SMC Posted October 17, 2011 Share Posted October 17, 2011 The fallacy is that being the play called. Besides the exaggeration, I don't think he calls patterns too short, I think the time hasn't been there for Sanchez to sit in the pocket and throw them. You want easy to execute plays like a fullback standing wide open at the marker? Why doesn't he call those? Actually, the receivers stopped and turned around. Sanchez didn't throw it early. The receivers ran the patterns they were supposed to. And knowing personnel is a big issue. Calling plays for guys with questionable hands doesn't make much sense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CTM Posted October 17, 2011 Share Posted October 17, 2011 Says the guy who's entire argument is based on the concept that Schotty can't be to blame because despite the fact that there is literally not one single shred of evidence to suggest he's any good at his job, there are other people to share the blame, so he suddenly becomes blameless. And to think how disgusted you used to become with people who had that same basis for their idiotic arguments. I mean honestly, if anyone around here can present something other than a list of bullsh*t excuses as to why Schotty is any good at his job, I would LOVE to hear it. My entire arguement is based on the fact that he's had bad QB's his entire run here.. what do i know if he's any good or not (the fact that he was hired and retaiend by 2 coaches could be evidence however).. imo, the last OC who was truely game changing in and of himself was bill walsh over 20 years ago... the rest of the guys are genuises when they have a great QB and sucky when they don't Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JustInFudge Posted October 17, 2011 Share Posted October 17, 2011 dome God knows that Southern Cali weather is a bitch! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
#27TheDominator Posted October 17, 2011 Share Posted October 17, 2011 Jones was solid with the Bears, solid with the Jets, sucked by the end of his time with the Jets, sucked a little less his first year with the Chiefs, and is back to sucking this year. Not sure that really proves a point either way. Woody was great with the Pats although was in rough shape by the end of his time in Detroit, so I suppose it's a fair point. Faneca? LOL. That one's a joke, right? Cotchery was actually the one guy who I was going to go back and give him credit for. Cotch sucked last year, so this year isn't much of a shocker, but Schotty does get credit for his earlier success given the guy never saw the field under Herm. Coles? Meh, I'd say he was better in his first run with the Jets and his time with the Redskins than his run under Schotty, but it certainly wasn't a significant difference, so I won't argue that one too much. Baker? Seriously? Guy was awful here and everywhere else, and I won't even put that one on Schotty, but he actually put up comparable number in his one season as a Pats backup as he did his last year as the Jets' starter. I mean, if we really want to sit here and go through every single player to step foot on the Jets offense over the past 6 years we can, but that's not the point. The fact that you came up with a grand total of 6 players over 6 years who didn't suck more with the Jets than other teams (some of whom I wouldn't agree with at all) isn't exactly my idea of a great defense. Of course the issue is not ALL Schotty's fault, and the players deserve their share of the blame, but the point is that while coaches can only coach and not do it on the field themselves, it is their job to get the best out of their players, and there's little to no evidence to support Schotty ever doing that, with perhaps the exceptions of Cotchery, LT (given his last couple of years in San Diego) and a few guys who at least didn't suck significantly more under his guidance. So you want to go through each of those players and "reason" why they supposedly did poorly with the Jets? How about doing that with the QBs? Pennington had one decent year with the Dolphins and that was against a pathetic schedule. Clemens was looked at as a decent starter on the Jets, now I'm not sure he is in the league. Favre? Give me a break. They were laying up 30 ppg before he got hurt and sh*t the bed. If you don't believe the injury that's fair enough, but it makes as much sense as LOLing at Faneca who is out of the league one year after being part of "the best offensive line in football". The fact is, the Jets are a defensive team and have been during Schottenheimer's entire term. I don't think it's fair to expect them to put up points and yards like the Colts and Saints. Don't forget the "I bet he goes to the pro bowl now" stuff when we let Victor Hobson go and the Pats picked him up. And we've lost so many more games because we didn't give in to Leon Washington's starter-money demands. Tannenbaum also cut ties with inherited starters Dewayne Robertson, David Barrett, and Eric Barton, among others. Sorry Sperm, you're on the wrong side. This isn't the Tannenbaum sucks thread. It's the Rex Ryan is 1 dimensional and delusionally lets Schottenheimer run the offense. All the players were better before and after their tenure here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RutgersJetFan Posted October 17, 2011 Share Posted October 17, 2011 Wow. I quit the Schottenheimer argument for a few weeks and I come back to find Victor Hobson references being thrown around. It's like when Marty McFly let Biff get his hands on the almanac and came back to find that he'd married his mom and was running Hill Valley. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CTM Posted October 17, 2011 Share Posted October 17, 2011 God knows that Southern Cali weather is a bitch! homo doesn't get dome reference... go polish one Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
