It's a passing league! Part Deux

[T0mShane]

That gif ended up costing me an hour of my night, which culminated with me watching Matt Foley motivational speaker. I forgot how brilliant he was and that Spade and Applegate couldn't keep their sh*t together during that skit. I can't even blame them for it, Farley was a genius and how anyone kept themselves together around him was beyond me.

Why couldn't God take Jack Black instead?

[RutgersJetFan]

That gif ended up costing me an hour of my night, which culminated with me watching Matt Foley motivational speaker. I forgot how brilliant he was and that Spade and Applegate couldn't keep their sh*t together during that skit. I can't even blame them for it, Farley was a genius and how anyone kept themselves together around him was beyond me.

 

Bennet Brauer here with another commentary. Didn't think the suits would have me back perhaps. Thought they'd have my dairy-air replaced by one of tem store mannequin well maybe I'm not "the norm". I'm not "camera friendly", I don't "wear clothes that fit me", I'm not a "heartbreaker", I haven't had "sex with a woman", I don't know "how that works", I don't "fall in line", I'm not "hygienic", I don't "wipe properly", I lack "style", I don't have "self-esteem", I have no "charisma", I don't "own a toothbrush", I don't "let my scabs heal", I can't "reach all the parts of my body", when I sleep I sweat profusely. But I guess the powers that be will keep signing my pay check until Jack and Jane K. Viewer start to go for the remote so they can get back to commentators who don't "frighten children", who don't "eat their own dandruff", who don't "pop their whiteheads with a compass they used in high school". Thank you, Kevin.

[Lupz27]

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 fully anticipate the team speed on the Jets to be a huge sticking point on how Idzik builds this team through the draft, and free agency, the Jets already have 4-5 guys on the front 7 who you can build with using that blueprint, and hopefully Milliner pans out, and 1 of the secondary pieces are in place. Lets see how many more he can land with up to 12 draft picks, and 30-50 million in Salary Cap space.

[BroadwayJoe12]

Bennet Brauer here with another commentary. Didn't think the suits would have me back perhaps. Thought they'd have my dairy-air replaced by one of tem store mannequin well maybe I'm not "the norm". I'm not "camera friendly", I don't "wear clothes that fit me", I'm not a "heartbreaker", I haven't had "sex with a woman", I don't know "how that works", I don't "fall in line", I'm not "hygienic", I don't "wipe properly", I lack "style", I don't have "self-esteem", I have no "charisma", I don't "own a toothbrush", I don't "let my scabs heal", I can't "reach all the parts of my body", when I sleep I sweat profusely. But I guess the powers that be will keep signing my pay check until Jack and Jane K. Viewer start to go for the remote so they can get back to commentators who don't "frighten children", who don't "eat their own dandruff", who don't "pop their whiteheads with a compass they used in high school". Thank you, Kevin.

 

I lose it every single time i hear "I haven't had 'sex with a woman.'"

 

This was always a particular favorite of mine:

"All because you wanted to save a couple extra pennies..."

 

[Jetknowledge]

One slight problem- Jets defense is not nearly as good as Seattle defense is

They have a better secondary, we have a better front 7.

 

Honestly, my opinion is there safety play makes there corners look better than they are.

[pedro55]

They have a better secondary, we have a better front 7.

 

Honestly, my opinion is there safety play makes there corners look better than they are.

 

  They have better depth.  Guys go in and out and that team doesn't seem to miss a beat.   And I wouldn't say the Jets front 7 is better.  The DL yes, the LB, no.

And the Jets aren't that great against the pass.   The Jets are great against the run.  Problem is most teams can pass the damn ball in 2014.    The Seahawks are great against the pass and they create turnovers.  And they are fast.  

 

  The Jets have a good starting point and Milliner did show some signs of making plays late in the season, lets hope he continues to do that.  But they need a lot of other pieces to even be close to the Seahawks or even 49ers at this point.  Lucky for the Jets they only have to compete in the AFC, where there really are not top defenses.  But there are a ton of good offenses.  The problem is the Jets offense stinks.

 

 And who knows where this seahawks team will go?   All these "greatest Defenses" conversations are nice except when you look at the history in the NFL, all those teams have been one and done.  Bears, Ravens, Bucs, etc had their one great year, one great super bowl, and then never came close again.  Great teams seem to know how to replace players and build a complete team. And a lot of it depends on that Great defense being great most of the time.  I don't think the Seahawks are like those Ravens or Bucs teams, as they have a good offense and a good team, but time will tell.

