Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 28

Thread: PETE KENDALL, PART DEUX?

  1. #1
    Jets Insider VIP
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    4,218
    Post Thanks / Like

    PETE KENDALL, PART DEUX?

    There seem to be two trains of thought on this whole Kerry Rhodes thing:

    1) There is a "master plan" that involves getting Rhodes out first, but ultimately ending up better than we started

    2) Rhodes was an overpaid malcontent, Rex didn't want him here, and the team is "better off without him"

    Obviously I hope option #1 is the correct one, but I can't help but think about the LAST time we "had" to get someone outta here . . . PETE KENDALL.

    I remember the debate on this board . . . "Tangini knows what they're doing . . ." , "He's not the player he once was . . ." , "wait til you see this Adrian Clarke kid . . ."

    Point is, there BETTER be a bigger picture here. Team CHEMISTRY has to be secondary to team TALENT.

    I have faith in Rex and Tanny, I really do. But I'll feel A LOT better when I can look back and see why they REALLY did it:O

  2. #2
    All Pro
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    brooklyn,NY
    Posts
    5,498
    Post Thanks / Like
    Bottom line is Rhodes is not Rex's Type of Safety. Cause he shy'd away from contact.

    That Former Ravens Scout on Twitter ( @movethesticks ) Predicted him getting traded all the way back in october.

  3. #3
    All Pro
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    astoria
    Posts
    5,301
    Post Thanks / Like
    i'm fine with this...getting cromartie and having jenkins back is far more important than losing an overpaid safety who had a problem with ryan...plz...

  4. #4
    Jets Insider VIP
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    4,218
    Post Thanks / Like
    [QUOTE=Hydro22;3517022]Bottom line is Rhodes is not Rex's Type of Safety. Cause he shy'd away from contact.

    That Former Ravens Scout on Twitter ( @movethesticks ) Predicted him getting traded all the way back in october.[/QUOTE]

    Sorry, not good enough.

    Rex doesn't get to say "He's not my kinda guy" unless he actually HAS that kinda guy waiting in the wings.

    (Of course he's twice my size and can say whatever he wants, but I feel pretty safe behind this keyboard:D)

  5. #5
    All Pro
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    brooklyn,NY
    Posts
    5,498
    Post Thanks / Like
    [QUOTE=OCCH;3517025]Sorry, not good enough.

    Rex doesn't get to say "He's not my kinda guy" unless he actually HAS that kinda guy waiting in the wings.

    (Of course he's twice my size and can say whatever he wants, but I feel pretty safe behind this keyboard:D)[/QUOTE]

    [QUOTE]#Here's a prediction that might be as good as gold... Kerry Rhodes won't be playing for the Jets next year

    I have a pretty good idea of what kind of players annoy Rex Ryan and Mike Pettine and Rhodes checks all the boxes 1:48 AM Nov 24th, 2009 via TweetDeck


    Rhodes is pseudo-tough guy... he's busted a lot of coverages and isn't making enough plays on the ball to cover up his warts 1:49 AM Nov 24th, 2009 via TweetDeck

    RT @jmiller3: Doesn't Rex talk just as much trash as rhodes?>> Rex doesn't mind the talking, trust me...not making any plays is issue 1:52 AM Nov 24th, 2009 via TweetDeck

    @TRacsTitans31 I think they will trade him... Rex is obsessed with toughness and play-making... Rhodes hasn't provided either one 1:53 AM Nov 24th, 2009 via TweetDeck in reply to TRacsTitans31[/QUOTE]

    [url]http://twitter.com/MoveTheSticks[/url]
    Last edited by Scoop24; 03-06-2010 at 09:50 PM.

  6. #6
    Jets Insider VIP
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    NYC
    Posts
    22,105
    Post Thanks / Like
    OCCH, I know you're struggling for a comparison, Rhodes wasn't overpaid.

    In fact, he was relatively cheap in 2010.

  7. #7
    Jets Insider VIP
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    4,218
    Post Thanks / Like
    [QUOTE=SMC;3517039]OCCH, I know you're struggling for a comparison, Rhodes wasn't overpaid.

    In fact, he was relatively cheap in 2010.[/QUOTE]

    Yeah, I was generalizing what people here on the board say, but that makes the point even more obvious . . .

    You DON'T get rid of the guy simply because "you don't like him".

    You're either a better team with him or without him.

    In hindsight, the Kendall decision was HORRENDOUS. If we have a gaping hole at safety this year, this one will be just as bad.

    OTOH, if we get a viable replacement, it will likely be a win on multiple levels.

