Talk:Eric Mangini

{{editsemiprotected}}

Untitled

Please post your question. BejinhanTalk 10:00, 25 November 2009 (UTC)

There needs to be a reference to his nickname, The ManGenius

• This is the most important part of his career, methinks.

140.247.243.7 (talk) 19:02, 25 April 2010 (UTC)

Chang the total career losses to 34 and win % to .413

Cannot change semi-protected article: After receiving his 9th loss this season on 11/22... 25 Jet losses + 9 Bengal = 34 losses total and win % = 0.414.

Needs reworking

This article has serious structural and grammatical errors and needs to be completely rewritten.

Could I also add that this reference to his age is silly "He is also the first and, so far, only NFL head coach to appear on Monday Night Football who was born after the program first aired on September 21, 1970."

I'm sure you could something like this with any relatively old/young person in anything.

I would remove it but I'm not sure how you do things in the wikipedia community.

Needs to be reedited Jonosathan (talk) 18:54, 3 May 2014 (UTC)

Please redited it because I justed wanted to change the title of his position but got musted up. Jonosathan (talk) 19:09, 3 May 2014 (UTC)

Mangini has his own site now

It's http://ericmangini.blogspot.com/ it's a spot for mangini and players news.. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Timbok (talk • contribs) 01:45, 13 February 2007 (UTC).

Looks like a fan blog rather than an official site. Mangini is referred to in the third person several times.—Elipongo ^{(Talk|contribs)} 06:59, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

I like it..—Preceding unsigned comment added by Timbok (talk • contribs) 01:18, 17 February 2007

I'm sure you do, however it doesn't comply with the Wikipedia:External links policy. —Elipongo ^{(Talk|contribs)} 19:34, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm it has all mangini though..—Preceding unsigned comment added by Timbok (talk • contribs) 01:40, 20 February 2007

I"m sure it does. If the blog was run by Mangini himself or was in some other way "official" (e.g. run by his publicity agency) it would be appropriate. Fan sites, however, fall outside of the Wikipedia:External links policy. —Elipongo ^{(Talk|contribs)} 21:04, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

Ok..—Preceding unsigned comment added by Timbok (talk • contribs) 01:26, 23 February 2007

The link in question, 'Eric Mangini rocks' is simply an un-updated blogspot blog that has little appreciation for any standards of NFL fan websites, and apparently has not been updated since February 15, 2007. The blog exhibits English language spelling errors and English language grammatical errors. There is little if no information about Mangini on this blog. --Mr Accountable (talk) 23:29, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

A walk on at Wesleyan?

The article claims that Mangini was a walk on at Wesleyan. I don't think Wesleyan offers scholarships. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.109.177.215 (talk) 10:05, August 24, 2007 (UTC)

Although Wesleyan University has a complicated Aid-Blind scholarship policy, and is more or less a leader in the development of scholarship policy on the Eastern seaboard of the US, it does not offer athletic scholarships per se. --Mr Accountable (talk) 23:32, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

Neutrality?

Whoever flagged this page should COMMENT on why it isn't neutral enough **for them**, or remove the tag. I will if there isn't some discussion here. You can't just flag it as disputed and then tuck tail and run. 76.26.107.104 20:05, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

Statements like these:

"A feud began...The basis of the feud is unknown and subject to much speculation"

"Feud" is a very POV word, while the rest is original research.

Nonsense. All of it. "Orig. Research:" You don't even know what that means. Another wiki puppet. *Everything* is well documented and sourced. If you don't come up with a valid reason for your criticism, such as a document showing the other opinion that you feel has been "neglected," I will simply remove the dispute flag. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.26.107.104 (talk) 21:13, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

First of all, I suggest you check your attitude out at the door and refrain from violating WP:CIVIL and WP:NPA. Secondly, for an IP making its first edits on Wikipedia, you certainly don't seem to be a rookie to editing here. If you have a username you normally edit under, please use it.

As far as your comments, you still have yet to provide a substantiated counter-argument. How can you "prove" that there is a "feud" between Mangini and Belichick? All that anyone can produce in regards to the subject is speculation and commentary. Saying "the basis...is up for speculation" is just an extension of that. Pats1 ^T/C 22:00, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

"fanned the flames"

Personal opinion.

"could further strain an already tense relationship between these two head coaches."

Original research.

""unwritten rule" in NFL coaching community against airing their laundry in public"

As with some of the above quotes, this contains colloquialisms like "airing their laundry" or "fan the flames" that aren't appropriate for an encylcopedic article (i.e. they aren't formal enough).

"many believe that this retraction is an illustration that just such a coaching fraternity "code" exists; and that Billick had only been interested in making that point, not embarrassing Mangini"

Need multiple sources to backup this claim.

In general, these edits rely too much on the commentary provided by the sources and lack encylcopedic prose. They also contain broad statements that do not provide enough sources to verify the claims. Pats1 ^T/C 20:44, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

This section is in major need of editing. It is obvious the writer made biased edits that contained opinion and original research due to fandom of the Patriots and hatred for Mangini. And it is intentionally misleading ... one of the articles used as a source indicate that the reason for the Belichick/Mangini fued is that Belichick did not want Mangini to take the Jets job becuase of Belichick's own hatred of the Jets stemming from his time there with Parcells and his one-day stint as coach. Yet the writer gives another reason that is pure speculation, and doesn't provide any source to back up that speculation.

Therefore, I am submitting the following edits:

"One suspected cause of their dispute is related to Mangini's solicitation of Pats coaches, support staff members and players to join him in New York, even while on a plane returning from a playoff loss to Denver."

