Jump to content

Now that we have an offense....


BroadwayJets

Recommended Posts

....it's interesting to see how our receivers are doing with Geno progressing into a capable quarterback.

 

http://www.ganggreennation.com/2014/9/16/6155141/geno-smith-who-are-his-favorite-targets-so-far

 

From these numbers, I'm a bit disappointed in mainly Nelson. Only targeted twice in 64 routes. That's not pretty. And also, of course Amaro's a rookie, so I'm sure his numbers will improve greatly. 

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 72
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Let's take a look to find out who Geno Smith's favorite targets are two weeks into the season and how he fares targeting each receiver the Jets have.

Numbers are taken and crunched further from ESPN's Jets page.

 

For your reference, Geno is currently a 65% passer averaging 6.6 yards per attempt.

 

Player Completions Targets Completion % Yards TD Yards per Target Routes run Yards per route run Eric Decker 9 14 64.2 137 1 9.7 59 2.3 Jeremy Kerley 8 13 61.5 60 0 4.6 48 1.2 Chris Johnson 6 8 75 23 1 2.8 25 0.9 Jeff Cumberland 5 7 71.4 64 0 9.1 48 1.3 Jace Amaro 3 5 60 13 0 2.6 22 0.5 Greg Salas 1 4 25 12 0 3 17 0.7 Bilal Powell 2 2 100 32 0 16 13 2.4 Tommy Bohanon 2 2 100 30 0 15 10 3 David Nelson 2 2 100 23 0 11.5 64 0.3 Chris Ivory 1 1 100 3 0 3 21 0.1

 

In conclusion, Eric Decker: very good. Everybody else: somewhere between meh and not so good.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What's scary, though, is how ineffective the offense became once Decker got hurt. 

 

Unless Marty comes out with a different gameplan on Monday like using our TIGHT-ENDS for instance, we better hope that Eric is ready to go by then.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We have added one surefire target in Decker. After that its only Kerley or Cumberland more like most of last season. Amaro needs to step up. Nelson has been disappointing. Salas has been atrocious but he is doing great on special teams. . Was hoping Enunwa might develop into something in the later half of the season. But with the DV cloud hanging over him not sure about his future.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We need another receiver to step up before I am willing to go so far as to say we have a good offense.  

 

I know its only 2 games, but so far Salas and Nelson have shown nothing and I don't think Hakim and Saunders have gotten any offensive snaps -- or if they did its very few.  6 receivers on the roster and only two who make plays -- I expected a lot more than we have seen so far out of Nelson.  He seemed to have developed some chemistry with Geno last season.  Based upon the numbers above, he has only been targeted twice in 2 games.  If Decker is hurt, then we are right back where we were last year.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What's scary, though, is how ineffective the offense became once Decker got hurt.

Unless Marty comes out with a different gameplan on Monday like using our TIGHT-ENDS for instance, we better hope that Eric is ready to go by then.

The offense struggled before he got hurt. It was when GB switched to a 3-4 def that we started to struggle. Decker injury just made it worse.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

....it's interesting to see how our receivers are doing with Geno progressing into a capable quarterback.

 

http://www.ganggreennation.com/2014/9/16/6155141/geno-smith-who-are-his-favorite-targets-so-far

 

From these numbers, I'm a bit disappointed in mainly Nelson. Only targeted twice in 64 routes. That's not pretty. And also, of course Amaro's a rookie, so I'm sure his numbers will improve greatly. 

 

Yeah, surprised how little Nelson is getting targeted.  Geno seemed pretty comfortable with him toward the end of last season.  That said, his 4th down catch after the TOTD was huge.  That wasn't the best ball and he certainly wasnt open...he came back for it and used his body to shield the defender and helped extend that drive.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You think they caught them off guard and couldn't make enough adjustments? The lack of running game did the Jets in.

 

It appears that way. Everything I've been able to read about it says the Jets offense was owning the "quad" defense that the Packers started out in, and when they adjusted to the 3-4. the Jets offense didn't adjust and struggled. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Geno completed passes to 9 different receivers.  He's got options, he just went cold in the 2nd half.  He was missing wide open receivers. 

 

Yeah, it looked like his brain slowed down a tick, so his timing was off. I don't think he was reading the defense as well. I also believe out playcalling got very, very flaky and somewhat conservative, which didn't help.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah, it looked like his brain slowed down a tick, so his timing was off. I don't think he was reading the defense as well. I also believe out playcalling got very, very flaky and somewhat conservative, which didn't help.

