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

[patsox23]

A perfect example of how statistics can tell you one thing when your eyeballs tell you another.

The offense last year, unlike nearly every other season, could not perform when it most needed to. No stat is going to convince me other than what my eyes could plainly see.

"When it most needed to?" The collapse in Indy was indeed a team effort - and if the O could've moved the ball better in the 2nd half or just made a play or two more, we would've won a 4th Super Bowl. But the choke job was on the defense, too, if not MORE. The offense managed to put 27 of the Pats 34 points on the board.

And quite frankly what your eyes tell you is in serious question if you're killing the offense for not getting it done. Considering the personnel, I'd say the offense did a pretty damn good job.

 

[Rob0729]

I think McDaniels coaching was one of the most underrated coaching performances of the Belichick era. Everyone says that Weis could have done better last year, but everyone forgets that a lot of people wanted to run Weis out of town until he had Corey Dillon because of his "lack of creativity" and his over use of trick plays.

McDaniels had nothing to work with other than Brady last year. Corey Dillon was done and could never even last into the second half. Maroney was consistently hurt after about game 8. Reche Caldwell could be a good #3 WR, but was forced to be a #1 and, other than Troy Brown and Doug Gabriel (for a couple of games), he didn't have another WR on the rost worthy of the #3 WR spot nevermind start until Gaffney exploded in the playoffs. Watson had a huge dropsey problem. Yet, the Pats were in the top third in offense. McDaniels and Brady pulled off magic last year.

I also don't buy anyone could do a great job with this offense. Have you watched the Rams the this season and last? Last year, they had Holt and Bruce both get over 1000 yards and are both potential HOFers and Stephen Jackson lead the league in rushing and we still scored more points than them (385 to 367). I mean how can a team that had Holt, Bruce, Bulger, and Jackson score less points than a team that had Brady, Caldwell, Troy Brown, and Corey Dillon? I would argue anyone with the weapons the Rams had last year should have been a top 2-3 offense in yards and points. They weren't. I beat not just any OC could have the success McDaniels have been having this year.

I don't get the McDaniel critics. They don't acknowledge the weapons he had last year were basically some of the worst in the league other than Brady and sporatically Watson, yet they dismiss the job he is doing this year because the weapons he has this year. He has Sammy "Freakin" Morris as his lead back the last two games and he has been running like Mercury Morris. This is the same Sammy Morris who who played back up to Anotwain Smith in Buffalo. Welker has been great this year, but he played back up to Marty Booker much of the year. McDaniels has some great weapons this year, but he might be a large part of the reason both Welker and Morris went from productive back ups to outstanding starters.

 

[Rob0729]

P.S. If McDaniels is smart, he doesn't follow Mangini and bolt for the first job that comes his way. He is better off spending a few more years with the Pats and gaining valuable experience and learning from one of the greatest of all time. Mangini is showing he doesn't know how to handle adversity and seems to be cracking a bit under the pressure.

 

[JoeSixPat]

LOL! Are you JOKING? "Ultimately" it falls with Belichick. You act like BB has no say in the everyday machinations of the offense. I'm not saying McDaniels deserves no blame or no credit - I'm not saying anything like that. But "ultimately?" Give me a break. Anyone with half a brain knows that ULTIMATELY the blame goes to one man. (He's the guy in the hoodie.)

As they say on the Big Show... "you're making my point"

So why then do people think McDaniels should get credit this year - indeed, enough credit to give him a head coaching position? "Ultimately" he doesn't deserve credit since "anyone with half a brain" knows that the credit goes to one man.

And since I'm primarily criticisizing McDaniels' play calling last year, I take it you're asserting that BB himself was calling the plays on the sidelines last year? McDaniels was simply getting the word from BB on his headphones and sending it in?

I think most would agree that part of BB's shortcomings in Cleveland was that he tried to micromanage, and didn't let his Coordinators do their jobs.

Has he not given that up? Are the coordinators puppets? Or do they actually have a role and deserve credit or blame for the schemes they select to showcase talent and hide deficiencies?

 

[JoeSixPat]

"When it most needed to?" The collapse in Indy was indeed a team effort - and if the O could've moved the ball better in the 2nd half or just made a play or two more, we would've won a 4th Super Bowl. But the choke job was on the defense, too, if not MORE. The offense managed to put 27 of the Pats 34 points on the board.

And quite frankly what your eyes tell you is in serious question if you're killing the offense for not getting it done. Considering the personnel, I'd say the offense did a pretty damn good job.

We're going to have to disagree on this I think.

My feeling is that the offense was able to contribute enough to make it deep into the post-season IN SPITE of the personnel selections and play-calling... not BECAUSE of it.

