Jets' Players Want Rex Extended

[slats]

Also, funny quote I came across from the Bears' GM in firing Lovie. Funny, because of how similar Idzik's statement will sound in two months:

That would be a weird statement when announcing Rex's extension. Idzik doesn't seem that weird.

[JiFtheOracle]

Lovie went to the Super Bowl with Rex Grossman. He won three division titles. His career record was 84-66.

What were you saying?

 

Something about losing games years ago makes you a good Head Coach.

 

#back to back AFCCG losses

[Bleedin Green]

OPINION- Parity this year is greater than any other time.

 

Supporting evidence-There are more close games in the 4th quarter than any time in history.

 

We will see if this trend continues

 

While I get what you're saying, I feel like every year there's always some "more than any time in history" type stat that comes up about the NFL season, because they're always looking for it.  While I admittedly didn't read the article, my impression from what you said is that this isn't even how close the final scores have been, but rather the score at some point in the 4th quarter (or perhaps going into the 4th), is that correct?  If so, I certainly find it to be an interesting stat, but for one to hold true and apparently not the other, it would seem to suggest there's a greater tendency for teams to start running away with games in the 4th.  I would probably guess if you take a deeper look at it, there might be more "parity" amongst teams in the middle of the league, but the extremes of best and worst are still as bad as ever (after all, there are still 2 winless teams), and most of that probably falls back to the QB position.

[dbatesman]

That would be a weird statement when announcing Rex's extension. Idzik doesn't seem that weird.

I'm gonna go ahead and +1 this, because Emery is one of the weirdest ******* guys in the league.

[Jetsfan80]

Something about losing games years ago makes you a good Head Coach.

 

#back to back AFCCG losses

 

"Do they give trophies for that?"

 

[Scott Dierking]

While I get what you're saying, I feel like every year there's always some "more than any time in history" type stat that comes up about the NFL season, because they're always looking for it.  While I admittedly didn't read the article, my impression from what you said is that this isn't even how close the final scores have been, but rather the score at some point in the 4th quarter (or perhaps going into the 4th), is that correct?  If so, I certainly find it to be an interesting stat, but for one to hold true and apparently not the other, it would seem to suggest there's a greater tendency for teams to start running away with games in the 4th.  I would probably guess if you take a deeper look at it, there might be more "parity" amongst teams in the middle of the league, but the extremes of best and worst are still as bad as ever (after all, there are still 2 winless teams), and most of that probably falls back to the QB position.

Basic gist- More games are "close" within the 4th quarter than any other time in the league, through nine weeks.

 

My opinion, is that this is a byproduct of parity. Along with supporting points that:

-Teams are making quick turn arounds in fortune in recent years

-The cap has flattened, meaning teams are having to scrounge for players more (inexpensive ones at that)

-The CBA has limited what teams can do in practices and training camps, lessening competitive edges for more talented teams.

-Injuries seem to have struck everyone more deeply

 

It is interesting to note that the scoring pace is at a high, and that would lead you to think there would be more lopsided games. It is just the opposite

[JiFtheOracle]

"Do they give trophies for that?"

 

 

Only if you want to eat the corn out of the feces of said Head Coach.  

[Jetsfan80]

 but the extremes of best and worst are still as bad as ever (after all, there are still 2 winless teams), and most of that probably falls back to the QB position.

 

Pretty much.  Before the season we were told that QB had become a very deep position.  That seems to have been a knee-jerk reaction now.  The RG3 injury and defensive adjustments have made the Spread Offense stuff seem like something of a short-lived fad already, as a lot of smart people here even predicted it would.  Pocket passers still reign supreme.

 

And if you look around the league, there's only a few guys that are having great years at QB.  Peyton, Rivers, Brees, Rodgers (now hurt), Romo, Luck.  Kaepernick has improved but hasn't been anything like the 2012 Kaepernick, and the Niners are a running team. 

 

Stafford looked awful without Megatron and Matt Ryan is showing his true colors a bit now that he doesn't have the best trio of weapons in the NFL.  Russell Wilson has more or less operated as a "Game Manager" this year, which perhaps in some ways shows growth.  He makes plays when he needs to.  Cam Newton has been inconsistent.  Brady, Roethlisberger, Flacco, Eli, RG3 and Palmer have been anywhere from mediocre to terrible. 

 

It's been a weird year at QB.

