dave mcbride Posted December 22, 2012 Posted December 22, 2012 http://fifthdown.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/12/21/nice-guy-ryan-gets-in-the-way-of-coach-ryan/
Coach Tuesday Posted December 22, 2012 Posted December 22, 2012 It's so depressing to me when an ex-NFL player is 10 times the writer that I am...
White Linen Posted December 22, 2012 Posted December 22, 2012 Pretty good read. I can see that being absolutely true. For as crazed and outrageous as Ryan seems, you can see that loyalty to a fault in him too.
dave mcbride Posted December 22, 2012 Author Posted December 22, 2012 It's so depressing to me when an ex-NFL player is 10 times the writer that I am... Ha! Right?!?
Beerball Posted December 22, 2012 Posted December 22, 2012 Pretty good read. I can see that being absolutely true. For as crazed and outrageous as Ryan seems, you can see that loyalty to a fault in him too. It was pretty good, except using today's Andy Reid as an exmple. You could also insert "Chan Gailey" in place of "Rex Ryan" and the story would have read just as well. I personally don't think Gailey is an offensive genius (if Rex is a defensive genius), but his loyalty to Fitzpatrick has brought about his departure from Buffalo (I hope). Gailey has tossed a few players under the bus, but his steadfast support for all things Fitzpatrick is his Achilles Heel.
mrags Posted December 22, 2012 Posted December 22, 2012 With the exeption of the last little but of the piece I disagree with probably all of it. Oh sure, Ryan might be loyal. But for a player to come out and back his coach is no suprise. Saying if he had better players he'd be in the Super Bowl. C'mon. That's like all of us saying if Chan had Tom Brady we'd be in the playoffs. NO F%#KING S%#T!!! Of course with a better team you would be better. Of course with a better QB you'd be better. Especially when you have one of the worst in the league in our situation. As far as Rex's situation, he started losing when he became like Chan. When he thought he could pass more with his over rated QB. When he got away from the ground and pound that got him to 2 straight AFC Championship games. There's no link or direct proof that the offense and the defense are married. I've tried to prove that point with this team for a long time. But with the Jets, you can clearly see thier offense and defense both declining over the years. The main cause IMO is the switch from the run to the pass. You limit your offense, you have more 3 and outs when passing. It puts the defense back in the field more and for longer periods of time. It is directly related. Run more and you win. Rex did that in his first few years, now he's passing more and with bad QBs and it doesn't work. Yeah, of course with a great QB you can make it work. But what happens when your 1 of the 25 teams in the league without a great QB? As far as the way it was written, it was well done. It's just the BS inside it that is comical to me. But hey, most will probably read my post and say the same thing.
Nanker Posted December 22, 2012 Posted December 22, 2012 Not so sure Ryan is viewed as a softie by all his players. That he'll look back on this year, and it'll harden his attitude toward dealing with the "him" in the "him vs. me" is dubious. It's a lot easier (managerially-wise) to soften from a hard-azz than it is for a softie to toughen up enough to get the job done. Tom Coughlin mellowed. The Bills have had a turnstile of "player's coaches" that have accomplished nothing. The one kick-azz macho mf they did have proved to be incompetent as a hc, and is currently under indefinite suspension from the league.
Miyagi-Do Karate Posted December 22, 2012 Posted December 22, 2012 Very nice article. Isn't this the dilemma for every major executive? You have to make tough decisions. "It's always lonely at the top."
BillsVet Posted December 22, 2012 Posted December 22, 2012 You could also insert "Chan Gailey" in place of "Rex Ryan" and the story would have read just as well. I personally don't think Gailey is an offensive genius (if Rex is a defensive genius), but his loyalty to Fitzpatrick has brought about his departure from Buffalo (I hope). Gailey has tossed a few players under the bus, but his steadfast support for all things Fitzpatrick is his Achilles Heel. I get the impression Gailey viewed the job in Buffalo as a him versus the league type thing. He wanted to show he could win almost regardless of the QB because his system was better and ahead of the curve. He'd run the spread and show 'em and now he was getting another chance as Buffalo HC. Then he comes here, figures he doesn't need a great QB to implement the spread, and proceeds to win some games in early 2011. That first 3 games then is probably what they refer to when saying Fitz has done it before. Well, I've maintained that Gailey cannot fool anyone anymore because the skill positions, Fitz included, aren't good enough. It started during the Week 4 game against Cincinnati and since then it's been a lot of downhill. I'm not saying Chan is arrogant (like his boss) or anything different than most HC's. But, as you point out, he's been too loyal to his system and the QB he chose.
mrags Posted December 22, 2012 Posted December 22, 2012 I get the impression Gailey viewed the job in Buffalo as a him versus the league type thing. He wanted to show he could win almost regardless of the QB because his system was better and ahead of the curve. He'd run the spread and show 'em and now he was getting another chance as Buffalo HC. Then he comes here, figures he doesn't need a great QB to implement the spread, and proceeds to win some games in early 2011. That first 3 games then is probably what they refer to when saying Fitz has done it before. Well, I've maintained that Gailey cannot fool anyone anymore because the skill positions, Fitz included, aren't good enough. It started during the Week 4 game against Cincinnati and since then it's been a lot of downhill. I'm not saying Chan is arrogant (like his boss) or anything different than most HC's. But, as you point out, he's been too loyal to his system and the QB he chose. the biggest point you made IMO is the Cincinnati game. Not so much that we Didnt have the horses for the race, but we Didnt have the trainer. Chan lost that game by being pass happy. We should have ran the ball with a late lead and killed the clock. It's the same as this year in Arizona (a win but we all know it shouldn't have been), Tennessee, Pats, Colts, and Rams. He costs is too many games with his pass first mentality. I even agree that this league is becoming more pass first. I understand it. But that doesn't nullify the facts that each game and each Sunday call for different plays, different strategies, and different game time decisions that must be changed in the fly. Chan fails at that part of the game.
