Talk:New York Jets/Archive 1

Archive 1

Improvement drive

National Football League is currently a candidate on WP:IDRIVE. Vote for it if you are interested!--Fenice 20:39, 10 August 2005 (UTC)

Team name

I added some information about how the Jets are still called the NY Jets even though they play in New Jersey. Ever since I was very young I wondered about this and I couldn't find much information as to the reason the name didn't change to the NJ Jets, or why they didn't simply become the "Jets" or whatever. I personally think that it's stupid that they are called NY when their stadium is in NJ, but I'm afraid that this may be POV.

I would still like to know more information about why the name didn't change. I theorized that it may have been a marketing move indicating an intent to return to New York eventually, but that's just a guess. [20:00, 12 September 2005 216.139.155.239]

• Probably they had the same reason as to why the Giants did not change their name. But for specifics, I'll have to research it further. Zzyzx11 (Talk) 20:05, 12 September 2005 (UTC)

The "New York" refers to the city, not the state; they are still part of the New York metropolitan area. Teams that move from city stadiums to suburban stadiums sometimes keep the city name anyway, e.g. Detroit Lions, Dallas Cowboys. Also, the Jets were still headquartered (admin, training, practice) on Long Island, New York and thus still felt a New York identification. Wasted Time R 20:28, 4 January 2006 (UTC)

• Speaking of team names, is it possible that New York AFL was originally the Titans to compete with the Giants in team name as well?CoolKatt number 99999 21:18, 12 September 2005 (UTC)

• Why the "Jets" name? Because of the Air Traffic at La Guardia or the Street Gang in West Side Story (remember the movie came out in 1961 and was wildly popular)?

another reason the jets had to change there name from the titans cause the owner of the giants at the time cause he pressed charges agaist the team cause the name sound similar

2005 season

I added some stuff to the end to discuss the other injuries. You can change them if they seem too sad (as I am a very sad Jets fan because of this season). MrC 04:37, 27 November 2005 (UTC)

also the reason they where renamed the jets where cause of the giants owner at the time pressing charges on the team cause og\f the names mostly meaning the same thing

History too QB- and passing-centric

The team history sections are way too quarterback- and passing-centric. Namath didn't win the Super Bowl alone! The main text has no mention of Snell and Boozer (or of receiver Maynard for that matter, a HoFer!). Same problems in later years -- much discussion of QBs and receivers, but none of Riggins or Freeman McNeil. What gives? Wasted Time R 20:35, 4 January 2006 (UTC)

History too recent-centric

Another issue: The history section focuses far too much space on recent seasons, especially the 2005 season, which is almost detailed game-by-game. 2001, 2002, and 2003 each get one paragraph. 2004 gets 3 paragraphs. 2005 gets 5 paragraphs which detail every major injury, list every game in the losing streak, and use the word "unfortunately" twice. The meaningless wins over Oakland and Buffalo get three sentences each - far too much coverage. I'm not complaining, just a heads-up that I'll probably be snipping a lot out of the 2005 coverage now that the season's over. Rhobite 04:25, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

I agree. Perhaps we should cut almost everything out from the 2004 and 2005 seasons except for the important information ('04 playoff run, '05 potential and injuries, etc.). MrC 03:26, 27 February 2006 (UTC)

Bill Belichick?

Doesn't he belong on the list of head coaches? Even if it was only for a day, it still counts right? --Scaryice 05:36, 2 February 2006 (UTC)

• No. The Jets do not officially list him as ever being the team's head coach and neither does the league. Zzyzx11 (Talk) 05:46, 2 February 2006 (UTC)
  • That should be noted anyway, if only as "unofficially". —Preceding unsigned comment added by 150.108.232.21 (talk) 00:04, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

Mangini Era Clean Up

Does anyone think this needs a bit of a clean up? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 72.81.24.75 (talk • contribs) .

• Most likely, yes. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a 24-hour sports nes site. Zzyzx11 (Talk) 01:48, 17 April 2006 (UTC)

Get their own stadium?

Why don't they get there own stadium? Do they ever plan to? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 209.206.165.20 (talk) 05:35, 17 January 2007 (UTC).

There were plans for a new Jets stadium on the West Side of Manhattan, but that fell through a month before New York lost its bid in the 2012 Summer Olympics. Right now, it looks like they'll join the Giants in building a new stadium in New Jersey. Now that you mention it, I can't believe nothing in the article addresses their stadium history. Seems pretty significant enough to deserve its own section.--Highway99 06:55, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

Fireman Ed?

