Integrity28 Posted June 3, 2013 Share Posted June 3, 2013 The only way Rex being a "players coach" hurt the team is his love affair with Mark Sanchez. Untrue. We've seem disciplinary meltdowns the past 2 years, call it whatever you want "losing the team" or whatever. It's like when you go to the mall and you see the dad who is obviously trying to be friends with his kids, instead of a parent, and the kids walk all over him. That's the environment Rex has built around himself. It didn't show up in his first 2 years here, because there were veteran players that made the young and/or thug turd players accountable to THEM. As those players left, they weren't replaced, and all you were left with were idiots being coddled by an idiot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gastineau Lives Posted June 3, 2013 Share Posted June 3, 2013 Untrue. We've seem disciplinary meltdowns the past 2 years, call it whatever you want "losing the team" or whatever. It's like when you go to the mall and you see the dad who is obviously trying to be friends with his kids, instead of a parent, and the kids walk all over him. That's the environment Rex has built around himself. It didn't show up in his first 2 years here, because there were veteran players that made the young and/or thug turd players accountable to THEM. As those players left, they weren't replaced, and all you were left with were idiots being coddled by an idiot. I think I misspoke. Only was an overstatement. But again, don't know how only one side of the ball was effected. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JiFtheOracle Posted June 3, 2013 Share Posted June 3, 2013 I think I misspoke. Only was an overstatement. But again, don't know how only one side of the ball was effected. Players coaches only work on Defense. Not offense. Science. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JoeKlecko Posted June 3, 2013 Share Posted June 3, 2013 It seems being a "players coach" only works on one side of the ball. Not sure how that works, but if our offense was as good as our D, we'd be in the Super Bowl four years running. I also think he's discounting the first two years to serve his argument. Is he saying it took Rex two years to ruin the team after taking them where they hadn't been since Parcells? And if they were ruined, again, how can that only happen on one side of the ball? How can being a "players coach" not absolutely destroy one side of the balls will to win in the face of being forced to trot back onto the field time and time again, their first sip of gatorade still on their lips after the other side of the ball (the side that was apparently ruined by the players coach) either turned it over or went three and out? I don't buy it. Not at all. Joe's condemnation of Rex coincidentally serves his support of Sanchez. Win-Win. That's not true. It affects both sides of the ball. He didn't discount the first two years. He said, "The first two seasons, you win. Hey, OK. In the meantime, those teams were inherited to some extent. The psyche of the team got in a place where they’re spending more time thinking about what they've done rather than what they're doing and what they're going to do. That is what happens when a player's coach takes over for a strict disciplinarian type of HC. They play well for two years as players enjoy the freedom, and it becomes more fun. Then by the third year, the lack of discipline and accountability starts taking a toll. The level of play falls off. The energy gained by the newness of the player's coach approach has worn off. It has affected the offense more than the defense for a couple of reasons. One, Rex IS a good defensive mind, has had excellent defensive coaches, and has had a greater infusion of young talent than the offense. Two, the offense was saddled with incompetent coaching in Schottenheimer, Cavanaugh, Sparano and perhaps other position coaches. There hasn't been the infusion of young talent on offense and what players have been added have been "projects" or lesser talents. The better players that were lost from the 2009-2010 teams were on offense (Jerricho Cotchery, Thomas Jones, Alan Faneca, Tony Richardson and Damien Woody primarily). That's a lot of high character veteran leadership and quality play. Even though Hartsock was a stupid penalty machine, he was a much better blocker than the rest of the Jets' TEs combined. There also was a turnover in some of the STs top players in Jay Feely, Steve Weatherford, and Wallace Wright, who was one of the best STs players. Something I rarely see mentioned on Jets boards is the chemistry that was lost. Many players commented how those 2009 and 2010 teams were like a family. There was no dissension in the locker room. The work environment was a very positive one. Then there's Sanchez. He had little experience entering the NFL, was never considered by most to be a can't miss topflight QB prospect, and then had poor coaching to go along with several different offenses and a lack of talent on that side of the ball. Sanchez' play has to have affected every unit on the team. When he continually turns the ball over, makes bonehead decisions, has poor accuracy and can't lead the offense to TDs, has to affect players on D and STs. They start wondering why bust their butts to give the ball back to the offense when Sanchez wasn't going to do anything positive with the opportunities. In 2010 the D was ranked as the #6 D. In 2011 & 2012, they were ranked #20. Is that not an affect on the D side of the ball? