It's as Much - If Not More - Rex as Schott
JetsLife
If folks are going to beat up Schott - I'm one of then - we should
start with Rex. He's the boss. I said several weeks ago: Rex's
potential fatal flaw is he permits his offense to malinger. That
doesn't cut it in today's game.
MZ
Does Rex have the ability to hire and fire? I think it's Tannenbaum's
call. And obviously Woody's. We don't know whose choice it is to keep
Schott around.
Michael
one thing i found odd... rex gave schotty a gleaming endorsement...
loves him... was floored when schotty wanted to stay... wanna know
what ??? i don't believe him. it is the way he talks when referring
to schotty. rex is crawling with clues. you can tell he's sugar
coating it. now... where would that motive come from ??? to get a
brash blustery up front guy like rex to puke out sweet cream ??? only
one guy in the entire jets organization could motivate rex to lick ass
in that manner. not tanny either... in my opinion, woody is enamored
with schotty... rex knows it and wont rock the boat. the best he can
do is like he did last year. he raided schotty's party. we saw
immediate results. may be we should all stop blaming schotty and
start blaming woody. woody did good in getting us rex, but woody is
only half savvy when it comes to ball. we need woody to wake up, i
think.
papa.carl44
"MZ" <ma...@nospam.void> wrote in message
news:G9GdnYnwpaQ6SRLR...@giganews.com...
Absolutely right. And just the fact that Schott stayed when Rex came in
tells me a lot....like he was the best available out there for Rex????
Schott's play scared and safe offense does NOT fit Rex's personality and
coaching style at all. I'd bet the house that Woody pulls these strings.
Harlan Lachman
"papa.carl44" <papad...@nospamverizon.net> wrote:
Papa, this is bogus. All Rex has to do is throw lil Shott under the bus
and blame him for the inept game plan and play calls we see. No way
Tanny or Woody would get in the way then with the mediaots calling for
Shott's head.
If he doesn't want to leave it up to mediaots, he can take play calling
or even game planning responsibilities away from him.
Rex is the HC. He is responsible for everything that happens regarding
his team. From personnel, to playing time, to training players how to
behave and perform, and for the game plans in all three phases of the
game.
Rex is responsible because if he doesn't like what lil Shott is doing,
and if anyone is satisfied they are incompetent or a fan of another
team, he is the one person who can single handedly do something about it.
Harlan
papa.carl44
"Harlan Lachman" <har...@eeivt.com> wrote in message
news:harlan-C0CC58....@news60.forteinc.com...
Harlan...who are the "mediots" calling for Schott's head? Maybe Rex doesn't
feel secure himself in offensive game planning. He could give it to
Callahan but if Schott is entrenched that would also be a problem. IF Rex
does something I'm wrong. If he doesn't and the play calling and poor
offensive performance continues, then you explain it to me. To be honest, I
can't follow your last paragraph. Who is satisfied with Schott? Who is a
fan of another team? You like this word bogus don't you? How do you know
it's bogus? It's a theory, a possibility and I want to hear yours when
Schott hangs around and nothing changes. I really hope I'm wrong...I hope
we hear soon that Rex has taken charge.
MZ
When has Rex ever thrown a player or a coach or anyone else he's worked
with under the bus??
Harlan Lachman
"papa.carl44" <papad...@nospamverizon.net> wrote:
So would I. I am doubtful.
I think we are making different points. You think someone has Shott's
back. I think even if someone does, if Rex took responsibility for this
team's offense it would not matter. Regardless of whether someone has
Shott's back, if Rex does not abrogate his responsibility (l like
"abrogate" too), it makes no odds.
If he continues to abrogate his responsibilities, nothing will change.
SOJ
harlan
papa.carl44
LOL...you went to an Ivy League school, you damn well better like "abrogate"
! I always felt my an education was a detriment as a coach, it wasn't cool
to be able to read and coach defense.:-) I guess what I'm
feeling, as I look back over Rex's career, is that he may not have the
ability to take over the offense right now. I hope I'm wrong. On the other
point, I think the issue may be more than someone having Schott's back, they
may want him to be more than the OC, or maybe they just created a situation
that makes it very difficult to not have him around. I'd love to see Rex
tell Mr. Johnson that they need to go a different direction and get the O
going like the D. But, I don't really see anything that portends that
possibility. One of the things that bothered me while watching Hard Knocks
was Mr. Johson's interaction with Westhoff over Clowney. I thought the
coach was very clear about what he felt, yet RWJ persisted. To me, that is
flat out improper. Then again, it's his team and he can do what he wants
with it. We definitely agree on one thing, if a major change is not made,
the fortunes of this team do not look very bright. What separates us from
some of the others is we don't think just bringing in some more "pieces"
would make a difference. I think BS would screw up a young Peyton Manning's
development. I can't see how a young QB gets any better with this system,
and quite honestly, it doesn't really look like a system as much as it is a
collection of plays.
