Jump to content

Reasons to feel good about the Jets


Maxman
 Share

Recommended Posts

Damn I thought I was an azzhole when it comes to Eugene.  GO Go GO Speed Racer Goooooo 

Bottom line is this. Vick will take over early in the season. I say we go 1-2 in first 3 games with Eugene showing zippo.

In game 4 he flounders horrifically and Rex pulls the plug. Enter Vick the Quick. Exit Eugene the Suck Bag.

Rex wants, needs, is desperate to win.  There will be a very very short leash on Eugene.

We have the best 'back up' qb in football (who's really the starter) and the worst starter in football (who's really the worst back up).  

So spin it as you may....this is a positive in my eyes.  

 

 

I've been asked to keep it positive and I'm not here to start any bs. So I'll say this and keep it positive liked I was asked.

 

Vick is and has been a bad QB. Thats not an opinion. Its a fact. The guy has awful accuracy, some of the worst pocket awareness I've ever seen, injury prone and TO prone. He's a terrible QB. He's not leading anyone anywhere. I'd much rather go with Geno and see what we have. This team is a few years away from contending anyway so why not give him a full 16 with upgraded weapons and see what he has to offer.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've been asked to keep it positive and I'm not here to start any bs. So I'll say this and keep it positive liked I was asked.

 

Vick is and has been a bad QB. Thats not an opinion. Its a fact. The guy has awful accuracy, some of the worst pocket awareness I've ever seen, injury prone and TO prone. He's a terrible QB. He's not leading anyone anywhere. I'd much rather go with Geno and see what we have. This team is a few years away from contending anyway so why not give him a full 16 with upgraded weapons and see what he has to offer.

 

Im not sure what is positive in here, but it's much better than before. Thank You

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  

As long as he's not as bad as that famous Oswald sense of humor, we should be okay.

  

He didn't play much QB after the age of 39. Solid kicker, though. He's also the outlier when it comes to talking about players with long careers.

Self awareness is key.

Hey Slut suck my dick

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've been asked to keep it positive and I'm not here to start any bs. So I'll say this and keep it positive liked I was asked.

 

Vick is and has been a bad QB. Thats not an opinion. Its a fact. The guy has awful accuracy, some of the worst pocket awareness I've ever seen, injury prone and TO prone. He's a terrible QB. He's not leading anyone anywhere. I'd much rather go with Geno and see what we have. This team is a few years away from contending anyway so why not give him a full 16 with upgraded weapons and see what he has to offer.

Because he's a suck bag. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  

As long as he's not as bad as that famous Oswald sense of humor, we should be okay.

  

He didn't play much QB after the age of 39. Solid kicker, though. He's also the outlier when it comes to talking about players with long careers.

Self awareness is key.

Slut your mother is so fat she has to pay twice to go through the turnstile.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

ok here are my postiives

 

1) One of the best defensive front 7's in the NFL. They are going to have to be beasts this year to help out the secondary until guys like McDougle and Pryor get their feet on the ground.

 

2) Better weapons for Geno or Vick. No longer having to deal with Clyde Gates, Greg Salas' Holmes They should be alot better with Decker and Kerley, along with Amaro and Cumberland at TE. Chris Johnson will be a nice addition to Ivory and Powell.

 

Some of my hopes

 

1) Geno takes the job: As long as he is not a turnover machine like he was at times last year Geno should be the guy. 

 

2) The secondary grows up FAST: They are going to need to too in the pass happy CFL. Milliner needs to be the Milliner we saw the last couple of games last year, McDougle picks things up fast and Pryor kills people.

 

The record may not show it this year but the Jets will be better than last year.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1.  We have the good guy (Geno) vs. bad guy (Vick) narrative going on at the most important position on the field.  Yeah, Geno isn't a saint, but he's FAR easier to root for.  I'm hopeful Geno will shut up his detractors.  Our season depends on it.

 

2.  Lots of youth everywhere to pay attention to.  Maybe we'll be that precocious team that overachieves a year earlier than expected.

 

3.  The mods are gay and happy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

i agree with this statement completely. the team can play a lot better than last year and still not be a .500 team

 

Perhaps. The only way I see a noticeable decrease in wins despite an improvement in most players' play is if Smith turns it over just as much as last year (don't forget, 6 of the opponents' TDs came on 5 pick-6's plus his behind the back fumble thing for a TD).  -97 in the point differential isn't too good.  But more than 42 of it was directly on Smith turning the ball over. The 42 points doesn't include any drives where we were already in FG range, should have scored a TD (if his pick-6 came on a play that should have been an easy TD), or picks/fumbles returned into scoring range (even though on paper the defense gets 100% of the blame even for a FG there).  