[Scott Dierking]

Pretty much.  Before the season we were told that QB had become a very deep position.  That seems to have been a knee-jerk reaction now.  The RG3 injury and defensive adjustments have made the Spread Offense stuff seem like something of a short-lived fad already, as a lot of smart people here even predicted it would.  Pocket passers still reign supreme.

 

And if you look around the league, there's only a few guys that are having great years at QB.  Peyton, Rivers, Brees, Rodgers (now hurt), Romo, Luck.  Kaepernick has improved but hasn't been anything like the 2012 Kaepernick, and the Niners are a running team. 

 

Stafford looked awful without Megatron and Matt Ryan is showing his true colors a bit now that he doesn't have the best trio of weapons in the NFL.  Russell Wilson has more or less operated as a "Game Manager" this year, which perhaps in some ways shows growth.  He makes plays when he needs to.  Cam Newton has been inconsistent.  Brady, Roethlisberger, Flacco, Eli, RG3 and Palmer have been anywhere from mediocre to terrible. 

 

It's been a weird year at QB.

Yet, points per game continues at an all time high pace.

[whodeawhodat]

 Jets fire Rex and Giants hire him. Big Mo follows and the Giants are back.  You are one lucky fella.  Book it.

 

Jets fire Rex and he will win a SB with his next team, not ours.  This guy thrives and feeds off of disrespect.  He is a fighter.  One of my favorite parts of Hard Knocks was when Rex stormed out of the conference call with Revis' agents telling them, I'LL SHOW YOU!!! he meant that sh!t, I felt that sh!t.  that was no act or bravado.

[#27TheDominator]

"Do they give trophies for that?"

 

 

Check Parcells mantel

[Sperm Edwards]

I can only conclude you didn't read the last article, which supplies exactly what you have asked

 

-Comparison to other seasons in a true through 9 week comparison

-By how much it is ahead of the closest season

 

You continue to shoot from the hip here without looking at facts presented. mumble-pointspreads-mumble-agenda-mumble-tangerines/oranges.

 

The facts that you asked for all provided there. If you would only look rather than spouting Spermy talk.

 

I read the article.  

 

It does not compare the first 7 weeks of this season to the first 7 weeks of other seasons (and certainly not the first 9 weeks).

It does not say whether or not any other prior seasons also had this same pace through 7 games.

It does not say that (if the current pace continues) how much different this is from prior seasons.

It does not say whether or not it is common for 4th quarters to be "less close" in the last 9-10 games instead of the first 6-7.

It does not include any numbers from prior seasons other than to say they ended "less" than 2013's first 7 weeks.

It does not say anything about there being less disparity between the very best and very worst teams, which was also a claim of yours.

 

The question is, did you read the article? Because you are claiming it says things it quite clearly doesn't say.

 

Finally, your total fabrication of things I never said - to put words in my mouth as though you're painstakingly arguing against an opinion you know I never claimed; to further challenge me to defend a position you know I never asserted; and to use that as some type of "gotcha" conclusion - says plenty.

[Scott Dierking]

I read the article.  

 

It does not compare the first 7 weeks of this season to the first 7 weeks of other seasons.

It does not say whether or not any other prior seasons also had this same pace through 7 games.

It does not say that (if the current pace continues) how much different this is from prior seasons.

It does not say whether or not it is common for 4th quarters to be "less close" in the last 9-10 games instead of the first 6-7.

It does not include any numbers from prior seasons other than to say they ended "less" than 2013's first 7 weeks.

It does not say anything about there being less disparity between the very best and very worst teams, which was also a claim of yours.

 

The question is, did you read the article? Because you are claiming it says things it quite clearly doesn't say.

 

Finally, your total fabrication of things I never said - to put words in my mouth as though you're painstakingly arguing against an opinion you know I never claimed; to further challenge me to defend a position you know I never asserted; and to use that as some type of "gotcha" conclusion - says plenty.

THIS article, Mr magoo

 

 http://www.coldhardf...-quarter/26445/

 

You haven't even read what I have down, just more shooting from the hip. You are unusually clumsy in this dialogue.

[Sperm Edwards]

THIS article, Mr magoo

 

 http://www.coldhardf...-quarter/26445/

 

 

Hahahaha

 

So 92 games instead of 89 games is your groundbreaking new normal "trend"? And that prior "record" was 9 years ago.  Not 1 year ago (continuing a "trend") and not 30 years ago (as though we've entered a new era not seen for decades).

