HessStation Posted February 3, 2014 Share Posted February 3, 2014 One slight problem- Jets defense is not nearly as good as Seattle defense is Interestingly if Tanny didn't overpay Sancez and Holmes they would of had enough money to keep Revis and Laron Landry. Revis, Cro, Laron, and say they take Eric Reid instead of Milliner bc they still have Revis and this D is just as good IMO. Herese but still interesting to play around with the what ifs.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CTM Posted February 3, 2014 Share Posted February 3, 2014 Interestingly if Tanny didn't overpay Sancez and Holmes they would of had enough money to keep Revis and Laron Landry. Revis, Cro, Laron, and say they take Eric Reid instead of Milliner bc they still have Revis and this D is just as good IMO. Herese but still interesting to play around with the what ifs.. It's nonsense, by any metric you want to look at our 2009 defense was just as good as the 2013 Hawks, the difference is that Seattle had a QB with a +100 rating who didn't turn the ball over, and we had a guy with ratings in the 60's who turned the ball over with the frequency of crusher making return trips to the buffet line Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HessStation Posted February 3, 2014 Share Posted February 3, 2014 It's nonsense, by any metric you want to look at our 2009 defense was just as good as the 2013 Hawks, the difference is that Seattle had a QB with a +100 rating who didn't turn the ball over, and we had a guy with ratings in the 60's who turned the ball over with the frequency of crusher making return trips to the buffet line Completely agree w you. QB is and forever shall be the #1 prerequisite. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt39 Posted February 3, 2014 Share Posted February 3, 2014 Completely agree w you. QB is and forever shall be the #1 prerequisite. 2009 Jets relied on the blitz....Seattle rarely blitzes...if we were able to pair our current dline with the 2009 secondary we'd be as good as Seattle. But their speed was on a different level. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
faba Posted February 3, 2014 Share Posted February 3, 2014 This is true- our pass rush came from blitzing schemes in 2009- unlike Seattle that rarely biltzes and has seven guys that fly to the ball in back Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sperm Edwards Posted February 3, 2014 Share Posted February 3, 2014 Thing is though if you're SF do you give Kaepernick, Flacco money? Who's going to be the first team to buck the trend is what Im getting at... No. Kaepernick doesn't have Flacco's leverage. Also, only Frank Gore ripping off an improbable 60-yard run kept the 49ers from dropping 3 of 3 to Seattle this year. Plus he was usually bad passing the ball when SF played someone with a halfway-decent defense. Here's all the good (or even ok) defenses SF played: - Seattle x2 in the regular season (had poor games in both, and was downright embarrassing in week 2 on national TV). - Indy (he sucked) - Carolina (sucked) - New Orleans (not exactly a stud defense, gained a pathetic 4 yards/pass attempt, and choked in the last half of the 4th Q in the loss) - Arizona x2 (had 2 excellent games and got no help from the 49er ground attack in the 2nd one). But Arizona's D was pretty inconsistent this year. 7 regular season games and he was between meh and awful in 5 of those 7 games. Beyond the 2 Arizona games, the guy racked up his good passing numbers against dogsh*t all season long. Playoffs: - 53%, 1/1, 227 yds vs GB (but had 100 on the ground, which is a big part of what makes him so dangerous/valuable). Meanwhile GB's defense sucked anyway. - 54%, 1/0, 200 yds vs Car. If Carolina had a really good offense they probably run away with this one. Vernon Davis miraculously got his feet in on a crappy throw for a 1 yard TD. Look at Davis here, wide open on that and other plays, and Kaepernick's throws either went elsewhere - like to Crabtree underneath when Davis was WAYYY open deep on the same side of the field - or the throw just sucked. The long pass to Boldin should have been a sure TD pass. Kaep unnecessarily threw off his back foot and was off-target. Luckily, Boldin was just that open that it was still a big gainer. - 58%, 1/2, 153 yds vs Seattle (but again, he had 130 yards rushing). Still, they lost the game on the now-famous Sherman/Crabtree interception in the endzone. It was 1st down on Seattle's 18 with 30 seconds left. Oh yeah, and he got intercepted on the prior drive as well. Total choke artist game. So, no way do I give him a Flacco-type deal if I'm