I agree with the first paragraph and disagree with the second. It's all about the timeline. First paragraph, absolutely. Who could have known what we had in Mark Sanchez? The guy could be a complete flop. Still could be, in fact. All we really have is 16 college starts. So yeah, Ryan "wasted" all those 1st team reps to find out. Predetermined starter? No. But I disagree with the 2nd paragraph. I WILL BE surprised if Sanchez is not named the starter. And named the starter very, very soon. But again, the timeline: Sanchez wasn't the predetermined starter but he is now. Hear me out. He's the starter because he held off a guy who has been in our system for what amounts to, in NFL years, eons. Clemens should have been very familiar with Schotty's playbook. He should also have been very familiar with the players, both OFF and DEF. For him to go out and throw these numerous INTs is inexcusable. His entire TC outlook (yes... dare I say... his entire NFL career) should have been focused on NOT throwing 2008 Favre-like INTs this preseason. And he did, like doling out M&Ms at a fucking candy convention. So no, I usually agree with you WSW, but in this case you're thinking is clouded. There should be no surprise in the naming of Mark Sanchez as our starting QB. Do it now and do it often!
At this point, I wouldn't be surprised with that decision, but I would be disappointed. Because while I don't think this was ever a predetermined thing, naming Sanchez as the starter at this point would mean youre basically disregarding everything you've seen and naming a starter based on a fantasy, not based on anything we've seen on the field. Because nothing Sanchez has done on the field has given me the notion that he can do a better job than Clemens, or that he wouldn't benefit a whole lot from spending a season on the sidelines and in practice learning what the NFL is all about.
I said I wouldn't be surprised if either were named the starter. So, no I won't be surprised if Sanchez is named the starter at this point. I agree with a lot of what you are saying. Sanchez sure looked like a rookie last night though. He threw what should have been 2 pick 6's, had a couple of delay of game penalties and was obviously pretty rattled. It was the Ravens though, and they can eat up seasoned vets. He did redeem himself with Reed and Lewis out of the game with that one pass, but it was one pass. While Clemens did throw a pick as well he did seem to have more command of the offense and didn't have any of those delay of game penalties. Those actually worry me more than the pic 6 Sanchez threw. It makes me wonder how much he's still thinking rather than playing. You're absolutely right that Clemens should be way ahead right now. Sanchez is a pretty talented guy though.
What Clemens has doen on the feild has not given anyone the notion that he would do any better than Sanchez and he has had 3 years to prepare for this moment. Starting him does little more than signal that we are waiting a year to get our true starter game experience. Why Bother?
Well, I have been giving this a lot of thought lately, probably more than it deserves, and my thinking has changed quite a bit over the past few weeks and months. Let me see if I can break it down for you as I see it without spinning off on 10 different tangents... First I take into account where Ryan is coming from. He wants to build what he had - only better. I think that Rex thinks he can take a team with a rook QB and carry that rookie with a stout defense and a killer running game further than the Ravens were able to do it with Flacco. I think he wants to do what the Steelers did with Roethlisberger. Then I look at where he is. He?s taking over a team who was charging hard in 2008 until their HC changed philosophy and quite obviously lost the faith of the player leadership of the Jets. There have already been a number of articles where players have questioned Mangini?s tactics in his final season as Jets HC. They gave up on him, and it showed on the field. He doesn?t want that to happen to him, so he has some very creative tactical maneuvering to do from a leadership standpoint. Ryan came out of the gate hemming and hawing about wanting to win Super Bowls every year he coached. When you say that to a beat writer or a fan, it just sounds like bluster and posturing. But when a HC says that to his team, he wants them to believe it with every fiber of their being, to the point where they would lay down in front of a thresher for him. These are the guys he wants to buy into his entire philosophy, and he better damned well care what they think. But right there was Ryan?s first problem. Because he wants those guys to buy into the Super Bowl Every Year torch that he?s carrying, but he goes out and drafts a cocky and inexperienced QB in round 1 and he?s intent on winning with this kid right out the gate. Do you think that if he drafted Sanchez and announced this kid was starting from week 1, that his team would still be buying into this Super Bowl talk? This offense went through a tough season with a grizzled HOF veteran QB who only knew half the playbook and they crashed and burned. No way in hell they believe they?re going anywhere with a rookie who only knows half the playbook and is gift-wrapped the starting QB spot. But maybe they buy in if they believe that rookie won the starting job outright. It can't all be about tough talk and not giving a shit. Most times I think that when a HC fails, it's more about diplomacy and leadership of his own players than it is about what plays are being called on the field.
I don't have a problem thinking he wants Sanchez to win the job. I do have a problem thinking he'd stack the deck in his favor in order to sell what he wants at the cost of possibly not playing the best guy. Giving Dirty his first NFL start against the Ravens doesn't seem like a smart move if that were the case. It would also be a very risky game to play. If people saw through it you'd be creating a much worse situation than the one you were trying to avoid by just naming him the starter to being with.
It's harder to see through the bullshit when you want to believe the guy that is spewing it. Just look at the political threads. People buy the words of their elected politicians wholesale, all the while supporting inane policy. Sometimes the leadership and diplomacy means more than the decisions made to those carrying out those decisions made above them. It's different in some senses, not different at all in others.
It's more then just being about wins and losses and who is the QB. It is a business and the business is in trouble. Sanchez sells more tickets and more PSLs. Sanchez is the starter. Week 1 or week 3 or 4, he is the starter.
Rex doesn't care about PSL's and he will name the starter. I think he's got a real tough decision in front of him right now though.
I take a different view to the same scenario. When Rex took over and had his presidential meeting speech, Favre had not yet retired. I think adding on to that fact, had he stuck with KC he would have lost his cred with his guys
Sure he could. If he wants to try and over step his bounds a cut a guy that the coach is going to be relying on this season. Backup QB is an important position too if that's where he is. Al Davis probably f's with the depth chart too.
Ryan is a first year coach and I am sure he is in tune with the "plan" whatever it may be, that is why he was hired. Besides, they resigned Harvard a couple of days ago. It was not widely reported because it isn't all that important...yet.
I don't think the Jets even believed Favre was coming back to play for them by the time Ryan was hired.
IT depends on the GM and how much power he has in the organization. I know for a fact in the NHL coaches have been fire for not playing certin players enough. I pretty sure Undead Al makes up his depth chart for the team. I would think that there is pressure on a lot of coaches to play the guy thier GM inviested picks and money in.
I agree with pretty much everything you said; it's very interesting, all of the psychology and diplomacy that goes into HCing. Yer probably correct about Rex's reasons for holding off on naming a starter (regarding the passage I quoted). But if/when he names Sanchez the starter, I think the team would buy into SB aspirations despite an inexperienced rookie starting. Without drawing a direct comparison to the Ravens & Flacco, all he has to do is mention that he's been to the AFC Championship with a young, inexperienced QB.