#27TheDominator Posted October 17, 2011 Share Posted October 17, 2011 Actually, the receivers stopped and turned around. Sanchez didn't throw it early. The receivers ran the patterns they were supposed to. And knowing personnel is a big issue. Calling plays for guys with questionable hands doesn't make much sense. I certainly don't remember any plays like what you are talking about. Saying it doesn't make it so. What players on the Jets don't have "questionable hands"? Conner can catch. He caught the ball in college. LT dropped one horrifically in one of the early games and he is one of the best receiving backs in history. I'm sure it was still Schotty's fault. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bleedin Green Posted October 17, 2011 Share Posted October 17, 2011 My entire arguement is based on the fact that he's had bad QB's his entire run here.. what do i know if he's any good or not (the fact that he was hired and retaiend by 2 coaches could be evidence however).. imo, the last OC who was truely game changing in and of himself was bill walsh over 20 years ago... the rest of the guys are genuises when they have a great QB and sucky when they don't So like I said, it's based on absolutely nothing but excuses... gotcha. It's not like we recently saw evidence on this very team of a defense that went from one of the worst in the league to one of the best with largely the same personnel but a change in coaching, right? Or perhaps a division rival that has managed to field a pretty successful offense so far this season with a whole lot of crap personnel, QB included. I've never seen a group of people trying so hard to discount coaching having any meaning whatsoever as those so desperate to blame all of the Jets offensive woes on Sanchez (and he most certainly deserves his share of the blame, but that doesn't excuse Schotty of his). Again, there's literally not been one single point made by anyone giving any support whatsoever to Schotty being any good at his job, just a list of excuses for why the evidence points to him sucking at it, and how it's in no way his fault that the group he's responsible for coaching has repeatedly failed for 6 years. Most of the teams in the NFL have crappy QBs, and yet many of them manage to field a lot more competent offense than the Jets, and that's without having the league's best OL. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CTM Posted October 17, 2011 Share Posted October 17, 2011 So like I said, it's based on absolutely nothing but excuses... gotcha. It's not like we recently saw evidence on this very team of a defense that went from one of the worst in the league to one of the best with largely the same personnel but a change in coaching, right? Or perhaps a division rival that has managed to field a pretty successful offense so far this season with a whole lot of crap personnel, QB included. I've never seen a group of people trying so hard to discount coaching having any meaning whatsoever as those so desperate to blame all of the Jets offensive woes on Sanchez (and he most certainly deserves his share of the blame, but that doesn't excuse Schotty of his). Again, there's literally not been one single point made by anyone giving any support whatsoever to Schotty being any good at his job, just a list of excuses for why the evidence points to him sucking at it, and how it's in no way his fault that the group he's responsible for coaching has repeatedly failed for 6 years. Most of the teams in the NFL have crappy QBs, and yet many of them manage to field a lot more competent offense than the Jets, and that's without having the league's best OL. what are you even talking about, this is getting ridiculous.. you devoted an insane amount of time arguing that pennington was sh*t, and now you are basing an arguement on him playing exactly as you'd expect.. the clemens comparison is absurd and favre got here last minute, yet actually was running a top 5 offense until hurt... and i could give a sh*t less about schotty, if he goes tomorrow i don't care Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bleedin Green Posted October 17, 2011 Share Posted October 17, 2011 what are you even talking about, this is getting ridiculous.. you devoted an insane amount of time arguing that pennington was sh*t, and now you are basing an arguement on him playing exactly as you'd expect.. the clemens comparison is absurd and favre got here last minute, yet actually was running a top 5 offense until hurt... and i could give a sh*t less about schotty, if he goes tomorrow i don't care The point is just because Chad sucked didn't excuse Herm from sucking, it didn't excuse Mangini from sucking, and now it doesn't excuse Schotty from sucking either. As far as the 08 season, you know just as well as I do outside of a 2-week span in which the Jets beat the Pats and Titans, nobody thought that team was worth a damn, and after that 2 weeks was over, people went back to thinking just that. The point is the whole thing coaches are paid for is to plan