 

packers switched from ineffective 4-3 to 3-4 at halftime. made a big difference. jets probably had geno ready for the 4-3, and packers made a smart move that threw jets and geno for a loop.

 

http://sports.yahoo.com/news/defensive-adjustment-secured-packers-victory-214502797.html

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Considering the Jets didn't draft a WR high Amaro's lack of production so far is disappointing.

I would have to agree, but cumberland is a far better blocker, so cumberland has seen many more snaps. They'll come, and so will the production. I think it's way too early for disappointment. If Decker is out this week we'll have no other choice but to see more tight end catches. I kind of hope that's the case with Decker in the game too. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

packers switched from ineffective 4-3 to 3-4 at halftime. made a big difference. jets probably had geno ready for the 4-3, and packers made a smart move that threw jets and geno for a loop.

 

http://sports.yahoo.com/news/defensive-adjustment-secured-packers-victory-214502797.html

 

Yep. I mentioned reading this in a couple spots. Their adjustments >>> our adjustments. 

 

We got out-coached, when you consider the in-game adjustments combined with the slap-stick routine we call a sideline.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah, it looked like his brain slowed down a tick, so his timing was off. I don't think he was reading the defense as well. I also believe out playcalling got very, very flaky and somewhat conservative, which didn't help.

 

 

packers switched from ineffective 4-3 to 3-4 at halftime. made a big difference. jets probably had geno ready for the 4-3, and packers made a smart move that threw jets and geno for a loop.

 

http://sports.yahoo.com/news/defensive-adjustment-secured-packers-victory-214502797.html

Yes. A mixture of all of this. It really seemed like Marty was trying to protect the lead on offense rather than extend it. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes. A mixture of all of this. It really seemed like Marty was trying to protect the lead on offense rather than extend it. 

 

Oh, there's not doubt that Rex saw the lead, and we went into his signature prevent style of D that ALWAYS lets teams back in games, while the offense was  instructed to "take the air out of the ball" which ALWAYS leads to predictable run plays for 2 yards, and failed wildcat gimmick sh*t.

 

Word is out on Rex's tendencies.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yep. I mentioned reading this in a couple spots. Their adjustments >>> our adjustments. 

 

We got out-coached, when you consider the in-game adjustments combined with the slap-stick routine we call a sideline.

 

that's depressing considering mccarthy generally considered one of the worst HCs in the league at in-game adjustments.

 

 

Yes. A mixture of all of this. It really seemed like Marty was trying to protect the lead on offense rather than extend it. 

 

i think he was protecting geno. kid still young and didn't practice against 3-4 all week. give geno time and he will be better at dealing with the unexpected.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would have to agree, but cumberland is a far better blocker, so cumberland has seen many more snaps. They'll come, and so will the production. I think it's way too early for disappointment. If Decker is out this week we'll have no other choice but to see more tight end catches. I kind of hope that's the case with Decker in the game too. 

 

If that is the case, then he wont see the field cause Cumberland is a terrible blocker.  I remember the Raiders play when he was trying to block the edge LB and he went right by him, resulting in Geno getting sack for 30 yards.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah, well.

 

Rex isn't exactly a hard guy to anticipate. We have a lead, we play conservative.

 

he is very unpredictable. sometimes after a big hit he yells "BOOOOOOM!" and other times he yells "BOYITELLA WHAT A HIT!!!!" there is no way of knowing which way he'll go

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh, there's not doubt that Rex saw the lead, and we went into his signature prevent style of D that ALWAYS lets teams back in games, while the offense was  instructed to "take the air out of the ball" which ALWAYS leads to predictable run plays for 2 yards, and failed wildcat gimmick sh*t.

 

Word is out on Rex's tendencies.