SF. Not yet, anyway. At least Flacco got them a ring first (close game as it was, it probably ends in blowout if not for the blackout), and Baltimore's success was most definitely because of his ridiculously-perfect passing in the playoffs (11/0 or something). Absent that, they don't make it out of Denver. Also a year later you see what happens to a team when you devote all-time-great $ to a QB who's otherwise just pretty good or ok mostly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CTM Posted February 3, 2014 Share Posted February 3, 2014 2009 Jets relied on the blitz....Seattle rarely blitzes...if we were able to pair our current dline with the 2009 secondary we'd be as good as Seattle. But their speed was on a different level. Yet, our defensive QB rating was superior to thiers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RutgersJetFan Posted February 3, 2014 Share Posted February 3, 2014 When you think about it, Rex basically won the Super Bowl last night. This thread = this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
T0mShane Posted February 3, 2014 Share Posted February 3, 2014 It's nonsense, by any metric you want to look at our 2009 defense was just as good as the 2013 Hawks, the difference is that Seattle had a QB with a +100 rating who didn't turn the ball over, and we had a guy with ratings in the 60's who turned the ball over with the frequency of crusher making return trips to the buffet line When you think about it, having Russell Wilson's parents bone three years too late cost Rex two titles. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Greenseed4 Posted February 3, 2014 Share Posted February 3, 2014 When you think about it, having Russell Wilson's parents bone three years too late cost Rex two titles. What I'm getting from this is if we make arrangements, we can be contenders in 2036. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
T0mShane Posted February 3, 2014 Share Posted February 3, 2014 What I'm getting from this is if we make arrangements, we can be contenders in 2036. Russell Wilson, meet Serena Williams. Serena, Russell Wilson. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Crusher Posted February 3, 2014 Share Posted February 3, 2014 It's nonsense, by any metric you want to look at our 2009 defense was just as good as the 2013 Hawks, the difference is that Seattle had a QB with a +100 rating who didn't turn the ball over, and we had a guy with ratings in the 60's who turned the ball over with the frequency of crusher making return trips to the buffet line Nice try but you might want to look up the current restraining orders the buffets within a 50 mile radius have against me and then maybe edit your post. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CTM Posted February 3, 2014 Share Posted February 3, 2014 When you think about it, having Russell Wilson's parents bone three years too late cost Rex two titles. Bevel made Wilson Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
T0mShane Posted February 3, 2014 Share Posted February 3, 2014 Bevel made Wilson Where is that cum-guzzling Pisswasser meisterbrau sourceworx now? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt39 Posted February 3, 2014 Share Posted February 3, 2014 Yet, our defensive QB rating was superior to thiers And then Pierre Garcon showed up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NCJETSFAN Posted February 3, 2014 Share Posted February 3, 2014 I agree and disagree. I do agree they are going to be good as long as Wilson is there, but I doubt they will be this good much longer. Wilson is on his rookie contract and is a FA in 2016. Bennett is a free agent this year. Clemons, Thomas, Avril and Sherman to name, but a few are FAs in 2015. They are not keeping all those players. The good thing, as champion, they can now bring in older players on the cheap to get a ring. Now, whether they are as athletic as the young team is another matter.. FYI they have almost no room salary cap wise and Sherman and Wilson are comming up they draft really well is how they do it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jetsjetsjetss Posted February 3, 2014 Share Posted February 3, 2014 i heard defense doesnt win anything Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pedro55 Posted February 3, 2014 Share Posted February 3, 2014 It's nonsense, by any metric you want to look at our 2009 defense was just as good as the 2013 Hawks, the difference is that Seattle had a QB with a +100 rating who didn't turn the ball over, and we had a guy with ratings in the 60's who turned the ball over with the frequency of crusher