faba Posted January 12, 2012 Share Posted January 12, 2012 How about everyone play better including mark-simple solution hah but so many of these guys played lousy this year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CTM Posted January 12, 2012 Share Posted January 12, 2012 Maybe he is a source .. Odds are good most of them come from the defense... Both logically and supported by other reports.. Point is who cares, Sanchez was terrible and is by far the biggest reason were not heading to NE this weekend ... He deserves a kick in the nuts Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ZachEY Posted January 12, 2012 Share Posted January 12, 2012 The PR crafting claim is just bogus and you know it. I never said it was in line with reality when someone BFFs. It's like getting defended by your mom. Mangold said everything right because he's Sanchez' friend. A friend does that. He doesn't need Rex, Tanny, or the Jets PR director to give him pointers. So, you believe he's speaking as a friend, and not an objective analyst of the QB's performance? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scott Dierking Posted January 12, 2012 Share Posted January 12, 2012 So, you believe he's speaking as a friend, and not an objective analyst of the QB's performance? I didn't see him comment on his performance as much he did on his effort. His effort was the most damning anonymous quote. The results are there for everyone to see, that does not need the over-analysis. As I said earlier, Mangold is one player that I would trust the sincerity of comments from. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ZachEY Posted January 12, 2012 Share Posted January 12, 2012 I didn't see him comment on his performance as much he did on his effort. His effort was the most damning anonymous quote. The results are there for everyone to see, that does not need the over-analysis. As I said earlier, Mangold is one player that I would trust the sincerity of comments from. See, I think the other issues are worse. Effort would be a good excuse for why he stinks. His abilities (or lack of them) are really the problem along with being a bitch (which is basically what the article said). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
T0mShane Posted January 12, 2012 Share Posted January 12, 2012 The PR crafting claim is just bogus and you know it. lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
T0mShane Posted January 12, 2012 Share Posted January 12, 2012 Again, if the "source" doesn't put his name on it, it's just Manish Mehta's word. lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scott Dierking Posted January 12, 2012 Share Posted January 12, 2012 See, I think the other issues are worse. Effort would be a good excuse for why he stinks. His abilities (or lack of them) are really the problem along with being a bitch (which is basically what the article said). Then there is no story here for you. Mark being lazy, as you say, are nothing to get uptight about. Just some malcontents mouthing off as they leave the door. Move on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Klecko73isGod Posted January 12, 2012 Share Posted January 12, 2012 Scott was definitely one of them. I can see Plax as well. Also, it's pretty clear to me now that Schitty was one of the sources of the article. Joe Theisman is close friends with Schitty and this is what Joe said in an interview after speaking with Joe (on rumors that Schitty wants the Atlanta OC job): Theisman, LOL. “[brian] felt like he was saddled and limited by what Mark Sanchez can do in New York,” Theisman said. “Mark is really not that good. He’s a hard-working kid. He wants to be good. But he doesn’t understand the game of football the way Matt does. “You have to play the position with the knowledge of where you are on the field, what the score is in the game. What [you] can do. What [you] can’t do. What are the things that are required of me. Really, the only route that Mark throws effectively is the quick post. He’s going to have a whole lot more to work with, with Matt Ryan.” You have to play with knowledge of the game Joe? WTF was your excuse then? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SMC Posted January 12, 2012 Share Posted January 12, 2012 So, you believe he's speaking as a friend, and not an objective analyst of the QB's performance? I don't think any of them is speaking as an objective analyst of the QB's performance. There is strong circumstantial evidence that Schitty was one of the annonymous team sources. He has an axe to grind. So does Ellard. It's clear to many that Scott was a source, another person with an ax to grind as he might get cut. They are sincere, but biased opinions on both sides of the locker room, just as there are on JN. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ZachEY Posted January 12, 2012 Share Posted January 12, 2012 I don't think any of them is speaking as an objective analyst of the QB's performance. There is strong circumstantial evidence that Schitty was one of the annonymous team sources. He has an axe to grind. So does Ellard. It's clear to many that Scott was a source, another person with an ax to grind as he might get cut. They are sincere, but biased opinions on both sides of the locker room, just as there are on JN. And see, while biased, their comments are far more interesting. When people speak out of turn, and out of anger, that's when you get real insight. They're not minding their manners anymore. When people say everything right, and follow the company line, there's really very little there. Second to the angry statements are the omissions made, which I've also talked about. This story for me has always been about Jets players saying Sanchez is the problem, not because of his work ethic, but because he's just not very good and because he's also a big baby. These are two things we've seen on the field quite a bit. The story is also about the overwhelming lack of support he's gotten from his teammates in general, and with specific regard to anything beyond work ethic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SMC Posted January 12, 2012 Share Posted January 12, 2012 And see, while biased, their comments are far more interesting. When people speak out of turn, and out of anger, that's