 

The Jets need to build a team who can win the AFC East. It's as simple as that.  They never seem to do that.  And from that point keep getting better.  They don't need to build a team who has a one year lucky run, and then need to rebuild a few years later.

[Jetknowledge]

They have better depth. Guys go in and out and that team doesn't seem to miss a beat. And I wouldn't say the Jets front 7 is better. The DL yes, the LB, no.

And the Jets aren't that great against the pass. The Jets are great against the run. Problem is most teams can pass the damn ball in 2014. The Seahawks are great against the pass and they create turnovers. And they are fast.

The Jets have a good starting point and Milliner did show some signs of making plays late in the season, lets hope he continues to do that. But they need a lot of other pieces to even be close to the Seahawks or even 49ers at this point. Lucky for the Jets they only have to compete in the AFC, where there really are not top defenses. But there are a ton of good offenses. The problem is the Jets offense stinks.

And who knows where this seahawks team will go? All these "greatest Defenses" conversations are nice except when you look at the history in the NFL, all those teams have been one and done. Bears, Ravens, Bucs, etc had their one great year, one great super bowl, and then never came close again. Great teams seem to know how to replace players and build a complete team. And a lot of it depends on that Great defense being great most of the time. I don't think the Seahawks are like those Ravens or Bucs teams, as they have a good offense and a good team, but time will tell.

The Jets need to build a team who can win the AFC East. It's as simple as that. They never seem to do that. And from that point keep getting better. They don't need to build a team who has a one year lucky run, and then need to rebuild a few years later.

I mean we're better on a talent level, they're a better team.

They play as 1 it seems like they know what each other are thinking at times.

They cover each other flaws, I rarely see any one of them get caught in a 1 on 1, or see 1 person coming to make the tackle.

That team work is what makes them the best, they rarely mis-communicate, I actually never seen them mis-communicate.

The 1 thing the Seahawks & 49ers have over us is there safety play.

Between the 3 teams Sherman is the best corner but as you can clearly see his safeties are always there to help.

And on offense they have all pro RB's & play makers.

Another flaw we have.

Nothing amazing except there team work and the coaches and front office in my opinion.

[JetsFanInDenver]

I am just glad Woody passed on signing Peyton!

[pedro55]

Well the Seahawks also have better PEDs.

[TuscanyTile2]

  They have better depth.  Guys go in and out and that team doesn't seem to miss a beat.   And I wouldn't say the Jets front 7 is better.  The DL yes, the LB, no.

And the Jets aren't that great against the pass.   The Jets are great against the run.  Problem is most teams can pass the damn ball in 2014.    The Seahawks are great against the pass and they create turnovers.  And they are fast.  

 

  The Jets have a good starting point and Milliner did show some signs of making plays late in the season, lets hope he continues to do that.  But they need a lot of other pieces to even be close to the Seahawks or even 49ers at this point.  Lucky for the Jets they only have to compete in the AFC, where there really are not top defenses.  But there are a ton of good offenses.  The problem is the Jets offense stinks.

 

 And who knows where this seahawks team will go?   All these "greatest Defenses" conversations are nice except when you look at the history in the NFL, all those teams have been one and done.  Bears, Ravens, Bucs, etc had their one great year, one great super bowl, and then never came close again.  Great teams seem to know how to replace players and build a complete team. And a lot of it depends on that Great defense being great most of the time.  I don't think the Seahawks are like those Ravens or Bucs teams, as they have a good offense and a good team, but time will tell.

 

The Jets need to build a team who can win the AFC East. It's as simple as that.  They never seem to do that.  And from that point keep getting better.  They don't need to build a team who has a one year lucky run, and then need to rebuild a few years later.

 

I would include the 1986 Giants in that mix of great defenses and they did win a 2nd SB but it was 4 years later (a lifetime in the NFL).

[Jetknowledge]

Well the Seahawks also have better PEDs.

I second that

[Sperm Edwards]

Problem with Jets's defense compared to Seattle is the Seahawks force turnovers.

 

In the years discussed (2009-2010) the Jets were 8th in the league in turnovers.  Seattle had 39 this season, 31 last season.  2009-2010 Jets had 31 and 30.  Not a totally insignificant difference, but the insinuation that our defenses didn't force turnovers is absurd.  Over equal 2-year spans (32 games) they forced 8 more turnovers.  You make it sound like they had 39 and we had a baker's dozen.  Also, an offense that scores points forces the other team's offense into being more 1-dimensional and therefore more predictable and therefore easier to defend.  Not to take away from the season they had, because they had a great season, but it's a factor and it only helped.

