Eric Mangini Thread

Originally posted by qnnhan7:

Originally posted by jonnydel:
well, I finished watching the first half of the coaches film - not sure if this makes me feel better or worse - but the whole, 'mangini played soft zone all game', completely inaccurate. We played spot dropping zone on only about 20-25% of our defensive snaps. We got whooped in man-coverage and whooped trying to play pattern match zone. In pattern match(at least in the first half) Tartt and Reaser looked lost and didn't know how to pass off their men. In zone, our LB's and Tartt got exposed...

The biggest thing - not surprisingly, was no pass rush from anyone not named Lynch....

Mangini would appreciate this post. He got pummeled after the game. Young and inexperience DB. We've got to live with it for bit more. Look at the bright side, there was a couple of INT that they could've made to changed the game.

Sometimes, I hate being right.... not to sound arrogant; but I mentioned it in the Pitt game and also after the Ari game. I was concerned about our DB's lack of ball skills, and it killed us in this game....

Originally posted by jonnydel:
Sometimes, I hate being right.... not to sound arrogant; but I mentioned it in the Pitt game and also after the Ari game. I was concerned about our DB's lack of ball skills, and it killed us in this game....

True and while I'm not a T. Brock fan his INT before the half was crucial to the way the game played out. It wasn't an easy catch. If he could have only made the second one

Geep seems to doing better...but we'll see.

Mangini on the other hand... well I'll just say this. When we first hired all these former coaches and assistants...I thought the one benefit of it would be that if our OC or DC struggled during the season and was stubborn with their approach, then it would be easier to replace them with a former coach or assistant who is already on staff..who knows the players and the playbook.

So if Mangini continues to not put the players he has to work with, in the best situations possible...then give the job to Tim Lewis or Jason Tarver

edit- Sadly I think Baalke is too attached to Mangini....like Harbs was to Roman.

Afrikan, for a change, I sincerely hope you are wrong on that. Kinda surprising tho, jonnydel's piece. Nonetheless, this team would be instantly better without mangini.

I've listened to Mangini's press conferences and he's been pretty forthright about what he's trying to do (without being too specific for other teams to glean). I see him mixing and trying to find comfort zones for the players. I also see the DBs playing faster and making more plays. So as they become less hesitant the schemes will look better. It seems very possible to me that Mangini will look pretty good by the end of the year.

The ebb and flow of emotions on this board are expected so I don't pay too much attention to the "Chryst sucks" "Mangini sucks" kind of posts after each game. It will change with results. If the results continue to be bad then there will be time to make changes in the off season. I don't want any changes during the year until the players have a chance to become fluid in their prospective roles. It would be unfair to the coaches and the players.

Here's the thing with Mangini. He's changing too much. One game he has one plan, the next, he changes it completely. This is Mangini in a nutshell. If we have been playing that crazy disguise coverage for 3 games, then we go to man, pattern match...there's no consistency. Do one thing well first rather than complete 180's.

Originally posted by Joecool:
Here's the thing with Mangini. He's changing too much. One game he has one plan, the next, he changes it completely. This is Mangini in a nutshell. If we have been playing that crazy disguise coverage for 3 games, then we go to man, pattern match...there's no consistency. Do one thing well first rather than complete 180's.

I was wondering about this as well, but not sure it doesn't help the DBs. By midseason will this benefit the team as opponents get a bit easier?

The confusion is getting less obvious, so that is a good sign.

Originally posted by dtg_9er:
It seems very possible to me that Mangini will look pretty good by the end of the year.

I believe in you man...but you're going to have to hold on tight to us until that happens. I don't know if we have the strength to go at this alone.

Originally posted by dtg_9er:
I've listened to Mangini's press conferences and he's been pretty forthright about what he's trying to do (without being too specific for other teams to glean). I see him mixing and trying to find comfort zones for the players. I also see the DBs playing faster and making more plays. So as they become less hesitant the schemes will look better. It seems very possible to me that Mangini will look pretty good by the end of the year.

The ebb and flow of emotions on this board are expected so I don't pay too much attention to the "Chryst sucks" "Mangini sucks" kind of posts after each game. It will change with results. If the results continue to be bad then there will be time to make changes in the off season. I don't want any changes during the year until the players have a chance to become fluid in their prospective roles. It would be unfair to the coaches and the players.

i'm sorry but tomsula helped run fangio's defense for 4yrs and abandoned it for a scheme that is garbage

and we can't really say he needs time to implement and its growing pains...fangio has that pile of sack in chicago at top 5 defense already

we are much more talented on d than them

i really don't get why tomsula would abandon a scheme that he saw succeed for 4yrs and taught...wasn't it reported they asked gase to make tomsula his def cord, if so did he plan to abandon fangio's scheme? baffling stuff.....he's a defensive minded head coach who was tutored under fangio for 4yrs and saw the brilliance of that scheme and he completely abandoned it

Originally posted by NCommand:
I believe in you man...but you're going to have to hold on tight to us until that happens. I don't know if we have the strength to go at this alone.

Sometimes I'm too patient...but as a fan it does little harm! LOL!

So, in short - they got schooled doing what they did so well against Green Bay.

In other words - the young guys don't travel well (being far worse on the road than at home). Not that unusual.

Originally posted by dtg_9er:

Originally posted by NCommand:
I believe in you man...but you're going to have to hold on tight to us until that happens. I don't know if we have the strength to go at this alone.

Sometimes I'm too patient...but as a fan it does little harm! LOL!

his defense wont look good with out a pass rush. Eli got maybe a hand on him all game and didnt really even need a lot of time to make a lot of throws/decisions

Originally posted by blizzuntz:
his defense wont look good with out a pass rush. Eli got maybe a hand on him all game and didnt really even need a lot of time to make a lot of throws/decisions

Their options are to change personnel or blitz more...or differently. I really have been hoping they shake up the DL by using Purcell and rotating more, though NY took them out of rotating by going hurry up. Still hoping Harold will help as well...and Brooks will be back...bad game for him to miss, as it was very win-able. But real life trumphs football sometimes.

This Defense does not have much more time to gel. We are halfway through the second quarter of the season. These guys MUST use these next 3 out of 4 home games to gel and get momentum and confidence going.

Same goes for the offense. If it doesn't happen in the next two weeks, it will be time to start evaluating talent rather than worry about winning games.

Originally posted by Joecool:
This Defense does not have much more time to gel. We are halfway through the second quarter of the season. These guys MUST use these next 3 out of 4 home games to gel and get momentum and confidence going.

Same goes for the offense. If it doesn't happen in the next two weeks, it will be time to start evaluating talent rather than worry about winning games.

Agree and am not unhappy with this. 8-8 last year with many of the injured retiring or moving on leads me to believe 9-7 would be very optiimistic at the beginning of the year. Now, at 1-4, the team looks more like a 7-9 team. That would still require them to win more than half their remaining games...with two each against Seattle and St Louis and one more against Arizona. Tough division.