Link: Opposing Ideals?
Will Leitch, formerly of the blog of much reknown, Deadspin, writes for NY Magazine that Coach Conservative and the Riverboat Gambler might be heading for loggerheads.
Lost in all the hullabaloo about the Favre trade was how diametrically opposed his style of play is to coach Eric Mangini’s. That doesn’t mean that Favre can’t run his and offensive coordinator Brian Schottenheimer’s system. It’s that Mangini is, by nature, a conservative, risk-averse coach; Favre, as we saw at least twice yesterday, loves to chuck it downfield and see what happens. Broadcasters call this Favre “trying to make a play.” Coaches call this “chaos.”
So, with the Jets facing a third-and-seven with two minutes left, needing a first down to secure the victory, Mangini called a handoff to Thomas Jones. The play was stopped well short, giving the Dolphins a chance at the final game-winning drive. Chad Pennington just missed on the final drive, but if he had succeeded, discussion of Favre’s first game as a Jet would’ve had a decidedly different flavor. Take this as the first warning flare in a conflict that might simmer all season long: the conservative, play-it-safe coach versus the “gunslinging” quarterback who would rather throw an interception than not throw at all … The Jets lucked out yesterday. The future might not hold such good fortune.
I think it’s a bit unfair to say that Mangini is willing to be unconventional, but there is an element of truth there. Favre ran the show in Green Bay, and this is a different team. Mangini’s job is to have a larger picture versus the one that a player has. So far, Favre knows who the boss is, but it bears watching.
29 Responses to Link: Opposing Ideals?
-
The Ed(itor) says:
Mangini’s offensive play calling in 4th quarter was way toooooo conservative. And the prevent defense was ever worse. This has got to change going forward!
-
billvv says:
The article picks out one call, a call I agree with, but makes no case that Favre wanted a different one. Secondly, citing no other calls ignores the wounded duck pass that Favre threw to Stuckey resulting in a TD. Mangini said that was a smart play, saying that an interception was a good an outcome as a completion. Leitch doesn’t say anywhere that the two differed on any calls. All devisive speculation to make a point only he sees.
-
RK says:
I believe you meant “isn’t” willing to be unconventional and I agree with that. He IS unconventional often in his coaching techniques and correct me if I’m wrong but there has been one trick play a game for the past 2 years (rough estimate).
That is a great point about having the bigger picture and he is not on the field and recognizes that. I have yet to see him tear into a player on the sidelines and it is a big leap to imagine he’d do that with Favre.
In my mind this is a garbage article based in fantasy or hyperbole; sensationalized to get hits to a website. Mangini is the coach and in Favre’s career has anyone ever heard of a coach complain about him?
-
oscarfactor says:
Victory cures all ills. If there was a tiny cloud of play calling disagreement between coach and QB, it disappeared with Revis’ INT.
Now, when Brett tosses 4 picks and the JETS lose 35-30, you might have a young coach say something that lends credence to this prediction. OR, when the Jets lose 10-3 and Brett only attempts 16 passes, THEN you might see a more animated and loud star quarterback.
I still say Brett will be severely tested this week – and his lack of total familiarity with the NY playbook will hurt.
-
Evan says:
FYI:
Peter King addresses Brady and Favre today in his Tuesday edition of MMQB (no I don’t work for CNN :) )In summary, King states Favre must be kickin himself that Brady went down b/c if he had stayed retired and this same situation occurred, he would be in foxborough today. I can’t argue that second point, but not sure if he is really kicking himself.
-
I don’t think of Mangini as that conservative – he has consistently gone for it on 4th down and tried numerous gadget plays.
I also totally agree with his playcalling in the 4th quarter — the Phin offense was completely putrid on Sunday, and to try a pass on that 3rd and 7, when there could’ve been a sack, fumble or interception when they had the score and the clock on their side, would’ve been asinine. His defense was playing very good and he has (unfortunately) seen Chad NOT rally teams back. Make him beat you, which he couldn’t. I guarantee against a better opponent, he would not employ the same strategy.
Leitch is just looking to stir it up. Whatever.
-
klecko71 says:
I was at the game sunday…sitting on the face of the sun…jesus it was hot…
anyway…3rd and 2 on that last drive i can see play faking and having favre throw….if u cant trust him then u got probs. but once we $$@ up and made it 3rd and 7…which is obv a bit tougher….then making miami use their last timeout wasnt a bad move.
mangini will get used to favre soon enough and trust him….cant go crazy this early about getting conservative.
the drive at 20-7 bugged me more b/c u can afford to take chances more then!!
and we also suck for not having a punter who can kick an extra point….thats scary.