 

This is utter silliness.  A 3-game difference is more a function of who matched up against whom rather than some new era in parity that just stepped in starting in 2013.  It's a rounding error.  It's something that could be influenced buy something like new kickoff rules.

 

What a load of nothing.

[Scott Dierking]

Hahahaha

 

So 92 games instead of 89 games is your groundbreaking new normal "trend"? And that prior "record" was 9 years ago.  Not 1 year ago (continuing a "trend") and not 30 years ago (as though we've entered a new era not seen for decades).

 

This is utter silliness.  A 3-game difference is more a function of who matched up against whom rather than some new era in parity that just stepped in starting in 2013.  It's a rounding error.  It's something that could be influenced buy something like new kickoff rules.

 

What a load of nothing.

Thanks for providing absolutely nothing to this, other than asking for something, then getting it, and then just scoffing it off.

 

YOU said there was an "ENORMOUS TALENT GAP" between teams.

 

Scores and results don't indicate that. What proof do you offer?

[sourceworx]

I'm gonna go ahead and +1 this, because Emery is one of the weirdest ******* guys in the league.

 

We should emulate him.  Fire Rex, and bring in a CFL guy to coach us next year.  Because figuring out how to stop Henry Burris is harder than figuring out how to stop Drew Brees.

[Scott Dierking]

Want more examples of parity?

 

-The last 9 SB winners have not contained a repeat winner.

-In no other period of SB history, can you go 9 years without having a repeat champion

-The last 9 champions, include 8 different teams (NYG twice)

 

Not only is the league accordioning in terms of talent and results, but the top teams are constantly shuffling.

 

Parity is alive and well in the and statistics and results point it out more so. Rozelle wins.

[Jetsfan80]

Yet, points per game continues at an all time high pace.

 

Partly due to some outliers, I'm sure.  The league had 2 guys (Peyton, Foles) each tie the touchdown passing record this year.

[slats]

Want more examples of parity?

 

-The last 9 SB winners have not contained a repeat winner.

-In no other period of SB history, can you go 9 years without having a repeat champion

-The last 9 champions, include 8 different teams (NYG twice)

 

Not only is the league accordioning in terms of talent and results, but the top teams are constantly shuffling.

 

Parity is alive and well in the and statistics and results point it out more so. Rozelle wins.

Who's arguing that there's not parity in the league?

If anything, this post counters your original contention that this year has had significantly more parity than other years. Do you even know what you're arguing, or why you're arguing? Your corner of the conversation seems to've gone off the rails.

[Scott Dierking]

Who's arguing that there's not parity in the league?

If anything, this post counters your original contention that this year has had significantly more parity than other years. Do you even know what you're arguing, or why you're arguing? Your corner of the conversation seems to've gone off the rails.

Sperm told me that there are "Enormous Talent Gaps" between teams.

 

Inversely games are tighter, and teams have the ability to turn fortunes around much more quickly than before in the League.

 

That is all.

 

Where are these huge talent gaps, and why do they not represent themselves in results?

[Scott Dierking]

Partly due to some outliers, I'm sure.  The league had 2 guys (Peyton, Foles) each tie the touchdown passing record this year.

The new rules would certainly be at the forefront of scoring. 

 

As everyone has been saying here, and everywhere, offense is at the forefront of the NFL

[bitonti]

SD the problem with your parity argument is that these Jets have something crazy like 20% of the cap tied up in Revis and Sanchez. That's a huge part of the resources that other teams have that Rex doesn't. This is not even bringing in Santonio, Cro as highly paid low performing players, add those guys in there and it's like 30-40 dead money on a 130 mil cap (more or less). When people say the Jets are talent poor it's absolutely true and these widespread "parity" arguments don't include a team with a quarter of their payroll tied up in 4 guys, 2 of whom they get absolutely nothing from and the other two who knows from week to week. 

[slats]

Sperm told me that there are "Enormous Talent Gaps" between teams.

 

Inversely games are tighter, and teams have the ability to turn fortunes around much more quickly than before in the League.

 

That is all.

 

Where are these huge talent gaps, and why do they not represent themselves in results?

Coaching? The Bucs' roster shouldn't be winless, and the Chiefs' roster shouldn't be undefeated.

And the Jets' roster shouldn't've won a majority of its games so far.

[Scott Dierking]

Coaching? The Bucs' roster shouldn't be winless, and the Chiefs' roster shouldn't be undefeated.