Harlan Lachman
"papa.carl44" <papad...@nospamverizon.net> wrote:
> thought the
> coach was very clear about what he felt, yet RWJ persisted. To me, that is
> flat out improper. Then again, it's his team and he can do what he wants
> with it.
No. It is improper. And, Woody knows better, serving on Boards of
Directors. If a Board bypasses a Director and talks to a manager, the
Director is undercut, the manager is confused as to what to do, and the
Board is abusing its power.
RWJ was inappropriate. If he has input, he goes to Tanny. Even going
directly to Rex with other than a question could be construed as
inappropriate although the lines of responsibility between Tanny and Rex
are probably clear enough.
Also, I really like your image about a collection of plays. It does seem
purposeless by design.
Rex D is predicated on attacking from multiple points and getting
sufficient down field coverage to warrant the risks.
But what is Shotts' offense purpose? He runs on first and second down
against 8 in the box and throws on 3rd down against 8 Dbs. Plus, most of
the throws on the early downs are short where the 8 in the box already
are and the Dbs are in position to move in and make it 9 or 10. Is the
purpose to attack the other teams strength with a hollow plastic toy
ball peen hammer?
Martz' offense is throwing the ball based on where the Dbs are in (to
where they are not) with precision routes. If the throws get there, it
is unstoppable. Brady seems to throw whenever the team plays the run
straight up. With Moss and Welker and now TE, he has someone open.
Shott has collection of plays. And even then, he seems to call them at
the wrong times.
h
MZ
> But what is Shotts' offense purpose? He runs on first and second down
> against 8 in the box and throws on 3rd down against 8 Dbs.
If he passed on 3rd down I'd have a lot more respect for him.
It's more like: 1) he chooses a random play on 1st down, not taking
into account field position; 2) he chooses a random play on 2nd down,
not trying to take advantage of matchups; 3) he chooses a random play on
3rd down, not taking into account down and distance.
Everything else we say about him is speculative. Maybe John's right
that Rex has a hand in the gameplan. Maybe some people are right that
Sanchez is just bad. But the one thing that's *indisputable* is that
the playcalling is terrible, and that is without a doubt all on Schott.
Johnny Morongo
> In article <JOidnTQuKKyF2wzRnZ2dnUVZ_uadn...@giganews.com>,
Pretty much nailed it here, H. But then a few of us here have been
saying essentially the same thing for at least four years, and some of
us for five. Doesn't seem like our squawking matters a hill of beans.
papa.carl44
It's a "shoe box" offense. I've seen bad high school coaches with this
idea. It's like keeping a bunch of plays on cards in a box file, and
pulling them out randomly.
papa.carl44
"MZ" <ma...@nospam.void> wrote in message
Amen.
papa.carl44
"buRford" <buR...@buR.ford.com> wrote in message
news:fq7396lhjo0sua9vv...@4ax.com...
> On Wed, 15 Sep 2010 20:33:53 -0500, MZ <ma...@nospam.void> wrote:
>
>>Harlan Lachman wrote:
>>> But what is Shotts' offense purpose? He runs on first and second down
>>> against 8 in the box and throws on 3rd down against 8 Dbs.
>>
>>If he passed on 3rd down I'd have a lot more respect for him.
>>
>>It's more like: 1) he chooses a random play on 1st down, not taking
>>into account field position; 2) he chooses a random play on 2nd down,
>>not trying to take advantage of matchups; 3) he chooses a random play on
>>3rd down, not taking into account down and distance.
>
> whining about this
> for 4+ years... he hasn't learned anything. Aside from not exploiting
> opponents'
> weaknesses, have you ever seen him set up a play? Or go for the Jugular?
> And then, of course, there's how he complicates everything before the
> snap. By the time
> the ball is snapped, the OL is confused, players are out of position, and
> everything is
> rushed. All the while the D just waits for the charade to stop, then goes
> about its
> business.
And all that crap so he can check down.