Smashmouth Posted May 29, 2013 Author Share Posted May 29, 2013 There were a lot of missed opportunities. Not just individual plays but entire possessions. It was sickening; we really could have beaten them. The killer in that game was the Jets first 4th quarter drive when they took 8+ minutes off the clock and did not run a no huddle offense to save time .They could have easily shaved 3 + minutes off that drive if they had a competent coach but they didnt. I remember screaming the entire drive while the Jets took their sweet time and huddled up after every play it was maddening That along with the fact Shottenhemiers calls at the goalline were borderline moronic didnt help matters any. Trying to covert a 3rd and long from your own 19 with 1:13 left and no one in the backfield to block was more dumb coaching. Ultimately Sanchez fumbled the ball and should have all the responsibility for that but after 2 incompletions the attempt to move the football in that situation played right into the Steelers hands. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
j4jets Posted May 29, 2013 Share Posted May 29, 2013 So because of our style of play as ground and pound, outputs like 12-23 for 100 yards is not only excusable, but a GOOD performance? Just because those were good performances by Sanchez's standards doesn't make them good performances by the league's standards. Given how poor he's been for his entire career he doesn't deserve the benefit of the doubt for doing the bare minimum to get us by in those playoff wins. He was carried by a stellar team both seasons. That's why he gets the grades I give for his individual performances. 12-23 for 100 yards, 1TD, and 1 int against an above average pass D, playing on the road in a playoff game with WRs that haven't started games since 2010 for a rookie QB is a good performance. You are only looking at stats. I am looking at circumstantial evidence. Its not so much about completing just above 50% and barely reaching 100 yards. Its about all the intangibles that go with it. Those weren't just good performances by Sanchez' standard. Those were good performances by ANY NFL standard given all the intangibles involved (again, rookie QB/HC, Road game, playoff game etc). Sanchez was asked to pass the ball 8 times in the 2nd half. He completed 5 for 41 yards and a TD. Yeah, he wasn't asked to do much, but when he was, he had a 115 QB rating in the second half. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sperm Edwards Posted May 29, 2013 Share Posted May 29, 2013 The killer in that game was the Jets first 4th quarter drive when they took 8+ minutes off the clock and did not run a no huddle offense to save time .They could have easily shaved 3 + minutes off that drive if they had a competent coach but they didnt. I remember screaming the entire drive while the Jets took their sweet time and huddled up after every play it was maddening That along with the fact Shottenhemiers calls at the goalline were borderline moronic didnt help matters any. Trying to covert a 3rd and long from your own 19 with 1:13 left and no one in the backfield to block was more dumb coaching. Ultimately Sanchez fumbled the ball and should have all the responsibility for that but after 2 incompletions the attempt to move the football in that situation played right into the Steelers hands. Like I said, there were plenty of missed opportunities. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smashmouth Posted May 29, 2013 Author Share Posted May 29, 2013 Like I said, there were plenty of missed opportunities. yep I know Im just pointing them out Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SenorGato Posted May 30, 2013 Share Posted May 30, 2013 The killer in that game was the Jets first 4th quarter drive when they took 8+ minutes off the clock and did not run a no huddle offense to save time .They could have easily shaved 3 + minutes off that drive if they had a competent coach but they didnt. I remember screaming the entire drive while the Jets took their sweet time and huddled up after every play it was maddening That along with the fact Shottenhemiers calls at the goalline were borderline moronic didnt help matters any. Trying to covert a 3rd and long from your own 19 with 1:13 left and no one in the backfield to block was more dumb coaching. Ultimately Sanchez fumbled the ball and should have all the responsibility for that but after 2 incompletions the attempt to move the football in that situation played right into the Steelers hands. We're still doing this with Mark Sanchez in this scenario? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smashmouth Posted May 30, 2013 Author Share Posted May 30, 2013 We're still doing this with Mark Sanchez in this scenario? has nothing at all to do with Mark Sanchez if the coach tells you to huddle up you huddle up. So stop trying to stir sh*t up. If Im Rex in that situation I grab Shotty by the ******* throat and tell Sanchez to go no huddle Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SenorGato Posted May 30, 2013 Share Posted May 30, 2013 The offense's production had nothing to do with the QB? You're sure about this? Would he power up in the no huddle or something? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jetsfan80 Posted May 30, 2013 Share Posted May 30, 2013 The offense's production had nothing to do with the QB? You're sure about this? Would he power up in the no huddle or something? I can't believe there are still people who think this way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt39 Posted May 30, 2013 Share Posted May 30, 2013 I can't believe there are still people who think this way. I still cant believe people think were fine with Jeremy Kerley, Jeff Cumberland and Stephen Hill with a rookie QB. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jetsfan80 Posted May 30, 2013 Share Posted May 30, 2013 I still cant believe people think were fine with Jeremy Kerley, Jeff Cumberland and Stephen Hill with a rookie QB. I don't think we're fine. I think we'll need to invest at least a couple early picks in the next 2 years on improving at the skill positions. Idzik recognizes this as well, otherwise I don't think there would have been rumors we wanted Tavon Austin so badly. It would have been superb if we could have paired Tavon with Geno. We'll also need a TE who, unlike Keller, can catch AND adequately block. Maybe Notre Dame will produce another one in the coming years. But I'm not in agreement we currently have the worst WR's in the league. TE's we're at or near the bottom probably, but not at WR. Sanchez made everyone look worse than they are. Hopefully Geno doesn't do the same. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
