Santonio throws Schotty further under the bus.
graybeard
<quote>
Holmes recalled only one or two times all season when he caught a pass
off a double move, an unthinkable number for one of the league's best
playmakers. Asked whether the Jets should take a more liberal approach
with more shots downfield, Holmes tried to be as diplomatic as he could.
"If you were in my shoes, what (would) you think?" said Holmes, one of
three Jet receivers to question the offense in recent weeks, as the
Daily News reported Sunday. "It's tough. You want to answer these
questions, but you got to do what you got to do. Just show up and play.
"We have to honestly run with the plays that are being called," he
added. "There's no audibling from the receivers saying, 'Hey, I want you
to throw me the ball on this route. I don't want to run (that) one.' So
it's pretty much what we have to do from the plays that are being
called."
The Dolphins' porous pass defense, which is giving up 307 yards per
game, doesn't necessarily guarantee anything, Holmes insisted.
"Honestly, it doesn't make a difference on our team," Holmes said.
"Because New England was ranked what in pass defense? And what did we do
against those guys? So it really doesn't matter what defenses are
ranked."
</quote>
The last paragraph above is truly telling to me. It supports what many
of us have thought for a long time, that Schotty calls plays in a
vacuum. I'm pretty sure PapaCarl would agree with me that the essence of
coaching is to play to your strengths and the opponents weaknesses,
while minimizing your weaknesses and the opponents strengths. Schotty
seemingly designs plays that are based on nothing more than his own
self-perceived cleverness.
--
graybeard
Michael
Watch, out Graybeard... Mrs Schottenheimer is on the job here...
graybeard
<johnc...@gmail.com> wrote:
>Gray, I don''t think the only person operating in a vacuum is Schott's
>play calling. I think some of the criticism in here of Schott is
>comical in that ignres other issuues. hell some of teh criticism I
>really wonder of they even watched the game.
>
>He could be a problem but so are some of the players. I think that he
>is not that good for many reasons. He was thin experience when he
>showed up but I still like some of the things he does & used to do. My
>gut feeeling & unlike those who "know" what is going on in the FO I
>don't kid myself that it is anymore than a feeling, is that Rex has
>his hand in it. He has made changes and schott probably isn't being
>true to himself but as Papa pointed out for $2MM year who would.
John, I don't think that Schotty is a blithering idiot. On the contrary,
I believe him to be very intelligent. It just seems to me that he thinks
he is smarter than everyone else in designing offensive plays, and he is
convinced that they will succeed no matter the ability of his own
players to carry them out, or the opposing defense's ability to stop
them.
--
graybeard
Michael
> X-No-Archive: Yes
>
> > Watch, out Graybeard... Mrs Schottenheimer is on the job here...
>
> acting like a bitch, so knock it off.
try a laxative...
Michael
> On Fri, 14 Oct 2011 10:26:48 -0700 (PDT), John C TX
>
trying to reason with him over schotty is a waste of band width at
this point. he is simply not logical just as sure as schotty is
incompetent by force of his history. now he finds it to be
"worrisome" when the obvious is stated on the matter.
graybeard
<johnc...@gmail.com> wrote:
>X-No-Archive: Yes
>gray, there is never a game where I am not scratching my noggin at
>times. Johnny is busy scratching something else but that is another
>story.
>
>Some of the plays have me wondering as well but I am talking about
>when we lose & you hear complaints about Schott, or any coach for that
>matter, & ignores what happened on the field. Sanchez throwing a
>stupid ball, dropped passes, staring off 1st & 25, etc. Look around
>the league tell me the OC's you want & I bet he has a good QB in front
>of him. I think Sanchez will get there it is just painful to watch.
>
>There is a possibility that Schott is bad but ignoring other
>variables or possibilities is to me, well, I guess what fan does.
>
>:)
John, I once read that around the league the OC is usually the most
hated coach on the staff by fans of the team. I don't know how much NY
sports you keep up with other than the Jets, but Giants OC Kevin
Gilbride is fondly referred to by Giants fans as Kevin Killdrive. The
grass is always greener I suppose.
--
graybeard
Ritchie
>
> Watch, out Graybeard... Mrs Schottenheimer is on the job here...
