It's a passing league! Part Deux

[LionelRichie]

  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.

 

You have to admit that Sanchez was pretty awful for most of the 2009 season.    

 

The first game I ever attended was vs. the Bills when Sanchez threw 5 int's while both Leon and Jones had over 100 yds rushing.   There was also the Falcons game when Rex announced they were out of the playoffs - I think they lost 10-9 or 10-8.    And then there was the Ted Ginn game where the Dolphins scored 30 pts without their offense scoring a single TD.   

 

I don't think the Jets really compare to the Seahawks D I just figured this was a good opportunity to reminisce about just how awful Sanchez is and how cursed this franchise is.  

[Bleedin Green]

  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.

 

So your entire argument is that a team's success is solely predicated on their defensive prowess, and offense is completely irrelevant. Yeah, you go ahead and keep on trying to figure out why people think Jets fans are idiots and let us know how that goes for you.

Oh, and hate to break it to you, but your entire post completely contradicts itself.

[Smashmouth]

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.

Very true on the scheme but the main thing is they HIT and Tackled guys as soon as they caught the ball. They ate up Mannings dink and dunk offense and his arm simply was not good enough to challenge them down field because typical back shoulder throws wont work against those corners and Chancellor/Thomas and Wagner are capable of shutting down any TE in the league on any given day as well. That along with some really bad decisions on the INT's caused the game to get totally out of hand.

 

Seattles defense was that elite last night and I think it proves that talent will win out most of the time. Manning, besides the few bad decisions he made, did get his play makers the ball they were simply not good enough to make anything happen vs the superior athletes of the Seahawks.

[Smashmouth]

So your entire argument is that a team's success is solely predicated on their defensive prowess, and offense is completely irrelevant. Yeah, you go ahead and keep on trying to figure out why people think Jets fans are idiots and let us know how that goes for you.

Oh, and hate to break it to you, but your entire post completely contradicts itself.

 

Not at all.

 

While Seattles offense is way more effective and less mistake prone than the Jets were in 09/10 the difference between the two teams was Seattle has an elite defense the Jets did not. Not to take anything away from Russell Wilson cause he played very solid all year and through out the playoffs last year and this year but that defense turned that game into a joke before Wilson had a chance to throw for 100 yards. They broke down the Broncos in every single facet of the game including Special teams and their team speed on offense was in another world compared to what the Jets have had in the last 10 years.

[Smashmouth]

  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.

 

 

 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.

 

Very good posts pedro55 ! Right on the money

[pedro55]

You have to admit that Sanchez was pretty awful for most of the 2009 season.    

 

The first game I ever attended was vs. the Bills when Sanchez threw 5 int's while both Leon and Jones had over 100 yds rushing.   There was also the Falcons game when Rex announced they were out of the playoffs - I think they lost 10-9 or 10-8.    And then there was the Ted Ginn game where the Dolphins scored 30 pts without their offense scoring a single TD.   

 

I don't think the Jets really compare to the Seahawks D I just figured this was a good opportunity to reminisce about just how awful Sanchez is and how cursed this franchise is.  

 

  I agree Sanchez stunk.  And he was better in 2009 than he was in 2011 & 2012 which is depressing.  And Geno was terrible most of last season.  Weapons or not on these teams, the QB has been pretty awful.   

 

 But this theory that if the Jets had a better QB they would have won is more a pipe dream.   If they had Pennington would they have done any better?  Probably not. It wasn't like Sanchez was the turnover machine in 2009 like he became later on.    And that Colts game,  the Jets defense didn't play well and they were beat by the better team.    If the Jets lost 17-13 or something, I'd say the offense ruined their chances.   But they lost 30-17, so it wasn't even a close game.  The Defense didn't show up against the Steelers the next year either for most of that game.  And hell the defense couldn't stop Big Ben when it mattered to end the game.   