Just out of curiosity, is there any reason Fireman Ed has no mention on this page? (The guy who sits on field level and is usually shown on TV leading the fans cheering)

• I have added fireman ed to the page.ROOSTER (talk) 17:07, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

Firemen ed needs major dental work, and thats a fact.

Jets Patriots section

I added a Jets Patriots section. This is significant due to the coaching changes of Belicheck, Mangini, and Parcells. Please add on, as I'm sure there are more.

I honestly don't think it really warrants its own section. I mean, the coaching carousel is pretty much covered in the history section, and if we're going to list players who've played for both the Jets and Patriots, why not do it for any of the other 30 teams as well? I just don't see the notability of it.--Highway99 05:54, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

The notabilty of it isn't just the coaching carousel, it's just how many players changed teams as a result of it. The players I listed were only in the last 10 years, and as you can see, this is likely more players/coaches then other teams have had their entire history. This is very relevant due to just how many players have changed team.

Fair use rationale for Image:NewYorkJets 1000.png

Image:NewYorkJets 1000.png is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 09:41, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

Jets yobs?

I noticed a NY Times article (see here) that pointed out that some of the "gentlemen" of the Jets fandom have gotten a bit boorish. 204.52.215.107 (talk) 04:49, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

yeah. And someone deleted your mention on the assertion that it was "poorly written and does not follow the source". I restored the edit because I failed to see how it was poorly written or how it does not follow the source. Moreover, if it was poorly written or not following the source, it should have been rewritten so it does. — Rickyrab | Talk 20:26, 22 November 2007 (UTC)

Sorry about the question, but...

What happens when the Jets play the Giants? Wouldn't the home-field advantage be voided out, because it's the same crowd? And does the NFL have to work out a schedule so the two teams don't both have home games at the same time? I'd really like answers to these questions, if somebody doesn't mind. 71.192.47.62 (talk) 00:37, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

It's the same as it would be with any other game. If the Jets fall as the home team (as they do in Jets/Giants games once every 8 years), then the game will be a Jets home game, and a Giants away game. It's not the same crowd - Jets fans have tickets to Jets home games and Giants fans have tickets to Giants home games. They are two separate organizations. But yes, the NFL does schedule their games so they aren't playing at home on the same weeks, obviously. Also, in the future, please avoid general discussion in article talk pages. Thanks. Pats1 ^T/C 01:34, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

Ok, thanks for clearing things up. 71.192.47.62 (talk) 20:55, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

ny jets subproject

Does anyone think it would be worth making a Wikipedia:WikiProject National Football League/New York Jets subproject? The giants have one and other teams have one. I would join the sub project and if anyone else would or feels they should be one then then say so. Please post your comments underneath or My talk pageROOSTER (talk) 17:29, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

Absolutely! I'd be glad to sign up for a subproject, and I'm sure other regular contributors would sign up. I think it would be a great way to get most articles relating to the Jets up to shape. Highway99 (talk) 01:31, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

I have created the subproject Wikipedia:WikiProject National Football League/New York Jets subproject please join up and edit the subproject page and make it betterROOSTER (talk) 20:53, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

brett favre era?

I know that the era's are name rightfully so after namath, and pennington, but perhaps its too early to call this new era the "brett favre era". until favre has suited up and plays more than one season, there should be a different title. otherwise, lets start naimg other era's like the ken o'brien era, the boomer esision era, the vinnie testaverde era... right now, leave it as the 2008 season. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.70.54.180 (talk) 01:02, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

• Should stay as the "Brett Favre Era". This is without a doubt the biggest thing to happen to the NY Jets since Joe pointed his finger into the air. Anyone else disagree? JohnnySeoul (talk) 14:51, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

Brett Favre fun

Hopefully nobody goes crazy that I changed my NY Jets uniform creation from number "00" to number "4" on the main template just to have some harmless Favre fun. I'll place the original uniform back on there shortly, unless the "4" upsets the majority. If that's the case, it should be removed immediately. Just harmless fun!! *smile* JohnnySeoul (talk) 14:46, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

Update Trade Info

Someone needs to update the trade information. According to ESPN--Brett Favre got traded for a forth-round draft pick. BUT it would turn into a third-round pick if Brett plays in 50% of the Jets' plays this season; a second-rounder if he plays in 70% and the Jets make the playoffs; or a first-round pick if he plays in 80% and the Jets reach the Super Bowl. I don't have the priviledges to update the page or else I'd do it myself. As a Packer fan, I'm sad to see him go; but I know he'll do well for you guys! It'll be a playoff season for the Jets. Guest (talk) 12:34, 8 August 2008 (EST)

This might be the wrong section for this, but in the area about Favre it says:

"The Jets had originally intended to pick Favre in the 1991 NFL Draft, but the Atlanta Falcons, who were one spot ahead of the Jets, chose him instead. Chad Pennington was promply released from the team the following day."