 

In the playoffs, turnovers got us past San Diego and Cincy.  Easy to forget the Coles fumble after Cincy started the game with a long kick return.  Turnover turned sure points into nothing.  The defense did get turnovers vs Pittsburgh but our offense gave the ball right back.  The defense had 1 turnover in the air and 2 turnovers on downs vs NE (one of them coming on NE's 38 that led to a TD thanks to LT and then Braylon plowing through 2 defenders).  The other Harris picked off a pass and handed the offense field position already in FG range.  We attempted a FG (and missed).   For all the talk about how our horrible defense lost the game in Pittsburgh, we picked off 2 passes and caused another turnover on the safety.  We scored 0 points off the 2 picks so it gives the impression that they never happened.  If Seattle does it and their offense scores on it, then it's "See how they create turnovers and that leads to points?" When the Jets defense did it then it's forgotten.

 

We had the #1 defense with league-worst-level QB play. That is damn impressive.  And we did get turnovers in both seasons.  After that, the bad contracts (and the lack of being allowed to bring in good UFAs) caught up to the team on both sides of the ball.  Might have made the playoffs in '11 as well if Sanchez doesn't collapse.  Hard to know what the defense would have ended up like if they were paired with a good offense.  All I know is paired with a poor one they were just ok.  After that they were worse and losing Revis after preparing for a season with him didn't help any).  Last year they were pretty inconsistent, and the bulk of that is because of the secondary (as everyone knows) from Wilson's awful start to Cromartie's awful season to our meh safety play.  But it was mid-gutting/rebuilding, so I give them a pass.  

[CTM]

 

We had the #1 defense with league-worst-level QB play. That is damn impressive.  

\

 

This.. It's really surprising how many people crap on the 09 defense. 

[Bugg]

In the years discussed (2009-2010) the Jets were 8th in the league in turnovers.  Seattle had 39 this season, 31 last season.  2009-2010 Jets had 31 and 30.  Not a totally insignificant difference, but the insinuation that our defenses didn't force turnovers is absurd.  Over equal 2-year spans (32 games) they forced 8 more turnovers.  You make it sound like they had 39 and we had a baker's dozen.  Also, an offense that scores points forces the other team's offense into being more 1-dimensional and therefore more predictable and therefore easier to defend.  Not to take away from the season they had, because they had a great season, but it's a factor and it only helped.

 

In the playoffs, turnovers got us past San Diego and Cincy.  Easy to forget the Coles fumble after Cincy started the game with a long kick return.  Turnover turned sure points into nothing.  The defense did get turnovers vs Pittsburgh but our offense gave the ball right back.  The defense had 1 turnover in the air and 2 turnovers on downs vs NE (one of them coming on NE's 38 that led to a TD thanks to LT and then Braylon plowing through 2 defenders).  The other Harris picked off a pass and handed the offense field position already in FG range.  We attempted a FG (and missed).   For all the talk about how our horrible defense lost the game in Pittsburgh, we picked off 2 passes and caused another turnover on the safety.  We scored 0 points off the 2 picks so it gives the impression that they never happened.  If Seattle does it and their offense scores on it, then it's "See how they create turnovers and that leads to points?" When the Jets defense did it then it's forgotten.

 

We had the #1 defense with league-worst-level QB play. That is damn impressive.  And we did get turnovers in both seasons.  After that, the bad contracts (and the lack of being allowed to bring in good UFAs) caught up to the team on both sides of the ball.  Might have made the playoffs in '11 as well if Sanchez doesn't collapse.  Hard to know what the defense would have ended up like if they were paired with a good offense.  All I know is paired with a poor one they were just ok.  After that they were worse and losing Revis after preparing for a season with him didn't help any).  Last year they were pretty inconsistent, and the bulk of that is because of the secondary (as everyone knows) from Wilson's awful start to Cromartie's awful season to our meh safety play.  But it was mid-gutting/rebuilding, so I give them a pass.

Last 3 years-tunovers forced/differential-

2011 -31, -3

2012-23, -13

2013-15, -14

We're not disagreeing, merely talking about what tehe Jets did early in the Ryan tenure, and how thye've gotten worse over the last 2 seasons.