-
dcpackerfan says:
I thought that Mangini’s comments on Favre’s second touchdown that could have been an interception were fine. He said that the QB had to throw it into the endzone so that it could be a touchback if it were intercepted. That seems reasonable to me. It is true that Favre did drive McCarthy crazy with some of his throws in 2006, but that was not the case in 2007. From what I heard after watching Favre forever, he seems to like Mangini and vice versa.
-
I forgot to comment on the Peter King article. I am not sure if Favre is kicking himself, since I think he would like to play two more years if he stays healthy. He would, however, love to play with Moss and get another Super Bowl ring. I thought that the Vikings could have really used Favre last night, although Jackson played better in the second half. That is where he really wanted to go when the Pack told him to take a hike. I guess the Pack GM was right to trade him instead, but the Jets were much more classy with Chad when they released him.
-
Najy says:
Mangini is not conservative at all.. He adjusts his strategy week in and week out depending on the team we will play.
Remeber back in 2006 against the Colts and their offense? We kicked on side kick after the half.. We went for it on 4th down in the redzone..
Last year against NE.. he went for it on 4th down several times because he knows when you need TD’s to win a game vs playing it safe and not losing the game.
He is a master of adaptation and adjustments… Dolphins had a lackluster offense and he was confident with the D…
If this was the Chargers or the Colts or Pats, I guarantee he would have opted to throw the ball.
-
SackDance99 says:
I will say it again, with more than a 3-point lead, with your opponent having only 1 TO remaining, with less than 2 minutes remaining and on your own 21 yard line, you run the ball. Period. Anything else would be foolhardy. Keep the clock running, make the opposing team use that TO and rely on your defense to keep the other team from the endzone. If Favre had thrown an incompletion (or worse), Chad would’ve had 1 TO to play with and extra time. Now, we know Chad is not that great at sideline patterns, so giving Chad a chance to stop the clock with a long pass down the middle of the field would have been dumb. I’ve seen Bassett, Cimini, Vaccaro and Deadspin all propose that Favre should’ve passed and gone for the 1st down and that not doing that was too conservative. But, passing on your own 21 yard line in that situation would’ve been reckless. Incompletion, clock stops, Fins save the TO…a disaster. And, what nobody has mentioned, the Jets could have gotten the first down. Jones was running down hill all day and just a slight opening and the game would have been over. Different situation, like a 3-point lead or less, then yeah, take the better chance for the first down by passing to end the game. But, like Gregg Easterbrook always points out in his TMQ column, many teams with leads fail to run to let the clock run thereby giving the opposition too much time to score. I thought Mangini made the absolutely correct call. Heck, even the prevent defense was the right call. Why blitz and give Chad the opportunity for a long completion. Like I said before, kudos to Chad for the perfect pass to Williams, but in the end he had to hit his WRs to win and he couldn’t.
-
subwayfare says:
I disagree with the characterization of Mangini as a risk-averse, conservative coach. He’s used trick plays with Brad Smith and Leon, had his whole front 7 walking around till the snap, a tactic he acknowledged came from players’ suggestions.
There’s also no evidence Favre wanted to throw on 3rd and 7. In fact, he stated that he wasn’t very confident in his mastery of the passing offense in his post-game comments. I’m sure they discussed these issues before the trade and felt like they could work together. The result was a win and I think many people are overstating the closeness of the game as a coaching failure. Another way to look at it is that Chad played right into the scheme and threw the game clinching INT.
I’m also finding the use of the term “prevent defense” a little tiresome. I’ll have to look at the game again but I don’t recall the Jets rushing fewer than 4 often, if ever, in the second half.
-
I think in the 4th quarter, they scaled back on the pass rush big time. The dolphins did a better job of picking up the blitz, but I dont think there were many blitzes late in the game.
Obviously, I hope we blitz every down (exaggerating) against Matt “first start since H.S.” Cassell. I hope we hit him hard early and often. Get that kid releasing excrements in his pants…prolly be vomiting already before the game.
-
good post sack….
3rd and 7 is hefty…….penalty hurt us….3rd and 2 we can make on the ground.
making miami use the last timeout was smart…
we won….period.
-
pat d says:
We did win. But the lack of a pass rush at the end of the game is a problem. At the end of the game it was not Chad but the Miami wideout that didn’t make the play.
-
Not blitzing does not equal prevent defense. Traditionally, the “prevent” refers to rushing three, or even fewer (the Pats have rushed 0 at times in their version) and dropping at least eight into coverage, protecting the sidelines and the goal.