And I do believe that the nature of the offensive coordinator's job is that he must assume responsibility for that. (I know - I'm out on the fringe on that)

So I do feel that the measure of an Offensive Coordinator is not what he does when he has Brady, Moss, Welker and others on the team... its how he responds when he needs to coverup major deficiencies. That's the challenge for any coach walking onto a struggling team next year, and McDaniels would not be my chosen guy.

 

[Rob0729]

As they say on the Big Show... "you're making my point"

So why then do people think McDaniels should get credit this year - indeed, enough credit to give him a head coaching position? "Ultimately" he doesn't deserve credit since "anyone with half a brain" knows that the credit goes to one man.

And since I'm primarily criticisizing McDaniels' play calling last year, I take it you're asserting that BB himself was calling the plays on the sidelines last year? McDaniels was simply getting the word from BB on his headphones and sending it in?

I think most would agree that part of BB's shortcomings in Cleveland was that he tried to micromanage, and didn't let his Coordinators do their jobs.

Has he not given that up? Are the coordinators puppets? Or do they actually have a role and deserve credit or blame for the schemes they select to showcase talent and hide deficiencies?

McDaniels is calling the plays for the most part, but his problem with play calling last year was partly because in some games his only RB at his disposal in many second halves were Heath Evans, he had no consistent down the field threat, and Brady had no legitimate third or fourth option on a lot of plays. You cannot minimize the fact that McDaniels was severly limited in what he could call based on the players he had at his disposal especially in the second half of games when Dillon was almost always spent.

 

[Rob0729]

We're going to have to disagree on this I think.

My feeling is that the offense was able to contribute enough to make it deep into the post-season IN SPITE of the personnel selections and play-calling... not BECAUSE of it.

And I do believe that the nature of the offensive coordinator's job is that he must assume responsibility for that. (I know - I'm out on the fringe on that)

So I do feel that the measure of an Offensive Coordinator is not what he does when he has Brady, Moss, Welker and others on the team... its how he responds when he needs to coverup major deficiencies. That's the challenge for any coach walking onto a struggling team next year, and McDaniels would not be my chosen guy.

So you must agree then that Charlie Weis was not a good offensive coordinator. Before we got Dillon, Weis consistently had more three and outs than McDaniels did. I posted our offensive numbers last year compared to 2003 on this board back in January and last year's offensive numbers including third down conversion rates and number of first downs were better last year than in 2003.

If you contend that this year is because of the talent on the field and anyone could do what McDaniels is doing, then I contend that anyone could do what Charlie Weis did in 2004 with Brady and arguably the best RB in the league that year.

 

[cstjohn17]

P.S. If McDaniels is smart, he doesn't follow Mangini and bolt for the first job that comes his way. He is better off spending a few more years with the Pats and gaining valuable experience and learning from one of the greatest of all time. Mangini is showing he doesn't know how to handle adversity and seems to be cracking a bit under the pressure.

The honeymoon may be over but Magini is a whole hell of a lot richer being a HC. He took a dog poop team to the playoffs last year and this year they have come back to earth.

HC opportunities are in very limited supply. McDaniels would be foolish to not take a job if someone offered him one.

 

[patchick]

The honeymoon may be over but Magini is a whole hell of a lot richer being a HC. He took a dog poop team to the playoffs last year and this year they have come back to earth.

HC opportunities are in very limited supply. McDaniels would be foolish to not take a job if someone offered him one.

I firmly felt that Mangini made the right choice even though he would probably fail in NY, because he was pocketing a ton of cash, gaining national name recognition, and setting himself up for a second successful tenure as an HC down the road. That, of course, was before his little rat problem came to the fore.

McDaniels, though, is even less experienced than Mangini overall. (This is only the 6th year for McDaniels as a coach, all under Belichick. Mangini had spent a decade under 3 different head coaches.)

I think the decision for McDaniels would be a lot like a red-shirt sophomore who had a super-hot year in college football. You hear you have a chance to be a day-one draft pick. Who knows if that opportunity will ever come again? Yet another year or two of training in the college game might well give you the tools and maturity to have a better long-term career. Not an easy choice by any means.

 

[Fahrenhype]

I doubt this. McDaniels is too new at the job, and there are better explanations for the Patriots' success than his play calling.

Mangina wasn't exactly a seasoned veteran. Just look at what is going on around the league, teams are getting desperate to find coaches. Hopefully he sticks around for a while but who knows. I guess the fact that so many people that work under Belichick are sought after is the only proof you need of how good he is at what he does.

 

[Deus Irae]

We're going to have to disagree on this I think.