[Matt39]

\

This.. It's really surprising how many people crap on the 09 defense.

No ones crapping on the 2009 defense...it's by far the best in team history and Revis had an all time great season. They just didn't play well in the title game.

[pedro55]

No ones crapping on the 2009 defense...it's by far the best in team history and Revis had an all time great season. They just didn't play well in the title game.

 

  That's the point.   They didn't play well in either title game.   And while the offense stunk both years,  the defense didn't exactly show up and play well in those championship games either.      I mean the Seahawks Defense just outscored the best offense in the history of the NFL(by stats) 9-8 in the super bowl.     The Jets great defense lost a game 30-17 and 24-19.   And they were losing 24-0 in that one game.    Huge difference.    

 

 If the Jets lost 10-9 in that championship game, then the point would be made.   But they were pretty much blown out in the second half of that game.  So lets stop with the Jets defense played great.   They had a great 9-7 season and a couple of playoff games.   They didn't play well in the AFC Championship game.  Great defenses show up for the big games.

 

 

 Nobody talks about the great Bears defenses the years they didn't win a super bowl.  Nobody talks about the great Bucs or Ravens defenses the years they didn't win the super bowl.   And honestly,  the Ravens offense sucked the year they won a super bowl years ago.    They had to juggle a bunch of crappy QBs.  That team couldn't even score 10 points at times.    But somehow that defense carried that team to a super bowl title.   The Jets had a great run, but the defense came up short.      Call it what you want, but nobody in their right mind would say the Jets defense had a good game against the Colts or Steelers in 2009 & 2010.

[Sperm Edwards]

Last 3 years-tunovers forced/differential-

2011 -31, -3

2012-23, -13

2013-15, -14

We're not disagreeing, merely talking about what tehe Jets did early in the Ryan tenure, and how thye've gotten worse over the last 2 seasons.

 

Differential is dependent upon the offense.  How is it the defense's fault if Sanchez or Geno turn the ball over 30x? 

 

Lame.

[Bugg]

Differential is dependent upon the offense.  How is it the defense's fault if Sanchez or Geno turn the ball over 30x? 

 

Lame.

31 turnovers to 23 and then 15 is a regression.There's some thought turnovers are variable that is random or more a function of facing a lousy QB or a back who fumbles. Clearly thougthe Seahawks make a point ot trying to strip ball carriers. ANd problem is when your HC focuses so much of his efforts and resources on his defense you cut down the margin for error for said defense to nothing. Not the defense's fault, someone else, perhaps a large guy in a black sweater vest? It's the offense; if you don't score or even do anything it's a long day for the defense. And mentally a discouraging day.WhatCollisions" makes clear about the Pettine/Ryan breakup is while Pettine would never tell Rex or an OC what to do, Pettine found the Jets' awful offense to be a daily discouragement.

[T0mShane]

\

This.. It's really surprising how many people crap on the 09 defense.

Simple explanation: terrible fans. They didn't even show up for the parade.

[RutgersJetFan]

\

 

This.. It's really surprising how many people crap on the 09 defense. 

 

I remember them getting us out of a lot of less than optimal field position situations.

[CTM]

Simple explanation: terrible fans. They didn't even show up for the parade.

 

 

They were busy working on their  Bevel 14 campaign posters

[#27TheDominator]

Simple explanation: terrible fans. They didn't even show up for the parade.

 

No offense, but one of the things SHerman was rattling on about was how many fans came out to the airport to support them after they lost last year.  Maybe we ARE terrible. 

[Bleedin Green]

  That's the point.   They didn't play well in either title game.   And while the offense stunk both years,  the defense didn't exactly show up and play well in those championship games either.      I mean the Seahawks Defense just outscored the best offense in the history of the NFL(by stats) 9-8 in the super bowl.     The Jets great defense lost a game 30-17 and 24-19.   And they were losing 24-0 in that one game.    Huge difference.    

 

 If the Jets lost 10-9 in that championship game, then the point would be made.   But they were pretty much blown out in the second half of that game.  So lets stop with the Jets defense played great.   They had a great 9-7 season and a couple of playoff games.   They didn't play well in the AFC Championship game.  Great defenses show up for the big games.