making return trips to the buffet line The 2009 Jets defense got manhandled by Manning and the Colts in the AFC championship game. Especially in the second half. The Jets did not lose because of Sanchez or the offense. The 2013 Seahawks Manhandled Manning and what some thought was one of the best offenses ever. So the reality is the Jets 2009 defense wasn't even close to being on the same page as this years Seattles defense. People are talking about this years Seahawks defense like they were the 85 bears or the Ravens of 2000 or the Bucs. The only difference is most people pretty much ignored Seattle all year long, even though they were the best team. Call it the Pacific Northwest nobody remembers reason or something. The Jets had a great defense in 2009, but nobody said they were as good as the 85 bears. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt39 Posted February 3, 2014 Share Posted February 3, 2014 The 2009 Jets defense got manhandled by Manning and the Colts in the AFC championship game. Especially in the second half. The Jets did not lose because of Sanchez or the offense. The 2013 Seahawks Manhandled Manning and what some thought was one of the best offenses ever. So the reality is the Jets 2009 defense wasn't even close to being on the same page as this years Seattles defense. People are talking about this years Seahawks defense like they were the 85 bears or the Ravens of 2000 or the Bucs. The only difference is most people pretty much ignored Seattle all year long, even though they were the best team. Call it the Pacific Northwest nobody remembers reason or something. The Jets had a great defense in 2009, but nobody said they were as good as the 85 bears. Peyton was having his way with our D in the first half too. They were just kicking short FG's....he started getting TD's later. Either way the defense couldnt get off the field all game. Thing is our D back then was more scheme oriented than talent....vice versa with this Seahawks defense they are just bigger/faster/stronger...Peyton can't do anything about that. Kerry Rhodes and Jim Leonhard werent those types of athletes. Feely missed two makeable kicks too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sourceworx Posted February 3, 2014 Share Posted February 3, 2014 Where is that cum-guzzling Pisswasser meisterbrau sourceworx now? Check out this stout that I brewed last year. It's almost as black as the gentleman that digs out your girl while you're at work every day. Almost. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pedro55 Posted February 3, 2014 Share Posted February 3, 2014 Yet, our defensive QB rating was superior to thiers Yet they went 13-3, best in the NFL, home seed throughout the playoffs, and won a super bowl 43-8 against Manning. The Jets were really an 8-8 team that got killed by Manning in the AFC championship game. I would say Seattle has the upper hand in that discussion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CTM Posted February 3, 2014 Share Posted February 3, 2014 The 2009 Jets defense got manhandled by Manning and the Colts in the AFC championship game. Especially in the second half. The Jets did not lose because of Sanchez or the offense. The 2013 Seahawks Manhandled Manning and what some thought was one of the best offenses ever. So the reality is the Jets 2009 defense wasn't even close to being on the same page as this years Seattles defense. Basing anything off of 1 game is ludicrous.. the 2010 jets defense, which wasn't as good as the 2009 defense, shut down Manning.. But even so, the devil is in the details... For the entire game, Seattle punted 1 time and had 0 turnovers, the Jets had 3 punts and a INT in 4 consecutive drives in the second half. How anyone thinks that doesn't impact the defense is mind boggling to me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bleedin Green Posted February 3, 2014 Share Posted February 3, 2014 The 2009 Jets defense got manhandled by Manning and the Colts in the AFC championship game. Especially in the second half. The Jets did not lose because of Sanchez or the offense. The 2013 Seahawks Manhandled Manning and what some thought was one of the best offenses ever. So the reality is the Jets 2009 defense wasn't even close to being on the same page as this years Seattles defense. People are talking about this years Seahawks defense like they were the 85 bears or the Ravens of 2000 or the Bucs. The only difference is most people pretty much ignored Seattle all year long, even though they were the best team. Call it the Pacific Northwest nobody remembers reason or something. The Jets had a great defense