Jump to content

Signs point to Rex Ryan's return


Maxman

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 133
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Mangold isn't a leader, though everyone likes to pretend he is because he's big and white and from the country. Colon is on a one-year deal. If the losses start to pile up, guys like Holmes and Cro, who are fighting for their next paychecks, will blow the room up. Rex provides no leadership. Hell, he needed Henry Ellard and Wayne Hunter to corral Holmes when he flipped out vs. Miami, then fired Ellard and dumped Hunter.

 

Mangold is a bit of a tool.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No. I'm not that upset at yesterday's loss. I was expecting it, actually. So there's no real "hurt" on my end, pal. The Jets are still what I believed they were at the beginning of the season - a young, rebuilding team with a rookie QB. 

 

Dick LeBeau is like 50-2 against rookie QBs as the Steelers DC, the Steelers are not nearly as bad a team as some were beginning to think they were, they were coming off a bye and had two weeks to prepare and the Jets were coming off a short week after an emotional win and are a very young team. 

 

I just don't buy into your ridiculous concept that the Jets have some inherent characteristic that makes them more susceptible to this type of letdown than any other team. 

 

EVERY team has one or two games per year where they come out flat. Sometimes they get lucky and their opponents are flat too and they eek out a win. It's happened to the Jets. I remember a 6-3 Jets win over the Steelers in the snow a few years back that perfectly fits that description. 

 

Hell. that's how you could accurately describe just about every Jets-Pats game from about 1987 to 1994. Its was a rivalry marked by ugly football. It certainly describes the Jets-Pats game from earlier this year. Both teams came out flat and the Pats eeked out an unimpressive victory. 

 

If you watch the Red Zone on Sundays you'll notice that every week there are games where you would expect one team to dominate the other but they struggle to score and the other team also can't seem to put it together. 

 

It's insanely narcissistic to believe this only happens to your team.

 

  We've heard this same story for years.    We can say they are rebuilding all we want, but if Milliner isn't any good, that's not really building a winner.  The offense is essentially useless at this point.  They don't have any good young WRs or RBs.  They have short term leases on injury prone guys.  Geno is still up in the air.   So this theory of 'rebuilding' is nice, but what happens when Harris leaves and some of the other young players who aren't exactly young anymore leave?    Start over?   That's the problem with 'rebuilding' in the NFL.   It can't be a long term process anymore.   Or you become the Browns, Rams, and Lions or even the Texans.   You're supposed to be good next year, but next year never really comes.    

 

  Honestly I see the same team they've always been.   The defense plays well for the most part, but is a bit overrated in general,  and the offense struggles.    So they are rebuilding this team into the same team that's really been an 8-8 squad for about 15 years now.   Some years they wind up 9-7, others 6-10, but doing the same thing over and over makes no sense.   

 

  I also hate the "well they were on a bye"  and we expected them to lose anyway crap.   Losers say those things.   Last time I checked, winning teams might have bad games, but they still win or compete.   The Jets could have stayed home yesterday and gotten the same result.   The defense didn't play well and the offense was non existent.   It's nice to look at the scoreboard and think, "it was only 19-6" but the truth is they were never really in that game.   And they've been this team for years now.   

I mean go back to the Steelers AFC CHampionship game.  Yeah I guess it was to be expected because the Jets beat up on the Patriots and spent their load that game.   If you think like that, this team will always be the same 8-8 squad no matter who rebuilds it.  

 

 I hope this regime is smarter than that and builds a team who shows up week in and week out.  So far this season they've been outclassed by the Steelers & Titans.  Lets hope they play well against the Patriots.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No. I'm not that upset at yesterday's loss. I was expecting it, actually. So there's no real "hurt" on my end, pal. The Jets are still what I believed they were at the beginning of the season - a young, rebuilding team with a rookie QB. 

 

Dick LeBeau is like 50-2 against rookie QBs as the Steelers DC, the Steelers are not nearly as bad a team as some were beginning to think they were, they were coming off a bye and had two weeks to prepare and the Jets were coming off a short week after an emotional win and are a very young team. 

 

I just don't buy into your ridiculous concept that the Jets have some inherent characteristic that makes them more susceptible to this type of letdown than any other team. 

 

EVERY team has one or two games per year where they come out flat. Sometimes they get lucky and their opponents are flat too and they eek out a win. It's happened to the Jets. I remember a 6-3 Jets win over the Steelers in the snow a few years back that perfectly fits that description. 

