Maybe we should also be talking about how total dogsh*t Revis played today, given his play all but single-handedly cost us the game. Just say'in, some stinky dead fish washing up on "Revis Island" these days. I'd also like to know why our D is so disappointing this year. I thought this D was supposed to be special, nay, historic, it was so loaded with talent. Instead, it's quite pedestrian. Alot of reasons right now this team isn't winning. Bad QB play, weak RB and O-line play, WR with butter hands (especially the Rookie), injuries, and a pretty average Defense that was supposed to be all-pro.
If you say so. I'd place him a bit below the middle-average of the 32 current NFL Starting QB's, aye. And I'd place him well above pretty much every backup QB I can think of of the top of my head, as well as a small but not insignificant number of current starters. I think he's well worth retaining on a value-for-money basis, a team leadership and Petty-grooming basis, and because until we have someone better to play (we currently do not) he's the best available. I'm well aware Jets Fan nation has an ongoing obsession with other teams cast off's and backups, the Metzenbergers and their ilk, and that's fine. If we can cut Geno Smith this off-season, and acquire one of those beloved other-team-backups, so be it, more competition is always good, and I'm perfectly happy if they can come in and beat out Fitz and Petty in 2016. But given the state of this franchise at QB, I don't let Fitz walk for 2016.
1975 Baltimore Colts 10-4, Lost in Divisional Round (2-12 in 1974) The Baltimore Colts suffered through a horrendous three-year stretch from 1972-74, winning just 11 games in that span. The suffering came to an end in 1975, when the Colts produced an eight-win improvement and earned a trip to the postseason. The improvement was good enough to earn Ted Marchibroda Coach of the Year honors and to bring Baltimore an AFC East division title. The campaign sparked a three-year run during which the Colts did not miss the postseason, though the team did not win a playoff game in that span, either. 1963 Oakland Raiders 10-4 (1-13 in 1962) 1963 was a notable year for the Raiders' organization for a number of reasons, most notably Year 1 of the Al Davis era. After winning just a single game in 1962, the Raiders rebounded with a new look (silver and black) and an exciting new offense. A nine-win improvement was good enough to earn second place in the AFL West and to earn Davis the AFL's Coach of the Year award. Four years later, Oakland would appear in the Super Bowl, and the future of the Raiders' organization, the AFL and the world of football would never be the same. 2004 Pittsburgh Steelers 15-1, Lost AFC Championship Game (6-10 in 2003) Putting together a disappointing campaign in 2003 may have actually been one of the best things to happen to the Pittsburgh Steelers' organization in recent memory. Their record allowed the Steelers to select Miami (Ohio) University quarterback Ben Roethlisberger with the 11th overall pick of the 2004 draft. Roethlisberger went on to lead the Steelers to a nine-win improvement, a franchise-best record and an appearance in the AFC title game. He also managed to take home Offensive Rookie of the Year honors. While the Steelers ultimately fell to the New England Patriots, 41-27, in the AFC Championship Game, the team went on to appear in three Super Bowls during the next six seasons, winning two. 1999 Indianapolis Colts 13-3, Lost in Divisional Round (3-13 in 1998) It is fairly safe to say that drafting quarterback Peyton Manning back in 1998 forever changed the Indianapolis Colts' franchise for the better. However, that fact wasn't quite apparent until Manning's second season. As a rookie in 1998, Manning completed just 56.7 percent of his passes (the lowest total of his career) and tossed 28 interceptions. The Colts won just three games for the second consecutive season. Everything changed in 1999, as the Colts increased their win total by 10 and earned a first-round bye in the postseason. Indianapolis' season ended with a 19-16 loss to the Tennessee Titans in the divisional round of the playoffs. However, Manning and the Colts missed the postseason just once over the next 11 years and won a Super Bowl along the way. 1999 St. Louis Rams 13-3, Won Super Bowl XXXIV (4-12 in 1998) Commonly referred to as the "Greatest Show on Turf," the 1999 St. Louis Rams also come in as our greatest single-season turnaround on our list. After winning a combined 15 games over the three previous seasons, St. Louis found a way to flip things around, especially on offense. With unknown quarterback Kurt Warner leading the charge, the Rams offense scored 30 or more points a remarkable 12 times during the regular season en route to an NFC West division title. Not only was the Rams team good enough to make a nine-win improvement during the regular season, but it was also good enough to take home an NFL title by defeating the Tennessee Titans, 23-16, in Super Bowl XXXIV. These Rams also found a way to sustain their success, making the postseason in four out of the next five seasons with another Super Bowl appearance after the 2001 season (lost 20-17 to the New England Patriots).