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shhwagah Posted June 3, 2013 Author Share Posted June 3, 2013 It seems being a "players coach" only works on one side of the ball. Not sure how that works, but if our offense was as good as our D, we'd be in the Super Bowl four years running. I also think he's discounting the first two years to serve his argument. Is he saying it took Rex two years to ruin the team after taking them where they hadn't been since Parcells? And if they were ruined, again, how can that only happen on one side of the ball? How can being a "players coach" not absolutely destroy one side of the balls will to win in the face of being forced to trot back onto the field time and time again, their first sip of gatorade still on their lips after the other side of the ball (the side that was apparently ruined by the players coach) either turned it over or went three and out? I don't buy it. Not at all. Joe's condemnation of Rex coincidentally serves his support of Sanchez. Win-Win. Good point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shhwagah Posted June 3, 2013 Author Share Posted June 3, 2013 Players coaches only work on Defense. Not offense. Science. Jet science. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flgreen Posted June 3, 2013 Share Posted June 3, 2013 Namath's take on Ryan is the same as it is with everything else. Say something controversial in the blind hope he will become relevant again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KSJets Posted June 3, 2013 Share Posted June 3, 2013 Everything he said is basically being said with the benefit of hindsight. Aside from Sparano, everything else he's "predicted" are things he's talking about after the fact. I don't recall him blasting Rex and his style when the team was in the AFCCG two straight years. He also never blasted the team until he was on the outs with Woody. Now he's going back and talking about all of the negative things that have happened to the team since. Then again, Joe is like most on this board, revisionist assholes. He's just a more famous a$$hole than anyone here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Integrity28 Posted June 3, 2013 Share Posted June 3, 2013 Namath's take on Ryan is the same as it is with everything else. Say something controversial in the blind hope he will become relevant again. Joe Namath doesn't thirst for relevancy, like some of you envy-driven people seem to insist. The guy is Joe ******* Namath. I imagine the dude's got zero insecurities, something many people that share your point of view cannot relate to. He has a high profile for our fanbase, he gets asked questions and he answers them. He's been way more right than wrong. HE's not the one suggesting he has or need more relevancy than that of a guy with a point of view, it's the fans that don't like what he's got to say that typically prescribe what his agenda is, only to serve their own: sulking because he's right and they aren't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JiFtheOracle Posted June 3, 2013 Share Posted June 3, 2013 Joe Namath doesn't thirst for relevancy, like some of you envy-driven people seem to insist. The guy is Joe ******* Namath. I imagine the dude's got zero insecurities, something many people that share your point of view cannot relate to. He has a high profile for our fanbase, he gets asked questions and he answers them. He's been way more right than wrong. HE's not the one suggesting he has or need more relevancy than that of a guy with a point of view, it's the fans that don't like what he's got to say that typically prescribe what his agenda is, only to serve their own: sulking because he's right and they aren't. He is desperately trying to stay relevant. Are you kidding with this? He's mostly wrong. He's wrong about this. This is the same man that said Mark Sanchez is a good QB. Get out here with this poop. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Integrity28 Posted June 3, 2013 Share Posted June 3, 2013 He is desperately trying to stay relevant. Are you kidding with this? He's mostly wrong. He's wrong about this. This is the same man that said Mark Sanchez is a good QB. Get out here with this poop. lol, yeah Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scott Dierking Posted June 3, 2013 Share Posted June 3, 2013 Rex Ryan is 34-30 with 4 road playoff wins and has 1 losing season as HC with Mark Sanchez as his QB. Apparently his style works, Mr. Namath. Herm Edwards after 4 years 37-32 Rex Ryan after 4 years 38-32 They both are "players coaches', who tend to have a short shelf life in the NFL, unless they continually re-invent themselves. Herm controlled a locker room better than Rex. Rex has more x's and o's aptitude than Herm. They both will come into a program and infuse it with life based on energy and personality. But that is a short lived jump start, and unless it has substance (which neither of these coaches have as a full compliment), it will get diminishing returns. Bottom line, I would not either coach leading my franchise long term. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