and scheme in order to get more out of less, and Schotty has shown zero ability to do that. When there is 6 years worth of evidence showing problems linked to the scheme and play-calling, that's simply not acceptable. Multiple receivers running to the same spots on the field, WRs constantly running routes short of the first down, offensive game plans designed to attack an opponents strength as opposed to their weaknesses are just a few of the things coaching-wise that have been constant throughout Schotty's tenure, and has continued on regardless of changes in players. Does that mean those are the ONLY problems? Of course not, that's far from the case, but that still doesn't make it ok. You can't sit there and wait around for a problem to be the only problem with your team before you do anything about it, that's just absolutely nonsensical. Should the Jets have never moved on from Pennington because his head coaches both sucked a$$? Or perhaps because he never had a TE worth a damn? Or maybe just because it wasn't his fault he kept getting hurt? Circumstances will never be perfect, but that doesn't make it ok for someone else to suck at their job. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SenorGato Posted October 18, 2011 Share Posted October 18, 2011 All 5 receivers running 4 yd patterns on 3rd & 6 says hello. Did Schitty purposely call a play intending for it to fail? No. Did he call a play that would only be succesful if a bunch of defenders fell down? Yes. Plus, if it's always about execution and not about playcalling, wouldn't you think after 6 yrs Schitty would get the clue to make something that is easier to execute? The players change, the opponents change, but the O is usually in the middle of the road at best, but mainly in the bottom half, every year. Schitty's problem is that failure has been rewarded so he has no incentive to improve. It's the Mangini syndrom. The Browns rewarded Mangini's failure so it gave him the false sense that his "system" works. No, it doesn't. Now he has an opportunity for self evaluation. Sean Payton got stripped of his playcalling duties TWICE, by two different organizations. He evolved and learned from his failures. JUST like it's drawn up! No doubt! I can imagine that POS making the call..."OK guys it's 3rd and 6. We need a game changer! The last thing we need is a first down. Lets get 5 WRs on the field! Everyone run 4 yards downfield, preferably in the same area! BREAK!" Sean Payton found a QB. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bleedin Green Posted October 18, 2011 Share Posted October 18, 2011 JUST like it's drawn up! No doubt! I can imagine that POS making the call..."OK guys it's 3rd and 6. We need a game changer! The last thing we need is a first down. Lets get 5 WRs on the field! Everyone run 4 yards downfield, preferably in the same area! BREAK!" Sean Payton found a QB. So let's just be clear here, your argument is that 5 different people made the same identical move on the same play at the same moment... and there was absolutely no reason for it beyond pure coincidence that they made the same exact mistake? That's your argument? I just want to be crystal clear here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SenorGato Posted October 18, 2011 Share Posted October 18, 2011 So let's just be clear here, your argument is that 5 different people made the same identical move on the same play at the same moment... and there was absolutely no reason for it beyond pure coincidence that they made the same exact mistake? That's your argument? I just want to be crystal clear here. Yes, that's exactly what I'm saying, and literally the only thing I regret about saying that is that I'm dignifying that ridiculous "yeah like 40 WRs are always in the same area all the time with Schitty's playcalls and designs(!)" claim. So let me get THIS clear...Are we counting taking a 22 and 23 year old rookie then sophomore QB (with 13 college starts and early draft entry to boot) to one game away from the Super Bowl twice...as in twice....I'm guessing this goes into the failure pile? Why? Because the offense didn't rank in the top tier? Are you really f'n shocked that the offense hasn't ranked in the top tier when the Jets' QB situation is given context? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SenorGato Posted October 18, 2011 Share Posted October 18, 2011 Gato i'm not trying to say this is all on Shotty. I would imagine that if we fired him and he went to NE then all of the sudden he would seem like a great OC again. While I do think that talent and execution can overcome some bad play calling I also think that great play calling boost the production of average players. Ultimately football is a strategy game and IMO the strategy of it has to account for more then 25%. What're you reasonable or sumptin? Don't you know it's either one extreme or another? Would you say that two straight AFCCGs is making the most use of average (if you want to call Sanchez that so far in his career) players? Ultimately football is a physical game played on a physical field where people have to do things correctly to see the desired result. