PFF really has a bug up it's A$$ over Darron Lee & Jets as a whole

[afosomf]

4 minutes ago, Adoni Beast said:

I pay about as much attention to these guys as I do Todd McShay and Mel kiper, none. As much as he's a douche, Belichick knows the game and said it best in this article:

http://mweb.cbssports.com/nfl/eye-on-football/25423617/bill-belichick-rips-analytics-websites-says-theyre-not-real-accurate

He basically says that its impossible for these analysts to know what the coaching staff wanted and expected out of each player on each given play. Football is a complete domino effect, if one player fails his job on a play it can cause everyone else to miss their assignment.

Little Bill goes on to say that even when he watches film of other teams he has no way to consistently decipher which player was the intial cause of a play breakdown, because he or anyone cannot know what the play's intitial intent was for every single player.

1 stat matters, scoreboard. 

did mumbles know the game when he didnt have Cindy as his QB?

[nyjunc]

5 minutes ago, afosomf said:

did mumbles know the game when he didnt have Cindy as his QB?

yes, he wasn't a good HC w/o him but few, if any, have ever understood the game better.

[afosomf]

Just now, nyjunc said:

yes, he wasn't a good HC w/o him but few, if any, have ever understood the game better.

Ya he understood it so much, he felt the need to cheat

[nyjunc]

1 minute ago, afosomf said:

Ya he understood it so much, he felt the need to cheat

just like a certain other coach who is constantly bending rules that you seem to love.  The bottom line is he wins, he's been a part of "cheating" since at least his days w/ the Giants but all teams try the same stuff.  Don't hate him b/c it works for him, hate him b/c of what he has done to our franchise.

[afosomf]

25 minutes ago, nyjunc said:

just like a certain other coach who is constantly bending rules that you seem to love.  The bottom line is he wins, he's been a part of "cheating" since at least his days w/ the Giants but all teams try the same stuff.  Don't hate him b/c it works for him, hate him b/c of what he has done to our franchise.

please enlighten us on this other coach who cheats like mumbles?

[nyjunc]

1 minute ago, afosomf said:

please enlighten us on this other coach who cheats like mumbles?

you know him, the man that has ruined another sport by teaching his players to cheat by acting and playing dirty.

[Colgateman]

Someone must of ravaged mainejets woman, might explain why he is so uptight

[Mainejet]

2 hours ago, Dcat said:

LOL, you are the biggest cry baby on this board by a country mile.  Now go shoot something.

 

 

Cram it straight up your a$$ if you don't like it, and be sure to remember this when the jets start out 2016 at 1-6...

[Dcat]

6 minutes ago, Mainejet said:

Cram it straight up your a$$ if you don't like it, and be sure to remember this when the jets start out 2016 at 1-6...

[ZachEY]

4 minutes ago, Mainejet said:

Cram it straight up your a$$ if you don't like it, and be sure to remember this when the jets start out 2016 at 1-6...

[Dcat]

2 minutes ago, gEYno said:

ya think?  LOL

[Adoni Beast]

1 hour ago, afosomf said:

did mumbles know the game when he didnt have Cindy as his QB?

While I do think Belichick is overrated for the simple fact of spygate and his previous HC gig being a disaster, I still think he is a great coach who truly understands the game in all aspects, and makes a great point about the stat analysts. Without Brady, no he doesnt have the win/loss record and rings that he does, but neither does Bill Walsh and Chuck Knoll without their QB's.

Off topic, but you inspires the thought in my mind, how I reapect coaches like Parcells and Joe Gibbs and think they're underrated for the simple fact that they won and went to multiple super bowls without hall of fame quarterbacks. However, I still give credit to coaches like Walsh, Knoll etc because in every sport you need talent to win. So you can't say Belichick doesn't know the game cause Brady is arguably the greatest of all time. He needs credit for developing and coaching him. Off topic ramble complete.

[nyjunc]

1 minute ago, Adoni Beast said:

While I do think Belichick is overrated for the simple fact of spygate and his previous HC gig being a disaster, I still think he is a great coach who truly understands the game in all aspects, and makes a great point about the stat analysts. Without Brady, no he doesnt have the win/loss record and rings that he does, but neither does Bill Walsh and Chuck Knoll without their QB's.