Michael
>
> - Show quoted text -
like henning was hated, like walsh was hated, like coryell was hated,
like kubiak is hated, like martz was hated, like cam cameron is
hated, like scott linehan is hated, like mularkey is hated, like ed
hughes was hated, like paul brown was hated, like lombardi was hated,
like tom moore was hated, like shula was hated, like madden was hated,
like gibbs was hated...
see the list above ??? baby schotty is not good enough to pick up
their dry cleaning.
shotty is hated professionally speaking because he sucks.
oldn...@mindspring.com
Here's Santonio on the Jets O and play calling as quoted in the Post.
For some reason, some of these words haven't been reported in this group yet!
~~~~~
Holmes Says Line Grounding Jets Passing Game
"I may be criticized again for saying it, but I think it starts up front,” Holmes said. “The big guys know it. [If] they give Mark [Sanchez] enough time to sit in the pocket and complete passes, I think everything changes. The routes that are being run are short routes, ‘Hey, let’s get the ball out of Mark’s hands quick. Let’s move the ball down the field and let’s go from there.'
"But if you can’t protect the quarterback for four or five seconds, then there’s no point in dropping back 7 yards to throw a football when he doesn’t have enough time. So, we pretty much have to roll with the way our offense is rolling right now."
"This is the second straight week Holmes has criticized the offensive line..."
“We’ve done a lot of talking in our meeting rooms about how well things can change if we were to stretch the ball a little bit more down the field,” Holmes said.
When asked if he personally wants to see more long passes, Holmes said, “If you were in my shoes, what would you think?”
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Dudes, we don't have to *infer* anything, or read any tea leaves here.
Santonio has said it right out loud -- "The O Line Is Grounding the Jets Passing Game" by keeping it from calling the plays the receivers want.
Because the O line sucks the O **can't** call the plays they all want -- that's the complaint the receivers have.
He Callahan, how do those tread-marks feel?
And somehow ... SOMEHOW ... in all this brave finger-pointing Holmes doesn't say a critical word about, well, you'all know who.
Yet more proof of the amazing hypnotic power of Schott and the great fear of his wrath in which the meek like Santonio live. :-)
oldn...@mindspring.com
And look at all the stupid picks that get thrown, drives that go nowhere, it's damned infuriating.
> I don't know how much NY
> sports you keep up with other than the Jets, but Giants OC Kevin
> Gilbride is fondly referred to by Giants fans as Kevin Killdrive.
Buddy was no fan of the run and shoot.
> The grass is always greener I suppose.
> --
> graybeard
Señor Patriots
>
>
> Because the O line sucks the O **can't** call the plays they all want -- that's the complaint the receivers have.
>
past the deficiencies of your QB were compensated by a strong OL and
running game, and now both have evaporated. So what's the OC going to
do? He seems to be pissing into a strong east wind.
I did think the (Carl?) one description of the five wides and empty
backfield showed a deficient play call when all five receivers went
short. To me that makes no sense even if there isn't time. You have
to at least send somebody on that deep route to help create some space
underneath. So to me that's perhaps a legitimate blown call, but so
far there is no consensus that this is happening frequently or is the
core problem.
In a case like yours I'd say a deep threat isn't nearly as valuable as
an underneath threat like Welker or a good TE or two. You could
establish a little rhythm and start moving the chains. I don't think
your offense is built that way though. Your team really has to run
the tits off the ball to be who they can be. But right there you see
a major issue if a couple of the OL can't run block that well.
Losing Woody really hurt your OL. I think perhaps the real core
problem here is on the personnel people?
Maybe Holmes should be pitching in a little with some underneath
routes. We saw Moss do it in NE when they were dropped way off the
ball at the snap. And a guy like Holmes is dangerous after the
catch. Maybe he should quit bitching and start offering to help in
different ways. If they fail to find ways to get him the ball then
your offense cannot possibly be successful, so why not look at
different ways? I'm not saying run him underneath all day, but shit,
once in a while to keep everybody guessing and to move the chains
can't be so bad.