#27TheDominator Posted May 30, 2013 Share Posted May 30, 2013 There is a monumental gap between fine and better than last year. You can't fix everything. Certainly not in one off-season. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt39 Posted May 30, 2013 Share Posted May 30, 2013 There is a monumental gap between fine and better than last year. You can't fix everything. Certainly not in one off-season. Of course. This is an unfinished product....but throwing the potential franchise QB out there with this group is a bad idea. It wont work. There isnt a guy on the team that can beat press coverage on the outside. Stephen Hill cant even run an in pattern. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
#27TheDominator Posted May 30, 2013 Share Posted May 30, 2013 Of course. This is an unfinished product....but throwing the potential franchise QB out there with this group is a bad idea. It wont work. There isnt a guy on the team that can beat press coverage on the outside. Stephen Hill cant even run an in pattern. Eh. Stephen Hill was open plenty last year and he had a bad hamstring. There is as little reason to think that he won't be able to run a pattern as to think that he will be a great receiver. We have no idea. I'm interested to see what these guys do. Sydney Rice and Golden Tate aren't exactly Branch/Biletnikoff, Rice/Taylor or Stallworth/Swann. There is no reason that Holmes, Hill and Kerley can't be adequate. Especially when you consider that it appears the team will look to throw a ton of balls to backs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SenorGato Posted May 30, 2013 Share Posted May 30, 2013 I still cant believe people think were fine with Jeremy Kerley, Jeff Cumberland and Stephen Hill with a rookie QB. I just think you're looking at it all around. See 27's post above. QBs are infinitely more important to what an offense does. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smashmouth Posted May 30, 2013 Author Share Posted May 30, 2013 The offense's production had nothing to do with the QB? You're sure about this? Would he power up in the no huddle or something? do you do heavy drugs or something ? My point on the No Huddle was to save valuable time in the 4th Quarter are you really this dense ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SenorGato Posted May 31, 2013 Share Posted May 31, 2013 do you do heavy drugs or something ? My point on the No Huddle was to save valuable time in the 4th Quarter are you really this dense ? Yeah, I'm probably the dense one here. Seems pretty obvious. All they had to do was unleash heck in the form of a Mark Sanchez led no-huddle drive in the 4th on the road against the Steelers to go to the Super Bowl. Everyone would have been like whaaaaaaat. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smashmouth Posted May 31, 2013 Author Share Posted May 31, 2013 Yeah, I'm probably the dense one here. Seems pretty obvious. All they had to do was unleash heck in the form of a Mark Sanchez led no-huddle drive in the 4th on the road against the Steelers to go to the Super Bowl. Everyone would have been like whaaaaaaat. yep heavy duty drug influence Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SenorGato Posted May 31, 2013 Share Posted May 31, 2013 yep heavy duty drug influence Lol oh Smash...Just say you have nothing. It's OK. It wouldn't be news. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smashmouth Posted May 31, 2013 Author Share Posted May 31, 2013 Lol oh Smash...Just say you have nothing. It's OK. It wouldn't be news. I would Gato if you just understood the very basic premise of my post. But you dont Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SenorGato Posted May 31, 2013 Share Posted May 31, 2013 I would Gato if you just understood the very basic premise of my post. But you dont Rotfl....You really believe this sh*t too, right? I always held out hope you weren't a complete idiot despite what I read, but the # of posts it took in this little debate for you to get offensively defensive is hint #8213210832104382140821. I assume you believe all this stuff completely sober? Further proof towards how overrated it is for the mind... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sperm Edwards Posted May 31, 2013 Share Posted May 31, 2013 Yeah, I'm probably the dense one here. Seems pretty obvious. All they had to do was unleash heck in the form of a Mark Sanchez led no-huddle drive in the 4th on the road against the Steelers to go to the Super Bowl. Everyone would have been like whaaaaaaat. unleash heck? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smashmouth Posted May 31, 2013 Author Share Posted May 31, 2013 Rotfl....You really believe this sh*t too, right? I always held out hope you weren't a complete idiot despite what I read, but the # of posts it took in this little debate for you to get offensively defensive is hint #8213210832104382140821. I assume you believe all this stuff completely sober? Further proof towards how overrated it is for the mind... You have taken a very simple thing and turned it into total stupidity. Let me explain so you can comphrehend K The Jets were down by 2 TD's they had the ball starting the 4th Quarter and proceeded on a long drive to the goal line. The drive took 8 + minutes at a time in the game where the clock was NOT a luxury. All Im trying to say here is if the Jets would have run a no huddle or a hurry up they could have saved time on the clock and when the Steelers got the ball back at the end of the 4th quarter rather than there only being 3:06 left on the clock we might have had 4 or 5 minutes left due to the time we saved running the hurry up, Im not sure WTF your questioning here or what you don't seem to understand since it makes total sense that time was very important in this situation. Has nothing at all to do with who was QB'ing so I dont give a flying **** if it was Sanches or Joe Montana you dont huddle up and waste 10 to 15 seconds per play when time is running out on your freaking season. If that does not help you to understand then dont bother replying Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.