 

 

 Nobody talks about the great Bears defenses the years they didn't win a super bowl.  Nobody talks about the great Bucs or Ravens defenses the years they didn't win the super bowl.   And honestly,  the Ravens offense sucked the year they won a super bowl years ago.    They had to juggle a bunch of crappy QBs.  That team couldn't even score 10 points at times.    But somehow that defense carried that team to a super bowl title.   The Jets had a great run, but the defense came up short.      Call it what you want, but nobody in their right mind would say the Jets defense had a good game against the Colts or Steelers in 2009 & 2010.

 

When you're using different criteria to evaluate the teams you're comparing, it kind of takes away from your argument.  You talk about turnovers and scores on defense, but then dismiss those same things when it comes to the Jets.  For example, you conveniently omit that the Jets / Steelers game saw the Jets D pick off Ben twice (both of which were followed by the Jets O going 3 and out) and get the ball back off of a safety.  More importantly, you make a distinct point of attempting to blame the Jets D for 7 points that were given up when they never even stepped onto the field.  Don't get me wrong, I know the D did not have a good start in that game, but they stepped up big time after that and were the only reason the Jets even had a chance.  Ultimately, the game saw the Jets offense score a grand total of 10 more points for the Jets than they did the Steelers, while the Jets D gave up 15 more points than they scored.  That reality is a fairly significant difference from the picture you were trying to paint.

 

After all, if the Seahawks offense similarly scored only 17 points and that Wilson fumble was brought back for a TD, they lose to 49ers in the NFC Championship despite their fantastic defense.  Of course that didn't happen, so it's not intended as a serious point of debate, rather simply noting that if it did absolutely nobody would be blaming the D.

[Sperm Edwards]

31 turnovers to 23 and then 15 is a regression.There's some thought turnovers are variable that is random or more a function of facing a lousy QB or a back who fumbles. Clearly thougthe Seahawks make a point ot trying to strip ball carriers. ANd problem is when your HC focuses so much of his efforts and resources on his defense you cut down the margin for error for said defense to nothing. Not the defense's fault, someone else, perhaps a large guy in a black sweater vest? It's the offense; if you don't score or even do anything it's a long day for the defense. And mentally a discouraging day.WhatCollisions" makes clear about the Pettine/Ryan breakup is while Pettine would never tell Rex or an OC what to do, Pettine found the Jets' awful offense to be a daily discouragement.

 

Except no one is arguing that our defense was elite (or even good) that year.  

 

And you are placing your distaste for Ryan onto Pettine, who has said nothing of the sort.  My opinion is that he moved to Buffalo for the most obvious reason, which is to get out of Ryan's shadow.  As long as he was with the Jets, any success the D had would be attributed to Ryan and Pettine would be thought to be just a figurehead.  Went to Buffalo to show that he could coach a whole defense on his own.  In time, all Buffalo coaches get fired and sometimes it's the coordinator that gets promoted. Or some other team could see he had success on his own after success with Ryan and hire him away to be their HC (which ended up happening sooner than anyone expected, even if it is just Cleveland).

[Sperm Edwards]

No one wants to see the offense suck, Ryan included.  Nor does he (as is absurdly claimed here) not care if the offense stinks.  I think there were 2 things lacking for most of his tenure.  

 

One, was having a good OC.  Schottenheimer was thrown onto him (and given an extension by his buddy Tannenbaum when all of Jets fandom wanted him gone).  Then when he was finally fired, or permitted to be fired, or whatever, Rex picked Sparano -- one of the few people who was actually a downgrade from Schottenheimer.  Some of that (if not the main reason) was that they shared the same overall philosophy of ball-control, a philosophy I might add that is shared by the current SB champs.  Some of it was getting advice on hiring him (directly or indirectly) from Parcells who the franchise still thinks - or thought, pre-Idzik - knows everything about everything.

 

Two, was having a good QB.  We haven't had one for the entirety of his tenure here.  There are only so many good (or good enough) ones on the planet and most of them were tied to their present teams before Ryan got hired.  

 

Go through the list of good QBs and ask yourself which we could have had.  Wilson is certainly one of them, but touching a QB in the first 2-3 rounds went out the window when Tannenbaum decided to satisfy the dual-"benefit" of (1) making Mark feel better after we showed interest in Peyton, plus (2) it cleared up millions in immediate cap space for the 2012 season.  So we weren't taking a QB in round 2 that year, unfortunately.  Manning wasn't coming here to compete for headlines with his brother.  It was never happening with any Jets HC.  Peyton Manning doesn't need NY to get headlines and certainly doesn't need the NY media ripping every mistake he made or non-stop asking neck-related questions after any underthrown or errant pass.  