Johnny Morongo
> X-No-Archive: Yes
>>> Gray, I don''t think the only person operating in a vacuum is Schott's
>>> play calling. I think some of the criticism in here of Schott is
>>> comical in that ignres other issuues. hell some of teh criticism I
>>> really wonder of they even watched the game.
>>
>>> He could be a problem but so are some of the players. I think that he
>>> is not that good for many reasons. He was thin experience when he
>>> gut feeeling& unlike those who "know" what is going on in the FO I
>>> his hand in it. He has made changes and schott probably isn't being
>>> true to himself but as Papa pointed out for $2MM year who would.
>>
>> John, I don't think that Schotty is a blithering idiot. On the contrary,
>> I believe him to be very intelligent. It just seems to me that he thinks
>> he is smarter than everyone else in designing offensive plays, and he is
>> convinced that they will succeed no matter the ability of his own
>> players to carry them out, or the opposing defense's ability to stop
>> them.
>> --
>> graybeard
>
> times. Johnny is busy scratching something else but that is another
> story.
> Some of the plays have me wondering as well but I am talking about
> matter,& ignores what happened on the field. Sanchez throwing a
> stupid ball, dropped passes, staring off 1st& 25, etc. Look around
> the league tell me the OC's you want& I bet he has a good QB in front
step and a half behind receivers (a poor sense of timing? impaired field
of vision? too much pressure in his face? pick a flaw, or two). but
it's cost the team good field position and 1st downs on more than one
occasion. But Sanchez is not the only, or the major reason that the
team has entered what will be an unexpectedly steep and rather prolonged
fall from 'elitedom' (a claim they never really could stake anyway -
they were never the Pats South or Pitt East).
graybeard
>I did think the (Carl?) one description of the five wides and empty
>backfield showed a deficient play call when all five receivers went
>short. To me that makes no sense even if there isn't time. You have
>to at least send somebody on that deep route to help create some space
>underneath. So to me that's perhaps a legitimate blown call, but so
>far there is no consensus that this is happening frequently or is the
>core problem.
ran routes of 5 yards or less, which only created a traffic jam of
offensive and defensive players in that whole area. Sanchez is lucky the
ball wasn't picked off.
>...
>routes. We saw Moss do it in NE when they were dropped way off the
>ball at the snap. And a guy like Holmes is dangerous after the
>catch. Maybe he should quit bitching and start offering to help in
>different ways. If they fail to find ways to get him the ball then
>your offense cannot possibly be successful, so why not look at
>different ways? I'm not saying run him underneath all day, but shit,
>once in a while to keep everybody guessing and to move the chains
>can't be so bad.
year were slants to Holmes running across the middle about 7 or 8 yards
downfield. Sanchez was hitting Santonio perfectly in stride then. I
don't know what has happened to those plays. Maybe those were some of
the routes Holmes was complaining about not being called anymore.
--
graybeard
graybeard
wrote:
>I don't know if Sanchez can ever overcome the basic tendency to throw a
>step and a half behind receivers (a poor sense of timing? impaired field
>of vision? too much pressure in his face? pick a flaw, or two). but
>it's cost the team good field position and 1st downs on more than one
>occasion.
in the Pats game, that I think the behind the receiver passes may be
caused by poor pass protection forcing Mark to throw before he can set
his feet and follow through. Either that or he is just naturally
inconsistent in his accuracy. I'm hoping for the former.
>But Sanchez is not the only, or the major reason that the
>team has entered what will be an unexpectedly steep and rather prolonged
>fall from 'elitedom' (a claim they never really could stake anyway -
>they were never the Pats South or Pitt East).
--
graybeard
John C TX
who goes prevent, or doesn't go prevent, his defensive schemes, etc.
but it just isn't as big a target as an OC who makes a decision on
every offensive play.
Down here there are a ton of LSU fans from the oil patch & the LA
diaspora & so many complain about Les Miles. Can you think of a
tougher job following Saban's success? All he has done is win a Natl
Championship and restocked the cupboard every year but he makes one
decision that goes awry (he takes more chances than any coach at that
high a level) and he gets labeled an idiot.
BTW I was & still am a big Gilbride hater. That he & Chris Palmer won
a Super Bowl probably silenced Giant fans for 20 minutes.