Perhaps this subject has already been brought up if so, I am sorry for being repetitive. Joe Namath has probably the best footwork of any QB in history in the pocket when his knees were not an issue. Bill Walsh would spend hours studying his mechanics to teach Montanna. So why would the Jet's organization not be interested in hiring him to mentor or coach QBs? Maybe I am missing something here? It seems like an obvious thing to do.
This idea that great players will automatically be good coaches and that they should want to coach is baffling to me. where does it come from?
While you're at it why don't the Patriots bring back John Hannah to coach their offensive line? Greatest O lineman in their history by far. Also learn how to write Jets. Lose the apostrophe as it makes you look like a 5 year old wrote it, Shakespeare.
No, I think it has to be a former jet so al toon, Wayne Cherbet, Wesley Walker would all be acceptable. Curtis martin- running backs coach Mickey Schuler tight ends Nick Mangold o line Joe Klecko d line Marvin Jones lbers Darrell Revis DBs Did I get this right?
In all honesty though, some of the best coaches in all sports were awful players. The best baseball managers are usually former backup catchers (Girardi, Hinch, Matheny, etc.). It takes a special person to be able to teach the game to players. Joe Namath never struck me as someone who could coach. Out of all former Jets players, I always thought Bart Scott and Brandon Marshall could do a good job. A lot of coaching is finding a way to relate to a player while maintaining respect.
I don't see it in Marshall. But Josh McCown I can see becoming a coach. Like you said its usually the ones that help the clipboard for a while or road the bench and observed the game most their career. Granted McCown started some but he has a lot of knowledge and knows multiple offenses. I could see him translating well.
Yep, rarely is this true. Look at Ted Williams for a prime example. "Them that can do. Then that can't , teach". There's a lot of truth in that saying. Great athletes are gifted with natural ability. Sure, they may work hard to improve upon it, but they start from a place far ahead of "normal" people. Even if they could describe how they do what they do, trying to teach someone with lesser ability becomes too frustrating. Whereas those who aren't born with these natural gifts have to study and think about and watch others in detail to try and achieve some level of competence, and along the way learn how to convey this knowledge to others. As to the specific topic, if Namath thought he could be a coach he would've become one.
I agree. I think it's the same in any sport, in the music world, and probably with writers and painters as well. Most of the greatest opera singers were natural singers. They never had to study to develop their vocal range, the quality of tone, the power, etc. They just had the natural coordination and talent. Those singers don't know how they do what they do, they just open their mouths and the glorious sound comes out. They have no clue how to teach someone else to do what they do. Back in '87 I studied for a short time with world-renowned tenor Franco Corelli who was one of the greatest operatic tenors ever. He had no clue how to teach another singer how to sing like he did, and in fact his own career ended early because he started tinkering with his technique because he thought he was working too hard, over-supporting. As a result, he lost that natural coordination, and the confidence in how he sang. The best teachers/coaches are usually those who themselves had to work hard to learn to do their craft. They had to learn the muscle groups involved with the right coordination and technique, and remember what it was like not to know, and then develop strategies/ways to teach the correct technique and coordination to others.
Ugh, no need to go there, that's really not fair. He cleaned himself up so there was a fringe benefit to that debacle. I don't in any way condone what he did, but I said at the time, you know, they should've protected him a little bit by not sticking a mic in his face after they saw where it was going; which is not the same thing as saying they should've enabled him. Everyone around him knew he was loaded, and he was on a fast track to dying a slow death, but they kept rolling the cameras even after it was obvious how shit-faced he was. It was mildly funny in the moment, but when you see if now, it's just painful and sad. Namath was in a lot of physical pain, his marriage was long kaput, he was lonely, the whole thing. I stick by my assertion to this day that if it was any other QB they would've been more politic about it. Think if it was Jim Kelly for example that happens? Namath fully owned it, deeply apologized to Suzy Kolber, and never drank abusively again. He shouldn't be given a medal for stopping something he shouldn't have been doing in the first place, but he shouldn't be castigated for that self-inflicted loss of dignity any longer, either. What IS funny about it is that it happened right after the Jets made him the ambassador for the team. You can't make it up. Jets are gonna Jet, even if it's Joe Willie. :/
They probably can't afford him. Coaching is a 365 days a year job. There is the team, scouting duties, managing film study. Most star players aren't great coaches. Lombardi, Walsh, Paul Brown, Sid Gilman, Tom Landry all so so players. Jim Brown, Joe Montana, Terry Bradshaw, Tony Dorsett, Troy Aikman none of them wanted anything to do with coaching.