 

Hell. that's how you could accurately describe just about every Jets-Pats game from about 1987 to 1994. Its was a rivalry marked by ugly football. It certainly describes the Jets-Pats game from earlier this year. Both teams came out flat and the Pats eeked out an unimpressive victory. 

 

If you watch the Red Zone on Sundays you'll notice that every week there are games where you would expect one team to dominate the other but they struggle to score and the other team also can't seem to put it together. 

 

It's insanely narcissistic to believe this only happens to your team.

 

The hurt I'm referring to is that of me being right, dummy.

 

If you cannot see the place 1-2 annual let-down games play in the Jets history, then you are either blind with optimism, or not being honest with yourself. It's not a theory. It happens every year. 

 

Also, I never said it happens ONLY to the Jets. I said the Jets have made it part of who they are, it's become tradition. So, while other teams may get upset here and there in games, their legacy is not the annual let down games... the Jets however, are the kings of the let-down. Similar to how the Raiders are the kings of drafting for speed, not talent. If you do it often enough, annually, it becomes legacy. 

 

So anyway, this isn't a debatable thing in my opinion. I'm basically arguing against your refusal to admit reality. Your responses tell me you are really reading and/or comprehending what I'm trying to say either here. Narcissism, LOL. Funny guy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No one is accepting mediocrity. 

 

It's called being realistic you sanctimonious....

I get it, being above .500 was great for 5 days. It was not realistic to expect it to last. Other teams who have not won a game this year, being rested and all that jive. 

 

Jets walked into an impossible situation yesterday. Thankfully no one got killed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I get it, being above .500 was great for 5 days. It was not realistic to expect it to last. Other teams who have not won a game this year, being rested and all that jive. 

 

Jets walked into an impossible situation yesterday. Thankfully no one got killed.

 

 

You just live in your own little world, huh?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Jets should win the Super Bowl because, yeah, 3-2.

The Jets should expect to lose game 6, because we did not expect much from them at the beginning of the year, new quarterback, weapons, team coming off a bye, rested team, rested team with no wins, rested team with no wins and D coordinator smarter than every other D coordinator not named Rex, and winds from the Northeast.

 

I am just glad they threw their helmets on the field yesterday. There has not been such a surprise attack since Pearl Harbor.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

what do you expect? teams lose games. teams with rookie QBs tend to lose games other teams normally don't when they aren't up against a DC who eats rookie QBs for breakfast.

this team was never winning the Super Bowl this year. the ultimate objective of this year is to find out if Geno's the guy (along with what other positions need to be filled). you can only claim the rest of us are settling for mediocrity if you're expecting playoffs/SB. and realistically, that's ridiculous.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

what do you expect? teams lose games. teams with rookie QBs tend to lose games other teams normally don't when they aren't up against a DC who eats rookie QBs for breakfast.

this team was never winning the Super Bowl this year. the ultimate objective of this year is to find out if Geno's the guy (along with what other positions need to be filled). you can only claim the rest of us are settling for mediocrity if you're expecting playoffs/SB. and realistically, that's ridiculous.

Jake Locker and Matt Casel beat the Steelers this year. 

 

All off season, I was asked to name one defensive coordinator better than Rex Ryan. Me, I come up with Dick Lebeau. No, I am told. He is over the hill. He can't conjure a defense any more.

 

Now, after week 6, the Jets are lucky still to have their logos on their helmets after playing Lebeau.

 

Funny how stances change

Link to comment
Share on other sites

so your hatred of Rex Ryan means the rest of us are settling for mediocrity?

Jake Locker and Matt Cassel are not rookies. And the biggest difference we've seen from earlier Steelers performances is that the Pitt o-line was way better this week. Roethlisberger is a good QB. our secondary is weak. and the defense STILL only allowed 19 points. the defense shouldn't have to allow 10 or less points to not be considered a failure.

the offense didn't perform because the rookie QB had a bad day. it happens.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

so your hatred of Rex Ryan means the rest of us are settling for mediocrity?

 

People trying to trumpet a 57-53 lifetime record and telling me that it is justifiable because it is better than someone who has won 2 SB tropihes in this town, and propping up 2 AFCCG losses.

 

THAT is settling for mediocrity

Link to comment
Share on other sites

People trying to trumpet a 57-53 lifetime record and telling me that it is justifiable because it is better than someone who has won 2 SB tropihes in this town, and propping up 2 AFCCG losses.

 

THAT is settling for mediocrity

 

Change isn't always good.  You don't always have to throw everything away and start over.  Bill Cowher coached for a long time before he won it all.

 

But it is silly arguing it, the Jets have already made their decision, this is a reliable report. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


×
×
  • Create New...