Articles from around the Web
PDF VERSION NOW DISCOUNTED OVER 30%
Click here to buy PDF version.
Click here to buy PDF version
Official Account: @fboutsiders
Scott Kacsmar: @FO_ScottKacsmar
Ben Muth: @FO_WordofMuth
Aaron Schatz: @FO_ASchatz
Vince Verhei: @FO_VVerhei
-- plus --
Bill Connelly: @SBN_BillC
J.J. Cooper: @jjcoop36
Cian Fahey: @Cianaf
Brian Fremeau: @bcfremeau
Tom Gower: @ThomasGower
Andrew Healy: @AndHealy
Rivers McCown: @RiversMcCown
Chad Peltier: @CGPeltier
Matt Waldman: @MattWaldman
Rob Weintraub: @robwein
29 Oct 2012
Mr. King looks at the impact of the hurricane homing in on the East Coast, praises Peyton Manning, and pontificates that Michael Vick deserves at least one more week.
Posted by: Rivers McCown on 29 Oct 2012
27 comments, Last at
30 Oct 2012, 2:02pm by
No link on title.
Link is now fixed.
Why does PK think that starting Tebow is necessary or even desirable? I'm referring to, in his list of things he didn't like:
"n. Mark Sanchez. Rex, it's time."
Look, Sanchez isn't playing well. But Ryan knows he doesn't have a better option on the bench. Change for the sake of change is the kind of thing writers love, but doesn't actually make sense for a coach.
Your argument would go over a whole lot better if it hadn't gotten the Broncos to the playoffs just last season with Tebow. (And not just to the playoffs, but actually to a playoff win.) They put Tebow in, revamped their offense to be run-first, and went on a tear. But it's not even about Tebow...it's about employing an offense that has a chance of success with your personnel. Green averaged over 5 yards a carry yesterday yet only got 15 carries, while the Jets had Sanchez throw it 54 times. Sanchez was off all day, yet they still had him throw over 50 passes? Yes, they trailed, but for much of the day they were within a couple scores; they actually could have tried to get back into it with their running game. If now isn't the time for a change, when will it be? After Ryan has lost his job will be too late for him.
I thought the whole idea was for the Jets to be a running team with Sanchez just managing the game. But they seem to be moving away from that and they get less successful the farther away they get. When they went 11-5 two years ago Sanchez averaged 31 passes per game. Last year he averaged 33. This year it's at 34 thanks largely to the 41 and 54 he threw the last two games.
Green got one fewer carry yesterday averaging 5.1 than he did against the Pats the week before when he averaged 3.4. He had an 8 carry game this year (and 2 where he had 11) but also games where he got it 27 and 32 times. They can't seem to decide what they want to do.
The Jets' O-line of 2012 is not the Broncos' O-line of 2011. You can't just say "hey, let's run the ball more!" The Jets also have basically no receivers, certainly compared to the Broncos of last year.
Sanchez isn't playing particularly well, but he has led the Jets to the AFC championship game twice. Tebow has one playoff victory, and that was only because the Steelers bizarrely dared him to throw deep when that's his only strength in the passing game.
Ryan knows how well Tebow is doing in practices. He never asked for Tebow to be brought to town. It was always a stupid idea to have him.
The Jets really need to fix their line play. If they can find a QB who is a significant improvement over Sanchez, great! But Tebow's not that guy.
And this rah-rah stuff is really overrated for its impact in the NFL. If that's what the Jets want at QB, they could start the Fireman.
If it was so obvious to Rex that Tebow stunk, why'd he trade for him? Strange move to go and get the guy then act like people are nuts when they expect him to be used.
Rex didn't trade for Tebow. By all accounts, Woody traded for Tebow and foisted him off on Rex, who dutifully said all the right things about using him and how he'd help them win and so on, perhaps creating the impression that he wanted him in the first place.
A bit more complicated than that given Sparano was the original architect of the Wildcat. And it also gets pretty funny to hear how it's Rex's team, except when it isn't Rex's team.
Perhaps Tebow could do what Rex and Sanchez have failed to do, and that's energize the rest of the offense and make them play hard. Even if it doesn't work out, it has the added benefit of requiring them to begin the search for a new QB instead of relying on someone who has proved ineffective year after year.
Unless Tebow can energize Revis and Holmes off IR, I just don't see it. This isn't a situation where Tebow can come in, squeak out a few narrow wins against a bunch of sad-sack opponents and win the division with an 8-8 record. Frankly, after looking at the remaining schedule I think the Jets will be lucky to win 4 more games.
I don't get why it has to be black and white.
Timmy comes in on some plays this season... I've seen a ball bounce off his helmet when he ran a route.
Why don't you bring him in for a series of downs.
Why don't you start the second half with him - you know after the team adjusted in half time.
Why not script some plays with him in the first or 3rd quarter.
I wouldn't make him my starter, but I'd make him a bigger part.
(to be honest, I haven't seen the Jets the last few games, so I don't know how big his part is now)
His part has been almost non-existent. They're now putting him in as an upback on punts just so he has something to do. The amount he's been used hasn't been worth the trouble they went to in drawing up plays. 2 of 3 passing on the year and 23 carries. He had one rush this past Sunday.
