Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
Sperm Edwards

How keeping Rex might AID in our GM search

104 posts in this topic

Yes, I may be reaching, but consider the totality of the Jets situation.

We have a terrible cap situation. We have half our starters either free agents or, due to bloated 2013 salaries, will be cut within the 2 months at the latest. We have no QB. We don't even have a backup QB. Our best offensive player is famous for being a superdouche and is mega-paid and uncuttable until next season. Our best defensive (and overall) player is coming off a season-ending ACL injury and is only under contract for one more year (and can't be franchised). Our pro bowl safety has said the Jets get no discount and he's going to the highest bidder, which we probably can't afford to be. This season is most likely going to be a failure.

So if you're a GM interested in the Jets job, but realize (or believe) that '13 is going to be pretty crappy, which would you choose?

a) The ability to blame the incumbent HC, with the public knowing (or at worst, believing) that he was forced upon you. Plus Rex is such a lightning bolt for press, and has such a big mouth, the blame for 2013 will fall squarely on Rex. The after year 1 he's easily fired (if that's your wish) and you can bring in your hand-picked guy with a clean slate.

b) Bring in your own hand-picked guy to coach a (most likely) sure-thing failure in year 1. If things don't turn around fast, you will be held more responsible for a year-one failure that was unavoidable whether Rex or a newbie took over as the 2013 HC.

In general, I agree that any incoming GM would want his own HC. But if year one is such a mess (from a GM's standpoint), but you still want the job - especially because of the gobs of cap space and latitude you'll have just 1 year into the job? It's not that inconceivable that said new GM would want the ability to not have to shoulder a greater portion of the responsibility for that year 1 failure. Particularly if you get to play it off like you never wanted Rex in the first place, which is believable enough.

If the Jets weren't in this hideous cap and talent scenario, then I agree Rex might be a hindrance for a GM who wants his own guy as HC sooner or later. But in our situation? I don't know that inheriting Rex is such a negative for him. The press already sees Rex as a negative and the press will render the new GM totally blameless for year 1.

Just a thought, anyway.

I agree.

GM gets a "free" first year, with very little accountability.

If things go more South next season, he gets to clean house underneath and do it his way.

Sort of a "no lose" situation, unless Woody has a tatoo of Rex in a green tie and glasses on his arm and is married to the buffoon long term regardless.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not for nothing but resign Landry an make the right draft pick at 9 at OLB an this defense is pretty nasty for 2013. Just keeping things honest here.

They would've been in the playoffs with a league average offense last season. They need to bring in skill players who can make plays.
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not sure what's worse: that you put in the effort to type this stupid post, or that you felt the need to go back and add to this stupid post.

The same can be said for 99.999% of your posts. You did make a good post...once.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not sure what's worse: that you put in the effort to type this stupid post, or that you felt the need to go back and add to this stupid post.

Your stupidity spawned it. Not sure which is worse.

Edited by JiF
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You're stupidity spawned it. Not sure which is worse.

LULZIANA

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The same can be said for 99.999% of your posts. You did make a good post...once.

Touch me. Feel me.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

LULZIANA

Damn, you totally got me, bro.

You're so cool.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The same can be said for 99.999% of your posts. You did make a good post...once.

Pretty much useless. Hands down the worst poster on the site.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, I may be reaching, but consider the totality of the Jets situation.

We have a terrible cap situation. We have half our starters either free agents or, due to bloated 2013 salaries, will be cut within the 2 months at the latest. We have no QB. We don't even have a backup QB. Our best offensive player is famous for being a superdouche and is mega-paid and uncuttable until next season. Our best defensive (and overall) player is coming off a season-ending ACL injury and is only under contract for one more year (and can't be franchised). Our pro bowl safety has said the Jets get no discount and he's going to the highest bidder, which we probably can't afford to be. This season is most likely going to be a failure.

So if you're a GM interested in the Jets job, but realize (or believe) that '13 is going to be pretty crappy, which would you choose?

a) The ability to blame the incumbent HC, with the public knowing (or at worst, believing) that he was forced upon you. Plus Rex is such a lightning bolt for press, and has such a big mouth, the blame for 2013 will fall squarely on Rex. The after year 1 he's easily fired (if that's your wish) and you can bring in your hand-picked guy with a clean slate.

b) Bring in your own hand-picked guy to coach a (most likely) sure-thing failure in year 1. If things don't turn around fast, you will be held more responsible for a year-one failure that was unavoidable whether Rex or a newbie took over as the 2013 HC.

In general, I agree that any incoming GM would want his own HC. But if year one is such a mess (from a GM's standpoint), but you still want the job - especially because of the gobs of cap space and latitude you'll have just 1 year into the job? It's not that inconceivable that said new GM would want the ability to not have to shoulder a greater portion of the responsibility for that year 1 failure. Particularly if you get to play it off like you never wanted Rex in the first place, which is believable enough.

If the Jets weren't in this hideous cap and talent scenario, then I agree Rex might be a hindrance for a GM who wants his own guy as HC sooner or later. But in our situation? I don't know that inheriting Rex is such a negative for him. The press already sees Rex as a negative and the press will render the new GM totally blameless for year 1.

Just a thought, anyway.

I agree. I threw out a lot of these same points as reasons new GM might want to keep Rex on, before it was trotted out that Woody was mandating it.

Excuse for failure aside, it gives the new GM a chance to evaluate the talent on the team, as well as the talent of the coaches under contract coaching them. It's also one less thing he has to do. He needs to handle a lot of immediately pressing cap issues and free agency all while putting together his front office and preparing for the draft. it's a lot. Having the head coach and at least half the team's staff in place makes the initial transition a little easier.