And the Jets' roster shouldn't've won a majority of its games so far.

You will always have outliers. If one (or several) of teams were so much stronger than others, or if one (or several) teams are so much weaker than others, then the scores in games should be reflective of that. We aren't seeing that.

 

The one team that does not fit my equation is indisputably Jacksonville. They certainly do not fit the parity equation.

[Jetsfan80]

Coaching? The Bucs' roster shouldn't be winless, and the Chiefs' roster shouldn't be undefeated.

And the Jets' roster shouldn't've won a majority of its games so far.

 

I wonder what Kansas City's record would be against our schedule, with their 29th ranked passing attack.

[Scott Dierking]

SD the problem with your parity argument is that these Jets have something crazy like 20% of the cap tied up in Revis and Sanchez. That's a huge part of the resources that other teams have that Rex doesn't. This is not even bringing in Santonio, Cro as highly paid low performing players, add those guys in there and it's like 30-40 dead money on a 130 mil cap (more or less). When people say the Jets are talent poor it's absolutely true and these widespread "parity" arguments don't include a team with a quarter of their payroll tied up in 4 guys, 2 of whom they get absolutely nothing from and the other two who knows from week to week. 

The Jets scenario is not all that unusual in the NFL.

 

Last year the Colts had 38, yes 38 mill in dead space in their coffers. And they made the playoffs. This is more signs of parity.

[slats]

I wonder what Kansas City's record would be against our schedule, with their 29th ranked passing attack.

Yeah, I mentioned yesterday, too, that KC has hardly beat QBs the caliber of Brady, Ryan, or Brees. Paul Maguire might even call them the worst 8-0 team he's ever seen.

[bitonti]

The Jets scenario is not all that unusual in the NFL.

 

Last year the Colts had 38, yes 38 mill in dead space in their coffers. And they made the playoffs. This is more signs of parity.

 

yeah well they didn't fire that coach did they? Rex is on pace to do something similar, without Andrew Luck btw. If Rex had Andrew Luck as his starting QB he'd Jets be coach for life.

[Scott Dierking]

If Rex had Andrew Luck as his starting QB he'd Jets be coach for life.

If, If, If.

[Scott Dierking]

yeah well they didn't fire that coach did they? Rex is on pace to do something similar, without Andrew Luck btw. If Rex had Andrew Luck as his starting QB he'd Jets be coach for life.

Parity!

[Jacked4JetsFB]

Can someone explain to me what makes our roster so bad? I think those who say how bad our roster is are living in a different decade. No roster these days is complete. You have to pick a couple of areas to where you want to invest your draft picks and your cap space these days.

 

Ours is O-line and D-line, and we have invested heavily in LB and CB too, although those don't always show it, but we have invested heavily there.

 

Many other teams who have better skill position players have weak lines because of it. Unless you get very, very lucky and have 2-3 years in a row of incredible drafting success, you are always going to have multiple areas of your team with weaknesses, its the reality of the NFL today.

 

Its really short sighted.

 

I think Rex is doing a fantastic job, and deserves an extension, but its almost comical that the people clamoring about how bad of a roster we have and how that should be the reason Rex is extended are failing to realize that the strong points of this team are the strong points that Rex has emphasized since coming here.

[Scott Dierking]

Can someone explain to me what makes our roster so bad? I think those who say how bad our roster is are living in a different decade. No roster these days is complete. You have to pick a couple of areas to where you want to invest your draft picks and your cap space these days.

 

Ours is O-line and D-line, and we have invested heavily in LB and CB too, although those don't always show it, but we have invested heavily there.

 

Many other teams who have better skill position players have weak lines because of it. Unless you get very, very lucky and have 2-3 years in a row of incredible drafting success, you are always going to have multiple areas of your team with weaknesses, its the reality of the NFL today.

 

Its really short sighted.

 

I think Rex is doing a fantastic job, and deserves an extension, but its almost comical that the people clamoring about how bad of a roster we have and how that should be the reason Rex is extended are failing to realize that the strong points of this team are the strong points that Rex has emphasized since coming here.

It's an overturned roster, with lack of well known, name players on it. You could not get by several seasons with this group, and fortunately they don't have to.

 

Sometimes, this is a great short term position for a team. If you get the right players, and get coaching to get involved. Credit Idzik and Rex for making that happen.

 

in today's NFL, and the subtleness in talent gaps between teams, you can win short term with a group like this. 