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bleedin Green Posted October 18, 2011 Share Posted October 18, 2011 Yes, that's exactly what I'm saying, and literally the only thing I regret about saying that is that I'm dignifying that ridiculous "yeah like 40 WRs are always in the same area all the time with Schitty's playcalls and designs(!)" claim. So let me get THIS clear...Are we counting taking a 22 and 23 year old rookie then sophomore QB (with 13 college starts and early draft entry to boot) to one game away from the Super Bowl twice...as in twice....I'm guessing this goes into the failure pile? Why? Because the offense didn't rank in the top tier? Are you really f'n shocked that the offense hasn't ranked in the top tier when the Jets' QB situation is given context? Hey, I was just asking a question. The answer for it was going to be very revealing, so all I wanted was an answer to that question. So it's settled, there is literally absolutely nothing Schotty could ever possibly be to blame for in your point of view, and you've made it clear you're incapable of any objectivity on the subject. It's not a matter of even an overall evaluation of his job, it was a simple evaluation of whether you are even capable of admitting him doing one single thing wrong ever, and the answer is obviously no. It just proves there's no point in anyone on this board ever discussing it with you again, and that's fine. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SenorGato Posted October 18, 2011 Share Posted October 18, 2011 Hey, I was just asking a question. The answer for it was going to be very revealing, so all I wanted was an answer to that question. So it's settled, there is literally absolutely nothing Schotty could ever possibly be to blame for in your point of view, and you've made it clear you're incapable of any objectivity on the subject. It's not a matter of even an overall evaluation of his job, it was a simple evaluation of whether you are even capable of admitting him doing one single thing wrong ever, and the answer is obviously no. It just proves there's no point in anyone on this board ever discussing it with you again, and that's fine. What in the hell are you talking about? No one cares about your lame "evaluation" based on a question that I answered honestly despite it being based on nothing but emotion based bs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bleedin Green Posted October 18, 2011 Share Posted October 18, 2011 What in the hell are you talking about? No one cares about your lame "evaluation" based on a question that I answered honestly despite it being based on nothing but emotion based bs. I'm talking about the fact that you admitted that you're incapable of objective discussion. It's fine, but any question about it has been answered, and it's a loud declarative "no". Doesn't matter anymore if our opinions agree or not, because even if it's only one play, you've proven beyond doubt you can't be. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jetsfan80 Posted October 18, 2011 Share Posted October 18, 2011 Don't you get it BG? Because none of us are offensive coordinators, we have no idea how a respectable offense should be run, at all. And Brian Schottenheimer is in no way borderline retarded. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bleedin Green Posted October 18, 2011 Share Posted October 18, 2011 Don't you get it BG? Because none of us are offensive coordinators, we have no idea how a respectable offense should be run, at all. And Brian Schottenheimer is in no way borderline retarded. Oooooooh... got it now. Thanks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CTM Posted October 18, 2011 Share Posted October 18, 2011 Don't you get it BG? Because none of us are offensive coordinators, we have no idea how a respectable offense should be run, at all. that part is 100% true schotty may indeed be a retard Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SenorGato Posted October 18, 2011 Share Posted October 18, 2011 I'm talking about the fact that you admitted that you're incapable of objective discussion. It's fine, but any question about it has been answered, and it's a loud declarative "no". Doesn't matter anymore if our opinions agree or not, because even if it's only one play, you've proven beyond doubt you can't be. You're being objective? Is objective defined as "take any responsibility off the guys on the field, they're only pawn pieces" or sumthin? Have I just missed that objective talk in the billion Schottenheimer threads? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bleedin Green Posted October 18, 2011 Share Posted October 18, 2011 You're being objective? Have I just missed that in the billion Schottenheimer threads? Completely objective? Of course not, but there's a difference between not complete objectivity and absolutely no objectivity. Let's put it this way, no matter how much I have completed disdained Schotty and for how long it has been, I still have actually acknowledged instances in the past where I felt Schotty has done a good job with certain play calls or other things at times, while still not being happy with him overall. To match to your level, I would need to take the position that every single individual play call Schotty has made has been absolutely incorrect, and that no player on the Jets is at all responsibility for the offensive failures, and that it is 100% on Schotty. As much as I hate the guy, that's certainly never been my stance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SenorGato Posted October 18, 2011 Share Posted October 18, 2011 Completely objective? Of course not, but there's a difference between not complete objectivity and absolutely no objectivity. Let's