 

Along those lines, it's strange that no one has come up with a widespread way of factoring that in. Say a QB throws a pick on his own 15 yard line and it's returned to the 5.  Then the defense goes onto the field and gets 2 sacks and a pass defended or any incomplete pass with the QB under heavy pressure. Then an easy FG is kicked.  On paper it's purely on the D, since they surrendered a scoring drive.  In practical terms, though, the defense played lights out.  Happens to every team, but it happens more to a team with a turnover-prone QB.

 

Look at New England's #8 defense in 2010. Brady+Hoyer combined for 5 TDs all season. Further, Brady didn't throw a pick after week 6 or something for the rest of the season.  So does the more even (for them) run:pass ratio as they had about 2000 yards on the ground with an immobile Brady back there. It gets reflected in how many drives the defense has to be on the field for.  And how quickly they have to go back out there never gets measured by anyone.  Their D was still decent, but they weren't as good as their ranking.

Now look at the Jets' 2011 defense in comparison.  At a cursory examination of the stats, it didn't look too good, particularly compared to the prior 2 seasons.  It looks like there was a MAJOR fall from 2010 to 2011; more dramatic than there actually was.  But even though everyone remembers the fall from the prior 2 seasons, a lot of it was just a function of opportunity for the opposition.  Sanchez had 18 picks and lost 8 fumbles :bag:.  14 of those interceptions came on 1st or 2nd down.  So the defense defended more drives than they otherwise would have had to if the offense had held onto the ball longer before turning it over (or scoring).  Then the rest of the team lost 8 more fumbles (including those nauseating return fumbles).

4 of the team's 16 fumbles lost were returned for TDs (2 from Sanchez, 1 each from Holmes & Keller), as well as 2 pick-6 passes from Sanchez.  42 points that superficially gets credited against the D (team points against) even though they weren't even on the field.  Sanchez had another pick where Buffalo started their drive on the Jets' 20.  The D gave up a TD, but 3 of it was on Sanchez since they were already well into FG range.

 

 - How did the team fare in percentage of drives where they yielded a score to the opposition? 8th in the league.  (Not great, but better than you'd think for a team that finished #20 in PA).

 

 - Also average number of plays surrendered per drive? #1 in the league.  Which mostly means a combination of 2 things: they're getting off the field fast because they did a solid job, or they're getting off the field faster because the opposition started in better field position to begin with.  There are other factors as well, like a big play on the original set of downs (*coughVictorCruz*), but there aren't too many of those relative to the number of plays, and I don't see any indication that the Jets surrendered a disproportionate # of big plays compared to others.

 

The 2011 Jets D was no world-beater.  They weren't as good as the Jets D of either of the 2 prior years. Even though they gave up only 15 TDs in the air, they did give up a f*ckload of rushing TDs (17). But with that combination, they would have been far more highly ranked but for the inordinate # of turnovers. In other words, they were noticeably better than their #20 ranking suggests.

 

All I'm saying is...I guess I'm agreeing with you. And even agreeing takes me this long. lol.  But really I was just looking this stuff up as I was responding.

 

The whole team can be basically pretty solid and one guy - the QB - can really turn things upside down.  Special teams fumbles are even worse. Think we had at least 3 of them that season.  They're typically deeper in our own territory and the D never gets the needed break (meanwhile the opposition D gets really well-rested).

  • Upvote 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

But more than 42 of it was directly on Smith turning the ball over. The 42 points doesn't include any drives where we were already in FG range, should have scored a TD (if his pick-6 came on a play that should have been an easy TD), or picks/fumbles returned into scoring range (even though on paper the defense gets 100% of the blame even for a FG there).  

 

 

Where is this info from?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's math.  5 pick 6 = 35 + 1 fumble returned for a TD = 42.  

 

http://www.nj.com/jets/index.ssf/2013/12/jets_film_review_how_geno_smith_threw_his_fifth_pick_6_of_the_season.html

 

What is the problem?  You don't want to count the extra points?

 

Bah. Not sure why, but that went right over my head.

 

What is the problem? You don't want to count the extra points?