Off topic, but you inspires the thought in my mind, how I reapect coaches like Parcells and Joe Gibbs and think they're underrated for the simple fact that they won and went to multiple super bowls without hall of fame quarterbacks. However, I still give credit to coaches like Walsh, Knoll etc because in every sport you need talent to win. So you can't say Belichick doesn't know the game cause Brady is arguably the greatest of all time. He needs credit for developing and coaching him. Off topic ramble complete.

the difference is walsh never had a chance to fail w/o Montana and Noll did make a championship game w/ Mark Malone I believe so he had success w/o Bradshaw.  

[Adoni Beast]

1 hour ago, nyjunc said:

the difference is walsh never had a chance to fail w/o Montana and Noll did make a championship game w/ Mark Malone I believe so he had success w/o Bradshaw.  

Nice catch on the Mark Malone year. I forgot about that. But if we're going that route, Belichick made 2nd round of the playoffs in Cleveland and went 11-5 with Matt Cassel. But, the real point is that I think Belichick knows football. I do not claim him to be the end-all be-all God of the game that some pundits proclaim. 

I just think pff and analytic stat sites are garbage, and agree with Little Bill in this instance. 

[nyjunc]

2 minutes ago, Adoni Beast said:

Nice catch on the Mark Malone year. I forgot about that. But if we're going that route, Belichick made 2nd round of the playoffs in Cleveland and went 11-5 with Matt Cassel. But, the real point is that I think Belichick knows football. I do not claim him to be the end-all be-all God of the game that some pundits proclaim. 

I just think pff and analytic stat sites are garbage, and agree with Little Bill in this instance. 

2nd rd and title game are very different and BB got smoked in the div rd by Pitt who then lost to the weakest SB team ever(1994 Chargers) at home a week later.  Cassell took over a 16-0 team and won 10 games w/ the same squad a year later, that's a HUGE difference plus Cassell would win a div title 2 years later.  so Cassell has two double digit win seasons under his belt and BB couldn't make playoffs w/ him w/ a team that was undefeated year before while Malone never won more than 6 games in a season. I think Noll won a playoff game w/ Bubby Brister too which was Bubby's only playoff win as a starter in his career.

 

Let's also not forget Pitt was the worst franchise in the sport when Noll took over and he built them into a dynasty.  BB took over a Cle franchise that made 3 AFC title games in 4 years in the late 80s and made 1 playoff app in 5 years there(then watched them become champions as the Ravens a few years later) and inherited a NE team w/ a core group that had made the SB a few years earlier.

 

I agree w/ Bill and I agree w/ you.  I don't dislike the PFF type stats but I hate when people use them as gospel rather than a part of the evaluation.  My disagreement w/ you is on BB himself, he is a football genius but he has been a failure as a HC w/o Brady.

[jamesr]

5 hours ago, Mainejet said:

Ryan Fitzpatrick or no, this team will NOT win more than 6 games. This team is worse on paper than they were last season. Mac did NOT help this team to improve. What everyone seems to be forgetting is that the job is to backfill ALL of the losses you suffer during the offseason meanwhile getting BETTER. That did not happen. What happened instead was band aids over huge losses and completely pathetic, sh*tty draft. So winning 6 games figures....

What losses specifically do you feel did not get backfilled?

DL has been covered by our FA signings. Our 'loss' at CB (Cro) is well covered by the depth we already have; at worst it'll be like for like, Cro was not good last year. LT we replaced Brick with Clady ... I'm struggling to see other losses (barring, obviously, QB that we've discussed above).

[Adoni Beast]

10 minutes ago, nyjunc said:

2nd rd and title game are very different and BB got smoked in the div rd by Pitt who then lost to the weakest SB team ever(1994 Chargers) at home a week later.  Cassell took over a 16-0 team and won 10 games w/ the same squad a year later, that's a HUGE difference plus Cassell would win a div title 2 years later.  so Cassell has two double digit win seasons under his belt and BB couldn't make playoffs w/ him w/ a team that was undefeated year before while Malone never won more than 6 games in a season. I think Noll won a playoff game w/ Bubby Brister too which was Bubby's only playoff win as a starter in his career.