JMO. 1. Never leave points on the field unless you have absolutely no choice. Always take points. 2. Never, ever go for 2 unless you absolutely have to. Always take the sure 1 unless you absolutely must go for two. I once heard a VERY respected Coach say this, and I agree with him. Like I say, JMO.
Then the GM and Head Coach are to blame for not signing someone who can kick routine mid-30 yard NFL Field Goals. Not having faith in your kicker to kick middle-range FG's is not a legitimate excuse for making poor decisions.
I don't want aggressive. False bravado is not impressive. I want smart for the circumstances. Some times that will be aggressive, sometimes that will be taking sure-points. It's not an all-or-nothing choice, and limiting it to that is false-logic. IMO Sperm nailed this thread with his first post in it.
I don't want aggressive. I want smart for the circumstances. Some times that will be aggressive, sometimes that will be taking sure-points. It's not an all-or-nothing choice, and limiting it to that is false-logic. IMO Sperm nailed this thread with his first post in it.
Time to think, and I still think we were too aggressive too early for the flow of this game. Down 12 with most of the 4th left, our O playing decently enough at that point and their O pretty well stopped cold, the right call is to kick the FG on 4th down and go to 22-13 (down 9). Plenty of time left to get the ball back 3-4 more times at that point. While the muffed punt may not have happened, you can't coach for a muffed punt, you coach the odds, and the odds say with that much time left it's better to be down 9 than down 12 with most of the 4th left to play. The play calling in my opinion was horrible, as Schlerith/Stink on ESPN said this morning (and he agrees with my opinions right down the line, for what little that's worth) you simply do not throw a backwards pass 4 yards behind the line on 4th down. You just don't do it. You also don't play call to throw to a nobody TE with 1 catch all year on 4th down. The 3rd and 4th down playcalling down the stretch was simply bad. No other way to put it. No, the play calling on offense was simply not good last night, but typical for what we've seen from Gailey this year. I don;' think we'll be seeing Gailey back in 2016 personally, I think this team and our GM know they can do better that a oft recycled 70 something. I also disagree with how Bowles used his timeouts towards the end. Once Buffalo got to 3rd and 2, with something like 2:55 left, you simply do not waste your timeout there because the odds say you're not going to stop them on 3rd and very short. You hold it back, take the 2 minute warning, and if you fail to stop them, you still have two TO's left to try and force a three and out. End of the day, we got a very solid Defensive performance last night vs. a pretty sh*t offense apart from the RB. I can forgive some of those missed tackles (somethign we've suffered from alot this year) because of how good that RB is. But the O played pretty poorly. Alot of dropped passes hitting both hands of the WR. Alot of taking their eyes off the ball. Alot of missed routine plays that would have made the difference. Fitz was Fitz IMO, nothing great, but good enough to have won this game if his WR's didn't constantly let him down. Hell, without the rookies Kickoff drop, we win this game, same as we win in Philli without a horrible specials turnover as well. I think Bowles will learn and get better, but I agree with the sentiments of some others, he doesn't quite know when to be aggressive and when to be strategic yet, that or he's taking his direction on that on O from Gailey. In either case, it showed last night to our detriment. No, I don't want him fired just because I am dissapointed in his performance last night (such asinine trolling that was last night) but I'd like to see him improve, and I believe he will. Gailey, however, will not improve, this is who he is. Losing in our house to Rex Ryan was one of the most painful experiences I've had as a Jets Fan in recent years. I loathe that man, and we handed him a win and handed a win to a team (IMO) that is clearly inferior to our own at almost every position. We're ultra thin now at RB, Marshall is clearly hobbled, Decker and Marshall both have too many dropsies and the Rookie and Kerley are simply unreliable options at this point. Sadly, it's the same old Jets on O, underperforming. We'll be lucky to compete the rest of this year with Fitz and the group if Ivory cannot constantly be the Ivory of the early season. And no, Geno wouldn't be better, thats pure fantasy IMO.
No, I don't want to dump them. But I can and will be critical of them when they have a horrible night and cost us a game, like they did tonight.
And sorry, no, one can support the franchise and be critical of those it employs when warranted.
I liked Herm back when, aye, but not for his quotes. And Rex, no, especially not for his quoates, and I would never, ever, want that fat **** back. Want to mock, at least be in the ballpark of accurate.
I have no idea what you're babbling about on that last front. **** sake, criticism does not = fire them all now.
This might bother me, if I had any idea who you were. Sorry, random forum guy #918227, I'll try harder next time to toe the homer-line and deflect all criticism for all things to Fitz instead.