 

[HessStation]

So IYRTAI there isn't an EXACT way to win Super Bowls but you usually need some combination of QB and Defense. Go figure. Carry on.

[Sperm Edwards]

How many other superbowl-level QBs are there really (that came into the league since Rex was hired)?

 

We whiffed on Sanchez in '09 and the earliest the team would have even thought about drafting another is '11 (and that's still a stretch after on-paper improvement plus coming so close to a SB several weeks earlier).  I was for it, but I never liked him as a QB, plus I was in the minority and no one with the team is asking individual fans if they think the QB should stay or go.  

 

Say they didn't like him after his rookie season.  Who were they going to draft? 

 

2010 draft we had access to Tim Tebow, Jimmy Clausen, Colt McCoy, Mike Kafka, John Skelton, and a half dozen other guys I never heard of.

 

What we'd have had to use to get other QBs here in 2011 and beyond:

 

2011 round 1: Kaepernick

2011 round 1: Dalton

 

(keep in mind, it would have been unlikely for anyone to use our round 1 pick on a QB after #5 pick Sanchez's 2nd season)

 

2012 round 2: Brock Osweiler (assuming he's actually any good)

2012 round 2 or round 3 if we traded up a handful of slots: Russell Wilson

2012 round 3: Nick Foles

2012 round 3: Kirk Cousins (Tannenbaum traded our 4th rounder away for Tebow)

Who else am I missing? Trading a couple of first round picks and more to move up high enough to draft Tannehill from #3 to #7 in 2012?

 

(Again, keep in mind how unlikely drafting of any of the first 4 were after Tannenbaum's Sanchez extension, when Tannenbaum was the one in charge of the draft.)

 

2013 round 2 plus 2014 round 2 plus more (to outbid KC): Alex Smith

2013 ? For all we know Geno's going to end up being the best QB in the class, though Glennon clearly had the best start.

 

Mixed in there you have to weed through and not sign all the others who vary from meh to garbage:

 

Henne, Campbell, Fitzpatrick, Manuel, Glennon, Palmer, Weeden, Flynn, Freeman, Orton, Hasselbeck, Wallace, McCoy, Clemens, Moore... 

 

 

We didn't have access to most of the good (or great) QBs, and those we did have a shot at were punted away when Tannenbaum extended Sanchez, in large part to clear his precious 2012 cap room.  Hey, we cleared up enough room to pick up Landry for 1 season, and hey he went to the pro bowl! So what if it meant we passed up on as many as 4 potential future QBs? No one signs a healthy, young QB to a mega-deal extension and then burns a 2nd-3rd round pick on a QB.  No one.  What needed to happen was not extending him in the first place.

 

But it's easier and lazier and more convenient to say Wrecks doesn't care about offense.

[Bugg]

No one wants to see the offense suck, Ryan included.  Nor does he (as is absurdly claimed here) not care if the offense stinks.  I think there were 2 things lacking for most of his tenure.  

 

One, was having a good OC.  Schottenheimer was thrown onto him (and given an extension by his buddy Tannenbaum when all of Jets fandom wanted him gone).  Then when he was finally fired, or permitted to be fired, or whatever, Rex picked Sparano -- one of the few people who was actually a downgrade from Schottenheimer.  Some of that (if not the main reason) was that they shared the same overall philosophy of ball-control, a philosophy I might add that is shared by the current SB champs.  Some of it was getting advice on hiring him (directly or indirectly) from Parcells who the franchise still thinks - or thought, pre-Idzik - knows everything about everything.

 

Two, was having a good QB.  We haven't had one for the entirety of his tenure here.  There are only so many good (or good enough) ones on the planet and most of them were tied to their present teams before Ryan got hired.  

 

Go through the list of good QBs and ask yourself which we could have had.  Wilson is certainly one of them, but touching a QB in the first 2-3 rounds went out the window when Tannenbaum decided to satisfy the dual-"benefit" of (1) making Mark feel better after we showed interest in Peyton, plus (2) it cleared up millions in immediate cap space for the 2012 season.  So we weren't taking a QB in round 2 that year, unfortunately.  Manning wasn't coming here to compete for headlines with his brother.  It was never happening with any Jets HC.  Peyton Manning doesn't need NY to get headlines and certainly doesn't need the NY media ripping every mistake he made or non-stop asking neck-related questions after any underthrown or errant pass.  