 

Let's also not forget Pitt was the worst franchise in the sport when Noll took over and he built them into a dynasty.  BB took over a Cle franchise that made 3 AFC title games in 4 years in the late 80s and made 1 playoff app in 5 years there(then watched them become champions as the Ravens a few years later) and inherited a NE team w/ a core group that had made the SB a few years earlier.

 

I agree w/ Bill and I agree w/ you.  I don't dislike the PFF type stats but I hate when people use them as gospel rather than a part of the evaluation.  My disagreement w/ you is on BB himself, he is a football genius but he has been a failure as a HC w/o Brady.

I agree with the fact he's been a failure as a head coach without Brady. 

[Dcat]

On 5/9/2016 at 11:36 AM, JoJoTownsell1 said:

LOL at "prototypical" sized LBers. You're still living in the 1980s.  

yup. Ray Lewis was 6'1" and under 240 when he was drafted in 1996.  More recently, you have Bobby Wagner. 

MaineJet is just being his usual cry baby self.

[win4ever]

10 hours ago, 32EBoozer said:

Good Times.... we came so close in '09 & '10.

The loss to the Colts hurt, but would have been tough to beat Brees and the Saints that yr.

'10 should have been our yr. Rex came up short that yr. in his preparation of the team and how flat they came out against Pitt.

Sad, because I think our "D" could have neutralized a strong GB team.

So tough to get back to the Big Game but I'm hopeful within the next few yrs. we can get there.

If only Giselle would convince Tammy to retire!

The Colts game was tough because we had the lead and it looked like we had Peyton's number.  If I remember correctly, it was someone random like Austin Collie or something that jumpstarted them in the second half, and our offense went really conservative.  I think that was my biggest issues with those teams, it had too much faith in the defense, so as soon as we got a lead, it turned into a very predictable offense.  

I really thought we would win, if we got a defensive stop against Pittsburgh on the last drive.  Infact, I remember being super happy for a second because it looked like the blitz had gotten to Rothlesberger, but he somehow shrugged the guy off and fired to a sliding WR to end all chances.  I believe we played GB that season, and held them to like 9 points, so it would've been a great matchup.  I don't even think I watched that SuperBowl.  

I'm hopeful if we can find a QB, because the rules are even tougher now to win with an elite defense.  I think last year was an anomaly with Denver, and they were pretty much a Steelers RB fumble away from being eliminated in the opening round.  You need to have that QB, and just not sure if we have the guy yet.  Even being optimistic about Geno, he's not that guy.  Have to hope Hackenberg or Petty develop because they have the physical skills.  

[32EBoozer]

1 hour ago, win4ever said:

The Colts game was tough because we had the lead and it looked like we had Peyton's number.  If I remember correctly, it was someone random like Austin Collie or something that jumpstarted them in the second half, and our offense went really conservative.  I think that was my biggest issues with those teams, it had too much faith in the defense, so as soon as we got a lead, it turned into a very predictable offense.  

I really thought we would win, if we got a defensive stop against Pittsburgh on the last drive.  Infact, I remember being super happy for a second because it looked like the blitz had gotten to Rothlesberger, but he somehow shrugged the guy off and fired to a sliding WR to end all chances.  I believe we played GB that season, and held them to like 9 points, so it would've been a great matchup.  I don't even think I watched that SuperBowl.  

I'm hopeful if we can find a QB, because the rules are even tougher now to win with an elite defense.  I think last year was an anomaly with Denver, and they were pretty much a Steelers RB fumble away from being eliminated in the opening round.  You need to have that QB, and just not sure if we have the guy yet.  Even being optimistic about Geno, he's not that guy.  Have to hope Hackenberg or Petty develop because they have the physical skills.  

Great read..... enjoyed you insights.

[Matt39]

 

[32EBoozer]

10 hours ago, Matt39 said:

 

Great quote! I hope all the talking heads like Cimini, Florio, King and the bumbs @ ESPN take notice.