This is not attributed and not accurate according to this source: http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/news?slug=ms-thegameface091407&prov=yhoo&type=lgns

This is the same source used to attribute the alleged missing computer in the next sentence. Also, there is no source to indicate WHAT exactly was on the laptop other than confidential files. The speculation that it included scouting reports is removed until there is an attributed source that says WHAT was on those files. "Confidential" COULD mean scouting reports; It could also mean financial data, naked pictures of Belichick in a hot tub, ANYTHING. I am rewriting the section so that it accurately reflects what is discussed in the source article.

I am also removing the bit about Deion Branch because the link is no longer active. Also, since the NFL ruled there was no wrongdoing in that instance, it doesn't need to be mentioned. (Public and sportswriters consensus outside of New England is that the Jets did nothing wrong and Belichick's claim was nothing more than sour grapes over Mangini's departure)

The attribution of sources in the next section was way off, as many of the sources did not state what the author claimed they did, and one link was dead. I have reverted the Mangini/Billick controversey so that it reflects what is stated in the mentioned sources. I also removed the following line:

"Given Mangini's exhibited willingness to steal from an organization and air its dirty laundry, some league insiders have even speculated that Mangini would be unlikely to find another coaching position in the NFL should his tenure with the Jets end."

Again, this is speculation, and is not attributed to a source, and looks like it was intended to defame Mangini rather than to inform the reader. And the last blurb about the Patriots removing a Jets official for taping the 2006 Jets/Patriots playoff game is also misleading. The Jets claim they were given permission, and filming the game from multiple angles is commonplace for both home and away teams. If you want to give mention to this instance, at least give both sides of the story.

Going over the original articles attributed, the original author did a good job of "cherry picking" pieces to defame Mangini, while leaving out critical pieces of information that were critical of anything having to do with the New England Patriots. (FYI, I am a NFC guy and couldn't care less about either team) After the edits I have made, I think both sides are depicted fairly and the neutrality tag can be removed. The only thing that needs to be done is to add a link to the Wikipedia article on "Spygate" within this section. One sentence isn't enough to address this controversial moment in the Belichick vs. Mangini sage, but there's no sense re-writing everything since there is an entire page dedicated to the controversy.

Goosedoggy (talk) 18:54, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

Coaching career -> Assistant coach

The chronology is backwards here, making for some seriously confusing reading. I propose rethreading it. The unfortunate structure also results in multiple "prior to" / "before that", which also makes for poor reading. The language in this section is, in general, subpar for Wikipedia, something that a rewrite should also address. Fyo (talk) 19:07, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

Augustus Gloop

I strongly agree with the edit of the anonymous user at 69.121.123.189 to remove the section entitled "Augustus Gloop". This poorly sourced section was little more than a rewording of an editorial by Matt Taibi of Rolling Stone, and added nothing of encyclopedic value to the article. More disturbingly, the section had some very serious WP:BLP concerns, and amounted to little more than playground name-calling. Please do not add this section back to the article! -- JeffBillman (talk) 19:05, 1 November 2009 (UTC)

• I should also add that this material does not pass the reliable sources test for biographies of living persons. Per WP:RS, "News reporting is distinct from opinion pieces. An opinion piece is reliable only as to the opinion of its author, not as a statement of fact, and should be attributed in-text. In articles about living persons, only material from high-quality news organizations may be used." [emphasis in original] -- JeffBillman (talk) 22:40, 1 November 2009 (UTC)

Alum of Wes U

The "Category: Wesleyan University alumni" should be added or reinserted. A football player is--in this case--both a "Wesleyan Cardinals football player" and a "Wesleyan University alumni." The two are not mutually exclusive and the former is not included in the Wiki list of the latter. 74.88.196.81 (talk) 03:26, 6 December 2010 (UTC)

Edit request from Reknj, 18 September 2011

A sentence in section under Cleveland Browns need change in tense. "Mangini has faced early criticism" should be changed to "Mangini faced early criticism" Reknj (talk) 22:49, 18 September 2011 (UTC)

Done --Jnorton7558 (talk) 00:10, 19 September 2011 (UTC)

Mangini/Belichick relationship

  I infer from the editing history that there was some controversy about how to deal with Mangini's relationship with Belichick after Mangini went to the Jets, and the net result has been to ommit any reference to the falling out. Neither has spoken about it publicly to my knowledge so there's necessarily an element of surmise involved, but the bad feelings were documented on camera-- there's probably a tape of their non-handshake handshake after a Pats/Jets game kicking around on the internet somewhere-- and many articles were written about it. There's nothing wrong with at least noting the articles is there? As it stands now, the entry is kind of like telling the Oedipus story but leaving out the naughty bits.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.121.154.224 (talk) 01:39, 31 October 2011 (UTC) 

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Eric Mangini. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20080708230503/http://www.wesleyan.edu/athletics/sportsinfo/news/newsmangininflcoachofjets.html to http://www.wesleyan.edu/athletics/sportsinfo/news/newsmangininflcoachofjets.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 15:05, 29 January 2016 (UTC)

Assessment comment

The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:Eric Mangini/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.

The following two sentences are in the article: "He is also one of three head coaches to have a winning record in his first season with the Jets (Bill Parcells and Al Groh are the others). Mangini finished his rookie season with a 10-6 record, the same as former Jets coach Herman Edwards did in his rookie year.[4]" If these sentences are true wouldn't be be one of four head coaches to have a winning record in his first season?

Last edited at 02:12, 12 January 2007 (UTC). Substituted at 14:36, 29 April 2016 (UTC)