 

 To me, as much hype as Rex's teams get on defense, his defense didn't exactly show up and play lights out in 2 AFC Championship games.   Sanchez and the offense has sucked for years, but at the end of the day,  you could say Rex and the Defense choked in those games.  The defense carried those teams, were expected to carry them, and they wound up playing poorly in both championship games.   And the team has gotten worse ever since.    

 

  The Problem I see with the Jets is they really don't seem to believe in "playmakers."   That 2009 defense was good and Revis was better than Sherman, but they needed Sanchez and that offense to put up 31 points to win a game in the playoffs.    Great defenses set the tone, the Jets defense kind of just sit on their heels and stop you.    Seattle has this defense that nobody wants to face.  They bring fear into the opponents.   They get into the opponents head.   That would be great if the jets had that kind of defense.   

 

 Again to me, the Jets had a defense that was good enough to win something if they had an offense that was just as good.  They never had a defense that was so dominant it didn't matter what the offense did as long as they didn't turn the ball over.   The 85 Bears, 00 Ravens, and Seahawks this year were pretty much those kinds of defenses.   The 2009 Jets weren't one of those defenses.    

 

So yeah if Sanchez and the offense were better, maybe things would be different. But most teams in the NFL could say the same thing.  Hell the Colts of yesteryear with Manning or the Colts this year with Luck and Packers could say if they had the 2009 Jets defense, they would win super bowls.  Hell, for arguments sake, you could say if the Packers or Colts had the Jets defense this season, they might have had a shot as well.   That's just not the way the real world works.

[CTM]

Not at all.

 

While Seattles offense is way more effective and less mistake prone than the Jets were in 09/10 the difference between the two teams was Seattle has an elite defense the Jets did not. Not to take anything away from Russell Wilson cause he played very solid all year and through out the playoffs last year and this year but that defense turned that game into a joke before Wilson had a chance to throw for 100 yards. They broke down the Broncos in every single facet of the game including Special teams and their team speed on offense was in another world compared to what the Jets have had in the last 10 years.

 

I don't understand how you could say this? Our 2009 defense was about equal in DVOA, had a lower defensive passer rating, gave up 20 less yards per game,  gave up less yards per pass attempt. The Jets defense gave up 19 TD's and 19 FG's on the season, Seattle gave up 20 Td's and 26 FG's.  The score % (% of drives ending in a score) against Seattle was 25%, ours was 20%, Seattle gave up 23.4 yards per drive and we gave up 21.6

 

There is basically NO meaningful metric in which they soundly beat us, but they were elite and we weren't.. All while they had a competent offense and we had a terrible one.

 

Essentially, you've looked at crusher and called him thin here.

 

Very good posts pedro55 ! Right on the money

 

LMFAO, absurd

[Bleedin Green]

Not at all.

 

While Seattles offense is way more effective and less mistake prone than the Jets were in 09/10 the difference between the two teams was Seattle has an elite defense the Jets did not. Not to take anything away from Russell Wilson cause he played very solid all year and through out the playoffs last year and this year but that defense turned that game into a joke before Wilson had a chance to throw for 100 yards. They broke down the Broncos in every single facet of the game including Special teams and their team speed on offense was in another world compared to what the Jets have had in the last 10 years.

 

Actually it does, but I certainly wouldn't expect you to agree with me.  I think we've long since established you and I are never going to come to an agreement on this kind of topic.  Keep in mind, I have long since acknowledged that the 09 Colts game was a team loss that all phases deserve blame for, but this idea that the offense had no part at all (never mind a significant part) in that failure is completely baseless and indefensible.

 

For starters, it's a bit excessive to try to credit solely one side of the ball for a team's overall success.  It's made that much worse when it's then being use as an attempt to allegedly prove the supposed massive superiority of a single unit of one team's over another, when they are statistically fairly comparable across the board and it is the other side of the ball that is the one that is so massively different.  Consider that the Seahawks #1 ranking in points allowed is provided as supposed proof, but it actually disproves the entire argument being made more than anything, as the Jets were the same in 2009 and the 2 teams allowed nearly the identical number of points on the season, further proving that the difference in those teams was the substantially superior Seahawks offense.  The respective records does nothing to change these realities.  Or are we supposed to believe that the Jets have a superior offense to every team who won less than 8 games this season?  Because that's exactly the kind of logic that's attempting to be used here, and it doesn't hold water.

