Talk:John McKay (American football)

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Fair use rationale for Image:McKayJohn06 10 01 1.jpg[edit]

Image:McKayJohn06 10 01 1.jpg 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 lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 18:52, 2 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sorting by Mac instead of Mc[edit]

Can someone please explain why the default category sorting for this entry specifies Mackay, rather than McKay? I don't see the point of that. Deejayk (talk) 17:14, 10 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Don't take this as a definitive answer, but it might have something to do with disambiguation. This is part of the John Mackay disambiguation page. Dementia13 (talk) 05:13, 2 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Team's Execution[edit]

Apparently there is some doubt (especially without a youtube video of it) whether he was asked about the execution of his team, his team's offense or just his team's offensive line. I won't remove it since it is such a great quote that McKay never tried to discredit.Autkm (talk) 04:01, 31 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I placed a "dubious" tag on it. It's a terrific line, but it's fairly certain that he never said it, and it needs to be removed. I would do it myself, but somebody will put it right back up again, so I'd like to let it sit with that tag for a while and hope that some readers look at the discussion page. I've researched their early seasons pretty exhaustively, and there are no references to this quote prior to 1980. At least one friend of McKay's has gone on record as saying that he believed the statement was never made. One would expect that such a great line would have been all over the press, would have turned up in Sports Illustrated's "They Said It" section, and again in various publications' "year in review" recaps. None of that happened. McKay was fond of both emphasizing "execution" and of publicly criticizing players; so it sounds like something he would have said, but it appears to go no further than that.
The closest I can find is a Sarasota Herald article from Dec. 6, 1976, after the Buccaneers lost to the Steelers 42-0. Rocky Bleier credited the win to the Steelers' "execution", a word which was repeated in the article title. McKay commented that the team had better players back in Tampa, meaning that there were 17 players on injured reserve, and the team by that point was mostly composed of second-stringers and waiver pickups. There's no mention of him advocating the team's execution in that game, although he did say that they "couldn't score against a strong wind". Dementia13 (talk) 05:08, 2 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Regarding the idea that McKay "never tried to discredit" it, here's another quote of his to keep in mind: "I'm amused at some of the things I've supposedly said". (Associated Press, Nov 5, 1980) Dementia13 (talk) 17:12, 28 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Here is an account of the statement with an interview of the reporter who claims to have asked the question to McKay:

Tom McEwen, longtime sports editor and sports columnist of the Tampa Tribune, won the 13th Red Smith Award on Friday. The award is presented annually by the Associated Press Sports Editors for outstanding contributions to sports journalism.
In his acceptance speech at the APSE's 20th annual convention, McEwen, 70, told stories of sports celebrities he had dealt with, and indicated that one of the more colorful was John McKay, former USC coach and the first coach of the longtime losing Tampa Bay Buccaneers.
"I remember asking McKay one Sunday about what he thought of his team's execution," McEwen said. "McKay commented that he thought that would be a fine idea." (LA Times Feb 26, 1993)[1] — Preceding unsigned comment added by Works2late (talkcontribs) 17:52, 30 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

In an NFL Films video hosted by Joe Theismann titled, "Warriors, Wizards and Wonder Boys," before they show clips of McKay, Theismann tells about someone asking McKay about his teams execution and that McKay said, 'I'm all for it.' Many of these quotes are on NFL Films "Football Follies" I will reference them, I just need a template Sorry, I couldn't find how to reference a VHS tape as a source.Bbigjohnson (talk) 09:20, 23 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The fact is, whether he said it or not, it's a hysterically funny line which is known as a McKay line. If nothing else, the page should say that he's commonly credited with the line. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.147.97.75 (talk) 04:42, 28 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ http://articles.latimes.com/1993-06-26/sports/sp-7257_1_tom-mcewen%7CTampa Tribune's Tom McEwen Wins Sports Journalism Award - Los Angeles Times

Doug Williams[edit]

I tagged the first three lines of the section on Doug Williams. All three are false, as McKay told Culverhouse that Williams was not worth the price he was asking for. Also, Williams' previous season ended with a knee injury, and nobody knew if he could even play. I'll dig up references when I get time. 108.75.200.203 (talk) 14:52, 3 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]