Monday, January 24, 2011

Rex's Stalingrad

Well, I think this article perfectly encapsulates my reservations about the Rex Ryan era.

Here's Ian O'Connor's take at ESPNY NY:

"After pushing all the right human buttons in Rounds 1 and 2, inspiring his Jets to knock out Peyton Manning and Tom Brady, Ryan suddenly lost the pulse of his team. The stunning disconnect between coach and player allowed the Pittsburgh Steelers to score the first 24 points of the game, and ultimately guaranteed that a second-half rally would save face, but not the season.

"We played a good half," an emotional Ryan said. "We just never played a good game."

Rex has to take the fall for that. His chief responsibility as head coach is to have his team ready to play, and yet the Jets were a lifeless mess in the first half, finding inspiration in absolutely nothing...

The Jets' defense was playing flag football out there, lunging and grabbing for air, looking like a unit prepping itself for the Pro Bowl instead of the Super Bowl.


I've said time and again, that a players coach who spends as much time cheerleading his players as drilling them can end up with a team that lacks focus and discipline. A team that doesn't want to work for 60 minutes, but thinks it can turn its effort on and off like a switch.

This Jets team has loads of talent, but for what was seemingly the 7th or 8th time this year, played about 30 minutes of football. We still pulled out some of those games against mediocre opponents. We almost pulled out last night's game, against the AFC's best, in their own stadium.

But we're not the AFC champions. Champions bring discipline for 60 minutes. Last year's Duke NCAA championship team was probably the 6th or 7th most talented team in the country. But they brought 40 minutes of tenacious defense every night, and selfless, intelligent play on offense to most possessions. This Jet's team is probably, on paper, the best of the 4 teams that were left standing on Championship weekend, but aren't getting to the final game. To me, that's the difference between the GOAT (Coach K) and Rex. Rex is fun. Rex is a character. Rex makes the player's happy. Rex makes reporters happy. The GOAT wins championships.

This team, and this coach, will probably have one more run at the SB in them. But if they fail to advance beyond their high-water mark again, I think questions will definitely arise over whether this team, with its character and approach, is capable of getting it done against the league's best. And once those questions start to creep into the psyche of the Jets players, it's over. You turn into the Buffalo Bills of the 90's.

After failing to defeat the Red Army at Stalingrad, the Wermacht still controlled Europe from the beaches of Brittany to the suburbs of Moscow. On paper, the German army still appeared a formidable force. But their guts had been eviscerated on the banks of the Volga, and their aura of invincibility destroyed.

While I hesitate to use a military metaphor for something as trivial as a football game, the analogy captures how this game might be looked at, a few year's hence, when considering the Ryan era in retrospect.

3 comments:

SheaHeyKid said...

This Jets team, and Schott in particular, remind me of the business saying "The good is the enemy of the perfect."

It's an interesting point: the enemy of being perfect is not being bad, it's being good. The reason is straightforward. In business, or in sports, when a situation is really bad it's easy to make changes. No one can deny the problems, and everyone accepts the need for change.

But when a situation is good, people are far more resistant to make needed changes. No one wants to mess with the status quo, and it's easy to make excuses that you are "almost there" (see '06-'10 Mets).

This brings me to Schott. I think he needs to go. This team has too much offensive firepower to come out as flat as they have in the first quarter ALL SEASON.

This was not just an AFC championship problem. It is almost a running joke among CBS commentators about how poor the Jets offense is in the first quarter or first half.

And it is simply inexcusable. Not when you have Pro Bowl talent all around. Not when you have Braylon and Santonio, LT and Greene, Mangold, Woody, Moore and D'Brickashaw. Not to mention Cotchery and Keller.

Not even Sanchez only being in his second year is an excuse. He played at a high enough level most of the year that the offense should have put up way more points.

I am left pointing the finger at the schemes and play calling, especially in light of the numerous ridiculous calls I watched all season, too numerous to list here, but suffice it to say last night's end-around and play calls from first and goal illustrate the point. Too often Schott tried to get too creative and tricky, rather than simply recognizing that our talent is better than their talent - we should therefore just line up and beat them straight up.

And therefore Schott needs to go.

He shouldn't be the only shown the door though.

Fredo said...

I can't argue with any of the points you made against Schott here. However, for better or worse, I think I would've made the same decision Rex did to bring him back.

Did the offense underperform the talent? Perhaps.

Were they maddeningly inconsistent? Definitely.

DId they seem to click a heck of a lot better in the two minute offense, when they essentially "set free?" Sure. Though that's pretty typical in the NFL.

This was an offense with a good (though not great--as many announcers would have it), offensive line. Da Brick and Mangold are agile, athletic blockers--but not punishers. Moore and Woody are big, tough professionals--but not All Pros. Slauson was a clear downgrade to Faneca, though his experience this year will likely pay off down the road. The proof in the pudding was the AFC Championship game: the Steelers for the most part were able to push the Jets back at the point of attack.

The RBs were average, lets face it.

Our weapons at WR and TE were formidable, no question about it. But of course, that's only valuable if the QB can get them the ball.

And that's where the crux of the decision to keep or fire Schott has to come down to. Does it seem that Sanchez is progressing, b/c that will dictate if the offense can get to the next level.

Fredo said...

Schott's schemes, maddening as they can be at times, have effectively allowed a rookie to be a starter from day one in NY, and lead his team to an AFC Championship game his first two years in the league.

I wouldn't have thought that possible with any QB and any coaching staff.

At the same time, Sanchez progressed mightily between years one and two. If he has a similar jump in year three, the Jets may win 13 games and start playing playoff games at home.

The Sanchize is the franchise, and to start him over in year 3, when everything has been coming along nicely for him, is not a decision I think I could make. Despite the legitimate black marks against Schott that you point out.