Of course PFF fits their narrative on the whole, so why not use them?

[Sperm Edwards]

On 5/9/2016 at 8:06 AM, dbatesman said:

PFF has a bug up its ass over math being really really hard.

The math added up just fine when PFF was calling a (then far less famous) Wilkerson the league's 2nd-best 3-4 DE after JJ Watt, and the 14th best player in the NFL outright (regardless of position).

[Miss Lonelyhearts]

31 minutes ago, Sperm Edwards said:

The math added up just fine when PFF was calling a (then far less famous) Wilkerson the league's 2nd-best 3-4 DE after JJ Watt, and the 14th best player in the NFL outright (regardless of position).

While your point about people liking numbers to the extent that they agree with them is no doubt well taken generally, I don't know if you could have made a dumber choice of person and subject to call out on this point.

PFF illustrates the problem of modeling with qualitative inputs and quantitative outputs. It'll give you numbers, but you can't really do anything with them. While their grades are typically somewhere in the ballpark of right for a given player in a vacuum, they don't actually relate to each other in any kind of predictable way, so why even use numbers? It's mathiness as opposed to math.

[Sperm Edwards]

23 minutes ago, Miss Lonelyhearts said:

While your point about people liking numbers to the extent that they agree with them is no doubt well taken generally, I don't know if you could have made a dumber choice of person and subject to call out on this point.

PFF illustrates the problem of modeling with qualitative inputs and quantitative outputs. It'll give you numbers, but you can't really do anything with them. While their grades are typically somewhere in the ballpark of right for a given player in a vacuum, they don't actually relate to each other in any kind of predictable way, so why even use numbers? It's mathiness as opposed to math.

My post was tongue-in-cheek, as in PFF has it out for Jets players, except when they show a relatively-unknown 3-4 DE as the 14th-best player in the NFL. Then it's ok. Nothing more than that. It wasn't a serious take on their methodology, or any math they do or do not use in general.

[Miss Lonelyhearts]

8 minutes ago, Sperm Edwards said:

My post was tongue-in-cheek, as in PFF has it out for Jets players, except when they show a relatively-unknown 3-4 DE as the 14th-best player in the NFL. Then it's ok. Nothing more than that. It wasn't a serious take on their methodology, or any math they do or do not use in general.

They do use addition, I guess. In theory a given number of greats, goods, mehs, bads, and buttfumbles ought to be amenable to aggregation via the plus operation, but expressing the sum as -3.8 or whatever is just rhetorical fiat.

[Sperm Edwards]

1 minute ago, Miss Lonelyhearts said:

They do use addition, I guess. In theory a given number of greats, goods, mehs, bads, and buttfumbles ought to be amenable to aggregation via the plus operation, but expressing the sum as -3.8 or whatever is just rhetorical fiat.

I was just making a cutesy comment (or my idea of a cutesy comment, anyway). You really read into it too much. You should read into it less. At least -3.8 pts less.  

[Mainejet]

18 hours ago, jamesr said:

What losses specifically do you feel did not get backfilled?

DL has been covered by our FA signings. Our 'loss' at CB (Cro) is well covered by the depth we already have; at worst it'll be like for like, Cro was not good last year. LT we replaced Brick with Clady ... I'm struggling to see other losses (barring, obviously, QB that we've discussed above).

Well, losing Snacks number one. His replacement is nowhere near the kind of player Snacks is. What about losing Brick? I'm not going to say I'm not hopeful that Ryan Clady can stay healthy. If that happens, he's actually a better player than Brick. But the fact is, Clady's been a walking injury and I do not have any faith in him staying healthy.

What's far worse is the fact that everyone knew it was time to do something about the OL. LT is a concern as is the entire right side. This starting lineup is old and that's really what I think you are missing. My feeling is this lineup will show it's age in a big way this season. Their play will decline.

Looking at the bigger picture, Mac did NOTHING to improve the offense. NOTHING. If he did something to improve this offense, please let me know what it is. Did he get a TE? No. Did he draft an OL that is anything more than depth for the future? No. This team is worse on paper right now and coupled with a playoff team schedule, this team is destined for a top ten pick. Now assuming that happens, and considering the Jets were a fringe playoff team with a 10-6 record in 2015, doesn't that mean that the front office guided us backwards?