My feeling is that the offense was able to contribute enough to make it deep into the post-season IN SPITE of the personnel selections and play-calling... not BECAUSE of it.

And I do believe that the nature of the offensive coordinator's job is that he must assume responsibility for that. (I know - I'm out on the fringe on that)

So I do feel that the measure of an Offensive Coordinator is not what he does when he has Brady, Moss, Welker and others on the team... its how he responds when he needs to coverup major deficiencies. That's the challenge for any coach walking onto a struggling team next year, and McDaniels would not be my chosen guy.

The "major deficiencies" were covered up to the tune of the #7 offense that put up enough points in the AFCCG to get the team to the Super Bowl. Saying McDaniels was a problem and not an asset makes no sense at all.

 

[cstjohn17]

1) I firmly felt that Mangini made the right choice even though he would probably fail in NY, because he was pocketing a ton of cash, gaining national name recognition, and setting himself up for a second successful tenure as an HC down the road. That, of course, was before his little rat problem came to the fore.

McDaniels, though, is even less experienced than Mangini overall. (This is only the 6th year for McDaniels as a coach, all under Belichick. Mangini had spent a decade under 3 different head coaches.)

2) I think the decision for McDaniels would be a lot like a red-shirt sophomore who had a super-hot year in college football. You hear you have a chance to be a day-one draft pick. Who knows if that opportunity will ever come again? Yet another year or two of training in the college game might well give you the tools and maturity to have a better long-term career. Not an easy choice by any means.

1) I agree completely, Mangini did the right thing. There is no down side. Lets say for the sake of argument that he loses every game this year and gets fired. He would have no problem getting a HC position at any mid to upper tier college or could land as a coordinator some where. Either way he works his way back up the food chain and gets another crack in 5-7 years. 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),

2) Great analogy to college sports. To me it is no brainer, you get a shot at 1 of only 32 similar positions in the world. The pay is good, it is work you like and it is likely a career aspiration. These positions are rare and if offered a position I couldn't see anyway McDaniel could turn it down. It is hard to sit back cherry pick, better to strike when the iron is hot. Coordinators go from geniuses to schmucks in a matter of games.

 

[Rob0729]

The honeymoon may be over but Magini is a whole hell of a lot richer being a HC. He took a dog poop team to the playoffs last year and this year they have come back to earth.

HC opportunities are in very limited supply. McDaniels would be foolish to not take a job if someone offered him one.

As Adam Schefter pointed out, there were 17 new head coaches over the last two years. Every year there seems to be at least 5-6 new head coaching jobs. HC opportunities are actually fairly plentiful with team owners and GMs really quick to pull the trigger on a HC.

The fact of the matter is that if Mangini didn't take the head coaching gig in New York, he would have been a strong candidate for the Atlanta, San Deigo, Pittsburgh, Miami, Oakland, Arizona, or Cowboys jobs. There were seven head coaching opportunities this past offseason. You are going to tell me that Mangini wouldn't have been a leading candidate for at least two or three of them?

 

[Rob0729]

The honeymoon may be over but Magini is a whole hell of a lot richer being a HC. He took a dog poop team to the playoffs last year and this year they have come back to earth.

HC opportunities are in very limited supply. McDaniels would be foolish to not take a job if someone offered him one.

Yeah, there were only seven head coaching jobs this past season and Mangini probably could have had his choice of at least two or three of them. In today's NFL, head coaching jobs are plentiful. Why else do you see Norv Turner getting a third chance to fail at head coach? I can think of at least a half dozen potential head coaching jobs for this upcoming season.

Mangini could be the head coach of the Chargers right now and I think even he could do a better job than Turner is doing and could be the toast of the NFL right now. We don't know if he made the right choice going to the Jets just yet, but they are less talented than many of the teams he could have been a head coach for this season. Ultimately, I think in the long run, Mangini may have made the worst choice he could have made.

 

[emoney_33]

A perfect example of how statistics can tell you one thing when your eyeballs tell you another.

The offense last year, unlike nearly every other season, could not perform when it most needed to. No stat is going to convince me other than what my eyes could plainly see.

DB's consistently playing up at or near the line of scrimmage - putting pressure on the RB, consistently double covering Caldwell and Watson as the only consistent receivers.. and worst of all putting an incredible amount of pressure on Brady as DBs didn't need to fear a deep threat.

The lack of talent was certainly a problem - but so too was the playcalling.

And let's give Brady a little bit of credit for making lemonade out of lemons as well.

McDaniels isn't going to have Brady or Moss or Welker next year.

How well do you think last year's offense would have done without Brady last year and with a mediocore WR corps.

THAT'S the situation McDaniels is walking into - and I'd think twice about putting him in that situation were I a GM...

