What’s a lie about Dalvin Cook not knowing his role? I don’t even know what you’re implying. The Saquon link is him tweeting that the reported contract offers by MLFFootball on Twitter are lies so again I’m not sure what Russini’s report about sitting out has to do with that. Saquon was holding out and he literally said he’s considered sitting out. I already noted the Commanders one. That’s where the team executive said she was blowing them for information if I remember correctly. We’re going by Reddit commenters from ten years ago? Looks like it was a plant, not a false report; https://www.dawgsbynature.com/2014/...esean-jackson-ending-speculation-about-browns A bit of a stretch to call any of this a history of lying.
The primary problem with all this lies in the connect-the-dots implication that it would of likely been Rodgers going to Zach and making the call on who would be the week 14 starting at QB for this team. Which off course and once again is very problematic for a lot of people/fans (including Rodgers) and their preference narratives that all go out of their way to keep any of this 2023 stink off of Rodgers himself. Despite the very large amount of very convincing speculative evidence that has already piled up suggesting he is indeed at least been adding his own fair share damning contributions to the totality of complete FO dysfunction playing itself out. It's no shocker that hold the line mentality is going to now try and assassinate the character and credibility of an otherwise great reputation reporter like Russini. That is just how this game gets played.
Assuming Zach said he didn't want to play, how is that different than other players saying they want out? More than a few people here have said that after this year's shit show players like Sauce, Garrett, and Breece will want out, would they be criticized if they expressed that desire? Or is only the hated and evil Zach Wilson who deserves it? I see no difference. And it's not like Zach went public with it as some players in the past did. Was he immature and perhaps naive for saying out loud what many others would've said under the same conditions? Definitely. Did he provide more bullets for those who want to shoot them at him? Absolutely. But let's drop the sanctimonious finger shaking. If he violated the code of professionalism by saying he didn't want to play after being jerked up and down by this clueless franchise, then whoever leaked what he said also violated "the code". This is all evidence of a lack of discipline that predates even the Douglas/Saleh regime. When arguably their best player - on offense anyway - LeVeon Bell wanted more money did the Steelers give in? And do you wonder why the Steelers are consistently good? And if you don't command respect for the team's values with discipline, then you won't get loyalty, and without loyalty you won't get the commitment to excellence that transcends adversity. All the money in the world can't buy loyalty and commitment. So pointing out that because Zach is being paid $35M should automatically produce his loyalty and commitment when the Jets haven't shown any in return ignores that basic truth. The same is true for Any Average Joe/Jane - no matter how much they get paid, they're not loyal to who pays them because of that. Sure, they may not quit (or threaten to) because they can't afford to lose the money, but that's not loyalty or commitment. For decades the Jets have desperately needed a complete culture change. With Woody in charge, it's not likely to happen.
It’s pretty asinine to try to compare a player holding out for money to a guy who said he doesn’t wanna go out there because he’s scared he’ll get hurt.
Yeah I know but I don’t really buy into your whole conspiracy narrative that anything that happens negatively for the Jets is Rodgers fault.
I also don’t even get the comparison. Fans despise when players do that so if you want to equate it as a similar scenario, the fans are usually irritated either way. And players never resent guys for holding out for more money (that we know of).
lying is a poor word on my part. it's more like twisting information to blow it up into a bigger deal, then back tracking. the rodgers one from earlier this year is a perfect example. she reported it in a way that made it sound like rodgers walked in with a list of people and said get them if you want me here. rodgers denied it and said it's not true at all, then she went back and said "I never reported that" thats when he did the whole lose my number thing. so not so much lying as twisting things to clickbait. realistically he probably said something like I like these people and if we can add them too it would be great. she takes normal everyday things in the NFL that happen all the time and try to blow one up to get clicks and rile up the fan base but words it in a way that gives her deniability to back track it. even with this report she back tracked it, then doubled down. If she was a random person on reddit it really wouldn't matter. and reddit has had some crazy good leaks that nobody believed at the time. probably one of the craziest was when someone was playing an online game with a NFL players wife and overheard him in the background talking to his agent and said he was signing with a team and nobody believed it and like a day later the news broke on every outlet. but when you are a professional journalists working for a legit website who's worked for several media outlets you should vet all your information before you throw it out there and 100% make sure it's reliable because once that door is open, it can't be closed. The other thing is usually with a report like this many other people will be able to corroborate it once it leaks. I haven't seen that either.
My "conspiracy" narrative doesn't actually include blaming Rodgers for anything that happens negatively to the Jets (I actually blame Woody's contributions as being the most damning overall in the totality picture). Just the select things where the most logical explanation once you start actually adding details up point the finger at him, and details which you need to mostly ignore (granted you've been better there then others here about that) and write of as a conspiracy theory as your best chosen method to adequately explain them away.
They really had no choice. Zach is the best QB on the roster. The o-line seems to be playing a little better we still do not have any receivers so I do not expect a big jump from the last few weeks on the offense of performance but they should be able to manage more than 8 points .
Just affirms that Saleh needs to be gone after the season IMO. You bench the former 2nd overall pick for a couple of PS-level QBs to "give the team a spark"? I think Saleh's tenure could be coming to an end soon, he seems to be in over his head as a HC.
Right or wrong, pretty apparent he did it to prove to the rest of the locker room... other guys suck they get benched too
If he's gotta make moves like that to keep the locker room on his side, I think that just reinforces my point. Bottom line is you should always play the player that gives you the best chance to win games. That applies to any position.
hackett pulled him from the game he was benched. that was confirmed. why saleh decided to run with boyle the next 2 weeks though I have no idea. I mean i guess it did quiet the fans but thats not worth throwing the game basically. he should have stuck with the "whether fans want to believe it or not, zach gives us the best chance to win right now"
