I just think you're staking your flag on the comfortable side of the planet, and you've set it in your head that there's no point in considering the alternative. The answer to your question shouldn't come from me. Sports writing is a competitive business like any other, and I trust that if Manish Mehta was reckless and wrong, or worse - lying - then the free press that is allowed daily access to the Jets locker room would investigate and report. Otherwise, they'd just be reporting only what the team offers them. And what fucking good is that?! But that seems to be what you're looking for. Let me now ask YOU a question. And you don't need to answer. Just consider the following: Note the common element in the statements of the three players who came out and defended Sanchez first: they all assume that someone DID say them. Not one of them begins with the assumption that the quotes were fabricated. That's very telling. If these were the statements of just a few malcontents, then I expect that a guy like Mangold would want to know who it is and would want to weed him out of the locker room. There's nothing bad in that. And yet, you'll question and indict the source. Nick Mangold won't.
http://www.nydailynews.com/sports/f...hez-article-1.1006020?localLinksEnabled=false I'm not reading back too many pages. Too lazy. If it's been brought up, I apologize. Just thought this was an interesting point of view. "When The News reported earlier in the season that Santonio Holmes and Derrick Mason had gone to Ryan to complain about the offense, the team denied it had happened and unceremoniously traded Mason. Perhaps that had something to do with players going all anonymous to Mehta with their less than flattering comments about Sanchez." I get that the Sanchez supporters will cry foul and the Sanchez haters will say, "See, I told you so". It makes sense on both sides. While remaining "anonymous" may be gutless, it gets your voice out there and may keep your job at the same time. Another point of view a buddy of mine mentioned was this: "Maybe the first people who supported Sanchez after the story came out were the ones who sold him out. What better way to keep your name clean than to act like you are the farthest removed from the offense." Food for thought.
This seems real tin foil hat territory. I absolutely believe that people said the things that were said but as I posted earlier, unless you see the transcripts and the actual questions that were asked (including all the follow up questions) then it means nothing. It is so easy for reporters to get the response they want by using the right questions. I know he said he started with an open question but its 100% clear it was not the only question asked. I always think of the brilliant 80's TV series Yes Prime Minister when thinking about how easy people are to be manipulated by surveys etc. In this example they are looking at the question of whether the UK should bring back National Service:
What's this? A reporter stating that a number of Jets do not have confidence in Sanchez? Stop the presses! And I thought the Jets were one big happy family who hung together through thick and thin. Unfortunately, Sanchez will spend two more seasons in a Jet uniform being confused by mediocre defenses until the non-proactive time delay Jet management team makes a move. Jets still need to squeeze what little marketing value is left from Sanchez before they quietly admit he's just another First Round bust - something the Jets have specialized in through the years.
This is an inaccurate characterization of the Jets vis-a-vis their QB situation since Woody took over. 2002 - Vinny OUT! Despite being the unquestioned leader of the offense at the time. It took 5 games of sucking in which he didn't even really play all that bad to force him out. 2007 - Chad OUT! Depsite being the unquestioned leader of the offense at the time. It took 8 games to drive the franchise's 6 year QB out the door. At the time he was performing well statistically but the offense was in a major rut due to somebody sucking badly on the line. What they're trying with Sanchez is something new: not cutting and running off of a season in which it's clear he was not well supported.
Did you miss the part where Mangold said that whoever made the comments should man up and come out with them openly? Mangold does want to start the process of fixing the divisions. Due to Mehta's angle of attack he, and nobody else on the Jets BTW, can do that.
"Angle of attack"????? Exactly what was Mehta suppose to do after several players told him Sanchez is lazy and not a great leader? His job is to report the news, good or bad, and that is what he did.
nobody told him a thing. He pulled a Cimini and made up faked "sources" and now he's twisting in the wind with them
I don't think Mehta made up sources. I think he took a few malcontents, added in a slice of people on the way out the door, muddled it all with reporting from a month and a half ago on the the Sanchez lazy mis-report and then poked like one or two guys known for having a loud mouth and not enough discipline in what they say and packaged the whole thing in a way that smeared Sanchez and Rex and the Jets in general. I think he did this knowing he could get away with it because the Jets were in such a state of disarray after the collapse and Rex's unfortunate choice of words on more than one occasion in trying to deal with it.
I think it's a bit of this and a bit of the contrary argument. The NY Daily News, going back to Cimini's beat, built itself a bit of reputation for reporting anonymous sources with regularity. Maybe Mehta didn't have a rep for manipulative journalism in the past, but you can bet his EIC applied a fair amount of pressure to rush this one into print. But I don't think out was only the loudmouths that made inflammatory comments like some people do, Mehta just learned the benefits of saving a recorder full of emotional postgame comments over the duration of a season.
There seems to be an awful lot of crickets inside the Jets lockerroom reluctant to back you up on this theory you're pushing. When one of the dozens of Jets beat writers finds that story, you'll get your props for calling it first. But then, the Jets front office had the opportunity to provide your side of the story before it ever hit print. They took a pass. Tucked somewhere inside the Mehta piece was mention of how Manish requested the opportunity to speak with Sanchez for his side of the story. The Jets front office denied him access. More that that, though - the Jets didn't provide ANYONE to dispute the claim. So, they knew the story that was coming, and yet they still let him flap in the breeze. Hell, it took Rex three days to come out with a comment. Look, I don't relish picking at Sanchez's open wounds. But if there is a problem, I want to know it. And even if you're correct that this is just a few malcontents - it doesn't matter. If Mark Sanchez comes back and doesn't disprove the premise of the story, if it wasn't true before, it will be then.
My issue with everything that was said is this: only Revis and Mangold had a good enough year to say anything about anyone. Everyone else needs to look in the mirror before criticizing anyone. IMO.