[Jetsfan80]

Can someone explain to me what makes our roster so bad? I think those who say how bad our roster is are living in a different decade. No roster these days is complete. You have to pick a couple of areas to where you want to invest your draft picks and your cap space these days.

 

Ours is O-line and D-line, and we have invested heavily in LB and CB too, although those don't always show it, but we have invested heavily there.

 

Many other teams who have better skill position players have weak lines because of it. Unless you get very, very lucky and have 2-3 years in a row of incredible drafting success, you are always going to have multiple areas of your team with weaknesses, its the reality of the NFL today.

 

Its really short sighted.

 

I think Rex is doing a fantastic job, and deserves an extension, but its almost comical that the people clamoring about how bad of a roster we have and how that should be the reason Rex is extended are failing to realize that the strong points of this team are the strong points that Rex has emphasized since coming here.

 

The only area on the field where we have adequate NFL talent is on the D-Line.  We've been entirely dependent on that unit this season. 

 

As Bit pointed out, a sizable chunk of our cap is being spent on players who aren't here anymore.  Sure, other teams out there have put themselves in some form of cap hell at one time or another, but there are few teams who doled out such terrible contracts to Sanchez, Holmes, etc. 

 

We invested heavily in LB and CB, yes.  But that doesn't mean the talent is there.  Cromartie finally started to look like Cromartie on Sunday.  Milliner made his first good play or 2 of his career as well.  David Harris has looked good in spells, but we know he's a liability in pass coverage and is heavily overpaid.

 

It's why Idzik had to come in and mostly clean house.  He will finally be able to get rid of the bad contracts and get some cap space to bring in impact guys this offseason.  But you're a fool if you think we're operating with anything above a bottom-3rd roster.  It's why prognosticators had us as somewhere between a 2-6 win team this year, and rightfully so.  With a rookie QB and so many holes, and after facing the schedule we did, 5-4 is incredible.

[Jacked4JetsFB]

It's an overturned roster, with lack of well known, name players on it. You could not get by several seasons with this group, and fortunately they don't have to.

 

Sometimes, this is a great short term position for a team. If you get the right players, and get coaching to get involved. Credit Idzik and Rex for making that happen.

 

in today's NFL, and the subtleness in talent gaps between teams, you can win short term with a group like this. 

I don't disagree, but the O and D lines alone make this a decent roster. This is why before the season started I was laughing about the idiotic predictions of 4-12, it had no basis other than last years record, none.

 

There are no names because our talent is at the non skill positions, and that is not the glory positions.

 

I think this is a 7-9 to 10-6 type roster, I really do.

 

If Geno can be a top 15 NFL QB next year, and we can get him two receiving threats for next year, I think this team is a legit contender next year. 

 

I will say it again, this is nowhere near a horrible roster. It is a roster without any big time playmakers at the skill positions, but no terrible at all

[Jacked4JetsFB]

The only area on the field where we have adequate NFL talent is on the D-Line.  We've been entirely dependent on that unit this season. 

 

As Bit pointed out, a sizable chunk of our cap is being spent on players who aren't here anymore.  Sure, other teams out there have put themselves in some form of cap hell at one time or another, but there are few teams who doled out such terrible contracts to Sanchez, Holmes, etc. 

 

We invested heavily in LB and CB, yes.  But that doesn't mean the talent is there.  Cromartie finally started to look like Cromartie on Sunday.  Milliner made his first good play or 2 of his career as well.  David Harris has looked good in spells, but we know he's a liability in pass coverage and is heavily overpaid.

 

It's why Idzik had to come in and mostly clean house.  He will finally be able to get rid of the bad contracts and get some cap space to bring in impact guys this offseason.  But you're a fool if you think we're operating with anything above a bottom-3rd roster.  It's why prognosticators had us as somewhere between a 2-6 win team this year, and rightfully so.  With a rookie QB and so many holes, and after facing the schedule we did, 5-4 is incredible.

 

 

There are bad contracts because we were delusional for a few years thinking we were legit contenders.

 

Our O-line is good if not very good by todays NFL standards, there is no way it is anything less than that.

 

We have decent LB'ers, and decent corners and our D line is top 3 in the NFL.

 

This is a middle of the road roster, nowhere near a bottom 3rd roster. If you want to call me a fool for thinking it is not bottom 3rd, find me 21 teams with better overall rosters, if not, your the fool.