This makes it sound like Pennington was released the day after the 1991 draft.74.219.149.67 (talk) 19:47, 9 August 2008 (UTC)

Also, "promptly" is misspelled in the above section.74.219.149.67 (talk) 22:13, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

• Then just fix it. JohnnySeoul (talk) 22:55, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

I edited it and tried to reword it a little. Hope it works better. (I edited it when I wasn't logged in, so it doesn't say my name next to it) Rackliffe (talk)

Image copyright problem with Image:Hess lg.jpg

The image Image:Hess lg.jpg is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check

• That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
• That this article is linked to from the image description page.

The following images also have this problem:

• Image:Shea postcard 1964.JPG

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --13:32, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

Titans throwbacks

The Jets didn't wear Titans throwbacks during the 1994 NFL 75th anniversary season - they wore modified throwbacks to the Super Bowl III era-uniforms[1]. The Titans throwbacks were created for the 2007 season, and have been carried over into the 2008 campaign. SixFourThree (talk) 15:28, 18 September 2008 (UTC)SixFourThree

Jets-Bills rivalry

Why isnt there a jets-bills rivalry like the jets have with Miami Dolphins and New England Patriots. and also including Indianapolis colts from 1970 as the Baltimore Colts to 2001 as Indianapolis colts since they where in there Division since the AFL and the NFL combined and intill 2001.

Playsmarts edits

Playsmarts wants to discuss his edits to this page so let's do it:

1. "Numerous New York Jet players have been selected to play in the Pro Bowl" - that is a nothing statement. Numerous members of every team have been selected to the Pro Bowl. Are you just trying to link to a list of them? There are numerous better ways to do this. Why not just include a list here? If it's too big, make a new list article. Otherwise, include a link to the list in External links, not in a new section.
2. "In honor of the final game at Giants Stadium, A number of former Jets players were honored during halftime of the Jets vs. Bengals game on January 3, 2010." First off, it's just not that interesting or notable. Every team honors someone or something at halftime of just about every game, don't they? Regardless, we don't need three blogs to give that information - not when it's already available in the playbook source.

Wknight94 ^talk 15:41, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

1. "Pro Bowl: I have no problem putting a full list copied from the site into the actual page (typed up with proper formatting and such). I might not get to it today, but I have no problem doing that over the next few days. While every team does have players selected to the Pro Bowl, I personally see nothing wrong with having this information on the team's Wikipedia page, as it is relevant to the page, and is properly sourced.
2. "Meadowlands Greats:

a) Teams rarely honor players at halftime without some sort of reason. In their final game at Giants Stadium, the Jets honored those players who were central figures during the teams 25 year tenure playing there. It is information that is also relevant to the team's Wikipedia page, and it is a properly-sourced avenue to have a list of Jets greats without veering of into unsourced, fan created, Wikiprdia guideline violating territory.

b) I have no problem removing The Jets Blog source, as it is a fan blog (even if it is done in a professional way, could be nothing more than some guy in a basement somewhere). The New York Jets website blog is more legit, because the blog is edited by the Editor In Chief of the entire website; However, I am not super wedded to it. However, the blog that I link to from The New York Times is a blog that has the same standards as the papers itself. Moreover, it is written by salaried, full time reporter employed by the paper. Indeed, the general rule against citing to blogs on Wikipedia makes this very exception (See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:SPS#cite_ref-3 --footnote 4). As such, I would like to keep it in addition to the cite from the program so that there is a second source for the information.

