Jets and Browns days who bought into what he has done. Mangini has no history with most of his players and has only brought in a small handful of former Patriots.

Belichick put his players in a postion to succeed by even abandoning his beloved 3-4 defense. Mangini has refused to abandon the 3-4 eventhough it is putting his best players like Vilma, Ellis, and Robertson in positions to fail.

Belichick gave a lot of leeway to Weis and Crennel and had a stern, but reserved demeanor. I don't know what leeway Mangini gives his assistants but by most accounts he is a yeller.

When Belichick had problems with a player (Terry Glenn), he chose to remove him from the team rather than make him a distraction. Mangini chose to go on a petty vendetta against a problem player (Pete Kendall) making the situation worse and a distraction. Also, losing Glenn did not hurt the Patriots from winning the Super Bowl. By not paying Pete Kendall an extra $1 million, the Jets running game has been non-existent.

I really don't think the situations are remotely the same. Belichick was far more savvy in 2001. He might have had similiar problems in Cleveland, but not in New England. That is where Mangini's lack of polishing and experience is hurting him.

 

[QuiGon]

Rofl.

I can't help but wonder if things would be that insane if the Pats started losing a lot. You'd think that Belichick's 5 SB rings would keep the vultures from second-guessing the coach. But then, Mangini has 3 rings himself.

You can't use rings earned as an assistant as justification to defend a guy as a head coach. Belichick certainly has the cache now but I remember quite vividly in the summer of 2001 - after only one year here - a lot of the local nitwits were calling for Belichcik to be fired.

 

[He Ban Me]

You are going on one source by a known Patriots hater though. I have never seen a journalist actually say that there were actually rumblings that players did not like Belichick other than this one line with nothing to support it.

I don't see the situations being the same. Belichick had a history with many of the Patriots players and brought in a lot of players from his Jets and Browns days who bought into what he has done. Mangini has no history with most of his players and has only brought in a small handful of former Patriots.

Belichick put his players in a postion to succeed by even abandoning his beloved 3-4 defense. Mangini has refused to abandon the 3-4 eventhough it is putting his best players like Vilma, Ellis, and Robertson in positions to fail.

Belichick gave a lot of leeway to Weis and Crennel and had a stern, but reserved demeanor. I don't know what leeway Mangini gives his assistants but by most accounts he is a yeller.

When Belichick had problems with a player (Terry Glenn), he chose to remove him from the team rather than make him a distraction. Mangini chose to go on a petty vendetta against a problem player (Pete Kendall) making the situation worse and a distraction. Also, losing Glenn did not hurt the Patriots from winning the Super Bowl. By not paying Pete Kendall an extra $1 million, the Jets running game has been non-existent.

I really don't think the situations are remotely the same. Belichick was far more savvy in 2001. He might have had similiar problems in Cleveland, but not in New England. That is where Mangini's lack of polishing and experience is hurting him.

That's fine too. But the article was posted in another thread, and the premise was, "my how things have changed", or "boy, how wrong he was". Who knows if this current report about Mangini is true either.

 

[SpiderFox53]

The Title of the thread is "things could be getting worse for Mangini.....

"More importantly, he can ill-afford to further cripple his already strained relationship with the team. Mangini’s authoritarian coaching style is detested by his players,"

Which is similar to :


"His players don't like him, the media doesn't like him, and his inflexibility is tiring."

So, all I am saying is, things were not all rosy for BB in the early years, but he has succeeded. Mangini looks like he is in a similar boat.

That's all, nothing more, nothing less. Just simply making a comparison.

If you don't understand the difference between:
"Mangini’s authoritarian coaching style is detested by his players"
and
"His players don't like him"

Maybe you shouldn't be posting on this board. BB's players don't always like him, but they always respect his knowledge of the game and his ability to coach. It appears that Mangina's players aren't buying what he's selling.

 

[FlyingElvis75]

You can't use rings earned as an assistant as justification to defend a guy as a head coach. Belichick certainly has the cache now but I remember quite vividly in the summer of 2001 - after only one year here - a lot of the local nitwits were calling for Belichcik to be fired.

Yeah, I think that's pretty clear. If the Pats went on a 0-4 run starting this weekend, I doubt we'd hear people calling for Belichick's head. He's proven himself in NE, and the players have already shown that they've got his back, no matter what.

 

[He Ban Me]

If you don't understand the difference between:
"Mangini’s authoritarian coaching style is detested by his players"
and
"His players don't like him"

Maybe you shouldn't be posting on this board. BB's players don't always like him, but they always respect his knowledge of the game and his ability to coach. It appears that Mangina's players aren't buying what he's selling.

You guys are absolutely loony. You don't listen to what I am saying, and you jump to presumptuous conclusions. Forget it, ok? It was a slight on BB, not a slight on NE, but THIS is a slight on YOU, because you have the brain of a newt. And if there is such a thing as a small newt, you would be it.