[JiFtheOracle]

 But this theory that if the Jets had a better QB they would have won is more a pipe dream.  

 

lulza

[JiFtheOracle]

I don't understand how you could say this? Our 2009 defense was about equal in DVOA, had a lower defensive passer rating, gave up 20 less yards per game,  gave up less yards per pass attempt. The Jets defense gave up 19 TD's and 19 FG's on the season, Seattle gave up 20 Td's and 26 FG's.  The score % (% of drives ending in a score) against Seattle was 25%, ours was 20%, Seattle gave up 23.4 yards per drive and we gave up 21.6

 

There is basically NO meaningful metric in which they soundly beat us, but they were elite and we weren't.. All while they had a competent offense and we had a terrible one.

 

Essentially, you've looked at crusher and called him thin here.

 

 

LMFAO, absurd

 

Nothing better than Smash pwnage.

[CTM]

Actually it does, but I certainly wouldn't expect you to agree with me.  I think we've long since established you and I are never going to come to an agreement on this kind of topic.  Keep in mind, I have long since acknowledged that the 09 Colts game was a team loss that all phases deserve blame for, but this idea that the offense had no part at all (never mind a significant part) in that failure is completely baseless and indefensible.

 

For starters, it's a bit excessive to try to credit solely one side of the ball for a team's overall success.  It's made that much worse when it's then being use as an attempt to allegedly prove the supposed massive superiority of a single unit of one team's over another, when they are statistically fairly comparable across the board and it is the other side of the ball that is the one that is so massively different.  Consider that the Seahawks #1 ranking in points allowed is provided as supposed proof, but it actually disproves the entire argument being made more than anything, as the Jets were the same in 2009 and the 2 teams allowed nearly the identical number of points on the season, further proving that the difference in those teams was the substantially superior Seahawks offense.  The respective records does nothing to change these realities.  Or are we supposed to believe that the Jets have a superior offense to every team who won less than 8 games this season?  Because that's exactly the kind of logic that's attempting to be used here, and it doesn't hold water.

 

When you remove special teams and the offense giving up TD's we gave up less points, 

[SenorGato]

While Seattles offense is way more effective and less mistake prone than the Jets were in 09/10 the difference between the two teams was Seattle has an elite defense the Jets did not.

Hey now, you're an All Star!

No

[Smashmouth]

I don't understand how you could say this? Our 2009 defense was about equal in DVOA, had a lower defensive passer rating, gave up 20 less yards per game,  gave up less yards per pass attempt. The Jets defense gave up 19 TD's and 19 FG's on the season, Seattle gave up 20 Td's and 26 FG's.  The score % (% of drives ending in a score) against Seattle was 25%, ours was 20%, Seattle gave up 23.4 yards per drive and we gave up 21.6

 

There is basically NO meaningful metric in which they soundly beat us, but they were elite and we weren't.. All while they had a competent offense and we had a terrible one.

 

Essentially, you've looked at crusher and called him thin here.

 

 

LMFAO, absurd

 

 

Nothing better than Smash pwnage.

 

WHAT HAPPENED TO YOUR FREAKIN METRICS AND DVOA IN THE SB ??????????????????????????????????????????????????

 

OH YEAH THATS RIGHT THEY MEAN NOTHING.

 

THERES YOUR FREAKIN OWNAGE JIFFY POP

[SenorGato]

Not even a just kidding in there...THATS the difference you came up with?

[CTM]

WHAT HAPPENED TO YOUR FREAKIN METRICS AND DVOA IN THE SB ??????????????????????????????????????????????????

 

OH YEAH THATS RIGHT THEY MEAN NOTHING.