--Playsmarts (talk) 18:44, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

Update: I deleted the link to The Jets Blog source. --Playsmarts (talk) 19:05, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

• Question regarding issue B: What was the criteria for being selected to this "Meadowlands Era Jet Greats" team. Was it voted by the fans and/or the media like any other official all-pro or anniversary team? If it was something like "whoever was available to show up" or "somebody in the front office making arbitrary decisions", than that is not a notable list IMO. Zzyzx11 (talk) 19:08, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

• Re: Zzyxx: I do not have the program in front of me (I am away from home for the weekend), but as I understand it, the team itself selected one player for each year the team played in the stadium (and some additional people). I do not know of any voting by the media or the fans. However, on a personal level, they did a very good job of having the players fans like myself wanted to see honored at that last game (ex. Vinny, Wayne Chrebet, Wesley Walker, etc...)--Playsmarts (talk) 19:41, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

The selection process is pretty important, IMO, because trying to pick one player for each year really limits any objective criteria. At least with an anniversary team, retired numbers or a hall of fame/ring of honor system, you can judge players using their career stats. And you also have an excuse to say something like, "Mo Lewis, Curtis Martin, Freeman McNeil and Dennis Byrd didn't get selected because they didn't get enough votes/did not meet the criteria".

But with this type of list, it seems to have been selected arbitrary or at random, without any clear merit, "just for the sake of celebrating the last game at Giants Stadium". And it would be especially random or arbitrary if someone says, "Mo Lewis, Curtis Martin, Freeman McNeil and Dennis Byrd didn't get selected because they declined to show up at the ceremony". If either one is the case, this is not something that would be relevant 10 or 20 years from now – just like randomly or arbitrary picking players who were with the Jets during the Shea Stadium years, AND were willing to make an appearance at the ceremony! Zzyzx11 (talk) 21:03, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

And it's no accident that I used Lewis, Martin, McNeil and Byrd as my examples above. They are some of the players who were mentioned in the comments section to the newyorkjets.com blog post you cited,[2], as fans are asking why they were not selected. And guess what Randy Lange, the editor-in-chief of newyorkjets.com, said in reply to some of those questions? Sorry, you'll have to look it up yourself, but it is all the evidence I need...Zzyzx11 (talk) 21:21, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

Agree 100%. Wknight94 ^talk 21:44, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

Re

zzyxx: You make a good point, and I will not be undoing your deletion. I will, however, be adding in a typed up Pro Bowlers list in the next few days. Until I do, I would appreciate it if you allow that section to exist as it is. I will be undoing that portion of your edit. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Playsmarts (talk • contribs) 02:07, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

Franchise History/Citations

The Franchise History was beginning to get quite extensive. In an effort to solve the problem, I cleaned up and sourced all of the "History of the New York Jets" article. Since completing that, as long as the majority is fine with the move, I believe we should delete the Franchise History of the NYJ main page just leaving a brief description of (key) past events that lead up to the present day (see New England Patriots main page).

I have also begun to source all information on the New York Jets main page which I hope to complete by August. UPDATE: All information has since been sourced, I implore anyone who makes future edits to please include references. The Writer 2.0 22:50, 2 August 2010 (UTC)

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:New York Jets/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Joe Gazz84^user•_talk•^contribs•_{Editor Review} 14:54, 25 August 2010 (UTC)

Initial Review

GA review (see here for criteria)

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose): b (MoS):

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):

3. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): b (focused):

4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

5. It is stable.

   No edit wars, etc.:

6. It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.

   a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

• I would like top see some more reliable sourcing. The quantity is good but the majority of the sources are from the same place. On Wikipedia it is mandatory that there are many different sources from a variety of places and a variety of material. The sources are the main part of the issue here. The review is put on hold until there are more verifiable other sources. Please place {{done}} next to the item below when the issue has been resolved. Another issue though is that text only needs to Wiki Linked on its first appearance. Such as New York Jets do not need to be wikilinked 3 times only on the first appearance. Joe Gazz84^user•_talk•^contribs•_{Editor Review} 15:21, 25 August 2010 (UTC)

• Sourcing Issue  Done
• Text Only needs to be Wiki Linked once as per MoS  Done

Correction Review

GA review (see here for criteria)

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose): b (MoS):

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):

3. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): b (focused):

4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

5. It is stable.

   No edit wars, etc.:

6. It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.

   a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

This article cleaned up nicely and is ready for good article status. Joe Gazz84^user•_talk•^contribs•_{Editor Review} 22:29, 26 August 2010 (UTC)

Inés Sainz

While I'm not happy that an anonymous IP removed the section with no explanation, I do agree with the idea that this "controversy" isn't notable enough for inclusion on this article. Agree or disagree? --Muboshgu (talk) 16:11, 20 September 2010 (UTC)

Agree. Utter recentism. The place for it is in the article on the Jets' 2010 season.--Wehwalt (talk) 16:15, 20 September 2010 (UTC)

Me too. Wknight94 ^talk 18:40, 20 September 2010 (UTC)