when you get real insight. They're not minding their manners anymore. When people say everything right, and follow the company line, there's really very little there. Second to the angry statements are the omissions made, which I've also talked about. This story for me has always been about Jets players saying Sanchez is the problem, not because of his work ethic, but because he's just not very good and because he's also a big baby. These are two things we've seen on the field quite a bit. The story is also about the overwhelming lack of support he's gotten from his teammates in general, and with specific regard to anything beyond work ethic. I'm surprised because it seems that you are mistaking sincerity for objectivity. A statement made in anger may reveal a person's true feelings, but it doesn't mean it's an objective assessment. For instance. Mel Gibson, a now known anti-Semite, goes on a drunken rant about Jews destroying Hollywood. Now, those are his true feelings. But they certainly are not objective nor "real insight." The annonymous statements fit the form of some angry players/coaches/FO people pissed off at the 8-8 season/losing jobs and lashing out at an easy, culpable target, which absolves them of any culpability. They certainly believe it, but that doesn't, necessarily, make them objective or accurate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SenorGato Posted January 12, 2012 Share Posted January 12, 2012 Who else is not shocked to see Sanchez and Dixon have bonded? Or that I went cheap here... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CTM Posted January 12, 2012 Share Posted January 12, 2012 And see, while biased, their comments are far more interesting. When people speak out of turn, and out of anger, that's when you get real insight. They're not minding their manners anymore. When people say everything right, and follow the company line, there's really very little there. Is that empirically true? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnnyHector Posted January 12, 2012 Share Posted January 12, 2012 Is that empirically true? Are you asking a general question or looking for free marriage counseling? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CTM Posted January 12, 2012 Share Posted January 12, 2012 Are you asking a general question or looking for free marriage counseling? bahahahahahha Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ZachEY Posted January 12, 2012 Share Posted January 12, 2012 I'm surprised because it seems that you are mistaking sincerity for objectivity. A statement made in anger may reveal a person's true feelings, but it doesn't mean it's an objective assessment. For instance. Mel Gibson, a now known anti-Semite, goes on a drunken rant about Jews destroying Hollywood. Now, those are his true feelings. But they certainly are not objective nor "real insight." The annonymous statements fit the form of some angry players/coaches/FO people pissed off at the 8-8 season/losing jobs and lashing out at an easy, culpable target, which absolves them of any culpability. They certainly believe it, but that doesn't, necessarily, make them objective or accurate. It's not about objectivity. It actually about subjectivity entirely. The overarching issues here are that there's a growing group within the Jets that think the QB is sh*t. These clandestine comments matter. You can dismiss them as bitter if you like, but with the exception of the hard work issue, everything they've said we've seen on the field with our own eyes, so even if they are bitter, they have a solid basis. Now, as for Mangold, it's not that he's more or less "objective" than the others, but he has an agenda as well. Simply put, Jets fans would rather hear Mangold's agenda because it falls in line with the "all's well" that so many of us would like to believe. I believe Mangold's answer is crafted, but that really doesn't matter, because Mangold's disagreement does nothing to undermine the fact that there are people within the organization, important ones on all levels, if we believe Mehta, who think Sanchez is garbage. That's an issue (or, a great thing if you're looking forward to his dismissal). As for objectivity, I'd go as far as to say there is no such thing as objectivity, it doesn't exist, but that's not a battle I'd involve myself in with a lawyer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ZachEY Posted January 12, 2012 Share Posted January 12, 2012 Is that empirically true? Yes. That doesn't mean people don't exaggerate based on emotion, but what someone says is always secondary to how and why they are saying it. It just takes more work to figure out the latter. That will be $185. Thanks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SMC Posted January 12, 2012 Share Posted January 12, 2012 It's not about objectivity. It actually about subjectivity entirely. The overarching issues here are that there's a growing group within the Jets that think the QB is sh*t. These clandestine comments matter. You can dismiss them as bitter if you like, but with the exception of the hard work issue, everything they've said we've seen on the field with our own eyes, so even if they are bitter, they have a solid basis. Now, as for Mangold, it's not that he's more or less "objective" than the others, but he has an agenda as well. Simply put, Jets fans would rather hear Mangold's agenda because it falls in line with the "all's well" that so many of us would like to believe. I believe Mangold's answer is crafted, but that really doesn't matter, because Mangold's disagreement does nothing to undermine the fact that there are people within the organization, important ones on all levels, if we believe Mehta, who think Sanchez is garbage. That's an issue (or, a great thing if you're looking forward to his dismissal). As for objectivity, I'd go as far as to say there is no such thing as objectivity, it doesn't exist, but that's not a battle I'd involve myself in with a lawyer. If the whole issue was belief, then why didn't you just say that? You've been bordering on tl;dr territory on this when it was such a simple point and one I agree with. There is a faction within the Jets who think Sanchez is crap. End of story. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.