 

THERES YOUR FRAJIM OENAGE JIFFY POP

 

DVOA predicted Seattle had a 60% chance of winning, numbnuts

[SenorGato]

DVOA predicted Seattle had a 60% chance of winning, numbnuts

Actually laughed out loud. Seattle is pretty much the league headliner for a numbers heavy organization.

[JiFtheOracle]

DVOA predicted Seattle had a 60% chance of winning, numbnuts

 

More Smash pwnage...

[Smashmouth]

DVOA predicted Seattle had a 60% chance of winning, numbnuts

 

Good for them Chan

 

Now so you can understand what a good defense or elite defense is you can see of you wonderful DVOA points out that Seattle's defense has given up 3 points all year on opening drives setting the tone for the games they played. The Jets were never ever that good on defense and never really blew anyone out like Seattle did either. What that causes during the regular season more so that the playoffs is the team sits back with a big lead. The Jets were in more close games in 09 and 10 . Seattles defense was and is light years ahead of what the Jets fielded in -0 and 10 because they have absolutely no weaknesses. The Jets were vulnerable in the middle of the field and had slow LB's and they did not force turnovers. You can let your DVOA compare the 2 defenses all you want but they are not close. Wonder what Seattle would have done to that Steeler offense in 10. It would have been a blood bath but they ran the ball down our throats and controlled the entire first half of a game we looked like we came out with cement shoes on

[Matt39]

Im curious which QB we should have had the would have put up 30+ in that Colts game. That's what it would have took to win that game...the defense didn't tire out because the offense wasn't sustaining drives, they couldn't get off the field in the first half either. 

 

What happened during the season is fairly meaningless as we weren't going to go 15-1...the Jets were one game within the SB with a bad QB. If they missed the playoffs we can play the what-if games more....but since we made it that far you kind of have to just use the Colts game. Seattle didn't have a weakness in their secondary like we did with Lito....there was nothing for Peyton to exploit....that reason alone pretty much makes Seattle's D >>>

[pedro55]

When you remove special teams and the offense giving up TD's we gave up less points, 

 

 Yeah but the Seahawks had the best Scoring Defense in the NFL this year,   whereas the Jets have never been known as a great scoring defense.

   

 They allowed  16 Passing TDs this season and Picked the ball off 28 Times.     Think about that.  They picked the ball off more than they gave up TDs.    In Yesterdays Super Bowl,  the Seahawks defense essentially outscored the Broncos 9-8.  So if the offense never scored,  the Seahawks still win.  

 

 The Jets were never that kind of defense.

[Miss Lonelyhearts]

I don't understand how you could say this? Our 2009 defense was about equal in DVOA, had a lower defensive passer rating, gave up 20 less yards per game, gave up less yards per pass attempt. The Jets defense gave up 19 TD's and 19 FG's on the season, Seattle gave up 20 Td's and 26 FG's. The score % (% of drives ending in a score) against Seattle was 25%, ours was 20%, Seattle gave up 23.4 yards per drive and we gave up 21.6

There is basically NO meaningful metric in which they soundly beat us, but they were elite and we weren't.. All while they had a competent offense and we had a terrible one.

Essentially, you've looked at crusher and called him thin here.

LMFAO, absurd

It's kind of difficult to compare the 2009 Jets to other great defenses. That was essentially the greatest one-trick pony of all time. The DPR was the product of 1) Revis having basically the best season any player has ever had and 2) Rex et al. getting him an insane number of chances (without digging up FOA, something like 120, about the second-most in the league). That's also where the variance comes from -- it's a relatively simple matter to avoid him and the numbers were way different when they did.

[Smashmouth]

Actually laughed out loud. Seattle is pretty much the league headliner for a numbers heavy organization.

your easily amused eh ? I predicted Seattle would put up 40 + and blow out the Broncos so yeah I'm laughing pretty hard as well and I didn't use percentages but I won a lot of money

[SenorGato]

The response to that utter shutdown was "good for them Chan," just in case anyone missed it. I'm lost for most words right now.