Yeah+big+whoop+you+wanna+fight+about+it+

 

Relax.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Perhaps. The only way I see a noticeable decrease in wins despite an improvement in most players' play is if Smith turns it over just as much as last year (don't forget, 6 of the opponents' TDs came on 5 pick-6's plus his behind the back fumble thing for a TD).  -97 in the point differential isn't too good.  But more than 42 of it was directly on Smith turning the ball over. The 42 points doesn't include any drives where we were already in FG range, should have scored a TD (if his pick-6 came on a play that should have been an easy TD), or picks/fumbles returned into scoring range (even though on paper the defense gets 100% of the blame even for a FG there).  

 

Along those lines, it's strange that no one has come up with a widespread way of factoring that in. Say a QB throws a pick on his own 15 yard line and it's returned to the 5.  Then the defense goes onto the field and gets 2 sacks and a pass defended or any incomplete pass with the QB under heavy pressure. Then an easy FG is kicked.  On paper it's purely on the D, since they surrendered a scoring drive.  In practical terms, though, the defense played lights out.  Happens to every team, but it happens more to a team with a turnover-prone QB.

 

Look at New England's #8 defense in 2010. Brady+Hoyer combined for 5 TDs all season. Further, Brady didn't throw a pick after week 6 or something for the rest of the season.  So does the more even (for them) run:pass ratio as they had about 2000 yards on the ground with an immobile Brady back there. It gets reflected in how many drives the defense has to be on the field for.  And how quickly they have to go back out there never gets measured by anyone.  Their D was still decent, but they weren't as good as their ranking.

Now look at the Jets' 2011 defense in comparison.  At a cursory examination of the stats, it didn't look too good, particularly compared to the prior 2 seasons.  It looks like there was a MAJOR fall from 2010 to 2011; more dramatic than there actually was.  But even though everyone remembers the fall from the prior 2 seasons, a lot of it was just a function of opportunity for the opposition.  Sanchez had 18 picks and lost 8 fumbles :bag:.  14 of those interceptions came on 1st or 2nd down.  So the defense defended more drives than they otherwise would have had to if the offense had held onto the ball longer before turning it over (or scoring).  Then the rest of the team lost 8 more fumbles (including those nauseating return fumbles).

4 of the team's 16 fumbles lost were returned for TDs (2 from Sanchez, 1 each from Holmes & Keller), as well as 2 pick-6 passes from Sanchez.  42 points that superficially gets credited against the D (team points against) even though they weren't even on the field.  Sanchez had another pick where Buffalo started their drive on the Jets' 20.  The D gave up a TD, but 3 of it was on Sanchez since they were already well into FG range.

 

 - How did the team fare in percentage of drives where they yielded a score to the opposition? 8th in the league.  (Not great, but better than you'd think for a team that finished #20 in PA).

 

 - Also average number of plays surrendered per drive? #1 in the league.  Which mostly means a combination of 2 things: they're getting off the field fast because they did a solid job, or they're getting off the field faster because the opposition started in better field position to begin with.  There are other factors as well, like a big play on the original set of downs (*coughVictorCruz*), but there aren't too many of those relative to the number of plays, and I don't see any indication that the Jets surrendered a disproportionate # of big plays compared to others.

 

The 2011 Jets D was no world-beater.  They weren't as good as the Jets D of either of the 2 prior years. Even though they gave up only 15 TDs in the air, they did give up a f*ckload of rushing TDs (17). But with that combination, they would have been far more highly ranked but for the inordinate # of turnovers. In other words, they were noticeably better than their #20 ranking suggests.

 

All I'm saying is...I guess I'm agreeing with you. And even agreeing takes me this long. lol.  But really I was just looking this stuff up as I was responding.

 

The whole team can be basically pretty solid and one guy - the QB - can really turn things upside down.  Special teams fumbles are even worse. Think we had at least 3 of them that season.  They're typically deeper in our own territory and the D never gets the needed break (meanwhile the opposition D gets really well-rested).

 

you basically describe the frustration of every fantasy football player when the offense turns the ball over within its own 20 and you are starting that team's defense  :)

 

your post brings up an interesting point. i wouldn't be surprised if one of those newfangled super stat sites like football outsiders hasn't developed a system to more accurately evaluate a defense. i for one thought that pick sixes and returned fumbles were not "credited' to the defense. although if the returner is tackled on the 1 yard line, the resultant TD certain is.

 

Sperm - you've been bringing it lately. Thanks for keeping the board readable and smacking around Tom and his minions.

 

am i a minion?

Edited by jgb
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...