-
sec108 says:
pat d, there was no play for the Miami wideout to make, Revis had the position and was the only player with any chance to make a play on the ball, which he did even though the wideout mugged him, its not as if Chad made a good throw and the wideout dropped it.
-
jetchick says:
pat d
I attribute the lack of a pass rush on our part toward the end of the game to the 100 degree on field conditions.
I have on many occasions sat in that stadium for jets games and the heat and humidity are debilitating…and I was just sitting there. The stands were mostly empty in the 4th quarter partly because Miami fans are wimps, and mostly because the heat is unbearable.
In a normal climate I think our pass rush will hold up for the entire game.
-
BubbyBrister/shovelpass says:
excellent point, jetchick. Kerry Rhodes stated on the radio yesterday that towards the end of the game, the defense was gassed, and that Miami was running the no-huddle on them during the hottest part of the day. That probably explained the lack of pass rush too.
-
The Jets rushed four, had one spy, and six DBs. All plays went in front of them for, usually, about 10 yards and ate up ten to fifteen seconds. One pass play almost ended the game but the end got out of bounds eluding two tacklers. That or an int was what the D was charged with and, I’ll say this again, it might have had you sitting on the edge of your seat, but it worked out just as planned. You cannot freak out watching this happen. Enjoy the drama, Chad looked good, but you had to know what would happen sooner or later.
-
pat D,
Chad’s pass was a lobbed duck, which because it was poorly thrown made it harder for Revis to pick off. If it had been straight on, Revis would have had it easy and if it was a proper fade, Ginn would’ve been way out of bounds.
-
Sec102
My point was that there was no play that the wideout could make. That is not the fault of Chad.He did throw a duck though.
-
My problem with the pass rush at the end of the game wasn’t that they were in prevent or weren’t blitzing enough, but that the 4 who were rushing didn’t get enough penetration and on alot of plays, Chad had all day to throw (he has always excelled when given that much time).
I totally agree that the heat might have had something to do with it, but as well paid pros, those are the kinds of things they have to deal with. While it worked out well for us, we let Chad get them close enough that if one of our dbs slips or the TE again gets open, we lose the game. On top of that, no one is mentioning that what Chad should have done was throw that last pass away (since no one was open) and have one last chance on 4th down. I’m not saying that the Jets should have been more aggressive, just that they could have used better play from their 4 pass rushers at the end. I think it is SD99 who is implying that things worked out exactly to plan, but come on, do you really think Mangini’s plan was for Chad to have a good shot, well within his range, of the end zone for the win? I don’t.
-
Big Fat Paulie says:
Mangini is a medical mystery. He has the smallest BALLS in New Jersey yet somehow he’s a head coach in the NFL.
Remind me again what exactly he did to get a NFL head coaching job. He yanked on Belichick’s you know what for over 10 years but that just makes someone a wanker not a head coach.
-
NYC Parking Expert, I think the plan was to rely on the defense and force Chad to pass short in the middle of the field. Did Mangini plan that Wright would get a dumb penalty? Did he plan that Ronnie Brown would be stopped and driven back in bounds but the referee called him out of bounds? Did he plan that Coleman would drop an easy INT? Like I’ve said, give Chad credit, he exploited Barrett and Smith and made a perfect pass to Ricky, but NYC Parking Expert, you have to admit that Mangini wanted to force Chad to try to get to his WRs, which he had to do to get deeper passes as the clock ran down. The INT surprised nobody who has seen Chad after his 2004 shoulder injury. Also, Chad was hit on that last pass, so the pass rush got to him and helped cause a turnover at the right time. As they say, “luck is the residue of design.”
-
NYC… I agree I don’t think that was Mangini in a bottle’s plan but he adheres to the bend but don’t break scheme or philosophy or lifestyle that his life partner has up in NE.
At least they got a pass rush, of course it was coming against a team that won one game last year with a rookie OL but hey luck is the residue of design.
Lowery and Revis look like studs at DB but Barrett looks like Ray Mickens, a Pass Interference Penalty waiting to happen. We love you Ray we love you more now that you’re gone!
A lot of us would’ve rather seen Mangenius go for it on 3rd and 7 but as always Mangina is smarter than everyone else so he runs TJ to eat more clock. Coslet, Kotite, and Herm would’ve been proud.
But certainly the Jets brass, Manginin included, knew this going in, right? I mean, Favre’s reputation as gunslinger and a guy who loves to be “creative” are well documented, and if this is something that is going to grate on Mangini and/or create major tension, then why would they bother making the trade?