[32EBoozer]

5 hours ago, Mainejet said:

Well, losing Snacks number one. His replacement is nowhere near the kind of player Snacks is. What about losing Brick? I'm not going to say I'm not hopeful that Ryan Clady can stay healthy. If that happens, he's actually a better player than Brick. But the fact is, Clady's been a walking injury and I do not have any faith in him staying healthy.

What's far worse is the fact that everyone knew it was time to do something about the OL. LT is a concern as is the entire right side. This starting lineup is old and that's really what I think you are missing. My feeling is this lineup will show it's age in a big way this season. Their play will decline.

Looking at the bigger picture, Mac did NOTHING to improve the offense. NOTHING. If he did something to improve this offense, please let me know what it is. Did he get a TE? No. Did he draft an OL that is anything more than depth for the future? No. This team is worse on paper right now and coupled with a playoff team schedule, this team is destined for a top ten pick. Now assuming that happens, and considering the Jets were a fringe playoff team with a 10-6 record in 2015, doesn't that mean that the front office guided us backwards?

MaineJet.... The draft is over, the players selected. MacDaddy and Bowles are here for at least 2 more seasons and Fitz/Geno will be the starter.

You're driving yourself nuts, along with everyone else.

Let's starp up and support this team and hope that the FO learns from it's mistakes and the players out perform their Draft position!

 

[jamesr]

6 hours ago, Mainejet said:

Well, losing Snacks number one. His replacement is nowhere near the kind of player Snacks is. What about losing Brick? I'm not going to say I'm not hopeful that Ryan Clady can stay healthy. If that happens, he's actually a better player than Brick. But the fact is, Clady's been a walking injury and I do not have any faith in him staying healthy.

What's far worse is the fact that everyone knew it was time to do something about the OL. LT is a concern as is the entire right side. This starting lineup is old and that's really what I think you are missing. My feeling is this lineup will show it's age in a big way this season. Their play will decline.

Looking at the bigger picture, Mac did NOTHING to improve the offense. NOTHING. If he did something to improve this offense, please let me know what it is. Did he get a TE? No. Did he draft an OL that is anything more than depth for the future? No. This team is worse on paper right now and coupled with a playoff team schedule, this team is destined for a top ten pick. Now assuming that happens, and considering the Jets were a fringe playoff team with a 10-6 record in 2015, doesn't that mean that the front office guided us backwards?

There comes a point with any player where you have to work based on value - Snacks is a prime example. Would it have been better for the Jets to sign him at a price like the one he got from the Giants? What else do you scale back on to fit his number in? The money he was asking simply didn't fit the value the team placed on him. And even if his replacement only provides 60% of the play that Snacks did, how much of a difference will that make to our D as a whole?

OL, there were attempts to improve / provide depth, they just didn't work out - again they were decisions made based on value. They made a decent offer to Kelvin Beachum, but didn't get into a bidding war and he signed elsewhere. Like the DL, you can't go out and overpay or else you end up with a mediocre / average team with an above average / hellish payroll situation. If Clady stays healthy LT will be upgraded; LG is already strong; C should be strong enough though durability is starting to become a question; and the right side does have some questions I agree. But looking at the draft (someone did a good breakdown elsewhere on this) the board just didn't present value where we were picking. 1st round the tackles were all gone, best we'd have got would have been a guard, and even then it'd have been a reach. And 3rd round the OT I wanted got picked one spot before us. 2nd round we could have gone OG with Whitehair, I doubt many would have argued with that.

So the offense as a whole didn't change much - but we got Forte to replace Ivory, who should provide more versatility than Ivory did. We get Amaro and Sudfeld back at TE - for better or worse  - and there is some potential in our WR depth which is better than last year. But as we've already covered, the QB will be the big determining factor here, and that still remains very much TBC. I can still easily see us finishing second in the division, same as last year, and potentially just missing the playoffs by a game, same as last year.