T0mShane Posted June 3, 2013 Share Posted June 3, 2013 He is desperately trying to stay relevant. Are you kidding with this? He's mostly wrong. He's wrong about this. This is the same man that said Mark Sanchez is a good QB. Get out here with this poop. Joe Namath is the Jerry West of the NFL. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peebag Posted June 3, 2013 Share Posted June 3, 2013 Joe Namath is the Jerry West of the NFL. Except Jerry was pretty much relevent for his entire career Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
T0mShane Posted June 3, 2013 Share Posted June 3, 2013 Except Jerry was pretty much relevent for his entire career Joe Namath transcends the sport of football. He was a defining figure of the counter-culture movement of the sixties. When an athlete guarantees victory, they call it "pulling a Joe Namath." Joe Namath is relevant as a cultural icon. To say he's "trying" to stay relevant is ridiculous. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Crusher Posted June 3, 2013 Share Posted June 3, 2013 Joe Namath transcends the sport of football. He was a defining figure of the counter-culture movement of the sixties. When an athlete guarantees victory, they call it "pulling a Joe Namath." Joe Namath is relevant as a cultural icon. To say he's "trying" to stay relevant is ridiculous.Printing this out and putting it under the signed Namath picture above my desk. This transcends sexy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jacked4JetsFB Posted June 3, 2013 Share Posted June 3, 2013 How old is Namath? Like a hundred or something? Seriously, I don't listen to anything anyone born before 1970 says anyway. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SayNoToDMC Posted June 3, 2013 Share Posted June 3, 2013 Herm Edwards after 4 years 37-32 Rex Ryan after 4 years 38-32 They both are "players coaches', who tend to have a short shelf life in the NFL, unless they continually re-invent themselves. Herm controlled a locker room better than Rex. Rex has more x's and o's aptitude than Herm. They both will come into a program and infuse it with life based on energy and personality. But that is a short lived jump start, and unless it has substance (which neither of these coaches have as a full compliment), it will get diminishing returns. Bottom line, I would not either coach leading my franchise long term. Herm got a loaded roster from Parcell's which got wasted during his time here and Rex got a loaded roster from Mangini which has gone downhill during Rex's time and before somebody responds OMG YOU COMPARE MANGINI AS A COACH TO PARCELLS!?!?!?! No, I don't Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smashmouth Posted June 3, 2013 Share Posted June 3, 2013 How old is Namath? Like a hundred or something? Seriously, I don't listen to anything anyone born before 1970 says anyway. that will get you far in life Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smashmouth Posted June 3, 2013 Share Posted June 3, 2013 While I get what you're saying about Pettine wanting to make a name for himself, and agree that there's some validity to that. I also think that everything you said about credit for the D, the personnel, and Rex probably getting the axe is probably true. After that is where we deviate. I think you misunderstood my points. I wasn't saying that Pettine is a better DC or defensive mind than Rex, but rather that he will probably be a better HC because he's more disciplined, balanced, and has that background. He would probably be closer to Mangini than Rex in terms of how he handled the players and team. I also wasn't saying that there's bad blood between Rex and Pettine. I think out of their past friendship and appreciation to Rex for giving him the opportunity to be a DC, he didn't say anything bad about or probably to Rex. I think he kept his dissatisfaction and frustration to himself. I could be wrong, but everything I've ever read about Pettine and his background tells me that he wouldn't be able to stand the circus that Rex created around the Jets. I think his leaving was precipitated by his desire to separate himself from that circus and a deteriorating situation with the Jets before his image became tarnished and too closely identified with the mess. His leaving on his own volition, rather than being fired, sends the signal that he didn't agree with everything that was going on with the Jets, is his own man and leaves him with a better profile/resume. With Revis probably leaving, and every possibility that Rex and his staff would be getting fired within a year, I think that put the final nails in the coffin of his time with the Jets. pretty much my take on the Pettine situation as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