in 2009, but nobody said they were as good as the 85 bears. The Jets were scoreless against the Colts in 3 of the 4 quarters in that game; trying to claim the offense had no part in that loss is complete and utter nonsense. That's not to say the Jets defense doesn't surely deserve their shame of the blame, but that's a far cry from the extremely distorted picture you're trying to paint here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt39 Posted February 3, 2014 Share Posted February 3, 2014 Basing anything off of 1 game is ludicrous.. the 2010 jets defense, which wasn't as good as the 2009 defense, shut down Manning.. But even so, the devil is in the details... For the entire game, Seattle punted 1 time and had 0 turnovers, the Jets had 3 punts and a INT in 4 consecutive drives in the second half. How anyone thinks that doesn't impact the defense is mind boggling to me. Because that defense youre referring to was getting beat up before that anyways. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CTM Posted February 3, 2014 Share Posted February 3, 2014 Yet they went 13-3, best in the NFL, home seed throughout the playoffs, and won a super bowl 43-8 against Manning. The Jets were really an 8-8 team that got killed by Manning in the AFC championship game. I would say Seattle has the upper hand in that discussion. Yes, cause Defensive passer rating correlates 100% to wins and losses. You are unwittingly making my point, had the 2009 Jets had a QB with a rating over 100 like Seattle did, we'd have won the SB Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pedro55 Posted February 3, 2014 Share Posted February 3, 2014 Basing anything off of 1 game is ludicrous.. the 2010 jets defense, which wasn't as good as the 2009 defense, shut down Manning.. But even so, the devil is in the details... For the entire game, Seattle punted 1 time and had 0 turnovers, the Jets had 3 punts and a INT in 4 consecutive drives in the second half. How anyone thinks that doesn't impact the defense is mind boggling to me. The 2010 Colts weren't the same team and were nowhere near as good as that 2009 Super Bowl losing team. People just want to believe what they want to believe. The Seahawks defense will be talked about as one of the best all time this year, whether thats' true or not is another story. And they are a young group. The Jets run was nice, but nobody outside of Jetsland, thinks they were one of the best defenses ever. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt39 Posted February 3, 2014 Share Posted February 3, 2014 The Jets were scoreless against the Colts in 3 of the 4 quarters in that game; trying to claim the offense had no part in that loss is complete and utter nonsense. That's not to say the Jets defense doesn't surely deserve their shame of the blame, but that's a far cry from the extremely distorted picture you're trying to paint here. Feely was the reason for that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pedro55 Posted February 3, 2014 Share Posted February 3, 2014 Yes, cause Defensive passer rating correlates 100% to wins and losses. You are unwittingly making my point, had the 2009 Jets had a QB with a rating over 100 like Seattle did, we'd have won the SB Except the Jets couldn't stop Manning or Big Ben in the playoffs. The Seahawks this postseason pretty much made Brees look pedestrian, made Kap irrelevant, and made Manning look like Ryan Leaf. Thats what great defenses do. The Jets had a nice run, but Manning exposed them in 2009. Great defenses don't lose a game 30-17 in the playoffs. And don't use the Sanchez excuse, he actually had a half decent game that day. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CTM Posted February 3, 2014 Share Posted February 3, 2014 Because that defense youre referring to was getting beat up before that anyways. Meh, The Jets offense had a long single play TD and 3 and out early in the game. Manning was home and in perfect conditions, the defense was being put back on the field quickly.. Again though, 1 GAME.. 1 GAME... anything can happen. Denver starting with a fluke safety and a long drive by Seattle certainly didn't impact the offense either I'm sure. Over the course of an entire season, FO and conventional stats listed the Jets as the better pass defense. Sorry if it doesn't fit in with whatever fiction you are pursuing, but it's just the truth. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CTM Posted February 3, 2014 Share Posted February 3, 2014 Per pedro and Matt, the Indianapolis colts are the true SB winners, since they beat the Hawks mid season. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bleedin Green Posted February 3, 2014 Share Posted February 3, 2014 Basing anything off of 1 game is ludicrous.. the 2010 jets defense, which wasn't as good as the 2009 defense, shut down Manning.. But even so, the devil is in the details... For the entire game, Seattle punted 1 time and had 0 turnovers, the Jets had 3 punts and a INT in 4 consecutive drives in the second half. How anyone thinks that doesn't impact the defense is mind boggling to me. Even more interesting is that it's basing it off of one game that wasn't even against the same team, but rather against the same QB on a different team 4 years later. Funny how that works considering all we keep hearing is an endless list of excuses as to why the QB isn't in any way to blame when his team loses. So why wouldn't the point of comparison be their performances against the same team? Oh, that's right, because the Colts slapped the Seahawks D around earlier this year, so that doesn't count. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pedro55 Posted February 3, 2014 Share Posted February 3, 2014 Meh, The Jets offense had a long single play TD and 3 and out early in the game. Manning was home and in perfect conditions, the defense was being put back on the field quickly.. Again though, 1 GAME.. 1 GAME... anything can happen. Denver starting with a fluke safety and a long drive by Seattle certainly didn't impact the offense either I'm sure. Over the course of an entire season, FO and conventional stats listed the Jets as the better pass defense. Sorry if it doesn't fit in with whatever fiction you are pursuing, but it's just the truth. The Seahawks were the best team in the NFL all season long. That defense was the best scoring defense all season long. And they went 13-3 and won a tough NFC West. The Jets needed a Colts team to sit their starters in a game just to hope to go 9-7 and sneak into the playoffs. People blaming Sanchez for losing that AFC Championship game to the Colts are grasping at straws and its a reason why people think Jets fans are idiots when you think that Jets defense was as good as this Seahawks defense. Not even close. And the funniest things about all this crap is the Colts didn't even win the super bowl that year. The Saints did. And Manning wasn't all that impressive against the Saints defense. But hey, somehow blame it all on Sanchez that the Jets D got exposed by Manning. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shawn306 Posted February 3, 2014 Share Posted February 3, 2014 Seattle won this game for the same reason the Giants beat the Patriots in both Super Bowls, they got pressure on the QB while dropping 7 men into coverage, that is the formula, yes you need decent coverage guys who can cover for at least 3-5 seconds, and/or anticipate/recognize routes. Combine that with a QB who won't turn over the ball, and you can compete for a Super Bowl every year. I think this is the reason Idzik is rumored to want Rex to change to a 4-3 defense, the blue print explained above is easiest ran from a 4-3, most 3-4 D's rely on blitzes to get to the QB. This.... Add to the fact that the Seahawks were +7 in takeways in the post season and you can see why they won. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pedro55 Posted February 3, 2014 Share Posted February 3, 2014 This.... Add to the fact that the Seahawks were +7 in takeways in the post season and you can see why they won. Thats what people dont get. Even when the Jets defense was great, they never seemed to make that game changing interception or score. They were really a Revis Island kind of team. Shut down corner, but never really create turnovers. The Patriots who won years ago, besides cheating, were crazy with Creating turnovers in the playoffs. Thats why they won. The Seahawks forced turnovers yesterday and scored points. That's what they did all season long. The Jets were one of those bend not break teams, but in a 13-10 game, they didn't seem to come up with a turnover. And they had a crappy offense. So it's why they went 9-7 and lost. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sperm Edwards Posted February 3, 2014 Share Posted February 3, 2014 Our defense was easily good enough to win a championship if the offense - primarily the QB - was also good enough. It doesn't matter if they were or were not as good as Seattle's. I don't see how that matters. Seattle's defense was better than plenty of superbowl winners and so was ours. Unfortunately the offense couldn't score enough points to get us past the championship game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.