As for your last question - I disagree that the FO is GUIDING us backwards. Situations change, for everyone - what I like is that the FO isn't playing the short term "pay everyone, roll the dice, get fired when it fails" approach - they're building a team in their way, looking at value rather than sticking purely to continuity and overpaying to keep everyone. I know it's not for everyone, but I personally feel it is a more grounded, realistic way to do business.

Here's one last thought - has Elway GUIDED the Broncos backwards?? Their team is much worse on paper, have a first place schedule in a strengthening division, and lost their #1 AND #2 QB, replacing them with Sanchez and Lynch. They have holes all over their D and a franchise guy looking for big money. Must really suck to be a Broncos fan right now ...

 

[jamesr]

On another note - Lee is one of 6 players listed on NFL.com as DROY candidates :

Quote

 

Darron Lee, LB, New York Jets

The Jets added the most active linebacker Ohio State had last year from a dominant defense that placed six starters in the draft. Second-year head coach Todd Bowles is a defensive-minded coach, and you can bet he and defensive coordinator Kacy Rodgers will devise an impactful, every-down role for the speedy Lee, who should play his best football on third down. The Jets boasted the NFL'sfourth-ranked defense last year, so a positive impact from Lee will get plenty of attention, particularly in such a big market.

 

 

Given how bad we have been for years on third down, this is music to my ears.

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap3000000660920/article/top-six-nfl-defensive-rookie-of-the-year-candidates-for-2016

 

[Mainejet]

19 hours ago, 32EBoozer said:

MaineJet.... The draft is over, the players selected. MacDaddy and Bowles are here for at least 2 more seasons and Fitz/Geno will be the starter.

You're driving yourself nuts, along with everyone else.

Let's starp up and support this team and hope that the FO learns from it's mistakes and the players out perform their Draft position!

 

I support the NYJ and very much want to see them win the SB before I die. The CS? I do NOT support, especially when they're doing their best impressions of incompetent a$$holes.

[Mainejet]

18 hours ago, jamesr said:

There comes a point with any player where you have to work based on value - Snacks is a prime example. Would it have been better for the Jets to sign him at a price like the one he got from the Giants? What else do you scale back on to fit his number in? The money he was asking simply didn't fit the value the team placed on him. And even if his replacement only provides 60% of the play that Snacks did, how much of a difference will that make to our D as a whole?

OL, there were attempts to improve / provide depth, they just didn't work out - again they were decisions made based on value. They made a decent offer to Kelvin Beachum, but didn't get into a bidding war and he signed elsewhere. Like the DL, you can't go out and overpay or else you end up with a mediocre / average team with an above average / hellish payroll situation. If Clady stays healthy LT will be upgraded; LG is already strong; C should be strong enough though durability is starting to become a question; and the right side does have some questions I agree. But looking at the draft (someone did a good breakdown elsewhere on this) the board just didn't present value where we were picking. 1st round the tackles were all gone, best we'd have got would have been a guard, and even then it'd have been a reach. And 3rd round the OT I wanted got picked one spot before us. 2nd round we could have gone OG with Whitehair, I doubt many would have argued with that.

So the offense as a whole didn't change much - but we got Forte to replace Ivory, who should provide more versatility than Ivory did. We get Amaro and Sudfeld back at TE - for better or worse  - and there is some potential in our WR depth which is better than last year. But as we've already covered, the QB will be the big determining factor here, and that still remains very much TBC. I can still easily see us finishing second in the division, same as last year, and potentially just missing the playoffs by a game, same as last year.

As for your last question - I disagree that the FO is GUIDING us backwards. Situations change, for everyone - what I like is that the FO isn't playing the short term "pay everyone, roll the dice, get fired when it fails" approach - they're building a team in their way, looking at value rather than sticking purely to continuity and overpaying to keep everyone. I know it's not for everyone, but I personally feel it is a more grounded, realistic way to do business.

Here's one last thought - has Elway GUIDED the Broncos backwards?? Their team is much worse on paper, have a first place schedule in a strengthening division, and lost their #1 AND #2 QB, replacing them with Sanchez and Lynch. They have holes all over their D and a franchise guy looking for big money. Must really suck to be a Broncos fan right now ...