Exactly what has he done with the playing time he's received to actually EARN more playing time?
"4. I think Cam Newton did something at the end of the first half in Chicago that really bugged me. From the Chicago 33, the Panthers called a Hail Mary with three seconds left. Newton threw it way over the end line. Either he wanted someone in the stands to have a souvenir, or he didn't want to risk another interception on his stat sheet. I'm guessing the latter, and I don't like it."
Tony Romo did exactly the same thing in the Cowboys-Giants game. Why pick on Newton and not Romo? And really, what's with the mind-reading? Simpler explanation: bad throw, rather than intentionally bad throw.
The mind-reading is what really gets me about that comment. Basically, it's the writer deciding that because the narrative about Cam (this year) is that he's a "bad attitude" player then therefore when bad things happen it's because he's deliberately making them happen. Whereas with Romo, nobody ever seems to question his guts or his heart, just his competence or intellect. (i.e. with Romo, it's like he has that mysterious supernatural attribute "Loser" in the same way that according to the narrative Tebow has the mysterious supernatural attribute "Winner," whereas Newton and Cutler are supposedly dragging their teams down by their bad *character*)
Ah, well, anything that lets writers crank out columns without actually having to talk about the actual game of football, I suppose...
Pot meet kettle. Look at your comment earlier about Rex Ryan, Woody whatshisface and the Tebow trade. That comment is just as much mind reading as Peter King's comments. ie. speculation on what might have happened - no proven facts involved. Of course King is paid to write, you aren't. His standards should be higher.
I'd say the fact that Tebow has rarely seen the field is a pretty good indication of what Rex Ryan thinks of him -- not much mind-reading necessary.
I don't particularly care about Cam Newton one way or the other, but I'm sympathetic now that he's apparently replaced Jay Cutler as the QB who is most closely scrutinized not for the quality of his play, but his (apparent) attitude.
During the broadcast Sunday, after Newton fumbled into the end zone and another Panther fell on it for the TD, the announcers must have spent five minutes discussing how Newton should have run over to his teammate and congratulated him rather than walking off the field (a point I don't necessarily disagree with, but that I didn't think was worth harping on as much as they did). Gee, maybe in the moment Newton was frustrated with himself for fumbling the ball in a crucial situation and wasn't in the mood to celebrate what was essentially a stroke of luck in the Panthers falling on it instead of the Bears?
I hate, hate, hate when announcers start telling athletes that their reactions to situations are wrong.
"9. I think Phil Richards of the Indianapolis Star hit a home run with his piece this week about how Chuck Pagano might be away from the team while undergoing chemotherapy for leukemia, but he's making his presence emotionally felt every day. Such as the day third-string quarterback Chandler Harnish was cut -- and the one who delivered the news, by phone, was the ailing head coach, from his bed. Pagano's one heck of a man."
MMQB has written a lot of nonsensical things over the years. This paragraph is the latest one that makes you say "WTF?" An ailing Chuck Pagano makes his presence emotionally felt by cutting the third-string QB from his bed? Really? And this makes him one heck of a man? I think MMQB easily could have come up with an example that actually makes sense.
Given the situation it was the kind of thing he could have easily delegated to one of his assistants without anyone batting an eye. He didn't do that that though he made the call himself ...some people might think that gives some insight into the man.
If one were cynical enough, one could theorize that said 3rd stringer will make less a scene when a potentially dying man cuts him.
While that's obviously true, it misses my point. How does doing this "mak[e] his presence emotionally felt"? The person involved is no longer on the team because he was, you know, cut. So how does this affect the team?
I would think doing something to make your presence emotionally felt would involve something like talking to the team before a game or during the week via a phone call or a taped message, having the team visit you in the hospital, etc. I think the "Chuckstrong" signs make his presence emotionally felt. I remember seeing the reaction in the locker room after they beat Green Bay and Jim Irsay talked about going down the street to give him the game ball in the hospital, and seeing the team's reacion. That showed his presence was emotionally felt.
I don't think the team is going out there saying "Win one for coach because he cut Chandler himself without delegating it to one of his assistants! OK. Huddle up!Chuckstrong on 3!"
Agreed. If the story was him calling up a third-stringer to tell him "Your position coach told me you've really been coming on the last couple weeks" it'd fit what PK said. But cutting the guy--while certainly showing he hasn't given up even the less desirable responsibilities of his job despite being seriously ill--has little to do with the emotions of the players.
Well, unless the team thinks Pagano will treat them as men, not jut pawns in a chess game. Doing this instead of farming it out might make those on the team think (or realize, if its true), that he is a coach, but also will treat them with respect.
At least King exposed me to the Gronk TD celebration. I didn't watch the game or see many highlights -- a very funny celebration!
The Vikings need offensive line help, while the Bears, Lions, and Packers have significant defensive concerns.
See All XP | NFL XP | College XP
© Football Outsiders, Inc. // Site powered by Stein-Wein // Partner of USA TODAY Sports Digital Properties