Ryan's whole approach is run the ball and don't turn it over.He's cared to death of INTS; Smithw as only allaowed to throw on 3rd and longa nd when there was no choice due to score. That works great if you have a decent OL and some good backs. But it has a limit if Tom Brady is in your division long-term, and probably in the playoffs. Ryan is the guy that was babbling about ground and pound; we didn't make that up. H is his father. he has a disdain or indifference or what ever you want to call it about the offense that successful defense-oriented coaches like Tom Landry, Parcells and Bellicheat figured out. Ryan's dad did not, and that strongly suggests he might not. And the Pettine as per "Collisons" stuff is that a crappy offense like this has been the entirety of Ryan's tenure means simply the idea the jets can pull off what the Seahawks have done a pipe dream.  We can rip Schottenheimer all day and extoll MM, but the Jets' offense moved from 31st to 29th or thereabouts. That is not getting it doen ever.

 

Let me say it is simply as I can -the Jets, barring lucking into a great QB(who Rex would probably never play anyway because of his slavish devotion to knaves and fools liek sanchez and now Smith, another thread or 7 we've been over) are not winning sh!t as long as Ryan is the HC. You can play semantics all you want; it won't help.

[Sperm Edwards]

Ryan's whole approach is run the ball and don't turn it over.He's cared to death of INTS; Smithw as only allaowed to throw on 3rd and longa nd when there was no choice due to score. That works great if you have a decent OL and some good backs. But it has a limit if Tom Brady is in your division long-term, and probably in the playoffs. Ryan is the guy that was babbling about ground and pound; we didn't make that up. H is his father. he has a disdain or indifference or what ever you want to call it about the offense that successful defense-oriented coaches like Tom Landry, Parcells and Bellicheat figured out. Ryan's dad did not, and that strongly suggests he might not. And the Pettine as per "Collisons" stuff is that a crappy offense like this has been the entirety of Ryan's tenure means simply the idea the jets can pull off what the Seahawks have done a pipe dream.  We can rip Schottenheimer all day and extoll MM, but the Jets' offense moved from 31st to 29th or thereabouts. That is not getting it doen ever.

 

Let me say it is simply as I can -the Jets, barring lucking into a great QB(who Rex would probably never play anyway because of his slavish devotion to knaves and fools liek sanchez and now Smith, another thread or 7 we've been over) are not winning sh!t as long as Ryan is the HC. You can play semantics all you want; it won't help.

 

He's scared to death of interceptions (and fumbles) from interception-prone QBs, and he's right to be scared by them given how many games they've cost us.  If we had a crappy offense with an average QB or better you'd have a good case.  

 

Not winning sh*t? We came damn close twice in a row with freaking Sanchez.  Having a real QB replace him - or Geno if he's not worlds better than his rookie season - is not "semantics" to me.  

 

What other coaches have "figured out" seems to have escaped the superbowl champs, since the last 2 seasons they finished with the #32 and #31 fewest pass attempts in the NFL.

 

I am comfortable with Mornhinweg running the offense and (so far) Idzik being in charge of shopping for the groceries.  

[joewillie78]

Ryan's whole approach is run the ball and don't turn it over.He's cared to death of INTS; Smithw as only allaowed to throw on 3rd and longa nd when there was no choice due to score. That works great if you have a decent OL and some good backs. But it has a limit if Tom Brady is in your division long-term, and probably in the playoffs. Ryan is the guy that was babbling about ground and pound; we didn't make that up. H is his father. he has a disdain or indifference or what ever you want to call it about the offense that successful defense-oriented coaches like Tom Landry, Parcells and Bellicheat figured out. Ryan's dad did not, and that strongly suggests he might not. And the Pettine as per "Collisons" stuff is that a crappy offense like this has been the entirety of Ryan's tenure means simply the idea the jets can pull off what the Seahawks have done a pipe dream.  We can rip Schottenheimer all day and extoll MM, but the Jets' offense moved from 31st to 29th or thereabouts. That is not getting it doen ever.

 

Let me say it is simply as I can -the Jets, barring lucking into a great QB(who Rex would probably never play anyway because of his slavish devotion to knaves and fools liek sanchez and now Smith, another thread or 7 we've been over) are not winning sh!t as long as Ryan is the HC. You can play semantics all you want; it won't help.