 

The Jets AVERAGE beating ONE team with a winning record over the last two seasons. In 2016, the first 6 weeks the Jets face ZERO teams with a losing record. In fact, the Jets first opponents won 64 games last season. Add to that the Jets did NOTHING to improve the offense and did not add one single starter for 2016. To think this Jets team would win be anything better than 1-5 at very best is setting yourself up for failure. More than likely, this team will not post a win until they face the Browns in week 8. So once again, I say this front office guided this team BACKWARDS.

[JustInFudge]

They also think we stink:

Football Outsiders: The Jets Stink

By Smackdad on May 11, 2016, 4:16p 113 

 

Apparently the guys over at Football Outsiders are not Jets fans. Poor benighted souls.

 TWEET  SHARE (78) PIN 

Projections are stupid, unless they project the Jets winning the next 50 consecutive Super Bowls. Then they're remarkably insightful and prescient, although a tad conservative on the Jets' upside. OK, with that disclaimer out of the way, Football Outsiders has published their preliminary AFC projections. The results are not pretty for Jets fans. Football Outsiders projects that the Jets will finish the 2016 NFL season with a 6-10 record, third in the AFC East behind New England and Buffalo. Since I know that kind of record begs the question, no, Football Outsiders does not project a Super Bowl title for the 2016 Jets. Fools.

Here is what Football Outsiders has to say about the Jets 2016 prospects:

 

The Jets had the highest DVOA of any team to miss last year's playoffs, but there's a lot of reason to be pessimistic about 2016. We're expecting some relapse after the Jets improved so much on both sides of the ball last season, and that's exacerbated by personnel departures. On defense, the Jets have to replace four starters, particularly Demario Davis and (unless they want to return to a three-man line) Damon Harrison. Matt Forte is a great addition to the offense, but he won't mean much if the Jets don't have a reasonable quarterback. Re-signing Ryan Fitzpatrick would give the Jets an additional win in our mean projections. Plus, the Jets have a tough schedule, partly because we expect so much from the Chiefs compared to the rest of the AFC West and partly because they don't get to play the Patriots without Brady like Buffalo and Miami do.

Here are the projections for the entire AFC. Surprisingly these projections have the defending Super Bowl champions Denver Broncos finishing with a losing record in 2016 and out of the playoffs. That is only slightly less shocking than projecting that the Jets will not win the Super Bowl.

1. Pittsburgh Steelers (12-4)

2. Kansas City Chiefs (12-4)

3. New England Patriots (10-6)

4. Houston Texans (8-8)

5. Cincinnati Bengals* (10-6)

6. Baltimore Ravens* (10-6)

7. Buffalo Bills (9-7)

8. San Diego Chargers (8-8)

9. Jacksonville Jaguars (7-9)

10. Denver Broncos (7-9)

11. Indianapolis Colts (7-9)

12. Tennessee Titans (7-9)

13. Oakland Raiders (6-10)

14. New York Jets (6-10)

15. Miami Dolphins (5-11)

16. Cleveland Browns (4-12)

*Wild-card teams

 

OK, commence the ritual flogging of Football Outsiders, projections in general, and the obvious as the nose on your face massive anti-Jets bias of all media, analysts, and sentient beings who are not Jets fans.

[jamesr]

3 hours ago, Mainejet said:

The Jets AVERAGE beating ONE team with a winning record over the last two seasons. In 2016, the first 6 weeks the Jets face ZERO teams with a losing record. In fact, the Jets first opponents won 64 games last season. Add to that the Jets did NOTHING to improve the offense and did not add one single starter for 2016. To think this Jets team would win be anything better than 1-5 at very best is setting yourself up for failure. More than likely, this team will not post a win until they face the Browns in week 8. So once again, I say this front office guided this team BACKWARDS.

All teams start next season 0-0. There are no "winning records" in Week 1. Just look at how many of our 2015 opponents had strong 2014 seasons - we played 4 games last year against 2014 DIVISION WINNERS, and our record in those games was 3-1.

As for not adding a single starter on offense for 2016 ... Clady and Forte will be starters. That's two by my count.