Your wrong. You heard the "experts" on ESPN radio. Your heating up their leftovers and serving it as you're own. I heard them talking (don't know who it was, I rarely listen to ESPN radio)about the game saying Rex went into prevent defense and the league is catching on. If you watch the game again, that's a load of sh*t. Rex was bringing pressure, he was switching up looks, he was playing man. The bottom line is that our pass rush slowed down in the second half and our DBs just weren't making plays on the ball or tackling the way they did against Oakland. Combine this fact with a bunch of ill timed penalties, timeoutgate and we have ourselves a late game collapse. Three plays in particular that really stood out to me. On the 97 yard drive, Davante Adams beating Allen on a slant route to put the packers inside the 5. The play after that Rex rushes 6 or 7, if Rodgers doesn't get the ball out in 1 second he's a dead man. Kyle Wilson playing the slot standing on the goal line. Balls snapped he backs up 2 yards as Cobb runs towards him providing just enough space for ARod to get the ball out before he gets crushed TD pack. The most obvious other play is the Nelson 80 TD that no one is talking about. Pryor missed the tackle and Dee was beaten badly. If Pryor makes that tackle that would've given the D a handful of chances to stop them. So no, the "experts" love to oversimplify problems because it makes their jobs easier, but we didn't lose because of Rex's supposed tendency to play prevent defense. We lost because we couldn't tackle, couldn't make any plays on the ball, and our pass rush slowed significantly in the second half.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If that is the case, then he wont see the field cause Cumberland is a terrible blocker.  I remember the Raiders play when he was trying to block the edge LB and he went right by him, resulting in Geno getting sack for 30 yards.

And I remember Cumberland pancaking Justin Tuck in that game. I mean it could go either way. And I think right now, that's the case. Amaro's reps will increase as the season goes on.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Your wrong. You heard the "experts" on ESPN radio. Your heating up their leftovers and serving it as you're own. I heard them talking (don't know who it was, I rarely listen to ESPN radio)about the game saying Rex went into prevent defense and the league is catching on. If you watch the game again, that's a load of sh*t. Rex was bringing pressure, he was switching up looks, he was playing man. The bottom line is that our pass rush slowed down in the second half and our DBs just weren't making plays on the ball or tackling the way they did against Oakland. Combine this fact with a bunch of ill timed penalties, timeoutgate and we have ourselves a late game collapse. Three plays in particular that really stood out to me. On the 97 yard drive, Davante Adams beating Allen on a slant route to put the packers inside the 5. The play after that Rex rushes 6 or 7, if Rodgers doesn't get the ball out in 1 second he's a dead man. Kyle Wilson playing the slot standing on the goal line. Balls snapped he backs up 2 yards as Cobb runs towards him providing just enough space for ARod to get the ball out before he gets crushed TD pack. The most obvious other play is the Nelson 80 TD that no one is talking about. Pryor missed the tackle and Dee was beaten badly. If Pryor makes that tackle that would've given the D a handful of chances to stop them. So no, the "experts" love to oversimplify problems because it makes their jobs easier, but we didn't lose because of Rex's supposed tendency to play prevent defense. We lost because we couldn't tackle, couldn't make any plays on the ball, and our pass rush slowed significantly in the second half.

 

I don't watch ESPN. 

 

I also don't eat leftovers.

 

Also, Rex has a long history of doing this on defense with a lead. No amount of paragraph break-free narrative is going to change that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't watch ESPN.

I also don't eat leftovers.

Also, Rex has a long history of doing this on defense with a lead. No amount of paragraph break-free narrative is going to change that.

I'm sorry if my paragraph break-free style offended you, as if somehow that diminished the point I was trying to make.

Is this better?

I didn't actually think I'd change your mind, I just had to get that off my chest.

I'm sure you don't watch ESPN. Really, I believe you..

I'm not talking about Rex's "long history".

I'm talking about the Packers game.

I'm not going to argue with you.

Just re-watch it. Tell me what you think.

I mustered up the courage to do it last night. What I took from it was that the defense as a whole did not execute, tackle, rush the passer, or cover anyone starting with the 97 yard drive not because Rex kept the D in prevent.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm sorry if my paragraph break-free style offended you, as if somehow that diminished the point I was trying to make.

Is this better?

I didn't actually think I'd change your mind, I just had to get that off my chest.

I'm sure you don't watch ESPN. Really, I believe you..

I'm not talking about Rex's "long history".

I'm talking about the Packers game.

I'm not going to argue with you.

Just re-watch it. Tell me what you think.

I mustered up the courage to do it last night. What I took from it was that the defense as a whole did not execute, tackle, rush the passer, or cover anyone starting with the 97 yard drive not because Rex kept the D in prevent.

 

Response full of snide crap and insistence that you're right and I'm wrong. Definitely seems like you don't want to argue.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


×
×
  • Create New...