Its the million dollar question:

 

Do our QB's and thus our offense suck because our coach is horrible at or ignores Offense?

 

or

 

Do we constantly get Terrible talent on offense that NO COACH could succeed with?

 

I tend to think our offensive talent has been better than people give credit for, and like you believe that as long as Our head coach is so blasé about that side of the ball, and puts all his energies into securing a great defense, that we will always be lacking enough scoring power to succeed.

 

Even our QB's who I tend to think are awful, may actually be better than they have shown, and simply any QB in his "system" (whatever that may be), would struggle.

 

If the talent on offense is upgraded significantly this off-season, and our offense next year is still woeful, then we will probably have a more definitive answer.

[HessStation]

What are the Rams gonna do with Sam Bradford is what I wanna know.

[Sperm Edwards]

 

If the talent on offense is upgraded significantly this off-season, and our offense next year is still woeful, then we will probably have a more definitive answer.

 

This is my opinion.  But we're running Mornhinweg's system not Rex's system.  Before that we were running Sparano's, and before that Schottenheimer's.  

 

This idea that no matter how many awful picks a QB throws, that we should have him throwing more more more is not a smart one to me.  Of course then the criticism, from the same people, would be, "How could Ryan let this kid keep throwing these awful picks? Try to run the ball a little to take some pressure of the QB!"

 

The other laughable idea is that Rex is standing there with his headset on mid-game, yelling to Mornhinweg which play he wants to run instead of the one called.  

 

Our offensive talent at receiver the first few years was fine.  Not great, but not awful like the past 2.  Where we were lacking was in who was delivering it.  I'm sure Sanchez could be better than he was, but I don't think he could have been good.  A good game here or there, yeah ok.  But lots of bad QBs have good games here or there.  You'll see the rest of his career: he will be a career nothing.  His greatest career success will have been when top ground games, OLs, defenses, and special teams units carried him kicking and screaming to a stone's throw of the superbowl.  

[HessStation]

The Jets should be focused on getting Bradford who's the best available option and fits the scheme.

http://mweb.cbssports.com/nfl/writer/jason-la-canfora/24375979/rams-could-release-sam-bradford-with-no-financial-constraints

[joewillie78]

This is my opinion.  But we're running Mornhinweg's system not Rex's system.  Before that we were running Sparano's, and before that Schottenheimer's.  

 

This idea that no matter how many awful picks a QB throws, that we should have him throwing more more more is not a smart one to me.  Of course then the criticism, from the same people, would be, "How could Ryan let this kid keep throwing these awful picks? Try to run the ball a little to take some pressure of the QB!"

 

The other laughable idea is that Rex is standing there with his headset on mid-game, yelling to Mornhinweg which play he wants to run instead of the one called.  

 

Our offensive talent at receiver the first few years was fine.  Not great, but not awful like the past 2.  Where we were lacking was in who was delivering it.  I'm sure Sanchez could be better than he was, but I don't think he could have been good.  A good game here or there, yeah ok.  But lots of bad QBs have good games here or there.  You'll see the rest of his career: he will be a career nothing.  His greatest career success will have been when top ground games, OLs, defenses, and special teams units carried him kicking and screaming to a stone's throw of the superbowl.  

I agree with this completely.

 

Lets upgrade the offensive talent, run Marty's system again, and see what happens.

 

Now, we all know that poor QB play can torpedo any system, so we have to hope that GENO or whoever the QB is will have to improve on the 65 QBR's we have been getting. If our QB play can get to say the mid to high 70's QBR, and cut the TO's, with this defense, should be a playoff team.

[Jetsfan80]

The Jets should be focused on getting Bradford who's the best available option and fits the scheme.

http://mweb.cbssports.com/nfl/writer/jason-la-canfora/24375979/rams-could-release-sam-bradford-with-no-financial-constraints

 

 

Did you even read the article?

 

Several NFL execs, when assessing that situation, believe it could lead to Bradford’s departure, while team sources have indicated the organization remains very comfortable with Bradford and while “all options would be on the table” if St. Louis has the top pick, the likelihood of drafting a quarterback is more remote than most other scenarios. The dream scenario for the Rams would be other teams coveting that pick -- as the Skins did with St. Louis’ second-overall selection in 2012 -- and then offering a bounty to trade down and pick up a bunch of selections, able to fill multiple holes.

 

 

They're not going to cut him.  Almost a 0 % chance of it.