Why would you hire a rat

[rhodeislandpatsfan]

If Mangini doesn't find a HC job would you ever hire him as an assistant when he has proven he will turn on you once he gets a chance.

Its not my intention to revisit spygate, the point is, every assistant in every sport knows something about someone that's why they are put in those trusted situations.

Would you hire a maid if you know he will tell the neighbors your family secrets.

BTW going 9-7 with a 3rd place schedule is not that great, going 11-5 with a first place schedule and an all-pro IR list is

 

[Gunnails]

If Mangini doesn't find a HC job would you ever hire him as an assistant when he has proven he will turn on you once he gets a chance.

Its not my intention to revisit spygate, the point is, every assistant in every sport knows something about someone that's why they are put in those trusted situations.

Would you hire a maid if you know he will tell the neighbors your family secrets.

BTW going 9-7 with a 3rd place schedule is not that great, going 11-5 with a first place schedule and an all-pro IR list is

 

[Kontradiction]

He won't turn on you the first chance he gets. What Mangini does is get hired there, get fired, go somewhere else, play a couple of games against you and when he continues to lose, tries to scorn his former bosses by ratting them out.

 

[alamo]

He won't turn on you the first chance he gets. What Mangini does is get hired there, get fired, go somewhere else, play a couple of games against you and when he continues to lose, tries to scorn his former bosses by ratting them out.

Unfortunately this is one of the issues few here can really look at objectively, to the extent that the facts get mangled. Mangini in fact beat the Patriots during their second (of three) meetings the previous year, he didn't "continue to lose" to his former bosses.

The facts in this case really aren't completely clear, and that's part of the reason Mangini may well get another chance. I have seen some theories that it was Tannenbaum who engineered the whole thing (after Mangini told him, though, perhaps even wanting the Jets to start taping too). Given what happened to Bradway and then Mangini while Tannenbaum is all the while standing at Woody Johnson's side, I think Tannenbaum's motives and actions are at least as suspect as Mangini's, probably more.

The way Mangini handled Favre and the team in 2008 will hurt him. The fact the Jets are in many ways a laughingstock in the league will help absolve him. Winning is usually the first priority, and Mangini did that very well at least half his time in NY (first season and half of 2008), so he might be worth the risk.

Especially since people will compare Mangini's first coaching stint with Belichick's. There are some similarities: a playoff season, and fired after losing the team due to factors outside his control. And I do believe Favre was largely outside Mangini's control.

 

[Kontradiction]

Unfortunately this is one of the issues few here can really look at objectively, to the extent that the facts get mangled. Mangini in fact beat the Patriots during their second (of three) meetings the previous year, he didn't "continue to lose" to his former bosses.

The facts in this case really aren't completely clear, and that's part of the reason Mangini may well get another chance. I have seen some theories that it was Tannenbaum who engineered the whole thing (after Mangini told him, though, perhaps even wanting the Jets to start taping too). Given what happened to Bradway and then Mangini while Tannenbaum is all the while standing at Woody Johnson's side, I think Tannenbaum's motives and actions are at least as suspect as Mangini's, probably more.

The way Mangini handled Favre and the team in 2008 will hurt him. The fact the Jets are in many ways a laughingstock in the league will help absolve him. Winning is usually the first priority, and Mangini did that very well at least half his time in NY (first season and half of 2008), so he might be worth the risk.

Especially since people will compare Mangini's first coaching stint with Belichick's. There are some similarities: a playoff season, and fired after losing the team due to factors outside his control. And I do believe Favre was largely outside Mangini's control.

Mangini's Jets were manhandled in the playoffs and then the first week of the season in 2007. Both games were blowouts. He then turned us in for something he KNEW was going on in 2006 but since he had just beaten us, probably wasn't angry enough to turn it in. He may say one thing about BB in the media but deep down you know Mangini just flat out doesn't like him anymore.

 

[alamo]

Mangini's Jets were manhandled in the playoffs and then the first week of the season in 2007. Both games were blowouts. He then turned us in for something he KNEW was going on in 2006 but since he had just beaten us, probably wasn't angry enough to turn it in.

But again, that portrayal bends the facts to suit the agenda. And I am not blaming you specifically, just pointing it out and saying I see a lot of it on this and every other boards.

In fact, the Patriots were caught at halftime. They were up by the decidedly non-blowout score of 14-7. So your saying a second consecutive blowout motivated Mangini to turn the Pats in is flat-out wrong.

 

[Kontradiction]

But again, that portrayal bends the facts to suit the agenda. And I am not blaming you specifically, just pointing it out and saying I see a lot of it on this and every other boards.

In fact, the Patriots were caught at halftime. They were up by the decidedly non-blowout score of 14-7. So your saying a second consecutive blowout motivated Mangini to turn the Pats in is flat-out wrong.

So then what is your conspiracy theory (I'm acknowledging the facts of the case aren't clear) as to why Mangini (and it was him who swung the axe) waited so long to turn the Pats in for it. After all, he probably knew about all this way prior to 2006. Why wait until a year after his first stint (and his first sour exchange with BB) to do it?