Really tough back-and-forth...I can't recall seeing that on ANY other debate....Gary Myers and Mark Malouisius (sp.) went toe-to-toe for about 2 minutes on whether or not having to keep Rex Ryan last year was a deal-breaker for 'top' GM candidates. Myers said it was NOT and said he spoke to at least 1 top candidate who said the issue wasn't Rex, it was having to dump Revis. Malouisius admitted he never spoke to any GM candidates (made him look weak) but quoted Jay Glazer. Myers came back saying you have to talk to the source(s), not a media guy. Hopefully someone can post it later if it's on the SNY Network website. They were civil, but man did they go back and forth. The other 2 guys just stood there !!
Thought Moose would have learned from his mentor about making up sources to fit the argument. That's one of the common things you need to do as apart of the NY Media.
Of course no top candidate wants to go anywhere that they need to retain the HC (unless that HC is a star) and not bring in their own guy. Losing Revis is secondary to that debate.
It so fucking funny how people like you thinks someone makes something up when you disagree or don't like what he says. smh
You realize the exact same thing can be said about you? And not for nothing, a guy who is using another reporter as his source should not be taken seriously.
I disagree. Unless you absolutely HATED Rex, why not keep him, especially if you know Woody likes him ? If you do your job as GM and the team tanks, you get to fire him after 1 or 2 years and bring in another guy and re-start the clock. And you may find out you like the guy.
Has nothing to do with hate and everything to do with job performance. Same as Woody liking Rex has nothing to do with Rex's job performance which was already declining. If we left evaluating our coaches performance up to Woody and how much he liked his HC, then we'd be stuck with Rex forever and would continue to suck in perpetuity. Additionally, my original point was that it's by far the exception to keep an incumbent HC when hiring a new GM to architect a franchise. The norm is to clean house and get rid of the HC and staff and bring in a whole new CS. If Rex was Harbaugh, then I could see the exception to the rule being used here. Yet Rex is nowhere close to that.
The circumstances warranted for Rex to be retained. At that point 2012 was his first losing season. He had previously went 9-7, 11-5, and 8-8. Rex deserved a chance to stay. Tanny had to go.
Of course the issue wasn't Rex lol You think a GM would deny a high ranking position if he had to deal with a coach he may not have wanted for a year? Give me a break. Take the job, make a ton of money, start building a team that you know will take some time, and fire Rex the following year. That whole bullshit about Rex holding other candidates back is just that, bullshit.
Jerry Reese never had the authority to fire Coughlin when he came on. And he inherited Coughlin at a time fans were clamoring to run Coughlin out of town. The Steelers never change GM and HC at the same time. It's a myth that you need to hire new GM and HC at the same time. We interviewed literally every top candidate 2 years ago for GM. There was no lack of interest due to the coaching situation. that was also a media myth. The only guy i can remember who took a different job was Caldwell, who went to Jax. Maybe he preferred less pressure in the smaller market, maybe he didn't feel he would mesh with Woody or Rex. who knows. In any event, that was really no big loss. I'm certainly not upset he didn't sign with us. However, circumstances what they are after this particular season, i do believe we need a new GM to go along with a new HC. it's just not automatically necessary, like the one idiot on the show was trying to claim..
Why keep him and risk your job and career on someone who was a clown, a big mouth, and undisciplined putz? There was also no guarantee that he'd be able to fire Rex after 1 year if things didn't go well.
Not true. I don't remember who, but I do distinctly remember reading that one or two of the top candidates that Woody wanted to interview declining to interview because it was made known that they would have to keep Rex.
No it isn't. There was no guarantee that the new GM would have been allowed to fire Rex after one season. What is BS is your claiming that it didn't hold any of the top candidates back and that the new GM could fire Rex after one year. You're talking out of your ass.
There were never any airplanes flying banners to fire Tannenbaum. He was definitely more popular with the press than Idzik is. Unlike Idzik he was adept at saying nothing. I don't recall Mehta, etc. asking for him to be fired. As a matter of fact I don't ever recall this kind of a press backlash against any GM. It was the call of Woody after esp the signings of Tone and re-signing of Mark. Someone had to pay for a failed 2012. And somebody is going to pay for this year, too.
Tanny made quick fix splash moves by mortgaging the future and messing up the cap in future years. Plus Tanny and Mehta were buddies. Idzik is trying a new approach and because we've had a bad year they want him out. I could see if we had 3 or 4 straight seasons like this.
So if Idzik isn't fired and next year is as big of a disaster as this year you would be in favor of giving him a few more years to keep trying?