 

[PromisedLand]

Rofl.

I can't help but wonder if things would be that insane if the Pats started losing a lot. You'd think that Belichick's 5 SB rings would keep the vultures from second-guessing the coach. But then, Mangini has 3 rings himself.

Two as a secondary coach and one as a DC who had play-calling duties suspended by his head coach.

Adam Vinitieri has FOUR rings but that doesn't qualify him to be a head coach either.

 

[spacecrime]

I was referring to this:

http://cbs.sportsline.com/b/page/pressbox/0,1328,3969965,00.html


which is posted in another thread on this board.

This is hilarious!!!!!!

Pete Prisco comment (don't miss the last sentence) on a FAN poll with:

30. Bill Belichick, New England Patriots. His players don't like him, the media doesn't like him, and his inflexibility is tiring. So why is he back running an NFL team? It's because he's a great defensive coordinator who is from the Bill Parcells' tree. Belichick is a much better coordinator than head coach, which the Patriots will find out.

This was written in June 2001. Prisco sure is clairvoyant, isn't he. Ha ha. That was the year before the Colts were thrown out of the division, so we played them twice in 2001. Anyone recall who won? [b[Belichick is a much better coordinator than head coach, which the Patriots will find out. [/B]

I'll give you one thing: the media still doesn't like him. Good thing the NFL doesn't assign W or L based on sucking up to the media

Thanks for the link. It is almost as good as the Ron Borges 2001 post-draft comment on how BB screwed up picking Seymour when David Terrell was available, and how BB followed that mistake up by taking Matt Light, who wasn't going to help any time soon.

What a bunch of dufuses.

 

[NovaScotiaPatsFan]

Mangini’s authoritarian coaching style is detested by his players

Where's Tom Jackson when ya need him?

 

[LoveDemPats]

Rofl.

I can't help but wonder if things would be that insane if the Pats started losing a lot. You'd think that Belichick's 5 SB rings would keep the vultures from second-guessing the coach. But then, Mangini has 3 rings himself.

Those rings self destructed amazingly enough. They just melted away. Manbeaner went looking for them, but all that was left was a hunk of swiss cheese.

 

[LoveDemPats]

That sounds like a similar head coach assessment, like from 2001.

Its amazing that we have such different views of BB.

And I will tell you, I frick'n can't stand to listen to Dungy. I know that you must love the dude.

So, what is it that you want from Pats fans? We need to be schooled by you, is that it?

Interesting.

Hey, who is more sanctimonious, Dungy or BB?

 

[LoveDemPats]

I think the comparison's valid, actually. And it serves to illustrate just how Mangini has gone wrong. He's tried to be a Belichick mini-me in his coaching style, but the style was never the point.

BB succeeds, and he's a hardass. He doesn't succeed because he's a hardass. He succeeds because he works like mad, knows as much about football as anyone alive, and puts his players in position to win. Players buy in because he walks the walk. If you're a hardass without a winning gameplan, you're just a jerk.

They are such different people. (I certainly don't know them except from what I have seen on the tube.) And I am not disagreeing with you except to say that it is so much more. Their personalities are way different. I think that BB has a sense of humor that is very very dry, and there are people who enjoy that a lot in a leader. He has an abundance of history/experience that bleeds and oozes from his every action. I am not sure if there is a better person around who can cut through the BS and get to the heart of the matter more quickly, and again this is a trait that makes people trust him.

I guess that I don't really like the term hardass. It can be a confusing term don't you think? I am a Marine. I have known many a "hardass." Many times they are just little boys trying to hide some insecurity that they have. (so, that is my view of what a hardass is, maybe it is a little slanted due to experience. And I am sure that you simply meant it as a generalization)

Leaders, true leaders, seem as if they are hardasses to people who will not listen to what is being said. When I listen to BB he seems pretty respectful, and gracious, until you step into an area where he feels you are trying to set him up. Then, he will shut you down with the quickness. People see this as him being a grump or a hardass. These are simplistic terms that seem to confuse the fact that he simply does not want to be taken advantage of by folks who are very willing to do so.

 

[LoveDemPats]

The Title of the thread is "things could be getting worse for Mangini.....

"More importantly, he can ill-afford to further cripple his already strained relationship with the team. Mangini’s authoritarian coaching style is detested by his players,"

Which is similar to :


"His players don't like him, the media doesn't like him, and his inflexibility is tiring."

So, all I am saying is, things were not all rosy for BB in the early years, but he has succeeded. Mangini looks like he is in a similar boat.

That's all, nothing more, nothing less. Just simply making a comparison.

How closely did you follow the pats back then?

 

[Frezo]

The Title of the thread is "things could be getting worse for Mangini.....

"More importantly, he can ill-afford to further cripple his already strained relationship with the team. Mangini’s authoritarian coaching style is detested by his players,"

Which is similar to :


"His players don't like him, the media doesn't like him, and his inflexibility is tiring."