Any improvement in 2013 is seen as a great success for new GM, and any failure is blamed on a soon-to-be outgoing head coach. It's not a terrible position to be in.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The same can be said for 99.999% of your posts. You did make a good post...once.

Link?

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Rich Cimini

Tom Gamble turned down second interview with Jags to focus on #Jets GM job, per @AdamSchefter. Jax leaning toward Dave Caldwell.

pretty sure I heard keeping Rex was going to keep us from getting this guy. :animal0029:

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Gamble wants to be here(over Jax anyway)

49ers director of player personnel Tom Gamble turned down chance for 2nd interview w/ Jaguars to concentrate on trying to land Jets GM job.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Rich Cimini

Tom Gamble turned down second interview with Jags to focus on #Jets GM job, per @AdamSchefter. Jax leaning toward Dave Caldwell.

pretty sure I heard keeping Rex was going to keep us from getting this guy. :animal0029:

Gamble wants to be here(over Jax anyway)

https://twitter.com/...597244302123009

49ers director of player personnel Tom Gamble turned down chance for 2nd interview w/ Jaguars to concentrate on trying to land Jets GM job.

But but Tom said:

You're an idiot. Florio didn't even make a passing attempt to pretend that he sourced this article. He mailed it in from his Droid based solely on who was interviewing where. If he had an article saying "anonymous sources are telling PFT that Gamble will sign with Jets..." then we have a story. This is not that. Dolt.

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I disagree, and I think it's even worse in this situation, given NY and Woodys reputation as a bad owner.

It's not unusual for a coach to be kept, but it is unusual for the forced keeping of the coach. The right way to do it is to say the new GM makes the call.

This times infinity.

The only correct thing for Woody to do is to entrust the new GM with all football decisions.

If the GM thinks giving Rex the reigns makes sense, then do it. If a new coach is what's needed, then do that.

If a team that's been sucking sees a major change at the top (new GM and/or coach), it can be used to re-invigorate the team.

Look at the Colts this year, Jets under first year Mangini, Jets under first year Ryan. You can say the first year the players over-achieved.

There's a chance that the 2013 Jets will not be a total waste to watch. I'm looking forward to the house cleaning and the (hopefully) good ways the cap hell and talent issues are addressed.

Edited by pfilippone
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But but Tom said:

Makes us an early favorite in the Alex Smith Sweepstakes -- yeah I said it.

If they get a serviceable QB in here this is a playoff team next year. I can't believe how many supposedly knowledgeable posters are already calling for a disaster before the draft, Free Agency, etc.

I bet Rex and Gamble won't share that defeatist attitude.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Makes us an early favorite in the Alex Smith Sweepstakes -- yeah I said it.

If they get a serviceable QB in here this is a playoff team next year. I can't believe how many supposedly knowledgeable posters are already calling for a disaster before the draft, Free Agency, etc.

I bet Rex and Gamble won't share that defeatist attitude.

While I agree Smith may make the jets a playoff contender next year, it's a 5 year assurance of it winning the SB, that is not appealing to me, I've seen plenty of playoff teams with zero chance to win a SB, I want a chance to win a SB

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

oops. double post

Edited by sirlancemehlot
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If they get a serviceable QB in here this is a playoff team next year.

You are still delusional. Keep the streak alive

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I disagree, and I think it's even worse in this situation, given NY and Woodys reputation as a bad owner.

It's not unusual for a coach to be kept, but it is unusual for the forced keeping of the coach. The right way to do it is to say the new GM makes the call.

It's not unusual at all for new GM's to be stuck with old coaches. It's not really that clueless by Woody standards.

It's not unusual to be loved by anyone

It's not unusual to have fun with anyone

but when I see you hanging about with anyone

It's not unusual to see me cry,

oh I wanna' die

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There is zero chance it aids the GM search, you could say it does not hurt, which I strongly disagree with, but in no way does it aid, if the new GM wants Ryan, he keeps him, but the lack of a choice cannot possibly aid.

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

While I agree Smith may make the jets a playoff contender next year, it's a 5 year assurance of it winning the SB, that is not appealing to me, I've seen plenty of playoff teams with zero chance to win a SB, I want a chance to win a SB

Oh I don't want Smith for 5 years.... 3 at the most... draft the QB of the future next year and let them sit for a year or 2. Don't repeat the mistakes made with Sanchez.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There is zero chance it aids the GM search, you could say it does not hurt, which I strongly disagree with, but in no way does it aid, if the new GM wants Ryan, he keeps him, but the lack of a choice cannot possibly aid.

It might give a potential GM 2 years of slack instead of 1. If the Jets crash in 2013 and get reasonably respectable(8-9 wins or at least 7 and some obvious vim and vigor) in 2014(with or without Ryan), the GM will look like a genius.
1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You are still delusional. Keep the streak alive

You are calling for less wins next year even though:

- Revis will be back

- the LBer corps will be revamped

- Holmes and Keller will be back

- We'll have the 9th pick in the draft

- Sanchez will likely not be the starting QB

and I'm delusional...

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh I don't want Smith for 5 years.... 3 at the most... draft the QB of the future next year and let them sit for a year or 2. Don't repeat the mistakes made with Sanchez.

DO not want to see the Jets make the same mistake the Kincks made with Ewing, rolling that contract over years into the future, instead of taking the hit and moving foward.
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

DO not want to see the Jets make the same mistake the Kincks made with Ewing, rolling that contract over years into the future, instead of taking the hit and moving foward.

I would suspect the new GM will be looking to cleanse the team of Tannys mistakes asap. I wouldn't think you can come in professing a new way of doing things then immediately make a Tanny-like move.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0