faba Posted June 3, 2013 Share Posted June 3, 2013 When Joe comments the media will pick it up- he has no need to make headlines Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
#27TheDominator Posted June 3, 2013 Share Posted June 3, 2013 The Pettine thing is not the lame part. The lame part is acting like Schottenheimer and Callahan leaving is some sort of indictment. Those guys were basically forced out. Everybody hated the offense and they were not picked by Rex. If Rex picked Sparano he should get killed for that, but Schottenheimer and Callahan leaving was certainly not an indication of guys abandoning Rex. As far as Pettine goes I'd be interested to know how much truth there was to all the Pettine as unamed source sh*t that was floating around here last season. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jetsjetsjetss Posted June 3, 2013 Share Posted June 3, 2013 Joe Namath transcends the sport of football. He was a defining figure of the counter-culture movement of the sixties. When an athlete guarantees victory, they call it "pulling a Joe Namath." Joe Namath is relevant as a cultural icon. To say he's "trying" to stay relevant is ridiculous. ehhhh not trying to say your wrong but for a 20 year old kid unless your a jets fan you have no idea who namath is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JiFtheOracle Posted June 3, 2013 Share Posted June 3, 2013 Herm Edwards after 4 years 37-32 Rex Ryan after 4 years 38-32 They both are "players coaches', who tend to have a short shelf life in the NFL, unless they continually re-invent themselves. Herm controlled a locker room better than Rex. Rex has more x's and o's aptitude than Herm. They both will come into a program and infuse it with life based on energy and personality. But that is a short lived jump start, and unless it has substance (which neither of these coaches have as a full compliment), it will get diminishing returns. Bottom line, I would not either coach leading my franchise long term. I'm going to feel bad for you when Rex gets his extension. Not really, but sorta. Joe Namath transcends the sport of football. He was a defining figure of the counter-culture movement of the sixties. When an athlete guarantees victory, they call it "pulling a Joe Namath." Joe Namath is relevant as a cultural icon. To say he's "trying" to stay relevant is ridiculous. Old dudes remember Joe Namath for guarantee, young dudes remember Joe for trying kissing Suzy on the sidelines hammered out of his mind. Nobody gives a **** about Joe Namath anymore, he's trying to stay in the fray by being a controversial analyst now and make up his time for being a drunken idiot. Herm got a loaded roster from Parcell's which got wasted during his time here and Rex got a loaded roster from Mangini which has gone downhill during Rex's time and before somebody responds OMG YOU COMPARE MANGINI AS A COACH TO PARCELLS!?!?!?! No, I don't Kellen Clemens, Thomas Jones, Chansi Stuckey = LOADED!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JoeKlecko Posted June 3, 2013 Share Posted June 3, 2013 How old is Namath? Like a hundred or something? Seriously, I don't listen to anything anyone born before 1970 says anyway. If you're serious with that, then that shows how ignorant and stupid you are. Totally pathetic. In most cultures the wisdom of older people is valued. Not in modern America. The youth think they know everything, when in reality, they don't know jack sh*t. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JoeKlecko Posted June 3, 2013 Share Posted June 3, 2013 Namath's take on Ryan is the same as it is with everything else. Say something controversial in the blind hope he will become relevant again. BS Namath doesn't have to try to become relevant again. For TRUE Jets fans, Joe Willie Namath will always be relevant. Anyone who thinks he isn't relevant isn't a real Jets fan imo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JoeKlecko Posted June 3, 2013 Share Posted June 3, 2013 Joe Namath doesn't thirst for relevancy, like some of you envy-driven people seem to insist. The guy is Joe ******* Namath. I imagine the dude's got zero insecurities, something many people that share your point of view cannot relate to. He has a high profile for our fanbase, he gets asked questions and he answers them. He's been way more right than wrong. HE's not the one suggesting he has or need more relevancy than that of a guy with a point of view, it's the fans that don't like what he's got to say that typically prescribe what his agenda is, only to serve their own: sulking because he's right and they aren't. This^^^^^^^. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JoeKlecko Posted June 3, 2013 Share Posted June 3, 2013 Joe Namath transcends the sport of football. He was a defining figure of the counter-culture movement of the sixties. When an athlete guarantees victory, they call it "pulling a Joe Namath." Joe Namath is relevant as a cultural icon. To say he's "trying" to stay relevant is ridiculous. Totally agree, but we're wasting our breath. These young "whippersnappers" who weren't born until the 90s or maybe 80s probably will never understand what Joe Namath meant to the Jets, the NFL or the culture of the day. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flgreen Posted June 3, 2013 Share Posted June 3, 2013 BS Namath doesn't have to try to become relevant again. For TRUE Jets fans, Joe Willie Namath will always be relevant. Anyone who thinks he isn't relevant isn't a real Jets fan imo. LOL You will have to come up with a Jets manifesto to more clearly define what a TRUE Jets fan is. or is it some one who only agrees with you Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shhwagah Posted June 3, 2013 Author Share Posted June 3, 2013 Joe Namath doesn't thirst for relevancy, like some of you envy-driven people seem to insist. The guy is Joe ******* Namath. I imagine the dude's got zero insecurities, something many people that share your point of view cannot relate to. He has a high profile for our fanbase, he gets asked questions and he answers them. He's been way more right than wrong. HE's not the one suggesting he has or need more relevancy than that of a guy with a point of view, it's the fans that don't like what he's got to say that typically prescribe what his agenda is, only to serve their own: sulking because he's right and they aren't. Envy-driven? Yeah he's Joe Effin Namath, the only Jets QB to ever win a Superbowl. He even guaranteed it! This is what I picture him saying in his head when people ask for his opinion and he grants it to them with the authority of someone who knows how to run the Jets team better than anyone in the organization. Joe will never not pick up the phone because he knows his comments will be on the back pages and everywhere else anyone cares to look at NFL news. How can you even say he doesn't thirst for relativity with a straight face? Seriously, this is Joe Namath and he likes attention. Have you heard of him? Hats off to the man, but don't make him out to be the humble saint you are making him out to be. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JoeKlecko Posted June 3, 2013 Share Posted June 3, 2013 LOL You will have to come up with a Jets manifesto to more clearly define what a TRUE Jets fan is. or is it some one who only agrees with you I don't use that card at all, except in this situation. In fact, I don't think I've ever used it before. I could never stand it when posters did that to other posters, but then I've never seen Jets fans attack and mock Joe Namath the way some of you have. He is the only real bright spot in this franchise's sorry ass history. He is the best player they have ever had, including Revis. You young kids need to learn about the team's history. Until or unless the Jets win another SB or get another HOF QB, Joe Namath IS the Jets. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flgreen Posted June 3, 2013 Share Posted June 3, 2013 I don't use that card at all, except in this situation. In fact, I don't think I've ever used it before. I could never stand it when posters did that to other posters, but then I've never seen Jets fans attack and mock Joe Namath the way some of you have. He is the only real bright spot in this franchise's sorry ass history. He is the best player they have ever had, including Revis. You young kids need to learn about the team's history. Until or unless the Jets win another SB or get another HOF QB, Joe Namath IS the Jets. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Integrity28 Posted June 3, 2013 Share Posted June 3, 2013 Envy-driven? Yeah he's Joe Effin Namath, the only Jets QB to ever win a Superbowl. He even guaranteed it! This is what I picture him saying in his head when people ask for his opinion and he grants it to them with the authority of someone who knows how to run the Jets team better than anyone in the organization. Joe will never not pick up the phone because he knows his comments will be on the back pages and everywhere else anyone cares to look at NFL news. How can you even say he doesn't thirst for relativity with a straight face? Seriously, this is Joe Namath and he likes attention. Have you heard of him? Hats off to the man, but don't make him out to be the humble saint you are making him out to be. Haters hatin' = envy-driven man babies. People like Joe don't thirst for relevancy, or relativity (you should look up the big words before you try to debate them), because they never lose it in the first place... from their own perspective. I know exactly the type of guy Joe is. He's good, he's not hinging on every chance he gets for attention. Joe is, always has been and always will be the guy that walks in the room and everyone looks to him... the people that try to hate on him are the ones that envy that guy. I'm not saying he's a saint. I'm saying he's the man. Big difference. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KSJets Posted June 3, 2013 Share Posted June 3, 2013 One thing is for certain, Joe will never have a shortage of people willing to give him a bj as evidenced by so many of you in this thread. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kleckineau Posted June 3, 2013 Share Posted June 3, 2013 Jealous a bit? Better to be a has been than a never was never will be hater. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.