put it this way, no matter how much I have completed disdained Schotty and for how long it has been,I still have actually acknowledged instances in the past where I felt Schotty has done a good job with certain play calls or other things at times, while still not being happy with him overall. To match to your level, I would need to take the position that every single individual play call Schotty has made has been absolutely incorrect, and that no player on the Jets is at all responsibility for the offensive failures, and that it is 100% on Schotty. As much as I hate the guy, that's certainly never been my stance. I don't caaaaaaaare if you sometimes admit he did a good job. That doesn't actually mean anything. That literally has the number zero as it's value to both myself and to you. All you're doing is patting yourself on the back for getting the trophy you handed out to yourself after you asked a question that got the answer it deserved given the conversation. You're not objecitve. You're on a mission, and you've been on a mission. It's actually sitting in your sig. Claiming objectivity doesn't 1. mean you're actually using flawless logic and 2. mean you're actually being objective. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bleedin Green Posted October 18, 2011 Share Posted October 18, 2011 I don't caaaaaaaare if you sometimes admit he did a good job. That doesn't actually mean anything. That literally has the number zero as it's value to both myself and to you. All you're doing is patting yourself on the back for getting the trophy you handed out to yourself after you asked a question that got the answer it deserved given the conversation. You're not objecitve. You're on a mission, and you've been on a mission. It's actually sitting in your sig. Claiming objectivity doesn't 1. mean you're actually using flawless logic and 2. mean you're actually being objective. I know you don't care... well, at least not a lot, but clearly enough that you can't stop responding to it, but that's probably just because you know I'm right. It's fine, there's a lot of lacking objectivity on this board, and I've certainly been guilty as well, it just so happens you have proven to have absolutely 0 objectivity whatsoever. If you really want to argue it that's fine, but it just makes something else you're wrong about. I know you're too slow to realize it, but there is no degree of comparison between you and I right now. I've never said my logic is flawless, because of course it's not, nobody's is around here. But just like anything else, there's degrees of objectivity, and while there's plenty of people far more objective on this board than I, you have officially proven yourself to be the single least here. It's not a big deal to me, I just wanted to know for my own future reference, and all it took was a really simple question to get the answer for me, and you can throw a fit about it if you like, but it's not going to change what was proven. It's told me to stop even trying to have a discussion with you about that, and that has now been carried over to this topic as well. Sorry if that pisses you off, but your answer clearly accomplished my goal, so I'm happy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CTM Posted October 18, 2011 Share Posted October 18, 2011 tl;dr Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SenorGato Posted October 18, 2011 Share Posted October 18, 2011 The point is just because Chad sucked didn't excuse Herm from sucking, it didn't excuse Mangini from sucking, and now it doesn't excuse Schotty from sucking either. One of those coaches are not like the others. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
#27TheDominator Posted October 18, 2011 Share Posted October 18, 2011 Only play I really bitched about tonight was the handoff pass on third down. I thought it was a manageable distance and they should have played it safe and taken their sarcastic cheer. I guess it takes the pressure off because if it works it's great if it doesn't it's just a gimmick and the players don't feel doomed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aten Posted October 18, 2011 Share Posted October 18, 2011 So like I said, it's based on absolutely nothing but excuses... gotcha. You keep saying this as though referring to an argument as an excuse is a real good point or something. Pointing out the talent, or more specifically the lack thereof, that Schottenheimer has had to work with isn't an 'excuse' for anything. Over his tenure we've had basically an average offense despite clearly subpar personnel, particularly at the quarterback position. There's a reasonable argument to be made that the offense under Schottenheimer has consistently outperformed its talent, which makes a pretty good case that he's not actually awful at his job. You can say this isn't evidence, or is an excuse, and you can think that doing these things to dodge the essential truth of the point makes you a very clever debater, but I'm bored now and it's way past your bedtime. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FloridaJetsFan Posted October 18, 2011 Share Posted October 18, 2011 In the words of the great Pee Wee Herman - I know you are, but what am I? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TommyT Posted October 18, 2011 Share Posted October 18, 2011 Rex Ryan is a 1-Dimensional Head Coach? No, next question Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.