adeltaY
New member
So, with these hires, I'm seeing this opinion a lot around twitter and reddit and am curious as to what y'all think.
The idea is that Pete hired people who won't question his decisions about philosophy/scheme and maybe personnel. Rex Ryan gave a great interview on Brock and Salk today and the story he used to describe Schotty highlighted his loyalty to the HC. To summarize, the Jets were playing Detroit and Rex said they should run the ball at least 40 times. Turns out, the Lions stacked the box and the Jets couldn't do it and ended up down 21-0. Rex asked Schotty what they were doing and he said he was committed to running 40 times like Rex said but that he also believed the Jets O could throw on the Lions. Rex got the offense together and asked them if they wanted to follow the original plan or win and they players naturally said win, so he told Schotty to change to the hurry-up and throw it and the jets forced OT and won.
This story shows how loyal Schotty is to the HC's plan. One huge plus was that Austin Davis said Schotty will bring us a consistent screen game, which we desperately need. With Ken Norton, the argument is similar. Pete has Ken in to motivate/inspire, but the defense truly belongs to Pete. Basically, Pete is going down doing it his way.
The question is, is this what's happening and if so, will it work? If they can fix the OL and get younger/healthier on defense, I don't see why not, BUT this is the opposite of the evolution many of us were calling for, myself included. Curiously, of the teams remaining in the playoffs, three run creative offenses. The Pats are obviously the Pats and they're always on the cutting edge, the Vikings under Shurmur do an excellent job of mixing things up, and the Eagles use motions, RPOs, cool WR sweeps, among many other creative concepts. The Jags are probably what Pete wants us to be. Not sure they're very creative, but they outmuscle the opposing defense with their RB and OL and smother opposing offenses with an incredible defense.
The idea is that Pete hired people who won't question his decisions about philosophy/scheme and maybe personnel. Rex Ryan gave a great interview on Brock and Salk today and the story he used to describe Schotty highlighted his loyalty to the HC. To summarize, the Jets were playing Detroit and Rex said they should run the ball at least 40 times. Turns out, the Lions stacked the box and the Jets couldn't do it and ended up down 21-0. Rex asked Schotty what they were doing and he said he was committed to running 40 times like Rex said but that he also believed the Jets O could throw on the Lions. Rex got the offense together and asked them if they wanted to follow the original plan or win and they players naturally said win, so he told Schotty to change to the hurry-up and throw it and the jets forced OT and won.
This story shows how loyal Schotty is to the HC's plan. One huge plus was that Austin Davis said Schotty will bring us a consistent screen game, which we desperately need. With Ken Norton, the argument is similar. Pete has Ken in to motivate/inspire, but the defense truly belongs to Pete. Basically, Pete is going down doing it his way.
The question is, is this what's happening and if so, will it work? If they can fix the OL and get younger/healthier on defense, I don't see why not, BUT this is the opposite of the evolution many of us were calling for, myself included. Curiously, of the teams remaining in the playoffs, three run creative offenses. The Pats are obviously the Pats and they're always on the cutting edge, the Vikings under Shurmur do an excellent job of mixing things up, and the Eagles use motions, RPOs, cool WR sweeps, among many other creative concepts. The Jags are probably what Pete wants us to be. Not sure they're very creative, but they outmuscle the opposing defense with their RB and OL and smother opposing offenses with an incredible defense.