So, all I am saying is, things were not all rosy for BB in the early years, but he has succeeded. Mangini looks like he is in a similar boat.

That's all, nothing more, nothing less. Just simply making a comparison.

What is your problem? We talk about Brady and you jump the thread with Manning talk. We talk about Mangini, you jump the thread with Belichick. We talk about the Pats, you crash in with the Colts. Why don't you just knock it off!?

 

[He Ban Me]

NOW HEAR THIS!!!!!!

There was a thread posted earlier today about a "poll" that was published in 2001. In it, the 32 HC's at the time were "ranked". BB was ranked somewhere around 30th. I think the point of the thread was to show how wrong the writer was. Here is the post:

an interesting look back at some of the names and how they were rated.

http://cbs.sportsline.com/b/page/pressbox/0,1328,3969965,00.html

Later, the thread we are in gets started. In it, SIMILAR WORDS were spoken about Mangini. Maybe not exact words, but if you compare how BB was viewed then (at least by this ONE writer), and how Mangini is being viewed now (at least by one writer) you get the feeling that they were/are each headed down a defeated path. I AM NOT ENDORSING EITHER VIEW. Just pointing out how Priscoe was proved wrong in the end, and suggesting that perhaps the current view of Mangini could ultimately be proved wrong as well. I assume you didn't like it when BB was talked about in this light, you defended him. The same shots you are taking at Mangini are the same shots that were thrown at BB. Who knows how it will all play out over time. That was my ONLY POINT.

CHILL

 

[spacecrime]

NOW HEAR THIS!!!!!!

I AM NOT ENDORSING EITHER VIEW.

That was my ONLY POINT.

I get it. You only have one point, but you don't know where you stand on it, and feel compelled to tell everyone that.

Cool.

Are you Joey Porter in real life, by any chance? 'Cause it sounds like you need a hug real bad.

 

[marty]

What is your problem? We talk about Brady and you jump the thread with Manning talk. We talk about Mangini, you jump the thread with Belichick. We talk about the Pats, you crash in with the Colts. Why don't you just knock it off!?

Do like I did and put him on your ignore list. It's helpful and would be greatly appreciated if everyone would stop quoting him tho'!!!!!!!

 

[Pats Fanatic]

Do like I did and put him on your ignore list. It's helpful and would be greatly appreciated if everyone would stop quoting him tho'!!!!!!!

I second that and everyone stop feeding these pathetic trolls.

 

[Fencer]

This is hilarious!!!!!!

Pete Prisco comment (don't miss the last sentence) on a FAN poll with:

30. Bill Belichick, New England Patriots. His players don't like him, the media doesn't like him, and his inflexibility is tiring. So why is he back running an NFL team? It's because he's a great defensive coordinator who is from the Bill Parcells' tree. Belichick is a much better coordinator than head coach, which the Patriots will find out.

This was written in June 2001. Prisco sure is clairvoyant, isn't he. Ha ha. That was the year before the Colts were thrown out of the division, so we played them twice in 2001. Anyone recall who won? [b[Belichick is a much better coordinator than head coach, which the Patriots will find out. [/b]

I'll give you one thing: the media still doesn't like him. Good thing the NFL doesn't assign W or L based on sucking up to the media

Thanks for the link. It is almost as good as the Ron Borges 2001 post-draft comment on how BB screwed up picking Seymour when David Terrell was available, and how BB followed that mistake up by taking Matt Light, who wasn't going to help any time soon.

What a bunch of dufuses.

Martz was praised for his flexibility while BB was dinged for his inflexibility.

Oops.

Basically, however, Prisco just did an intelligent ranking of the experienced head coaches, then guessed about how to arrange the inexperienced ones at the bottom.

 

[PatsFanInVa]

Regarding Mangina - couldn't happen to a nicer guy!

Of course, the "his players hate him" bit has to be reminiscent of "this team hates their coach," for Pats fans. Yes, you take the media with a grain of salt. But Mangina is just going out and falling flat on his doughy face, is the basic gist of things. It doesn't much matter which QB he starts, whether the players "hate" him, or anything else. His coaching tenure with the Jets is simply not that stellar. The city of New York expected one big leap to be followed by another, and voila! they're us in 2001, we're the Rams in 2001, the handsome prince comes and puts a slipper on their foot...

See, I like that the Browns are showing some life. A couple years ago they just looked doomed, with the Ravens, Bengals, and Steelers all looking like contenders. I feel good that Romeo might pull it out after all. I'd love for Saban to have done well, just in another division. I wish good things on the Belichik "tree." But Mangina specifically slapped that mentor in the face the first chance he got. Had the Pats crumbled and the Jets soared to the top of the division, the people of NY would be calling him Mangenius and talking about the great loyalty he showed to his new club by pulling that crap. But now it turns out there really is a team out there that can't win without illegal taping (or with it,) and that's the New York Jets.

Couldn't happen to a nicer guy.

PFnV