Just in Atlanta Posted December 22, 2012 Posted December 22, 2012 Fabulous read. Thanks for sharing. I've always liked Rex Ryan, and don't understand why so many people don't. He's honest. And funny. Seems like he is the anti Bilichick, a guy who cut a player the day before the Superbowl last year.
T master Posted December 22, 2012 Posted December 22, 2012 http://fifthdown.blo...-of-coach-ryan/ Has any one delivered this to Chan , he could learn a thing or 2 from this article about loyalty to a fault HELLO !!! I'm just sayin !!
Bronc24 Posted December 22, 2012 Posted December 22, 2012 Fabulous read. Thanks for sharing. I've always liked Rex Ryan, and don't understand why so many people don't. He's honest. And funny. Seems like he is the anti Bilichick, a guy who cut a player the day before the Superbowl last year. I think that's the point and the reason Belicheat was coaching in the Superbowl while Ryan was lying in a bed of used socks.
Just in Atlanta Posted December 22, 2012 Posted December 22, 2012 I think that's the point and the reason Belicheat was coaching in the Superbowl while Ryan was lying in a bed of used socks. Think a half way point would be preferable. At some point, everyone--even coaches--need to be human. And let's remember Bilichick lost the last Superbowl, and Ryan made it to two AFC championships. Used socks? Do I even want to know what you're implying?
starrymessenger Posted December 22, 2012 Posted December 22, 2012 Fabulous read. Thanks for sharing. I've always liked Rex Ryan, and don't understand why so many people don't. He's honest. And funny. Seems like he is the anti Bilichick, a guy who cut a player the day before the Superbowl last year. I agree. Rex is a great guy and great DC. Unlike Belly he's a human being. Would love to see him in BLO. With respect to Gailey, I don't think he is loyal to a fault. I think his "loyalty" to Fitz has mostly to do with his having sold him to Buddy and Ralph for 60 million garbanzos. Probably has more to do with his own perception of his legacy as an OC who can turn chickenpoo into chicken salad at the QB position.
San Jose Bills Fan Posted December 22, 2012 Posted December 22, 2012 As for the writing, I guess when judged from the standpoint of a former player, it's pretty good. Certainly Price is a better writer than Matt Bowen and possibly better than Ross Tucker. As for Rex, I find him to be a very likable guy and I think he's really straight forward and not terribly complex. What you see with Rex is what you get. As for the thesis of the piece, Pryce seems optimistic that Rex will fix his fatal flaws. I wonder why he feels this way? It could just as easily be concluded that Rex will never change. Possibly Pryce takes the optimistic view because he likes Rex.
starrymessenger Posted December 22, 2012 Posted December 22, 2012 As for the writing, I guess when judged from the standpoint of a former player, it's pretty good. Certainly Price is a better writer than Matt Bowen and possibly better than Ross Tucker. As for Rex, I find him to be a very likable guy and I think he's really straight forward and not terribly complex. What you see with Rex is what you get. As for the thesis of the piece, Pryce seems optimistic that Rex will fix his fatal flaws. I wonder why he feels this way? It could just as easily be concluded that Rex will never change. Possibly Pryce takes the optimistic view because he likes Rex. Also found that to be an odd comment, especially from someone who knows him well. People who are essentially open and frank by nature simply do not morph late in life into inscrutable and Byzantine personalities. Rex won't and can't change. Same for Belly. They are opposites.
mrags Posted December 22, 2012 Posted December 22, 2012 As for the thesis of the piece, Pryce seems optimistic that Rex will fix his fatal flaws. I wonder why he feels this way? It could just as easily be concluded that Rex will never change. Possibly Pryce takes the optimistic view because he likes Rex. And this is really no different than Stevie or CJ, or KW, or Barnett coming into the media and saying Chan or Wanny aren't at fault. The players are for not executing. They all claim to LOVE thier coaches. It's really no different than anywhere else.
purple haze Posted December 22, 2012 Posted December 22, 2012 It's so depressing to me when an ex-NFL player is 10 times the writer that I am... Pryce has always been a writer though. Not something he just picked up after he played. He was writing during his career. And I believe he studied communications at Clemson.
Fan in San Diego Posted December 22, 2012 Posted December 22, 2012 It was pretty good, except using today's Andy Reid as an exmple. You could also insert "Chan Gailey" in place of "Rex Ryan" and the story would have read just as well. I personally don't think Gailey is an offensive genius (if Rex is a defensive genius), but his loyalty to Fitzpatrick has brought about his departure from Buffalo (I hope). Gailey has tossed a few players under the bus, but his steadfast support for all things Fitzpatrick is his Achilles Heel. Good point.
Recommended Posts