  8. #8
    All Pro
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    astoria
    Posts
    5,301
    Post Thanks / Like
    [QUOTE=SMC;3517039]OCCH, I know you're struggling for a comparison, Rhodes wasn't overpaid.

    In fact, he was relatively cheap in 2010.[/QUOTE]nah...overpaid is just the right word...

  9. #9
    Rookie
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Way Upstate NY
    Posts
    928
    Post Thanks / Like
    Im sorry but there is know way for Rex or Tanny to know the future and how this will pan out. I am accepting it now as a fact of the matter that they made the decision based on what they know now, not what may happen tomorrow.

    And I respect that too. We have know idea the reasons, nor might we ever, and it shouldn't matter. They have shown their abilities to manage this team. and I find that enough for me to trust this move.

  10. #10
    Veteran
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    1,373
    Post Thanks / Like
    [QUOTE=OCCH;3517018]There seem to be two trains of thought on this whole Kerry Rhodes thing:

    1) There is a "master plan" that involves getting Rhodes out first, but ultimately ending up better than we started

    2) Rhodes was an overpaid malcontent, Rex didn't want him here, and the team is "better off without him"

    Obviously I hope option #1 is the correct one, but I can't help but think about the LAST time we "had" to get someone outta here . . . PETE KENDALL.

    I remember the debate on this board . . . "Tangini knows what they're doing . . ." , "He's not the player he once was . . ." , "wait til you see this Adrian Clarke kid . . ."

    Point is, there BETTER be a bigger picture here. Team CHEMISTRY has to be secondary to team TALENT.

    I have faith in Rex and Tanny, I really do. But I'll feel A LOT better when I can look back and see why they REALLY did it:O[/QUOTE]
    You make some interesting points. The only thing I can say is that losing a quality O-lineman (like Kendall) can you hurt you a lot more than losing a player in the secondary who I think is pretty flawed.

  11. #11
    Jets Insider VIP
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    NYC
    Posts
    22,105
    Post Thanks / Like
    [QUOTE=OCCH;3517042]Yeah, I was generalizing what people here on the board say, but that makes the point even more obvious . . .

    You DON'T get rid of the guy simply because "you don't like him".

    You're either a better team with him or without him.

    In hindsight, the Kendall decision was HORRENDOUS. If we have a gaping hole at safety this year, this one will be just as bad.

    OTOH, if we get a viable replacement, it will likely be a win on multiple levels.[/QUOTE]

    There's 2 distinct & mutually exclusive thoughts I have:

    1. Considering what the Jets gave up for Cromartie, a better & younger player at a more important position, the Jets got fair value for Rhodes.

    2. I didn't see any need in getting rid of Rhodes. I thought the solution to the Rhodes situation was Rhodes playing better. Tanny likes to fill needs in FA/trades and flexibility in the draft. Tanny just went against that.

    In a nutshell: good value but bad trade.

  12. #12
    Jets Insider VIP
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Posts
    22,809
    Post Thanks / Like
    [QUOTE=SMC;3517059]There's 2 distinct & mutually exclusive thoughts I have:

    1. Considering what the Jets gave up for Cromartie, a better & younger player at a more important position, the Jets got fair value for Rhodes.

    2. I didn't see any need in getting rid of Rhodes. I thought the solution to the Rhodes situation was Rhodes playing better. Tanny likes to fill needs in FA/trades and flexibility in the draft. Tanny just went against that.

    In a nutshell: good value but bad trade.[/QUOTE]

    But the draft isn't for another 6 weeks. Who is to say a safety won't be obtained by then?

  13. #13
    Jets Insider VIP
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    4,218
    Post Thanks / Like
    [QUOTE=SMC;3517059]There's 2 distinct & mutually exclusive thoughts I have:

    1. Considering what the Jets gave up for Cromartie, a better & younger player at a more important position, the Jets got fair value for Rhodes.

    2. I didn't see any need in getting rid of Rhodes. I thought the solution to the Rhodes situation was Rhodes playing better. [B]Tanny likes to fill needs in FA/trades and flexibility in the draft. Tanny just went against that[/B].[/QUOTE]

    Which likely only happened for one of two reasons . . . personal dislike for the player (by Rex/Tanny/etc.) or a BIGGER MASTER PLAN.

    It promises to be another interesting off-season . . .:yes:

  14. #14
    All League
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    3,482
    Post Thanks / Like
    [QUOTE=OCCH;3517042]Yeah, I was generalizing what people here on the board say, but that makes the point even more obvious . . .
    [B]
    You DON'T get rid of the guy simply because "you don't like him".[/B]

    You're either a better team with him or without him.