[SenorGato]

your easily amused eh ? I predicted Seattle would put up 40 + and blow out the Broncos so yeah I'm laughing pretty hard as well and I didn't use percentages but I won a lot of money

[pedro55]

 We can argue stats and numbers all day long, the truth is,  a Seahawks backup defensive player for parts of this season just won a Super Bowl MVP.

What's that tell you about how good that defense really is.

[ZachEY]

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.

 

Not to mention that QB pre and post major surgeries.

 

What Manning did this year was amazing considering his arm is basically Pennington at this point.

[Smashmouth]

 We can argue stats and numbers all day long, the truth is,  a Seahawks backup defensive player for parts of this season just won a Super Bowl MVP.

What's that tell you about how good that defense really is.

let Chan and Gato look it up on DVOA they'll get back to ya

[Smashmouth]

Not to mention that QB pre and post major surgeries.

 

What Manning did this year was amazing considering his arm is basically Pennington at this point.

He did what he did surrounded by talent, too bad that talent was completely over matched in the SB. You know,  like the Jets are every week.

 

If Manning chose the Jets over the Broncos his career might very well be over right now.

[ZachEY]

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.

 

This is all that matters.  Just like the fact that we were once having Tebow vs. Sanchez arguments.  Should have told you all you needed to know about either player.

 

When you have to argue that the defense is NOT the best in the league and you also have to argue that Sanchez is NOT the worst in the league, the gap is still a mile wide.

[Smashmouth]

DVOA predicted Seattle had a 60% chance of winning, numbnuts

and the only factor involved in that prediction was defense right ??

[Matt39]

This is all that matters.  Just like the fact that we were once having Tebow vs. Sanchez arguments.  Should have told you all you needed to know about either player.

 

When you have to argue that the defense is NOT the best in the league and you also have to argue that Sanchez is NOT the worst in the league, the gap is still a mile wide.

 

And even with that wide gap we still were one game within the SB....all that happened before that doesn't really matter. We can play that what if game with the 2011 season more so than the 09/10 years.

[ZachEY]

Not at all.

 

While Seattles offense is way more effective and less mistake prone than the Jets were in 09/10 the difference between the two teams was Seattle has an elite defense the Jets did not. Not to take anything away from Russell Wilson cause he played very solid all year and through out the playoffs last year and this year but that defense turned that game into a joke before Wilson had a chance to throw for 100 yards. They broke down the Broncos in every single facet of the game including Special teams and their team speed on offense was in another world compared to what the Jets have had in the last 10 years.

 

That's one game.  Sanchez was in the conversation for worst in the league every season.  Wilson has never been considered that.  The difference is monumental.

 

Jets 2009 defense was championship caliber, even if they at times were imperfect.  The 2009 Jets offense, at least passing, was in the basement.

[Smashmouth]

Not to mention that QB pre and post major surgeries.

 

What Manning did this year was amazing considering his arm is basically Pennington at this point.

wait a minute you mean with a Pennington arm and incredible cast of skill players you can win in this league ?? Go Figure

[ZachEY]

 But this theory that if the Jets had a better QB they would have won is more a pipe dream. 

 

[CTM]

Good for them Chan

 

Now so you can understand what a good defense or elite defense is you can see of you wonderful DVOA points out that Seattle's defense has given up 3 points all year on opening drives setting the tone for the games they played. The Jets were never ever that good on defense and never really blew anyone out like Seattle did either. What that causes during the regular season more so that the playoffs is the team sits back with a big lead. The Jets were in more close games in 09 and 10 . Seattles defense was and is light years ahead of what the Jets fielded in -0 and 10 because they have absolutely no weaknesses. The Jets were vulnerable in the middle of the field and had slow LB's and they did not force turnovers. You can let your DVOA compare the 2 defenses all you want but they are not close. Wonder what Seattle would have done to that Steeler offense in 10. It would have been a blood bath but they ran the ball down our throats and controlled the entire first half of a game we looked like we came out with cement shoes on

 

 

If you watched more then 3 seattle games all year I'd be shocked..  go away