Interesting reporting. I read a story of the same interview earlier: http://www.northjersey.com/sports/p..._biggest_game_in_the_history_of_the_Jets.html Note the additional word that significantly changes the sense of the statement; I'm surprised that a Jets blog would fall into the same trap as some of the more sensationalist media outlets who want to report Rex's lunch order as some kind of massive slight on anyone and everyone who ever played professional football.
that's what I'm talking about Rex. clap clap lol waits for the butthurt Pats fans to come here talk about "he so mean" grab some kleenex and leave the football talk to real man.
Remarkable how leaving that one word "there" out of the sentence changes everything, doesn't it? ("We're going there to win the game" versus "We're going to win the game.") By the way, in terms of what he was quoted as saying in that article, I can't agree that this is the second-most important game in the franchise's history. The AFL chapionship game in 1968 against Oakland was definitely more important than this, for some of the same reasons he says here: it was against an arch-rival and the last game had been a crushing loss (the Heidi game). It also was a time when the overwhelming majority of the "experts" looked down on the team and their league, and it was for the chance to get to the championship game.
That's a more difficult question. It's only all of the garbage that has gone on around the team that has made this game seem more important - from a practical point of view, how is this so different from the 2006 Wild Card game against New England, especially given how much BB hated Mangini? The 1982 AFC conference championship game against Miami was against a hated division rival, and was for the chance to go to the Super Bowl, so I would rank it higher than this one. In fact, I disagree with Rex in general - I would rank any conference championship game (including last year) above this one in terms of importance for the franchise. The fact is that if the Jets lose on Sunday it is only exactly what would have been expected when a 14-2 team coming off a bye plays an 11-5 team at home. There are games like that in the playoffs all the time - what makes this one special? Only the media hysteria, that's what.
Damn you statjeff for being so goddamn level-headed and intelligent. I can't be as hyped up as I was thinking it's the second most important game now! :smile:
The smallest word left out of a sentence that totally baffled everyone at the time was when we landed on the moon and Neil Armstrong proclaimed, "One small step for man; one giant step for mankind." The statement basically makes no sense because he is saying the same thing... "man" is usually substituted for "mankind." What he meant to say, and what he had written on a piece of paper to say, was, " One small step for a man; one giant step for mankind." He left out the word "a," which then would have made the entire sentence make sense.
I actually think the first article got the words right but the second got the sentiment right. Watching the press conference I noticed when Rex, said "we're going to win the game" but in the context, i took it as they aren't afraid of going to NE and are going there with the intention of winning the game. Still, when he said it I immediately began seeing the headlines proclaiming that Rex guaranteed victory.
Now I will say I do wonder if Ryan is really being forthcoming by suggesting the Jets will not try any trickery. But having said that, there is one way the Jets could win this game that would be more satisfying than others. And that would be to outright beat the crap out of them in a physical manhandling, straight at them.
New England.... F**k Them. This was interesting 5 Westbrook type plays for JmcK...would put NE off balance.
"That's one small step for [a] man, one giant leap for mankind" 1969 was an amazing year. Man first steps on the moon. The Jets win the Super Bowl. First meeting of the Jets and Giants. Jets won 37-14. Mets won the World Series. Woodstock And a lot of crappy political stuff.
Well, it's even more than that, because I heard it live and I don't recall him using the word "there" at all. BUT, his intonation was clear enough. I recall him saying it as "We're GO-ing to win," as opposed to saying, "We're gonna win." Unless I'm remembering it incorrectly, I think the beat writers are adding the "there" to make his meaning clear.
He's so mean.... I actually like what he's said this week, he just said that we're a good team but he thinks his team will win. Nothing wrong with that.
I didn't hear it, but it seems that that was the way it was put. I haven't noticed anyone making a big deal out of it, so I guess it was too obvious a sound bite to use against him.
no reasonable person has ever felt he has said anything out of line ever. the only asinine thing he has ever said as head coach of the NYJ is that we were eliminated from the playoffs after the Atlanta game last year.