    In hindsight, the Kendall decision was HORRENDOUS. If we have a gaping hole at safety this year, this one will be just as bad.

    OTOH, if we get a viable replacement, it will likely be a win on multiple levels.[/QUOTE]

    I will politely disagree with that notion. If a player is unwilling to get with the program and butts heads with the coaching staff, it becomes necessary to move that player for as much value as you can get.

  15. #15
    All Pro
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Posts
    6,712
    Post Thanks / Like
    Eric Smith started games last year for Kerry Rhodes.

    Clearly he did fine then and the team is good with that idea.


    Kendall had no proven player behind him. Clarke was far from that.

  16. #16
    Jets Insider VIP
    Charter JI Member

    Join Date
    May 1999
    Location
    Naples FL
    Posts
    42,983
    Post Thanks / Like
    [QUOTE=OCCH;3517042]Yeah, I was generalizing what people here on the board say, but that makes the point even more obvious . . .

    You DON'T get rid of the guy simply because "you don't like him".

    You're either a better team with him or without him.

    In hindsight, [B]the Kendall decision was HORRENDOUS[/B]. If we have a gaping hole at safety this year, this one will be just as bad.

    OTOH, if we get a viable replacement, it will likely be a win on multiple levels.[/QUOTE]

    How so we got him for nothing and got back a 4th..Granted his replacement sucked but he pulled his crap during camp when it's much harder to get better players.. Had he lived up to the contract he signed there wouldn't have been a problem.. If Rhodes had Jim Leonhards heart he'd be all Pro every year..

  17. #17
    Waterboy
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    16
    Post Thanks / Like
    Even if the Jets imagine themselves as Super Bowl contenders cutting your starting running back and safety back to back is a blow. Since we don't really know if the Jets are ready to enter elite team status these moves are particularly bewildering. Dumping your starting running back to hand the job to a rookie who had several excellent games and your once upon a time pro bowl safety for mediocre picks with no designated successor is risky.

    What if Greene turns out to be injury prone or can't bring it all season as the every down guy. And I hate trading talent. I love Ryan but isn't the coach's job to coach up the players particularly the most talented ones. A half a bad season is enough to give up on a guy like Rhodes??

    I'd advise the front office to move carefully going forward. Let's build on our unexpected playoff run not recklessly act like the laws of football physics don't apply to us.

    Keep your good players if at all possible.

  18. #18
    Hall Of Fame
    Charter JI Member

    Join Date
    May 1999
    Location
    Manalapan, NJ/Boca Raton, Fl
    Posts
    14,734
    Post Thanks / Like
    [QUOTE=OCCH;3517025]Sorry, not good enough.

    Rex doesn't get to say "He's not my kinda guy" unless he actually HAS that kinda guy waiting in the wings.

    (Of course he's twice my size and can say whatever he wants, but I feel pretty safe behind this keyboard:D)[/QUOTE]

    2 things.

    Rex does get to say "He's not my kinda guy". That's what HCs get to do. Especially those that come in, take your team to a Championship game and become the toast of the town.

    The other, Rhodes was a lot of things. Over paid, underachiever, not dedicated, soft, etc, but he wasn't a malcontent or one that was creating problems like Kendall.

    He wasn't producing, sucked up too much cap space and was due a big piece of change that the FO didn't think he was earning.

  19. #19
    Jets Insider VIP
    Charter JI Member

    Join Date
    May 1999
    Location
    Naples FL
    Posts
    42,983
    Post Thanks / Like
    [QUOTE=zensum;3517272]Even if the Jets imagine themselves as Super Bowl contenders cutting your starting running back and safety back to back is a blow. Since we don't really know if the Jets are ready to enter elite team status these moves are particularly bewildering. Dumping your starting running back to hand the job to a rookie who had several excellent games and your once upon a time pro bowl safety for mediocre picks with no designated successor is risky.

    What if Greene turns out to be injury prone or can't bring it all season as the every down guy. And I hate trading talent. I love Ryan but isn't the coach's job to coach up the players particularly the most talented ones. A half a bad season is enough to give up on a guy like Rhodes??

    I'd advise the front office to move carefully going forward. Let's build on our unexpected playoff run not recklessly act like the laws of football physics don't apply to us.

    [B]Keep your good players if at all possible[/B].[/QUOTE]

    The one's that want to be on the team and believe in your system Yes.. But that wasn't Rhodes..

  20. #20
    All Pro
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Fr:NYC to Mid Ga.
    Posts
    8,838
    Post Thanks / Like
    well then what about head hunter 'Ah-head-dee-bo'

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Follow Us