A case of the "eyes" seeing what they WANT to see, and the "eyes" ignoring stats/facts because they don't agree with what he WANTS to see.

The "no stat is going to convince me line" just puts you in position to believe whatever the hell you WANT to believe rather than objectively analyze anything.

McDaniels wasn't and isn't perfect, but he did a damn good job last year. You can't give Brady credit and give McDaniels none, that's asinine.

Coordinators can be helpful to a team but they aren't some sort of magicians. No coordinator/head coach is going to take 0 talent and make something out of it. You need the players to be able to coach, McDaniels was handcuffed last year, but he still did a fine job

 

[Rob0729]

1) I agree completely, Mangini did the right thing. There is no down side. Lets say for the sake of argument that he loses every game this year and gets fired. He would have no problem getting a HC position at any mid to upper tier college or could land as a coordinator some where. Either way he works his way back up the food chain and gets another crack in 5-7 years. 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),

Except he might have gotten a better position this year like say the Chargers and been a successful NFL coach for the next 10 years. With the revolving door at head coach in NFL, head coaching jobs are plentiful. Smart assistants who are in demand don't jump at the first job that comes their way, they jump at the right job that comes their way. If you are in demand one year, you are likely to be in demand the next and there are almost guaranteed 4-5 jobs every year.

 

[cstjohn17]

Yeah, there were only seven head coaching jobs this past season and Mangini probably could have had his choice of at least two or three of them. In today's NFL, head coaching jobs are plentiful. Why else do you see Norv Turner getting a third chance to fail at head coach? I can think of at least a half dozen potential head coaching jobs for this upcoming season.

Mangini could be the head coach of the Chargers right now and I think even he could do a better job than Turner is doing and could be the toast of the NFL right now. We don't know if he made the right choice going to the Jets just yet, but they are less talented than many of the teams he could have been a head coach for this season. Ultimately, I think in the long run, Mangini may have made the worst choice he could have made.

He may have gotten a chance at one of these jobs, each GM has their darling in mind before the search begins. In the mean time he took a team to the playoffs and made over a million dollars. I know money isn't everything but it sure helps.

IMO he made the right decision. I think we know full well that he wouldn't have been the mx for the Chargers or the Steelers. Atlanta, Arizona, St. Louis are all as bad or worse than the Jets. It is not like he could walk in and say "I am the great Magini, hire me now! or else". He got lucky the Jets took a chance on him so why not try to swim on his own instead of being BB's little *****. Length of tenure and NFL success are not related (see Crennell).

He will have one more year after this one (3 in total) before the heat gets really hot. If he gets them to .500 next year he likely stays for a 4th.

 

[RayClay]

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.

 

[Rob0729]

He may have gotten a chance at one of these jobs, each GM has their darling in mind before the search begins. In the mean time he took a team to the playoffs and made over a million dollars. I know money isn't everything but it sure helps.

IMO he made the right decision. I think we know full well that he wouldn't have been the mx for the Chargers or the Steelers. Atlanta, Arizona, St. Louis are all as bad or worse than the Jets. It is not like he could walk in and say "I am the great Magini, hire me now! or else". He got lucky the Jets took a chance on him so why not try to swim on his own instead of being BB's little *****. Length of tenure and NFL success are not related (see Crennell).

He will have one more year after this one (3 in total) before the heat gets really hot. If he gets them to .500 next year he likely stays for a 4th.

I don't know full well that he wouldn't have been a candidate for either Pittsburgh or the Chargers. Mangini actually seems right up the alley of what the Steelers look for (young, bright, defensive minded coach). He probably wouldn't have gotten the Chargers job since they didn't fire Schottenheimer until late in the offseason.

If I was a young head coach candidate, I would much rather have the Arizona job than New York. Less media scrutiny and lower expectations, better talent with a QB of the future, a relatively soft division with no powerhouse, and not having to be in Belichick's shadow as much.

If Mangini wanted to wait yet another year, the following are head coaching jobs that are definitely or possibly to be open: the Eagles (the worst kept secret in the NFL is that Andy Reid is retiring after this system), Carolina (if John Fox doesn't make the playoffs), the Giants, Cincy, Cleveland, San Deigo, St. Louis, Miami, Buffalo, Washington (Gibbs could retire), and Tampa (if Gruden takes the Eagles job and maybe even if he doesn't). And those are before a surprised resignation or firing.

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.

 

[patsox23]

As they say on the Big Show... "you're making my point"

So why then do people think McDaniels should get credit this year - indeed, enough credit to give him a head coaching position? "Ultimately" he doesn't deserve credit since "anyone with half a brain" knows that the credit goes to one man.

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.